A Fresh Look at the Number, Effectiveness, and Cost of Meetings in the U.S

A Fresh Look at the Number, Effectiveness, and Cost of Meetings in the U.S

(Elise Keith) #1

Harvard Business Review articles on meetings
(Jane Lewis) #2

Want to share the key info here - methods and findings? I’d be interested in seeing what this research came up with, and how it came up with it.

(Elise Keith) #3

Hi Jane,
I’m not sure I understand the question - and hadn’t seen your question earlier, so sorry for the slow reply!

As may be painfully obvious, I am not an academic or researcher AT ALL. Methods? Ummm… I dug into the numbers and studies I could find. Is there a name for that approach?

I believe I was invited to participate because my company publishes so much content about meetings, this particular piece has relevance to the symposium, and I try to be clear about where the information comes from and how I arrive at each conclusion. But after reading some of the other symposium papers, I’m painfully aware that my perspective is not a trained academic perspective. :slight_smile:

For this piece, you can read the original here and let me know. What is this method called?

For another look at the way I synthesize work from multiple disciplines, this is also a useful piece:

As a software company founder, I am not subjected to the standards of peer review (much to my great relief!) This means I can write in a much more informal fashion, but on the down side, it also means I miss out on the collaborative and shaping input I might otherwise gain. We certainly hear from the practitioner community - I’m eager to learn from the academic community now too.

Looking forward to hearing your thoughts

(Christoph Haug) #4

Ironically, this is precisely what academics should do too, at least when the source of the number they have is not clear. I came across Elise’s blog post when I was digging into that 11 million number that kept popping up all the time and she had done the work that no academic had done.

(Christoph Haug) #5

Look, @Elise_Keith, your blog post is being cited by Steven Rogelberg. That’s how scientific facts are made :wink:

Image source: Der Meeting-Papst auf Deutschland-Tour - symm

Or at least I think it’s supposed to be your blog post. The slide says “Keith, 2016” although your blog post is from 2015. And your conference paper is from 2017… :thinking:

(Christoph Haug) #6

And now on CBS…

(Elise Keith) #7

You’d think some of that reflected glory would lead to more sales for my book, but a Business Insider pick it was not. They just don’t know what they’re missing… :wink: