Subtle impact of long meetings on service delivery in public organisations

_______________

OPINION

By Rosette Maska

Studies have long informed that excessive meetings reduce productivity, weaken decision-making, and exhaust employees (Perlow, Hadley & Eun, 2017; Rogelberg et al., 2014). Yet in many public institutions across Sub-Saharan Africa, meetings continue to stretch for hours or entire days far beyond what the evidence recommends. What should be a tool for coordination and problem-solving has instead become a silent drag on public service delivery, hence the efficiency paradox.

While private companies and public organisations in developed countries have embraced short, structured, time-bound meetings, many institutions in the region maintain a culture where long sessions are seen as a sign of seriousness, inclusivity, or accountability. The reality is different. Prolonged meetings slow down decisions, demotivate staff, drain resources, and weaken the very services citizens rely on.

Lost productivity and slower decisions

One of the most damaging consequences of lengthy meetings is lost productivity. When entire departments spend full days in boardrooms, approvals stall, public queries go unanswered, and operational work is pushed late into the evening or forgotten altogether. Global research shows that high meeting loads correlate with unfinished tasks and reduced concentration effects that become more harmful in already resource-strained public sectors (Allen, Lehmann-Willenbrock & Rogelberg, 2015).

Long meetings also contribute to decision paralysis. Many of these sessions end with deferred conclusions or calls for “another meeting,” creating cycles of delay. Organisations that adopt shorter, more focused meetings typically make decisions faster because discussions are structured, pre-reading is shared early, and time limits are enforced (Perlow, Hadley & Eun, 2017).

The human and financial toll

The human cost is often overlooked. Employees leave long meetings mentally drained, disengaged, and less innovative. For civil servants juggling heavy workloads, this constant cognitive fatigue undermines performance and morale.

The financial implications are equally troubling. Extended meetings attract transport refunds, per diems, allowances, overtime, utilities, and catering costs. Across a financial year, these expenditures quietly consume significant chunks of the public purse. In some institutions, annual meeting costs rival the operational budgets of critical departments yet this outflow remains normalised.

Why this paradox persists

Several structural and cultural factors entrench this meeting culture: rigid bureaucracies, leadership that does not enforce discipline, and limited adoption of digital tools that could replace physical meetings. In many institutions, presence in meetings is treated as a marker of loyalty or hard work, even when it reduces actual output

Building a better meeting culture

Reform requires discipline, not large budgets. The following can significantly improve efficiency:

• Strict agendas and time limits: Allocate precise time for each agenda item and avoid overruns.
• Decision-focused meetings: Circulate briefing notes and decision memos beforehand so meetings concentrate on approvals.
• Short stand-up huddles: Ten-minute daily check-ins maintain alignment without wasting hours.
• Digital collaboration: Use virtual platforms, workflow systems, shared dashboards, and emails for updates.
• Leadership example: Managers must model brevity and enforce accountability for meeting misuse.

A path to faster, citizen-centred service

Resolving the efficiency paradox is not about meeting etiquette; it is about protecting public time and improving service delivery. When meetings are shorter, sharper, and purposeful, decisions accelerate, staff remain motivated, and institutions become more responsive to citizens’ needs.

The writer is an independent researcher and a member of the Network for Multi-disciplinary Research Africa