Hybrid Meetings

This module teaches Amazon's narrative-memo approach to running decision meetings, built around Amazon's practice of replacing slide decks with written memos and generalizing it to any decision or inform meeting participants run. Participants learn the Two-Pizza Rule for meeting size, the structure of a narrative memo (full sentences, data, FAQ, recommendation), and the "study hall" silent-reading opening. They then write a one-page memo for a real recurring meeting using a provided template, exchange it with a partner for silent reading and feedback, and discuss where this format would help and what cultural barriers stand in the way of adopting it.

This module teaches the 4 P's framework (Purpose, Product, Personal Benefit, Process) for designing effective meeting invites. Participants use a real recurring meeting from their own calendar and, working in partner pairs, rewrite its title, body, agenda, and norms using the framework. Each partner takes a turn applying the 4 P's to the other's meeting, producing a redesigned invite they can actually send.

This module teaches participants how to design meetings that hold up when authority is unclear ??? multiple stakeholders, overlapping decision rights, or decisions that don't stick. Participants learn three common failure modes (Phantom Decision-Maker, Competing Authority, Absent Decision-Maker) and the DACI model (Driver, Approver, Contributor, Informed) for assigning a single, unambiguous final decision-maker. They practice applying DACI through a case study built around a scenario with three VPs holding informal, overlapping authority over an internal tool launch ??? mapping roles, naming an Approver, and planning pre-alignment ??? then discuss real authority-tension situations from their own work and commit to a specific stakeholder conversation. The three-VP case is a scenario for practicing the framework; the DACI structure and pre-meeting moves generalize to any meeting with unclear decision rights.

This module teaches participants how to build a lightweight system for improving recurring meetings over time, rather than treating meeting design as a one-time fix. Participants learn four common failure modes in meeting feedback (too late, too vague, attribution risk, no action loop), a three-tier framework for matching feedback frequency and depth to a meeting's stakes (Micro-feedback, Monthly Retro, Quarterly Redesign), and three anonymity levels for collecting input (Identified, Pseudonymous, Fully Anonymous). The module closes with the Action Loop Rule ??? never ask for feedback you don't intend to act on ??? and participants apply everything by designing a feedback system for one of their own recurring meetings, including tier, questions, anonymity level, and action loop, then exchanging designs with a partner for feedback.

This module teaches Patrick Lencioni's four-meeting-type framework from Death by Meeting: Daily Check-in, Weekly Tactical, Monthly Strategic, and Quarterly Off-site ??? each with its own length, frequency, and purpose. Participants learn why mixing these types into one "meeting stew" lets urgent tactical work crowd out important strategic work, then apply four diagnostic questions to audit their own recurring meetings: what type is this meeting now, what type should it be, is it missing from the calendar entirely, and is it mixing types. Participants type-audit their top 5 recurring meetings, identify a mis-typed meeting with a partner, and commit as a group to splitting, reducing, or eliminating one specific meeting.

This module has participants audit how well AI note-takers capture their real meetings, then use what they find to redesign how they run meetings ??? not the AI tool itself. As homework, participants run an AI note-taker across three meetings (one they organize, one they attend, one recurring) and score each summary against a five-dimension rubric covering decisions captured, action items with owners, usefulness to non-attendees, named tensions, and cleanup effort. In session, they compare their lowest-scoring meetings in a round robin and group discussion to surface patterns in what makes meetings easier or harder for AI to capture, then close by committing to one specific "I will" change to test in their next meeting.

This module teaches how to choose the right asynchronous communication format instead of defaulting to whatever mode a team habitually uses. Participants learn the four async modes ??? email, chat, Loom/recorded video, and shared docs with comments ??? and use a four-question decision tree to match the mode to the message. Practice includes auditing recent sent items to spot mismatches (like emails that should have been a Loom, or meetings that should have been async) and a partner discussion on their team's default async habits and where mode-mismatch friction shows up.

This module opens Oak & Reeds' Hybrid Meetings workshop by helping participants decide which meetings deserve to exist and how to run the ones that do. Participants share personal challenges and goals with a partner, then apply a decision flowchart and an Async vs. Sync Decision Matrix (mapping High/Low Emotion against High/Low Complexity) to real meetings on their own calendars. The module also introduces core hybrid facilitation practices???engagement triggers, physicality breaks, facilitating rather than presenting, and rotating meeting roles???that are built out in later modules.

This module teaches the 7 P's framework for planning high-quality meetings: Purpose, Product, People, Process, Pitfalls, Prep, and Practical Concerns. Participants learn why meetings go off the rails when these elements are assumed rather than clearly stated, including how to articulate a meeting's personal benefit (the "what's in it for me") to drive engagement. Participants apply the framework by identifying their organization's most critical cross-functional meetings, then work in small groups to map one real meeting they're a critical contributor to against all 7 P's, capturing their thinking on a flip chart and sharing results with the full group.

This module teaches the 4 P's framework (Purpose, Product, Personal Benefit, Process) for planning effective hybrid meetings. Participants apply each element to a real, upcoming meeting they are organizing or facilitating: classifying its purpose (Inform, Explore, or Narrow), defining the tangible product it should create, articulating the personal benefit for attendees, and mapping out task and process roles for key participants, including potential "stretch roles" to rotate.

This module teaches participants how to plan and facilitate hybrid meetings where some attendees are in person and others are remote. Using the 4 P's framework (Purpose, Product, Personal Benefit, Process), participants learn to design meetings with a clear reason for gathering, a tangible output, a stated benefit for attendees, and defined roles and norms for balancing in-person and virtual participation. Participants practice engagement techniques (engagement triggers, physicality breaks, cold calling, forced participation), assign in-person roles like Virtual Attendee Avatar and Temperature Taker, and rehearse mid-meeting "course corrections" (Behavioral Observation + Impact Statement + Process Adjustment) to fix common problems like low discussion or imbalance between in-person and virtual voices. In a paired exercise, participants apply the 4 P's to build an agenda for a real upcoming meeting they'll run and get partner feedback on it, and the module closes with a discussion of how to use the first and last three minutes of a hybrid meeting.

This closing module wraps up the Hybrid Meetings program by having participants recap the session's key ideas ??? meeting audits, the 4Ps agenda-planning technique, participant roles, and facilitation methods for hybrid groups ??? and turn them into action. Participants reflect on what they learned and whether they hit their goals for the session, then write down three concrete Monday-morning commitments: a meeting to redesign using the 4Ps, an interactive engagement method to try, and a meeting to cancel or convert to an asynchronous format. Participants are encouraged to share one commitment with the group and optionally pair up with an accountability partner.