Collaboration in transition: what Meetings are trying to replace

Claas
Nov 20, 2025
5 min read

I recently came across an app that allows an AI version of yourself to attend meetings for you. It didn’t sound clever. It sounded strange. I couldn’t help but wonder: who actually wants this? And what does it say about the meetings we create? Because if a machine can sit through your meeting and summarize it just fine, the real question is: why are we meeting at all?

That made me pause. And write this.

I was also reminded of another story. A while ago, it made headlines that a software engineer in India secretly held seven full-time jobs at once - all remote, all overlapping. Technically, yes, he was gaming the system. But what struck me more was this: attending meetings and delivering just 10-15% of expected performance was enough to survive in multiple roles? In ambitious companies, no one noticed for a long time? But it raises a deeper question: if it’s possible to work full-time for seven employers without anyone noticing, what exactly are meetings doing?

As someone working in a startup consultancy, I’m lucky. Our meetings are simple, focused, and mostly necessary. We’re still small enough that conversations matter and most of us are involved in the right places.

But I’ve also seen the other side. Big organizations where you sit in calls with a dozen people, three of whom actually speak. Regular updates that could have been shared in a message. Weekly syncs where most people have their camera and mic off, because they’re doing other things.

It makes you think. Not just about meetings, but about attention. Presence. The point of it all.

How it used to be

Before the pandemic, collaboration relied heavily on physical presence. Many alignments happened informally, spontaneously, and without a calendar invite. Teams worked side by side or at least within earshot. Quick check-ins across desks were standard. Hallway and kitchen conversations covered everything from project updates to general sentiment, no agenda needed.

Working together on-site created visibility and allowed for spontaneous problem-solving and support. Jour fixes and status meetings existed, but in between, people simply got things done. Roles and responsibilities were mostly clear or emerged naturally, without the need for constant confirmation.

What changed?

The pandemic and the remote push

The sudden shift to remote work had a massive impact on how we collaborate. Spontaneous interaction disappeared. Visibility and reachability had to be rebuilt. Trust and connection could no longer develop informally.

At the same time: a leap in tools and tech

Video calls, collaboration platforms, and async tools became everyday standards: Teams, Zoom, Miro, Slack, Notion, and more. Documentation, contribution, and feedback became easier and more complex. Calendars turned into the primary arena for collaboration.

Where are we now?

Meetings have become the repair shop for lost proximity. They are everywhere and still somehow too much. Collaboration now happens in the calendar. Availability matters more than contribution. What used to be casual and trust-based now needs planning, moderation, documentation and often feels inflated.

But meetings are rarely the actual problem. They are a symptom. A symptom of the desire for control, safety, and synchronization deeply rooted in work culture and made more visible by remote setups.

Remote setups led to more formal time blocks. Calls are shorter but more frequent. With more meetings comes more context switching, and less space for deep work. Meetings now serve a social role; visibility and connection more than pure content exchange. Collaboration happens through tools, not between people. Comments replace conversations, boards replace rooms. Recurring meetings have become default, while ad-hoc calls with a clear purpose often work better. One-on-ones are often the only format that self-corrects, they get shortened or canceled when not needed. That alone says a lot.

What is working and what is not

Flexibility through remote work remains a win, as does broader participation via digital collaboration. Better documentation and traceability are positive effects. But they come with trade-offs: more meetings driven by fear of misalignment, less attention due to fragmented schedules, and a noticeable drop in informal clarity and team rhythm. Constant presence in virtual space is exhausting without necessarily producing better outcomes.

What can we do about it?

Not everything can be solved with a new tool or a no-meeting-Friday. But there are practices that help.

Clarify the purpose: every meeting should have a reason: a decision, an update, or a connection. If that’s missing, async updates are enough.
Focus on contribution, not attendance: results matter more than hours logged on a call.
Rebuild informal space with intention: use virtual drop-ins, open hours, and unstructured conversations to foster connection.
Structure async collaboration: define how and where people give feedback, make decisions, and move work forward. It won’t organize itself.
Challenge rituals: dailies and check-ins aren’t bad, but they’re not sacred either. Review them regularly. If they don’t help, let them go.
Protect deep work: meeting-free time blocks aren’t a luxury, they’re a necessity. Teams at GitLab, Shopify, and SAP actively protect these windows.
Make presence count: if someone chooses to come to the office, that should mean something. Let in-person time be for real collaboration, not dial-ins from the same floor.
And finally: not everything needs to be said in every meeting. Clarity and trust grow more often in silence than in repetition.

I’m not offering radical recommendations I wouldn’t follow myself. But there are bolder examples. Shopify, for instance, deleted all recurring meetings from calendars in 2023. Only those that were truly missed were brought back. The result: less calendar reflex, more clarity.

And sometimes, all it takes is one realization: if no one dares to cancel a meeting that no one understands anymore, something’s off.

Looking back - and forward

The pandemic acted as a catalyst. Much of what changed was overdue. Flexibility has opened doors, allowed for more inclusion and choice, and made work more accessible across locations, roles, and time zones. We don’t want to go back.

But collaboration without co-location remains a challenge. The tools held up. The people changed. At least that’s how it feels. Being remote requires structure and clarity, things that proximity used to provide on its own.

If people want to work in an office again, we shouldn’t just allow it. We should support it. The cost of presence is not higher than the cost of isolation, distraction, and inefficiency. Hybrid shouldn’t mean that physical presence comes with hidden penalties. If showing up to the office came without transition cost, without losing flexibility, time, or autonomy, many more people would choose it.

And while the future will likely stay hybrid, we should pause when we hear things like: “There’s now an app that lets an AI version of you attend meetings on your behalf.” That’s not collaboration. That’s delegation to the edge of absurdity.

We’ve come too far to simply reverse course. But if collaboration becomes performative, scheduled, and automated to the point where our presence no longer matters, we’ll have lost more than we gained.

Rethinking collaboration does not mean cancelling everything or switching tools. It starts with being more deliberate about how we work, why we meet, and when we actually need to talk.

It’s not about doing less. It’s about doing it with more purpose.

That made me pause. And write this.

As someone working in a startup consultancy, I’m lucky. Our meetings are simple, focused, and mostly necessary. We’re still small enough that conversations matter and most of us are involved in the right places.

But I’ve also seen the other side. Big organizations where you sit in calls with a dozen people, three of whom actually speak. Regular updates that could have been shared in a message. Weekly syncs where most people have their camera and mic off, because they’re doing other things.

It makes you think. Not just about meetings, but about attention. Presence. The point of it all.

How it used to be

Working together on-site created visibility and allowed for spontaneous problem-solving and support. Jour fixes and status meetings existed, but in between, people simply got things done. Roles and responsibilities were mostly clear or emerged naturally, without the need for constant confirmation.

What changed?

The pandemic and the remote push

The sudden shift to remote work had a massive impact on how we collaborate. Spontaneous interaction disappeared. Visibility and reachability had to be rebuilt. Trust and connection could no longer develop informally.

At the same time: a leap in tools and tech

Video calls, collaboration platforms, and async tools became everyday standards: Teams, Zoom, Miro, Slack, Notion, and more. Documentation, contribution, and feedback became easier and more complex. Calendars turned into the primary arena for collaboration.

Where are we now?

But meetings are rarely the actual problem. They are a symptom. A symptom of the desire for control, safety, and synchronization deeply rooted in work culture and made more visible by remote setups.

What is working and what is not

What can we do about it?

Not everything can be solved with a new tool or a no-meeting-Friday. But there are practices that help.

Clarify the purpose: every meeting should have a reason: a decision, an update, or a connection. If that’s missing, async updates are enough.

Focus on contribution, not attendance: results matter more than hours logged on a call.

Rebuild informal space with intention: use virtual drop-ins, open hours, and unstructured conversations to foster connection.

Structure async collaboration: define how and where people give feedback, make decisions, and move work forward. It won’t organize itself.

Challenge rituals: dailies and check-ins aren’t bad, but they’re not sacred either. Review them regularly. If they don’t help, let them go.

Protect deep work: meeting-free time blocks aren’t a luxury, they’re a necessity. Teams at GitLab, Shopify, and SAP actively protect these windows.

Make presence count: if someone chooses to come to the office, that should mean something. Let in-person time be for real collaboration, not dial-ins from the same floor.

And finally: not everything needs to be said in every meeting. Clarity and trust grow more often in silence than in repetition.

I’m not offering radical recommendations I wouldn’t follow myself. But there are bolder examples. Shopify, for instance, deleted all recurring meetings from calendars in 2023. Only those that were truly missed were brought back. The result: less calendar reflex, more clarity.

And sometimes, all it takes is one realization: if no one dares to cancel a meeting that no one understands anymore, something’s off.

Looking back - and forward

The pandemic acted as a catalyst. Much of what changed was overdue. Flexibility has opened doors, allowed for more inclusion and choice, and made work more accessible across locations, roles, and time zones. We don’t want to go back.

But collaboration without co-location remains a challenge. The tools held up. The people changed. At least that’s how it feels. Being remote requires structure and clarity, things that proximity used to provide on its own.

And while the future will likely stay hybrid, we should pause when we hear things like: “There’s now an app that lets an AI version of you attend meetings on your behalf.” That’s not collaboration. That’s delegation to the edge of absurdity.

We’ve come too far to simply reverse course. But if collaboration becomes performative, scheduled, and automated to the point where our presence no longer matters, we’ll have lost more than we gained.

Rethinking collaboration does not mean cancelling everything or switching tools. It starts with being more deliberate about how we work, why we meet, and when we actually need to talk.

It’s not about doing less. It’s about doing it with more purpose.

Comments