It slowly dawned on Ian Hughes that at least half of the meetings he attended were a waste of time. So he rewrote the rules.  Now, if someone schedules a meeting at his research company, Consumer Intelligence, they must explain to every single person invited why they should attend. And anyone can walk out halfway through if it’s unproductive.  Crucially, there’s no such thing as a mandatory meeting.  The number of meetings per week, or even per day, seems to be increasing, and people are really fed up.  “Every single meeting in this company is now optional,” Hughes said from his company office in Bristol in the UK.  This transition to a more productive working day hasn’t been easy though, Hughes acknowledges that many managers took a while to buy into his new plan when it was introduced three years ago. And there are still probably too many meetings being scheduled. But, Hughes said his approach has increased productivity and improved office culture.  “Is there any value in a long meeting when an email would suffice? If not, then let’s not have a meeting,” he said.  Hughes is battling a problem that has invaded most offices. Managers spend a third of their time in meetings, studies have shown many of them an unproductive waste of time.  “The number of meetings per week, or even per day, seems to be increasing, and people are really fed up with it,” said Ralf Wetzel, associate professor for organisation and management at the Vlerick Business School in Belgium. “The problem is that managers don’t know how to change this culture of meetings.”  Meetings are often called by insecure managers, Wetzel added. Bosses who fear they’ve lost control, and don’t trust their employees, often schedule multiple meetings to micromanage every decision. The meeting room becomes the only place managers communicate with their team, which is a poor way to resolve problems.  It’s those managers who often go from one meeting to another, all day, without doing any actual work, said Blaire Palmer, CEO of That People Thing, a management consultancy outside London, UK. “We’re quite addicted to meetings,” Palmer said. “If we’re not going to meetings, sometimes we wonder what we’re supposed to be doing.”  Luckily there are easy ways to fix the problem. Learn how to delegate and then let employees figure out solutions on their own. Invite only essential people to meetings. And, ensure everyone in attendance understands the purpose of the meeting. That end goal ought to be making a decision.  Simple steps to meaningful gatherings...  1. Let people complete tasks on their own, instead of using meetings to micromanage  2. Invite only essential people  3. Skip lengthy status reports  4. Use meetings mosty to problem solve and reach solutions  “We often schedule meeting after meeting searching for an answer, and then we make the decision we knew we were going to make all along,” Palmer said. “Instead, make it clear in that first meeting you will be reaching a decision at the end of the hour.”  For regular meetings, the ones your department schedules every day or every week, consider if they actually bring value to the company, Palmer said. Chances are, you can get the same kind of check-up done with a quick email or phone call. Or better yet, empower people to make their own decisions.  The art of the productive meeting  Changing how you approach meetings will result in quicker, less formal, less hierarchical meetings — and that’s where real collaboration happens, Palmer said.  David Hale did just that four months ago at his San Francisco, US-based company, Gigwalk, which produces software to help with project management. He noticed his engineering team would hold meetings standing up, never longer than 15 minutes, and with lightning-fast updates. The meetings consisted of everyone recounting what they did yesterday, what they’re doing today, and what hurdles are in their way.  “We have an open office, so this was literally happening right next to my desk, and I’m looking at this and thinking, ‘Damn, this is effective,” Hale recalled.  Changing how you approach meetings will result in quicker, less formal, less hierarchical meetings.  His management staff used to hold three longer meetings a week. Now, they hold one longer strategy session on Mondays and two shorter “stand-up” meetings modelled after the ones used by his engineering department. The practice has also inspired him to cancel regularly scheduled meetings and any meetings about issues that could be resolved by email.  Fewer meetings means managers are less involved with the details of projects, but Hale said often that leads to innovation. “When you’re getting positive surprises, your team coming to you with good ideas you hadn’t considered, you’re being a successful manager,” Hale said.  For Hughes, the culture of fewer meetings even extends to his clients. Recently, one of his clients asked for a two-day meeting to discuss strategic plans, but Hughes responded that one day would be enough.  “Let’s not put a two-day meeting in the diary just because we can,” Hughes said. “If there’s no value in a two-day meeting over one, the customer will be grateful that we saved them the time.”  Best of all, Hughes said, reducing the number of meetings not only frees up time for managers. It actually contributes to a change in culture: managers shouldn’t focus on time in boardrooms but on how to actually get things done.  To comment on this story or anything else you have seen on BBC Capital, please head over to our Facebook page or message us on Twitter.
Stuck in back to back meetings? Here's how to ditch them and just get on with your job.