A meeting can take time without changing the work. It happens when the topic is broad, the participants do not have the necessary information or it is not clear who can decide. Improving the encounter requires defining its function.
Before convening it, I propose to indicate the question to be solved and what the participants must read. If you only need to communicate an update, a document may be sufficient. If alternatives are to be compared, the meeting should make visible the conditions and consequences of each.
During the discussion, it is useful to separate available facts, evaluations and missing information. A disagreement may depend on different goals or data interpreted differently. Recognizing the cause allows you to choose whether to decide immediately or carry out a focused investigation.
In the end, few clear elements are enough: decision, responsible and time of verification. If the choice is postponed, it must be specified what information will make it possible. Even a short meeting can be ineffective; the duration does not measure the result. The useful criterion is whether the meeting reduced an uncertainty or allowed an action that was previously blocked, avoiding transferring the entire discussion to the next meeting.