The End of Pre-Meetings? How Trust and Development Drive Real Efficiency

I keep a close eye on the company’s developments and was particularly intrigued by last week’s announcement regarding the shift back to a five-day office schedule. However, what truly caught my attention was Amazon’s decision to eliminate pre-meetings in an effort to reduce bureaucracy. I’ve witnessed the inner workings of Amazon’s leadership principles , which aim to push the boundaries of speed, action, and agility. This recent move, while seemingly aligned with those values, raises deeper questions about whether it addresses the root cause of inefficiency. This stirred some thoughts within me…

The Leadership Principles Dilemma

Amazon’s leadership principles, like “Bias for Action” and “Invent and Simplify,” are designed to drive innovation while cutting through layers of complexity. In theory, these principles should prevent the need for bureaucratic processes that slow down decision-making. However, even the most agile organizations fall prey to bureaucracy over time as structures expand and decision-making requires cross-functional collaboration.

The elimination of pre-meetings could be viewed as an attempt to live more fully by these principles. But the real question is: does removing these meetings tackle inefficiency at its core, or simply cut a process that serves as preparation for bigger discussions like the renowned six-pager? The phrase 'the devil is in the details' comes to mind, emphasizing how pre-meetings lay essential groundwork, ensuring discussions are well-structured and outcomes more effective.

"Does removing these meetings tackle inefficiency at its core, or simply cut a process that serves as preparation for bigger discussions like the renowned six-pager?"

Bureaucracy vs. Trust

One key question this decision raises is whether bureaucracy stems from complex processes or from a lack of trust in teams to act independently. In many organizations, pre-meetings may signal that leaders don’t fully trust their teams to deliver without alignment or fear that failure is more likely without extensive preparation. These meetings serve to ensure teams are aligned, narratives are clear, and expectations are understood before engaging with higher leadership or key stakeholders

If Amazon – and other companies following a similar suit - ?aims to reduce inefficiency by eliminating pre-meetings, the success of this approach will depend heavily on whether trust is already deeply embedded in the culture. Teams need to feel empowered and trusted to make decisions without the need for constant validation. Removing pre-meetings may risk creating more confusion if teams are not given the autonomy and tools to prepare independently.

The focus should shift from cutting out perceived inefficiencies to addressing the root cause: trust. Empowered teams, trusted by their leaders, need fewer processes to ensure alignment and clarity. As Peter Drucker famously said, “Efficiency is doing things right; effectiveness is doing the right things.” The reduction in processes, when done thoughtfully, can boost efficiency without sacrificing quality.

"Trust is the glue of life. It's the most essential ingredient in effective communication. It's the foundational principle that holds all relationships." – Stephen R. Covey

Development: The Key to Actualizing Autonomy

Trust alone, however, is not enough. To effectively reduce bureaucracy, companies need to invest in continuous team development. The more capable and aligned teams are, the less they will need oversight and pre-alignment meetings. Development, in this context, goes beyond traditional training. It’s about ensuring teams have the skills, capability, capacity, knowledge, and confidence to make decisions autonomously.

Organizations that wish to reduce bureaucratic processes should emphasize development programs that are designed to foster critical thinking, communication, and collaboration. Development helps teams navigate complex projects and decisions without needing the safety net of extra meetings or check-ins. This can lead to a more efficient decision-making process because teams already know what’s expected and are equipped to deliver on those expectations.

In Amazon’s case, the decision to cut pre-meetings could be a bold step if paired with a focus on upskilling and ongoing development. Without this foundation, however, it risks creating gaps where teams may feel underprepared, leading to inefficiencies down the line.

Efficiency: Smarter, Not Just Leaner

There’s a crucial difference between creating lean processes and creating smart ones. Many organizations, in their quest to cut bureaucracy, focus on trimming steps and processes without considering the purpose behind them. This can result in leaner operations, but not necessarily more efficient ones.

Amazon’s leadership principles emphasize the need for simplicity and action, but they also highlight ownership and accountability. True efficiency doesn’t come from removing processes for the sake of it, but from thoughtfully eliminating those that don’t add value. Pre-meetings, when used correctly, can be an essential part of alignment and preparation. They help clarify objectives, eliminate confusion, and ensure meetings stay on track.

The goal for companies like Amazon shouldn’t just be to cut steps but to refine the processes that remain. By doing this, they can ensure that the processes they do keep drive value and help teams achieve their objectives efficiently. Leaner processes are only effective if they still allow for clarity, communication, and alignment.

The Role of Leadership in Efficiency

Leadership plays a critical role in this balance. Leaders must recognize when processes are hindering progress and when they are necessary to ensure alignment and successful execution. The decision to eliminate pre-meetings must be made with the understanding that these meetings, while sometimes labeled bureaucratic, can be crucial for preparation and alignment.

During my time at Amazon, I witnessed several meetings devoted to reviewing six-pagers—often highlighting rigidity and a subtle sense of distrust in teams' ability to execute without extensive oversight. Good leadership should also focus on creating a culture where teams feel safe to make decisions and learn from imperfections. Leaders should avoid demonizing failures, instead fostering an environment where missteps are seen as learning opportunities, not roadblocks. When teams are given the tools, autonomy, and support they need, processes can be streamlined without sacrificing quality. The removal of pre-meetings then becomes part of a broader strategy of building trust, empowering teams, and allowing them to make independent decisions without fear of retribution.

"The real test will be whether this approach fosters genuine innovation and autonomy or leads to confusion and inefficiency."

Moving Forward: Innovation or Risk?

Amazon’s decision to eliminate pre-meetings is clearly part of a broader strategy to streamline operations, reduce bureaucracy, and accelerate decision-making—a move that likely appeals to shareholders. However, without addressing the deeper cultural and structural foundations of trust and development, this shift risks backfiring.

The true test will be whether this approach fosters genuine innovation and autonomy or leads to confusion and inefficiency. Success will depend on how well teams are supported, empowered, and equipped to function effectively without these traditional preparation processes.

Conclusion: Efficiency with a Human Touch

I’ve seen the constant push for efficiency and innovation within the company. While the drive for efficiency and innovation is essential, there's a delicate balance between reducing bureaucracy and eroding vital preparation. Pre-meetings may seem expendable, but they often play a critical role in fostering alignment and clarity across teams.

The future of effective leadership is not solely about cutting processes; it's about cultivating a culture of trust, development, and empowerment that fuels efficiency. Only then can organizations like Amazon continue to innovate while maintaining the rigor and alignment necessary for sustainable, informed decision-making.

Thanks for reading!

Mark

These are my own views and not that of my employer.

?