Managed Security Services: CISO Does Not Bear Sole Liability
Benedikt Langer
8 min. read In many organisations, the CISO is seen as the person who stands accountable for security. ...
Read Article
7 min Reading Time
The average knowledge worker spends 31 hours per month in meetings they themselves deem unproductive. A total of 12 hours per week go toward meetings – fully one-third of working time. During core working hours, focus is broken every two minutes by meetings, emails, or chat messages. The cost? $37 billion annually in the U.S. alone. And yet, nothing changes – because meeting culture is the problem everyone complains about but no one decides to fix.
TL;DR
- 31 hours/month unproductive: Atlassian estimates the time specialists spend in meetings that generate no measurable output.
- 12 hours/week in meetings: 31% of working time goes to meetings. Since 2019, meeting load has doubled.
- 48% say “unnecessary”: Nearly half of all employees consider their most recent meeting superfluous; 61% say little or nothing was accomplished.
- One interruption every 2 minutes: Microsoft’s Work Trend Index 2025 shows focus is disrupted every two minutes during core working hours.
- $37 billion/year in damage: The annual cost of unproductive meetings in the U.S. That’s roughly $29,000 per employee per year.
The Data: Why Meeting Culture Is a Cost Problem
The evidence is clear – and comes from independent sources. Atlassian found that specialists spend an average of 31 hours per month in meetings they personally rate as unproductive. That’s nearly four full workdays vanishing into conference rooms – leaving no tangible change behind.
What makes a meeting unproductive? A meeting is unproductive if it lacks a defined purpose, fails to reach decisions, and assigns no concrete tasks. Most common causes: no agenda, too many attendees, no decision-maker present, and no follow-up after the session. A well-run meeting has no more than seven participants, a written agenda, lasts under 30 minutes, and ends with documented decisions or action items.
Meeting load has doubled since 2019. What was once an occasional annoyance pre-pandemic has become a permanent state due to remote work. Why? When spontaneous hallway encounters vanish, every alignment requires a calendar invite. Calendars filled up – and no one ever cleared them out again.
Microsoft’s Work Trend Index 2025 delivers the starkest figure: During core working hours, a knowledge worker’s focus is interrupted every two minutes – by meetings, emails, or chat notifications. Two minutes isn’t enough to finish a single thought – let alone develop a strategy.
Sources: Atlassian, Microsoft Work Trend Index 2025, Harvard Business Review
48% Say: “My Last Meeting Was Unnecessary”
Survey data is consistent – and sobering. 48% of respondents rated their most recent meeting as unnecessary. 53% called it a waste of time. 61% said little to nothing was achieved. 76% report feeling drained on days packed with meetings.
These aren’t fringe opinions. They’re majorities. A majority of knowledge workers consider a majority of their meetings pointless – yet still attend three to five of them daily. Why? Because meeting culture is a social norm, not a rational choice. And social norms don’t shift through insight – they shift through new defaults. Canceling a meeting marks you as uncooperative. Not being invited makes you feel overlooked. Having fewer meetings makes you appear less busy.
For IT organizations, the problem is especially acute. Software developers need uninterrupted focus blocks of at least 90 minutes to be productive. With interruptions every two minutes, those blocks simply cease to exist. The result? Code gets written between meetings – not instead of them. Quality suffers, velocity drops, and the CIO wonders why the team delivers nothing despite fully booked calendars.
What Companies That Mean Business Are Doing
The Harvard Business Review conducted a 14-month study across 76 companies to see what happens when organizations radically overhaul their meeting culture. Findings:
Introduce meeting-free days: Companies that implemented one or two meeting-free days per week reported productivity gains of 35-73%. Employee satisfaction rose measurably. Stress and perceptions of “micro-management” declined. The effect was strongest among teams previously burdened with the heaviest meeting loads.
Shorten default duration: Shifting the standard meeting length from 60 to 25 minutes sounds simple – but delivers massive impact. Logic: Meetings expand to fill available time (Parkinson’s Law). Twenty-five minutes forces focus on essentials. The five-minute buffer before the next meeting prevents the chronic chain of delays that destroys every calendar.
Cap participant numbers: Amazon’s “Two-Pizza Rule” – no meeting should include more people than two pizzas can feed – is widely known. Data backs it up: Decision quality measurably declines beyond eight participants. Beyond twelve, real discussion vanishes – replaced only by presentations to an audience.
Asynchronous before synchronous: 80% of today’s alignment meetings could happen asynchronously via documented decision templates. Loom videos, Notion docs with comment threads, or structured Slack channels can replace the “quick alignment” that routinely runs 45 minutes.
The Counterargument: Meetings Aren’t the Problem
Before the anti-meeting crowd celebrates: Not every meeting is bad. Strategic discussions, conflict resolution, and creative brainstorming require synchronous interaction. A counterpart’s facial expression, a spontaneous interjection, a shared whiteboard – these cannot be replicated asynchronously.
The issue isn’t meetings per se. It’s inflation: too many, too long, too many attendees, no agenda, no outcome. The solution isn’t “no meetings” – it’s “fewer, shorter, better.” In 2023, Shopify slashed 76% of all recurring meetings. The result wasn’t chaos – it was a more intentional meeting culture where every remaining meeting had to serve a clear purpose.
Leaders face a special responsibility: Their calendars set the standard for the entire organization. If the CIO spends eight hours daily in meetings, that signals: “Meetings matter more than focused work.” To drive change, leaders must model it – in their own calendars first.
The Math: What Reducing Meetings Really Delivers
For an employee earning €80,000 annually, 31 hours of unproductive meetings per month cost roughly €14,000 per year. For an IT department of 50 knowledge workers, that’s €700,000 per year vanishing into meeting rooms – not as investment, but as habit.
Cutting meeting load by one-third reclaims 10 hours of focus time per employee per month. This isn’t a productivity hack – it’s 1.5 additional workdays per person, now available for value-creating work. No new hires. No new tools. No budget increase. Just the decision to treat the calendar seriously.
The math works the other way, too: What if the 260 hours lost annually to meetings deemed pointless were redirected to deep work? For an engineering team working on a cloud migration, 260 hours of focus time per person is the difference between a quarter’s delay and on-time delivery. This isn’t a wellness program. It’s capacity planning.
Conclusion
31 hours per month in meetings with zero output. One interruption every two minutes. $37 billion in annual damage. These figures have been known for years. What’s missing isn’t insight – it’s consequence. Meeting-free days, 25-minute defaults, participant caps, and “asynchronous-first” policies – these tools are already on the table. The question isn’t whether meeting culture must change. The question is who in your organization will clean up their calendar – and then actually start with their own invitation list.
Frequently Asked Questions
How much time do knowledge workers spend in meetings?
On average, 12 hours per week – 31% of working time. Atlassian pegs unproductive meeting time at 31 hours per month. Since 2019, meeting load has roughly doubled – driven primarily by the shift to remote and hybrid work.
What does an unproductive meeting cost?
Unproductive meetings cost roughly $29,000 per employee per year. Across the U.S., that totals $37 billion annually. The calculation is based on the share of working time spent in meetings perceived as pointless, multiplied by average labor costs. For a 50-person IT department in Germany (€80,000 average salary), that equals around €700,000 per year.
Do meeting-free days really work?
Yes – the data is consistently positive. A Harvard Business Review study across 76 companies over 14 months showed productivity gains of 35-73% after introducing one or two meeting-free days per week. Employee satisfaction rose; stress fell. Crucially: Meeting-free days must be rigorously protected – a single exception is enough to undermine the culture.
How many participants should a meeting have?
Maximum seven for decision-making meetings; maximum twelve for information-sharing meetings. Decision quality measurably declines beyond eight participants. Amazon’s “Two-Pizza Rule” remains a practical benchmark. Every additional attendee who doesn’t actively contribute reduces the entire meeting’s efficiency – and incurs opportunity costs through their own lost focus time.
What did Shopify do about meeting culture?
In early 2023, Shopify eliminated 76% of all recurring meetings. Instead: asynchronous communication became the default; meetings were reserved only for cases with a clear agenda and defined outcomes. The result wasn’t a communications crisis – but a more intentional meeting culture. Remaining meetings grew shorter, sharper, and more productive.
Editor’s Reading Recommendations
More from the MBF Media Network
Header Image Source: Pexels / cottonbro studio (px:8468813)