Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own.
Meetings are often considered a necessary evil in modern workplaces. In fact, many professionals today spend so much time in meetings that they feel there’s hardly any time left to do actual work — ironic, I know.
Yet, decades ago, Ingvar Kamprad, the legendary founder of IKEA, was a firm opponent of unnecessary meetings, advocating instead for brief, focused discussions.
You might then wonder how we let our work culture get to this stage of wasting time, with perspectives like Kamprad’s being present then and now. However, while his philosophy of cutting down on meeting length and frequency to boost productivity resonates with the current debate about workplace efficiency, some might argue that this approach cannot be relevant in an era defined by digital communication and hybrid work setups.
But Kamprad may also have been right all along. So, let’s examine the core of his philosophy and see how it relates to today’s demands.
The problems with excessive meetings
We touched upon the huge portion of the day that meetings often take up earlier, but for more context, a study by the Harvard Business Review found that executives spend nearly 23 hours a week in meetings — an increase from less than 10 hours in the 1960s. Remarks that this can be whittled down to longer hours or harder work are completely wide of the mark, and even if they were true, you’d be better off having fewer meetings.
That’s because a survey by Korn Ferry found that 67% of employees believe that too much time in meetings keeps them from doing their best work. What I’m getting from this is that by ditching unnecessary meetings, you’ll save time, but what you do in that reduced time will be better.
Kamprad was keenly aware of this reality and danger. His approach at IKEA was famously frugal, not only financially but also with time. He insisted that meetings be kept short, actionable and focused only on the essentials, with next steps and action items being prioritized.
His philosophy stems from a deep understanding that excessive meetings often lead to diluted focus, poor decision-making, and, ultimately, lower productivity. This completely resonates with me. As a former CTO within a remote engineering team of 150, I was constantly on calls that took my attention away and de-railed operations. This was what led me to create Bubbles, an AI note-taker and async collaboration platform.
At Bubbles, we have proven through a meeting survey that this communication style and willingness to keep meetings to strictly essential topics can reduce meeting time by up to 38%. Personally, I have experienced a highly positive knock-on effect in terms of productivity because of this.
Related: Why It’s More Productive to Have Fewer Meetings
The economic cost of meetings
Beyond the frustration they cause, long meetings have a real economic cost. According to a report from Doodle, poorly organized meetings cost U.S. companies $399 billion in 2019 alone. These costs are due to lost productivity, wasted time, and ineffective follow-up actions. A study by Microsoft also found that after 30 to 40 minutes of a meeting, participants’ attention begins to wane, leading to less effective outcomes. Personal experience leads me to agree with this, so I advocate for keeping meetings focussed on critical topics only. Everything else can be sent in a bubble, a Slack message, or an email.
That’s especially important because, from a company perspective, time is money, and reducing unnecessary meetings could lead to significant savings in terms of both time and employee engagement. Kamprad asserted that the longer the meeting, the less productive it becomes for both the company and the participant. I’d say this is still true today.
Kamprad’s philosophy in the modern workplace
In an age of online meeting fatigue and constant “quick-pings,” Ingvar Kamprad’s meeting philosophy feels more relevant than ever. His belief that time should be used efficiently aligns with the growing popularity of asynchronous work models, where teams communicate and collaborate without needing to be online at the same time. While this is growing, online meeting stats are still staggering.
Microsoft Teams, for example, boast 320 million users worldwide in 2024, and in the remote working world, 76% of employees use video calls every day. Mix that with the Korn Ferry statistics above and we quickly realize that Kamprad’s focus on quick decision-making and streamlined processes fits well with these modern approaches. His method of cutting down on unnecessary face-to-face time allowed for more work to be done.
Related: It’s Time to Retire Jeff Bezos’ 2-Pizza Rule for Meetings — Here’s Why.
Are minimalist meetings the best option?
However, Kamprad’s philosophy isn’t without potential pitfalls. While reducing meeting time can certainly boost productivity, the quality of collaboration and team cohesion could suffer if overdone. Not all meetings are wasteful; some are necessary for creative collaboration, making critical decisions, or aligning teams on strategic goals like OKRs.
According to a 2021 survey by Gartner, 82% of employees said that well-structured and purposeful meetings are essential to their productivity and engagement. For me, the key is finding a balance between minimizing time-wasting meetings and ensuring that essential discussions still happen effectively.
Conclusion: Still relevant — but adaptable
So, is Ingvar Kamprad’s meeting philosophy still relevant today? The answer is yes — with some meeting management adjustments. His principles of focusing on essential communication, cutting down time-wasting, and ensuring meetings lead to clear action points remain critical to modern business practices. However, as our working world becomes more digital, companies need to adapt this philosophy by incorporating new tools and methods to ensure collaboration doesn’t suffer.
At the end of the day, Kamprad’s legacy offers a valuable reminder: meetings should never become the work itself. Make sure you stick to that!
