Right beside the debate about Work From Home vs Return to Office is the topic of in-person meetings vs online ones.
The COVID-19 lockdowns especially prompted discussions around how productive we are in remote settings — and inspired thousands of memes about sitting pantsless on the other side of the screen.
As organizations continue to blend remote and on-site work, and as researchers study behavioural differences between each, some insist that in-person is the best approach.
However, each format brings distinct advantages and trade-offs.
Below, we explore three key strengths and limitations of each, along with the environments where they tend to work best.
The Case for In-Person Meetings
1. Stronger human connection and trust
Benefit:
In-person meetings allow for richer communication. Body language, eye contact, subtle facial expressions, and informal moments before and after meetings all contribute to stronger interpersonal bonds.
These signals help teams build trust faster and reduce misunderstandings.
Cost:
They require physical presence, which can exclude remote employees, increase travel time, and create scheduling friction—especially for distributed teams.
Works best when:
- Building new relationships or onboarding team members
- Navigating sensitive topics or conflict resolution
- Strategic planning that requires alignment and buy-in
Works poorly when:
- Teams are geographically dispersed
- The agenda is purely informational or repetitive
2. Higher engagement and focus
Benefit:
Being in the same room tends to reduce multitasking. Participants are more likely to stay present, contribute, and respond in real time, which can lead to more dynamic discussions and quicker decisions.
Cost:
If poorly facilitated, in-person meetings can feel long, performative, or dominated by louder voices—wasting time just as easily as virtual ones.
Works best when:
- Brainstorming and creative collaboration
- Workshops or problem-solving sessions
- Decisions need rapid back-and-forth discussion
Works poorly when:
- Clear agendas or outcomes are missing
- Attendance is driven by habit rather than necessity
3. Clearer communication for complex topics
Benefit:
Complex or high-stakes discussions often benefit from being face-to-face. Misunderstandings can be spotted and corrected immediately, and visual aids or physical materials can enhance clarity.
Cost:
Organizing these meetings can be expensive, both financially and in lost productivity, if they require travel or disrupt deep-focus work.
Works best when:
- Discussing ambiguity, change, or long-term vision
- Aligning multiple stakeholders with differing priorities
Works poorly when:
- Information could be shared just as effectively in writing
- The topics are only communicated verbally. Written documentation is often needed to solidify.
The Case for Online Meetings
1. Flexibility and accessibility
Benefit:
Online meetings remove geographic barriers, making it easier to include diverse voices across time zones. They’re faster to schedule and reduce the time and cost associated with commuting or travel.
Cost:
The ease of scheduling can lead to overuse, filling calendars with unnecessary meetings and contributing to screen fatigue.
Works best when:
- Teams are remote or hybrid
- Updates, check-ins, or status reports are needed
- Inclusivity across locations is a priority
Works poorly when:
- Participants are already overloaded with virtual calls
- Technological difficulties, like lagging and glitching, take hold
2. Efficiency and time saving
Benefit:
Virtual meetings tend to be more concise. With less room for side conversations or informal delays, they often start and end on time, encouraging tighter agendas.
Cost:
Efficiency can come at the expense of spontaneity. Conversations may feel transactional, leaving little room for creative detours or relationship-building.
Works best when:
- Decisions are straightforward
- Clear documentation or follow-ups are required
- Time is limited
Works poorly when:
- Open-ended discussion or innovation is the goal
3. Easier documentation and accountability
Benefit:
Online platforms make it simple to record meetings, share screens, capture notes, and create written trails. This can improve clarity, accountability, and knowledge sharing—especially for those unable to attend live.
Cost:
The presence of recordings can sometimes inhibit candid conversation, making participants more cautious or scripted.
Works best when:
- Compliance, training, or knowledge transfer is involved
- Teams need consistent reference points
Works poorly when:
- Psychological safety and openness are critical
Which is more effective?
Rather than asking which format is better, a more useful question might be: What does this meeting need to accomplish?
In-person meetings tend to excel at connection, complexity, and collaboration. Online meetings shine when efficiency, flexibility, and accessibility matter most. The most effective workplaces recognize that both are tools—and like any tools, their value depends on when and how they’re used.
In a world of hybrid work, effectiveness often comes not from choosing sides, but from choosing intentionally.
