Ava Scott, a cognitive scientist at the University of Copenhagen, notes that meetings are frequently treated as a default organizational reflex without clear intention. This lack of explicit purpose leaves many sessions feeling aimless to participants. Scott’s research examining corporate employees at Microsoft revealed that recurring meetings are the primary drivers of user frustration, with participants describing successive sessions as almost indistinguishable in content. When a meeting lacks a clear objective, taking up employee time is counterproductive. Recognizing this inefficiency, several major corporations, including e-commerce platform Shopify, have moved to eliminate recurring meetings from company calendars.
Despite these drawbacks, empirical data suggests that meetings still provide substantial long-term value when managed correctly. A 2026 working paper published by the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) offers a counterweight to blanket anti-meeting sentiments. Led by Harvard economist David Deming and utilizing survey data from over 9,000 Norwegian workers gathered by research firm Norstat, the study identified a positive association between high meeting density, long-term wage growth, and on-the-job skill acquisition.
The researchers hypothesize that high-frequency meeting environments provide junior workers with invaluable exposure to senior leadership, facilitating the tacit transmission of institutional knowledge, expertise, and professional skills. Although the study’s correlational nature precludes proving direct causality, the authors conclude that despite their immediate friction, meetings ultimately serve a vital purpose, describing them as the "broccoli of work—widely disliked, but probably good for us anyway."
Strategic Timing, Humor, and Cultural Context
Optimizing meeting outcomes also requires an understanding of social dynamics, human biological rhythms, and cultural norms. For example, the strategic deployment of humor can spark creative problem-solving and enhance team performance, provided the humor is authentic, supportive, and positive rather than mean-spirited. Lehmann-Willenbrock’s research analyzing corporate video archives revealed that humor is most effective when meeting participants already know each other well enough to feel psychologically safe.
However, the freedom to use humor in meetings is not always evenly distributed across workplace hierarchies. Vita Stout, a science educator and comedian at Sierra College, studied humor usage by analyzing speaker interactions at the 2022 International Congress for Bat Research in Austin, Texas. Her findings, published in Proceedings of the Royal Society B, showed that while well-timed humor successfully builds community, it was deployed far more frequently by established, senior male scientists than by early-career researchers or scientists from underrepresented groups.
Timing is another essential factor supported by organizational research. Meeting organizers should align schedules with human circadian rhythms, explicitly avoiding the post-lunch energy drop when cognitive capacity naturally wanes. Furthermore, meeting times must respect workers’ personal lives and family obligations. Lehmann-Willenbrock notes the frustration caused when internal sessions—especially those regarding diversity or work-life balance—are scheduled late in the afternoon, directly conflicting with employee childcare responsibilities.
Finally, cultural background plays a substantial role in shaping expectations around meeting etiquette. A cross-cultural study led by Lehmann-Willenbrock surveyed 1,432 workers across six nations to measure responses to lateness. Participants from the United States and the Netherlands expressed high levels of irritation and frustration when leaders or peers arrived 5, 10, or 15 minutes late. In contrast, respondents from China and Chile exhibited significantly higher tolerance for identical delays.
Kreamer stresses that expanding cross-cultural research remains a critical priority for meeting science. Because the vast majority of existing data has been gathered within North America and Europe, further global studies are required to determine whether standard meeting best practices hold true across different international business cultures. Until those empirical insights are fully realized, organizations will continue meeting to figure them out.
