The tension described here is real, the problem isn't just too many meetings, it's that the ones we do have don't reliably produce the outcomes they should. Most meeting productivity advice focuses on reducing meeting count or improving facilitation; fewer tools address what happens after. CogniAIX is one I've been using specifically for this: it takes the meeting output and converts it into a structured record of decisions made, tasks assigned, and open items - so the accountability layer that should come out of every meeting actually does. It doesn't fix bad meetings, but it does mean the good meetings produce reliable follow-through.
I like this Todd. This applies to customer meetings as well. Micro-meetings are very effective. I've found having multiple 15 min meetings are more productive (higher close rates) than having a few 1 hour meetings. Cadence, single focus per meeting and f/u are the keys. Duration is the risk - John
The tension described here is real, the problem isn't just too many meetings, it's that the ones we do have don't reliably produce the outcomes they should. Most meeting productivity advice focuses on reducing meeting count or improving facilitation; fewer tools address what happens after. CogniAIX is one I've been using specifically for this: it takes the meeting output and converts it into a structured record of decisions made, tasks assigned, and open items - so the accountability layer that should come out of every meeting actually does. It doesn't fix bad meetings, but it does mean the good meetings produce reliable follow-through.
I like this Todd. This applies to customer meetings as well. Micro-meetings are very effective. I've found having multiple 15 min meetings are more productive (higher close rates) than having a few 1 hour meetings. Cadence, single focus per meeting and f/u are the keys. Duration is the risk - John
Thanks John. Do you think it is the focused intend? Not a huge time commitment but valuable for the time?