Meetings, while sometimes necessary, are a tax on productivity. They are the worst kind: they feel like real work but often aren’t, and they often generate visibility for the organizer in a way unrelated to how useful they they are.<p>Anything that can be a task (or diff, or Figma, or CAD artifact, or deck, or whatever) should be: tasks have a chain of custody, they have a clear owner/POC, they can change hands, the can have artifacts attached, they are searchable and durable, leaders can consult them asynchronously so that 1-on-1 meetings are: “how can I solve or help you solve this thing that seems to be in the way?” and not “so, whatcha working on? how’s that novel coming Bryan?”<p>A focused voice or video chat with the minimum number of participants, decent audio gear, a clear agenda with clear resulting action items, and everyone deeply contextualized via durable, discoverable subject matter media is a net win. Personal charisma loses some of its effect, being prepared becomes the name of the game: this is a good thing.<p>Yes it’s higher friction, yes it raises the stakes on getting the agenda, participant list, and actions items really tight. Yes it forces leaders to read diffs (or whatever work product artifacts) and understand them. in order to be part of the process or run a sane performance cycle. Yes it cranks up the volume on the question: “do we <i>really</i> need a meeting here?”.<p>As a manager who ruthlessly suppressed fluffy meetings by running a tight ship on tasks and diffs and knowing the subject matter deeply: forced remote work is the best thing that ever happened to knowledge work.<p>Sucks to be a manager who can’t code, but we’re better off without them.