Stop the Meeting Madness¶
Perlow, L. A., Hadley, Noonan, C., & Eun, E. (2017). Stop the Meeting Madness.
Cited by¶
1 citation across 1 artifact.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Domain-specific¶
- Meeting Inflation
- The growth has three distinguishable components that require different interventions: genuine coordination-need growth with team size (addressed by async communication channels that decouple coordination from real-time attendance), defensive scheduling driven by information-exclusion anxiety (addressed by decision-rights frameworks that clarify who must be informed versus who must decide), and coordination-of-coordination proliferation in which meta-meetings arise to triage the object-meeting load (the recursive self-compounding phase, addressed only by a deliberate calendar audit that cuts from the root)
This sourceThe HBR feature establishing that meeting load is a systemic problem - executives average nearly 23 hours a week in meetings, up from under 10 in the 1960s, and 'chopped-up schedules interrupt deep thinking' - and that 'real improvement requires systemic change, not discrete fixes'; the entry's three-way split of the growth, with a distinct cure for each component, is its own synthesis rather than this article's taxonomy.
Supported in partVerified against the source
- The growth has three distinguishable components that require different interventions: genuine coordination-need growth with team size (addressed by async communication channels that decouple coordination from real-time attendance), defensive scheduling driven by information-exclusion anxiety (addressed by decision-rights frameworks that clarify who must be informed versus who must decide), and coordination-of-coordination proliferation in which meta-meetings arise to triage the object-meeting load (the recursive self-compounding phase, addressed only by a deliberate calendar audit that cuts from the root)
Verification¶
Does it exist? Not checked yet. This entry carries no identifier to resolve. It was extracted from the citation as written in the article, normalized, and deduplicated against the rest of the registry.
Does it back the claim? Read against the text for 1 of 1 citation: 1 supported in part. Each verdict is shown under its citation below, with what in the work backs the sentence.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:93de18a5a80a · see in the full table