Okay, you're 45 minutes into the weekly project meeting when someone asks, "Wait, what did we decide about the pricing and features comparison table?" Three people give three different answers. Sofiia, she's running the meeting, looks confused. Everyone else shrugs and is wondering if they missed something.
This isn't a meeting failure. I mean it is a failure, but not strictly because of the meeting. It’s your brain working exactly as designed.
Here's what most people don't realize about meetings — they're cognitive minefields. We pack them with so much more information and points of action than our brains can actually handle, but then we’re surprised when nothing sticks.
The research
A few years back, I was nerding out on the notion of context switching and I stumbled across Nelson Cowan's 2007 work on working memory. It turns out humans can really only hold 3-4 chunks of information at once, not what I’d always heard as the 7±2 from George Miller's 1956 research. But then, I dug deeper into what Miller actually said. Turns out it only applied to very specific memory tasks, not the complex discussions happening in your conference room with all of our modern distractions.
Okay, let’s try it out. Here’s a number of words. Look at them for 10 seconds, maybe play something in the background like a podcast to mimic a meeting. Maybe music for good measure. Maybe there’s a theme, dunno. Then, scroll away so you can’t see them. Write down/type as many words as you can remember. How’d you do? Did you get 3-4 and make team Cowan? Or somewhere in the 5-9 area, more Team Miller? More than nine?
Once I’d learned it, I began seeing it everywhere. I'd notice this in workshops, meetings, and check-ins. Often, in a list of about 10 things, people would remember so few of them. Maybe 3-5 and usually the ones at the beginning and end. The stuff in the middle? Flat gone.
Sound familiar? How often do you remember the middle part of a long meeting?
This is your brain trying to track seven agenda items, three side conversations, and someone's screen share all at once.
Then there are the other cognitive realities we ignore:
Your mental resources actually deplete as the day (and night) goes on
Context switching creates up to 40% efficiency loss
All sorts of biases play here, like authority bias means people give disproportionate weight to whoever has the most seniority or recency bias makes the last thing discussed feel most important, etc.
No wonder we end up having meetings about meetings, to clarify what happened in the original meeting. And we’re exhausted by it all.
Ready to work with your team's cognitive limits instead of against them? Let's make meetings work for you and your team, not against.
What actually works
The solution isn't to give up on meetings.
It's to work with our human brains, not against it.
Start with your most important decision when people are freshest. Break complex topics into smaller, digestible chunks. Give people time to process individually before jumping into group discussion. Write key points down in a place where everyone can see them and they don't disappear into the ether.
Most importantly — limit the number of outcomes you're trying to achieve. If your agenda has seven bullet points, your team's working memory is already overloaded before you even start. Cut it in half.
I started applying these insights with clients and teams I work with. Instead of cramming everything into one "strategic planning session," I recommend tackling one decision at a time. Instead of talking through problems in real-time, we'd start with individual thinking, then build up to group discussion. Focus in before flaring out.
The difference has been noticeable. People seem to remember what we'd discussed. Decisions stuck. Follow-up meetings became less necessary because we'd actually covered the ground fully and less of it.
Something else to consider
“The human brain has evolved to focus on one thing at a time.”
This insight from the emotional intelligence researcher captures why most meetings feel so exhausting. We're asking our brains to do something they weren't designed for — juggle multiple complex topics simultaneously while also tracking group dynamics and trying to contribute meaningfully.
Looking back
Most teams I work with are fighting their own cognitive architecture without realizing it. But once you understand how the brain and its working memory actually functions, the path forward becomes clear.
What would change if we started designing meetings around how people actually think and process information?
Until next time,
Skipper Chong Warson
Making product strategy and design work more human — and impactful
—
Tired of meetings where nothing sticks and decisions disappear into the ether? Let's make something better together. Book an intro call with How This Works co