The Meeting Existence Test

Prototype the decision or deliverable first, then keep only the part of the meeting that still earns its time.

Here is the whole idea in plain language, with no jargon. Before you schedule a meeting to decide something or produce something, make a rough first version of that thing yourself. Write the decision you think is right, or draft the document, schedule, or shortlist.

Then send it to the people involved and ask them to do one of three things: approve it, correct one specific part, or tell you what fact is missing. Their answers usually settle most of it before anyone meets.

Often you can cancel the meeting, or shorten it to the one point that is still open. You only keep a full meeting when the disagreement is real, crosses someone's authority, needs live back-and-forth, or depends on human judgment. You do not need any special software to do this — a document and an email are enough, and nothing here asks you to sign up for anything.

A meeting is supposed to produce a concrete result:

• a decision
• an approved draft
• a ranked shortlist
• a plan or schedule
• named owners and next actions
• a recommendation with tradeoffs

Do not use the cancellation rule blindly for legally required meetings, safety reviews, sensitive employee matters, crisis response, or conversations where trust and human nuance are the work. You can still prepare an artifact first, but the artifact does not replace accountable judgment.

Write one sentence:

When this meeting ends, we will have __________.

Weak: "alignment on the launch"

Useful: "an approved launch date, one owner for each workstream, and a written list of risks that can move the date"

If you cannot name the output, do not send the invite yet.

Make the ugliest useful version of the output. Use real inputs, not invented ones.

Examples:

A real prototype puts the proposed decision or deliverable into practice. A fake test only asks people to imagine it.

Fake: "What should the homepage say?"

Real: "Here is the proposed homepage. Change the line that is inaccurate or unclear."

Fake: "Which vendor do you like?"

Real: "Against these approved criteria, Vendor B is the current recommendation. Name the missing fact or wrong assumption that changes it."

Send the artifact before the meeting with a bounded response request:

Please respond by [time] with one of these:
1. Approve - this is good enough to use.
2. Change - name the exact section and your proposed correction.
3. Blocked - name the missing fact or authority that prevents a decision.

Do not ask "Thoughts?" It produces commentary, not a decision.

Use the response to choose the smallest live conversation that still earns its cost.

• Cancel: The artifact is approved or the comments resolve it.
• Shorten: One bounded issue remains. Invite only the people who own or can settle it.
• Keep: The remaining disagreement is consequential, crosses authority, needs live negotiation, or depends on human nuance.
• Stop and escalate: The prototype reveals legal, safety, regulatory, privacy, employee, or material financial risk.

Copy this, fill it in, and send it. It works in any document or email — no tool required.

MEETING EXISTENCE TEST

1. DECISION OR DELIVERABLE
When this is done, we will have:

2. FIRST WORKING VERSION
[Put the actual draft, recommendation, schedule, or shortlist here.]

3. EVIDENCE AND CONSTRAINTS
Known facts:
Approved criteria:
Budget / deadline / policy limits:
Sources:

4. OPEN UNCERTAINTIES
What could change this version?
What is missing?
What must a human decide?

5. RESPONSE
[ ] Approve
[ ] Change this exact part:
[ ] Blocked by this missing fact or authority:

6. MEETING RULE
Cancel if:
Shorten and narrow if:
Keep the meeting if:
Decision owner:
Response deadline:

Use only an AI tool approved for the information involved. Remove or mask sensitive customer, employee, legal, financial, health, or security data unless the tool and account are approved for it.

You are helping me prepare a first working version before a meeting.

The meeting is supposed to produce:
[one concrete decision or deliverable]

Use only the source material below. Do not invent facts, quotes, numbers, policies, customer needs, or outcomes.
Mark missing information as [MISSING].

Create a one-page working draft with:
1. Proposed decision or deliverable
2. Evidence and constraints
3. Tradeoffs
4. Assumptions that may be wrong
5. Missing facts
6. The smallest questions that require a human decision

Source material:
[paste approved, non-sensitive source material]

Run this on one recurring meeting for three cycles before making a broad claim.

Do not translate this into a made-up productivity percentage. Look for behavior:

• Did people use the artifact?
• Did it produce a decision?
• Did it expose the real disagreement?
• Did the meeting shrink without creating rework?
• Did the decision hold?

1. 1Pick one recurring meeting with a concrete output.
2. 2Complete sections 1, 3, and 6 of the template.
3. 3Build the rough version in section 2.
4. 4Send it with the approve / change / blocked response.
5. 5Apply the meeting rule.
6. 6Record the outcome in the scorecard.
7. 7Repeat twice, then keep, change, or kill the method.

The episode's public show notes must link every tool actually used to produce the episode or demonstrated in the build. Use verified official URLs. If Andrew has a legitimate affiliate link for an actual tool used, label it clearly and state that the show may earn a commission at no extra cost to the listener. Tool selection remains editorially independent.

This meeting method is tool-neutral. Do not add a software recommendation or affiliate link merely to fill this section. The release editor should insert the verified production-tool list only after the final episode is made.

AI can speed up a first draft. It cannot supply accountability. A person still owns:

• the purpose of the meeting
• source quality and factual accuracy
• permission to use the information
• the decision and its consequences
• legal, safety, privacy, and employee judgment
• final approval

This playbook is built to run on its own. Everything above works with a document and an email — no account, no signup, and no purchase required.

A guided GreatArrow rollout of the Meeting Existence Test — shared templates, response reminders, and scorecard tracking set up for a whole team — is not yet available. Until it ships, use the do-it-yourself steps above. This is a status note, not a launch promise or a date.