Meetings have become a cornerstone of modern professional life. On average, employees devote up to 8 hours per week to these gatherings. They aim to boost collaboration and facilitate decision-making, but they don’t always hit their target. Currently, more than half of the time spent in work meetings is perceived as unnecessary, and many professionals leave the session without clear next steps.
This is one of the main conclusions from the report ‘The Cost of Bad Meetings’ by Jabra, a company specializing in audio and video solutions for professionals, in which they analyze the impact of ineffective meetings in today’s work environment and the consequences they cause at the economic, productivity, and employee experience levels.
Technological Failures and the Rise of the Meeting Debt
The impact of an ineffective meeting isn’t always felt at the moment it happens, and in many cases its effects become evident later. According to the study, 66% of professionals report leaving meetings without clearly defined actions, which leads to the need to schedule more sessions (59%) and increases workload (59%). Among the causes, technology problems play a significant role.
Currently, 52% of virtual meetings have technical faults, a reality that rises in the case of hybrid meetings, i.e., those that combine in-person and remote participants. In this case, the percentage of meetings with issues climbs to 75%. Among the most common, there is difficulty hearing or seeing all participants correctly. This results, on average, in an 11-minute increase per hybrid meeting, while disrupting the flow of conversation.
“Having a well-organized meeting is almost as important as having the right technological infrastructure. Poor connectivity or audio/video issues directly impact the outcomes of the session, even doubling the need to revisit some topics later,” explains Camile Petit, Sales Manager for Iberia at Jabra.
Consequently, some participants opt to do without video as a possible solution to these issues, a decision that makes understanding even harder and increases by 43% the need for further meetings. All of this generates what Jabra calls a growing “meeting debt”: a cycle in which an ineffective meeting leads to another, resulting in a cumulative impact that ends up harming the company’s productivity.
Much More Than Time Lost: Costs and Burnout Among Professionals
The consequences of a bad meeting go beyond inefficient use of work time; they also affect a company’s finances and the mental load borne by professionals. According to the research, in an organization of 5,000 employees, the combination of inefficient meetings and tech problems can generate productivity losses exceeding €130 million per year (roughly $140 million). Of these, more than €112 million (about $121 million) are related to time spent in unnecessary or low-value meetings, while another €7.3 million (about $7.9 million) are attributed to technical incidents in hybrid meetings.
Regarding employee experience, 87% of professionals report feeling a certain fear toward meetings. Moreover, 42% hit their energy limit after two consecutive hours of meetings, and 83% after more than four hours. All of this can translate into a diminished attention span, a greater need to revisit matters afterward, and reduced participation.
On this point, the format in which one attends the meeting also matters. Half of professionals joining remotely for a hybrid meeting have felt excluded at times, a factor that is more pronounced for women (with a 16% higher likelihood of feeling sidelined) and for junior employees (26%).
“Virtual or hybridly organized meetings are a widely used solution in companies to speed up task resolution or to boost collaboration; however, it’s essential that the conditions are in place for this to happen. In hybrid environments, technology has become a key element for fostering more inclusive, balanced participation that can contribute value,” adds Petit.
AI Can Improve Meetings, but It Cannot Fix Their Shortcomings
Artificial Intelligence can also contribute to more productive meetings, thanks to tools for generating transcripts, summaries, or follow-up. In this sense, the quality of meetings takes on even greater importance. According to the study, 3 out of 4 professionals have already tried this type of solution, but fewer than 1 in 3 use them regularly.
These results suggest that the main challenge isn’t the technology itself, but the conditions under which it’s used. When conversations are confusing, decisions aren’t clearly defined, or participants have difficulty hearing and understanding one another, the value of these tools is significantly reduced.
In other words, AI can help collect documentation and facilitate the follow-up of meetings, but it can’t replace the need for well-organized meetings and a solid technology experience.
“AI is capable of improving a well-organized meeting, but it can’t fix one that’s failing. If organizations want to unlock its full potential, they must start by ensuring that participants can see, hear, and understand each other clearly. The effectiveness of these tools largely depends on the quality of the conversations they are designed to support,” concludes Petit.
