The Surprising Science of Meetings

Have you ever walked out of a meeting thinking, “That could have been an email”? Steven G. Rogelberg’s The Surprising Science of Meetings begins with exactly that frustration—the universal dread of wasted meeting time—and transforms it into a question of scientific inquiry: what actually makes a meeting work?

Rogelberg, an organizational psychologist, argues that while meetings seem ordinary, they are the most expensive and under-managed activity in modern organizations. In the United States alone, more than fifty-five million meetings occur daily, costing businesses over $1.4 trillion annually. Yet few leaders are trained to run them effectively. The author’s central claim is that bad meetings are not inevitable—they are solvable through science. Using decades of research in organizational behavior, group dynamics, and leadership, Rogelberg shows that effective meetings can boost engagement, innovation, and satisfaction if leaders apply evidence-based practices.

Why Bad Meetings Persist

Most organizations tolerate poor meetings as a “natural cost of doing business.” Leaders overuse meetings to appear busy, perpetuate inclusion rituals, or seek unnecessary consensus. As Rogelberg warns, these habits form a kind of corporate inertia: dysfunctional practices spread until frustration feels normal. The result is declining morale, lower productivity, and what he calls meeting recovery syndrome—the exhaustion and negativity that lingers long after a bad meeting ends.

The Case for Keeping Meetings—but Making Them Better

While many executives fantasize about abolishing meetings altogether (Peter Drucker once called them “a symptom of bad organization”), Rogelberg insists meetings are essential to organizational life. They create inclusion, shared understanding, and decision quality. Without them, teams lose coordination and culture deteriorates. The true goal isn’t fewer meetings—it’s better meetings.

To fix meetings, Rogelberg introduces the emerging discipline of meeting science: the study of pre-meeting design, in-meeting conduct, and post-meeting consequences. Drawing upon research from universities, consulting firms, and organizations like Google and Amazon, he turns data into practical advice. Throughout the book, he blends psychology, management theory, and case studies to reveal what separates thriving teams from frustrated ones.

Themes and Strategies Covered

The book unfolds across two major sections: first, Rogelberg diagnoses the scale of the problem—too many meetings, too little value—and second, he offers evidence-based remedies. You’ll learn why leaders often misjudge their own meeting skills (the Lake Wobegon Effect), understand how Parkinson’s law ensures meetings expand to fill their allotted time, and discover how shorter “huddles” and standing sessions can rejuvenate collaboration. Rogelberg also explores how positivity, silence, and servant leadership make meetings more productive and humane.

Why This Science Matters

Behind every team’s success lies the invisible rhythm of meetings—the conversations shaping decisions, morale, and innovation. Rogelberg’s work matters because it redefines leadership not as managing projects, but as stewarding other people’s time. Improving just one meeting a day, he argues, can trigger cascading benefits across an organization. Better meetings reduce frustration, save money, and elevate careers, particularly for leaders who learn to guide with inclusivity and intention.

“A poorly conducted and unnecessary meeting is a form of time theft—a theft that can be prevented.”

This guiding principle runs through the book: respect people’s time by designing meetings that matter.

Rogelberg invites leaders to become scientists of their own meetings—to experiment, measure, and iterate. With tools for assessing meeting quality and guidelines for agendas, huddles, and feedback surveys, The Surprising Science of Meetings equips anyone to transform frustrating routines into engines of collaboration. It’s a rallying call: don’t fight meetings or flee them—fix them through science.

Rogelberg opens with the sobering reality of modern work: meetings have exploded. From the 11 million meetings recorded in 1976 to over 55 million daily today, they now consume more than half of many executives’ calendars. CEOs of top firms reportedly spend up to 60 percent of their working hours in meetings—but most employees say these sessions feel like time drains.

The Hidden Costs of Meeting Madness

Meetings don’t just waste time—they waste billions. When Rogelberg calculates meeting cost by multiplying attendees’ salaries by meeting hours, even routine weekly check-ins cost thousands annually. Xerox estimated $100 million a year spent on meetings in one division alone. Add opportunity costs—lost creativity, frustration, and exhaustion—and the total toll becomes staggering. He calls out a cultural acceptance of inefficiency: organizations study marketing and finance obsessively but rarely analyze their most time-consuming ritual.

Why We Keep Meeting Anyway

Paradoxically, the rise of meetings owes its momentum to good intentions. As workplaces became flatter and collaborative, leaders viewed meetings as democratic tools for inclusion and alignment. Rogelberg cites a pharmaceutical executive who quipped, “Our abundance of meetings is the cultural tax we pay for an inclusive, learning environment.” In other words, the desire to empower voices leads to more gatherings—but not necessarily better outcomes.

The author concludes that meetings are both the lifeblood and the plague of modern organizations. The challenge isn’t elimination but renovation. Like rain in London, meetings may seem inevitable—but unlike the weather, they can be improved through design and leadership.

To fix the meeting problem, Rogelberg introduces “meeting science”—a research-based toolkit grounded in organizational psychology. He explains that scientists examine what happens before, during, and after meetings to uncover patterns that make collaboration thrive or collapse. The aim isn’t speculation, but data-driven transformation.

How Scientists Study Meetings

Meeting research uses diverse methods: field surveys, lab experiments, and controlled trials. Rogelberg recounts studies such as Allen Bluedorn’s experiment comparing stand-up versus sit-down meetings. The result? Standing meetings finished 34 percent faster with equal quality decisions. Other experiments explored emotional contagion—Yale professor Sigal Barsade found that just one upbeat attendee could lift an entire group’s cooperation and creativity.

The False Solution: Fewer Meetings

Contrary to Peter Drucker’s dictum that “the fewer meetings the better,” Rogelberg shows that eliminating meetings erodes connection and clarity. Employees who attend too few meetings feel isolated, misinformed, and unsupported. Teams without enough interaction lose alignment and innovation potential. The true fix isn’t fewer gatherings—it’s applying evidence to make them worthwhile.

Meeting science offers tested answers to age-old frustrations: optimal length, group size, facilitation style, and even seating arrangements. It transforms guesswork into strategy, letting leaders manage meetings like experiments. Rogelberg’s thesis echoes behavioral economics (as in Daniel Kahneman’s studies of bias): once we measure how we actually behave, we can design for better outcomes.

“Meetings done well can be transformative—vehicles for democracy, creativity, and connection.”

By grounding meeting reform in science rather than folklore, Rogelberg empowers leaders to restore meaning to one of the workplace’s most maligned rituals.

One of Rogelberg’s most striking insights is psychological: leaders are terrible judges of their own meeting skills. He describes the “Lake Wobegon Effect,” our tendency to believe we’re above average. Managers consistently rate their meetings as far more productive than attendees do—a disconnect fueled by self-interest and talk time. The more a leader speaks, the more effective they feel.

Blind Spots and Their Consequences

This inflated self-view breeds organizational blind spots. Poorly run meetings replicate across departments, shaping a culture of wasted time. Rogelberg recounts how at Verizon, 79 percent of people thought their own meetings were “very productive,” but only 56 percent rated their peers’ meetings the same. Without feedback systems, leaders never see the gap.

Tools for Seeing Clearly

Rogelberg advocates regular meeting evaluations—short surveys, emoji ratings (as used by Weight Watchers), and 360-degree feedback that includes meeting questions. Intel’s Andy Grove famously required every employee to take a course on effective meetings, emphasizing that stolen time equals stolen equipment. Self-awareness, Rogelberg notes, predicts career success more strongly than technical skill.

Servant Leadership: The Mirror’s True Image

The ideal meeting leader, he concludes, is a servant leader—someone who views meetings as opportunities to elevate others. Borrowing from Adam Grant’s “giver” concept, servant leaders listen actively, manage conflict constructively, and create psychological safety. They pace conversation, draw out quieter voices, and focus more on facilitating than dominating. This mindset transforms meetings from monologues into collaboration.

Research shows that giving leaders create more productive, happier teams. The same principle applies in meetings: elevate others to elevate results.

For Rogelberg, true leadership begins when you stop seeing meetings as showcases of authority and start treating them as stewardship of time and trust.

Why are most meetings exactly one hour? Rogelberg traces this norm to software defaults—Microsoft Outlook set 60 minutes, and culture obeyed. But as humorist C. Northcote Parkinson predicted, “work expands to fill the time available.” Meetings stretch unnecessarily because they can. The author proposes a radical experiment: shorten them deliberately.

Defying Parkinson’s Law

By scheduling shorter, oddly timed sessions—like forty-eight minutes—leaders introduce healthy pressure and focus. This leverages the Yerkes–Dodson law: moderate stress boosts performance and engagement. Companies like Google institutionalized “speedy meetings” of 25 or 50 minutes, even building calendar toggles to enforce it. The result? Timely starts, fewer delays, and sharper discussions.

The Rise of Huddles

Rogelberg celebrates the ten- to fifteen-minute “huddle,” practiced at firms like Apple and Ritz Carlton. These daily stand-ups deliver rapid coordination on wins, priorities, and obstacles. They enhance accountability and morale without draining energy. Examples from RSC Bio Solutions show how brief huddles improved urgency and collaboration after feedback loops were added.

Hazards of Short Meetings

Short meetings aren’t magic. Leaders must honor start and end times to avoid eroding trust. Rogelberg even cites companies that impose playful penalties—beer jar fines or push-ups for running over. The key is discipline: shorter meetings should replace, not supplement, longer ones. Used well, they turn communication into rhythm instead of ritual.

When meetings respect time boundaries, research shows engagement rises and stress falls. It’s not about cramming work—it’s about clarifying purpose. Rogelberg wants leaders to ask before every meeting: how much time do we truly need?

Most business books treat agendas as sacred tools. Rogelberg calls them “a hollow crutch.” His research found little correlation between having an agenda and meeting effectiveness. Why? Because most agendas are recycled and perfunctory—lists of topics without thought or flow.

Turning Agendas into Event Plans

Good agendas resemble event blueprints. Leaders should define specific goals—decisions to make, problems to solve, actions to assign. Invite participants to contribute their own items to ensure relevance and voice. Andy Grove’s approach at Intel required leaders to focus on issues that “preoccupy and nag” employees; this principle fosters engagement and accountability.

Order and Flow

Research by Glen Littlepage showed that items early in an agenda receive disproportionate time and attention. Rogelberg recommends front-loading high-impact topics within the first 15 percent of a meeting to maximize energy. Prioritize employee-generated items when possible to build inclusion and commitment. End with a quick wrap-up that clarifies takeaways and owners of action steps.

Adding Accountability

Borrowing from Apple’s “Directly Responsible Individual” (DRI) system, assign a person to every agenda item. Public ownership increases follow-through and distributes leadership opportunities. Rogelberg also encourages flexible timing—occasionally assigning minute limits to steer focus while avoiding creative bottlenecks.

Ultimately, an agenda is only as effective as the thinking behind it. Cancel meetings without compelling agendas—Rogelberg urges this with glee. “Yes, yes, please yes.” Preparation, not paperwork, drives productivity.

Large meetings feel inclusive but rarely productive. Rogelberg’s research, echoing Bain & Company data, shows that decision quality drops 10 percent for every person added beyond seven attendees. Larger groups suffer coordination chaos, dominance by a few voices, and social loafing—the tendency to reduce effort when hidden in a crowd.

The Magic Number

For problem-solving and decision-making, seven or fewer people is ideal. Eight to twelve can work for brainstorming with skilled facilitation. Beyond that, meetings should serve informational or motivational purposes, not interactive decisions.

Balancing Inclusion and Efficiency

Cutting invites risks bruised egos—humans equate invitations with value. Rogelberg offers humane hacks: split agendas into smaller meetings, let some attendees join only relevant portions, and collect pre-meeting input from peripheral stakeholders. Sharing detailed notes afterward sustains inclusion without overcrowding the room.

He cites Google’s open document culture and Siemens’ leader dialogues as examples of transparent communication replacing unnecessary attendance. Some companies even enforce numeric rules—Amazon’s “two-pizza rule” or manufacturing firms limiting to seven attendees unless approved. Each protects both productivity and dignity.

When you trim the guest list intelligently and involve absent voices through notes and surveys, you give everyone the greatest gift: time reclaimed for real work.

We often enter meetings with mental baggage from prior tasks. Rogelberg calls this a psychological “interruption effect.” To counter it, leaders must deliberately create separation—the shift from scattered to present. The secret ingredient: positivity.

Emotion as a Meeting Tool

Studies by Matthew Grawitch and Joe Allen found that groups with positive moods integrate information better and produce more creative outcomes. Humor and laughter even correlate with higher team performance. Rogelberg urges leaders to spark good moods—not with gimmicks, but through authentic connection and appreciation.

Building Presence

Before meetings begin, greet attendees personally, share gratitude, or play energizing music. He suggests brief recognition rounds (“who helped you this week?”) and snack rituals to lighten the atmosphere. These cues—physical and emotional—signal a reset from individual grind to collective purpose.

Sustaining the Energy

To maintain focus, ban multitasking and technology distractions. Obama famously banned phones in Cabinet meetings to ensure presence. Rogelberg cites research showing that handwritten notes improve comprehension over laptop use. Interactive tools like clicker quizzes or brief partner discussions can re-engage participants mid-meeting.

Positive energy isn’t frivolous—it’s functional. Meetings that begin with joy and respect end with clarity and collaboration. Your tone as leader sets the temperature of the room.

It sounds paradoxical: the best way to improve communication may be to stop talking. Rogelberg demonstrates that silence, when structured, unleashes participation and creativity. He calls this family of techniques brainwriting and silent reading.

Brainwriting: Creativity in Parallel

Instead of brainstorming aloud, participants write their ideas silently and anonymously. This eliminates “production blocking” (waiting to speak), fear of judgment, and dominance by extroverts. Across 80 studies, silent idea generation produced 20–40 percent more original ideas than spoken brainstorming. Rogelberg’s examples—from mentoring task forces to innovation workshops—show participants enjoying freedom and focus.

Silent Reading: Deep Understanding

Inspired by Amazon’s Jeff Bezos, meetings begin with attendees quietly reading a written proposal instead of watching a PowerPoint. This ensures equal preparation, reduces performative bias, and leads to richer debate. Reading accelerates comprehension because everyone controls their pace and can reflect in real time. Afterward, discussions are deeper and decisions clearer.

Distinct Outcomes

Rogelberg frames silence as a gift of space—the moment when ideas surface without hierarchy. It demands courage to try but yields high returns. The book closes the technique section with Will Rogers’s quip: “Never miss a good chance to shut up.” In meetings, silence isn’t absence—it’s focus.

Used wisely, intentional quiet counteracts chaos, gives voice to the thoughtful, and transforms meetings into shared discovery.

Remote calls are perhaps the hardest meetings to run well. Rogelberg calls them “primed for failure.” With no visual cues, attention wanes, people multitask behind mute buttons, and communication becomes chaotic. Yet remote collaboration is inevitable—so science must adapt.

The Problems of Phone Meetings

Audio-only meetings encourage anonymity and social loafing. People who can’t be seen are more likely to disengage. Overlapping talk and poor sound further harm comprehension. Rogelberg advises proactive facilitation: call roll, use names frequently, and forbid mute when possible. He suggests leaders act as air-traffic controllers—guiding who speaks and when.

Better Structures: Subteams and Intervals

For larger remote groups, he highlights manager Sandy from Siemens, who breaks her team into subgroups of four to tackle problems separately before reconvening representatives. Another technique, “meeting intervals,” uses asynchronous work between short calls: brainstorm in shared docs, vote online, then meet briefly to decide. This mirrors Cadbury Schweppes’s real-world method of separating discussion from decision-making to improve quality.

Practical Enhancements

Video, shared documents, and chat for signaling rather than side talk all help restore connection. Keeping meetings short—about 15 minutes—and gathering feedback regularly keeps engagement high. Rogelberg reminds leaders that remote success relies on structure rather than spontaneity.

Even digitally, human connection thrives on intentional design. A well-run remote meeting respects the same principle as any great in-person one: clarity of purpose, fairness of voice, and stewardship of time.

Rogelberg concludes with a call to transform leadership philosophy itself: treat meetings like experiments. Visualize, prepare, manage, and reflect. Each gathering is both an outcome and a data point. The cycle—try, reflect, learn—creates continuous improvement and organizational ripple effects.

The Five Practices

• Visualization and anticipation: Imagine success and conduct “premortems”—predicting failure before it happens to preempt issues.
• Preparation: Intentionally shape time, agenda, and attendee list using evidence on length and group size.
• Mindset: Lead with servant and giver values, prioritizing psychological safety and inclusion.
• Active facilitation: Manage energy, positivity, and focus in real time. Ban distractions, celebrate contributions, and sustain engagement.
• Reflection: Gather feedback, measure wasted time indices, and evolve continuously.

The Ripple Effect

Improving one meeting daily triggers systemic change—better morale, smarter decisions, stronger culture. Rogelberg compares this to behavioral reinforcement: leaders who model curiosity and learning inspire others to experiment too. The act of reimagining meetings, he writes, is the act of reimagining leadership.

“Together we can fix the dysfunctional state of meetings, one meeting at a time.”

In the end, The Surprising Science of Meetings is more than a manual—it’s an invitation to lead with evidence, empathy, and experimentation. Meetings, Rogelberg insists, are where organizations come to life. Make them count.