„What specific result do we need to achieve in the next 15 minutes to make this meeting successful?“ This is the question that managers and moderators can ask at the beginning, before the conversation gets lost in long explanations and side topics.
The idea is simple: participants should think not only about what needs to be discussed, but also about what needs to be achieved. This could be a decision on a specific issue, approval of a plan, assignment of tasks, or choosing a next step.
However, it is important to distinguish between a useful management tool and a proven universal result. There is no reliable data that one question automatically cuts every business meeting in half. It can help when the meeting has a clear purpose, the right participants are invited, and the conversation is moderated consistently.
Focus on the outcome, not the conversation
A 2026 study tested a brief pre-meeting goal orientation among 361 employees at a global technology company. The study analyzed 7,196 meetings. Participants were asked questions about the purpose of the upcoming meeting, but the results did not show a statistically significant improvement in meeting effectiveness.
The researchers did report greater awareness of participants’ goals and behaviors, suggesting that such a question can be useful as part of a broader meeting organization, but should not be presented as a stand-alone solution to the problem of time wasting.
McKinsey also puts the goal at the center of preparation. In the consulting firm's analysis, one of the key questions is "What is this meeting about?" According to McKinsey, a vague goal delays decisions and creates confusion, even when the conversation seems active.
15 minutes for direction, not for the entire meeting
A short time horizon doesn't mean that every question must be resolved in 15 minutes. It serves as a check on whether the conversation is moving toward a result. If the topic is complex, participants can formulate a specific intermediate goal: to choose between two options, clarify what data is missing, or determine who will prepare the proposal.
The World Economic Forum presents a similar model for 25-minute meetings. It divides the time into three parts: up to 12 minutes for context, eight minutes to focus on key issues, and five minutes for post-conversation actions. “Simply put, 25 minutes is practical, achievable, and backed by sound logic”, writes author Donna McGeorge.
A rule of thumb is to end a meeting with answers to three questions: what was agreed upon, who is taking on the task, and when it is due. If these answers are missing, even a short meeting can be ineffective.
The scale of the problem is also significant. A study by the National Bureau of Economic Research in the United States, based on more than 9,000 workers in Norway, estimated that meetings take up an average of 12% of work time and 14% of companies' payroll costs. The same study found that meetings can be beneficial through knowledge sharing and coordination, meaning the goal is not to eliminate them, but to use them more effectively.
Source: mckinsey.com