Your weekly meeting keeps getting moved. Or a monthly catch-up comes too late for a decision that needed you last week. Before changing the calendar, look at what happens between meetings.
Our suggestion: If you need somewhere to start, try 30 minutes weekly or every other week. Choose together based on the work, the person's preference and how easily they can get help in between. Monthly can also work if important conversations still happen when they are needed. Agree how to reach you sooner and when to check whether the arrangement is helping.
Start with the work and what the person needs
Ask: “When do you need help or a decision from me? What would you rather talk through without rushing?” Consider new responsibilities, decisions that cannot wait and whether there is somewhere private to talk.
Weekly meetings are one option when someone is learning unfamiliar work or responsibilities are changing quickly. Every other week may fit a steadier workload if help is easy to get in between. With monthly meetings, check that development, feedback and important questions still get attention. Experience alone does not settle this: a specialist may want frequent contact, while a new hire may need practical help much more often than a scheduled 1:1.
New responsibilities
Fictional customer-success handover: try a weekly conversation.
Between meetings: ask for help before a decision blocks the handover.
When the handover ends, check whether weekly still helps.
Stable work with an urgent deadline
Fictional payroll work: try a fortnightly conversation.
Between meetings: use the named backup for urgent approvals.
After the next payroll close, check whether anything waited too long.
If you want different things, discuss why: “I think we need more contact during this handover. What would help, and what would feel like unnecessary checking?” Explain any constraints and agree when to revisit them. Fewer meetings should not be a reward, or more a penalty.
Leave enough time for the conversation
You might start with 30 minutes and adjust together. A single decision could take less; a career conversation might deserve a separate, longer slot. If you keep running out of time, look at the topics and interruptions as well as the length of the meeting.
Research finding — a longer meeting was not automatically rated better
In one survey of 292 people about a recent work meeting, duration alone was not significantly associated with perceived effectiveness. The study covered varied meetings and did not identify a best length for 1:1s. Leach et al., 2009.
For your next conversation—our suggestion: ask whether you had enough time for the topic that mattered. If it needs more, agree another slot rather than rushing the last five minutes.
With eight people, 30 minutes each week takes four hours a week, before preparation or follow-up. Every other week, with the meetings spread evenly across both weeks, takes two hours a week. Check what you can reliably keep in your calendar.
If you cannot keep the schedule, talk to your own manager about your workload or how many people you manage. Repeated cancellations should not leave the employee carrying the cost of an arrangement you cannot deliver.
Agree how to get help in between
Say where to send a question, when to expect an answer and who can help when you are unavailable. “Message me any time” is little use if nobody knows when you will read it. For an urgent safety or operational issue, use the company's immediate response process.
For remote work, discuss time zones, somewhere private to talk and which format works for both of you: video, audio or an accessible written exchange. Remote work alone does not decide the frequency. A team update may answer a shared question; an individual concern still needs somewhere to go.
Fictional example: an experienced payroll specialist prefers every other week. During payroll close, a named colleague can cover urgent approvals. After the next close, you will check whether any decisions waited too long. Her experience was one part of the conversation, rather than the rule for choosing a schedule.
When you move a meeting, offer another time
Let the person know and suggest a replacement. Ask if anything needs attention before then. If they want to skip, check both your topics and theirs, then agree when you will next talk. An empty agenda does not tell you whether someone has a concern.
“I need to move tomorrow's conversation. Would Thursday afternoon work? Is there something we need to resolve before then?”
If this keeps happening, discuss which times you can actually keep. Make sure the person can still reach you for something that cannot wait.
Our suggestion: offer a time you can keep. If you will be late or need to move it again, tell the person rather than leaving them waiting.
Ask whether these meetings are helping
On the date you chose together, ask: “Did anything wait too long? Did we have time for your topics? What would you change?” You can change the duration, timing, preparation or way of asking quick questions as well as the frequency. Check whether quieter colleagues and people on other shifts can reach you just as easily.
Formal performance, conduct, harassment, health or legal matters need the company process and appropriate HR, specialist or reporting support; changing the schedule does not replace it.
A small agreement you can copy
We will meet:
We are trying this because:
Time and format that work for both of us:
For something that cannot wait, contact:
When to expect a reply, and who can help if I am unavailable:
If we need to move a meeting:
We will check whether this is working on:
Use the preparation guide and checklist to gather topics before the meeting. This agreement makes time for those conversations.
What the research tells us about frequency
Research finding — leaders described different schedules, without comparing which worked best
Sixteen German leaders of virtual teams described varied 1:1 schedules and efforts to set aside time for individual conversations. These were interviews about their pandemic experiences, rather than a test of the best interval. Efimov et al., 2024.
Research finding — an association in one bank, not a frequency experiment
At Nordea, more frequent 1:1s before the move home were associated with more favorable self-rated performance changes afterward. Frequency was a control variable; the study did not establish cause and effect or an optimal interval. Dekker et al., 2025.
Our suggestion: use those findings as a reason to ask how the arrangement is working. They do not settle whether this person needs a weekly, fortnightly or monthly meeting.
- Ilona Efimov, Volker Harth, Stefanie Mache (2024). “That was one of my most difficult and biggest challenges”: experiences, preconditions and preventive measures of health-oriented leadership in virtual teams – A qualitative study with virtual leaders. BMC Public Health, 24, 1338. Full text.
- Henri C. Dekker, Melanie L. Feldhues, Nikolay Georgiev (2025). Working apart together: How outcome control supports operations when working from home. Decision Sciences, 56(5), 471–488. Full text.
- Desmond J. Leach, Steven G. Rogelberg, Peter B. Warr, Jennifer L. Burnfield (2009). Perceived Meeting Effectiveness: The Role of Design Characteristics. Journal of Business and Psychology, 24(1), 65–76. Author copy.