Meeting in person changes what world leaders can do with each other, in a way nobody can quite articulate and remote communication has not replaced.

Added to korrents 6 Sept 2026 · How quotes work · Something wrong? Tell us

Where this collides

• In tension with

  Hybrid work is the worst of both arrangements: it destroys the main benefits of remote work while also failing to deliver the benefits of an office.

  Fridman says meeting in person changes what people can do with each other in a way remote communication has not replaced. Hansson says hybrid is the worst of both arrangements. If in-person contact does something irreplaceable, the arrangement that supplies some of it is not obviously the worst of the three.

Shared subject first, then similar wording. They may agree or disagree.

• Face-to-face meetings are not inherently better than other forms of communication and can waste time just like anything else. TBThorsten Ball22 May 2020
• In-person events are better for good-faith debates and open minds DHDavid Heinemeier Hansson7 Dec 2022
• One-on-one meetings create politics and waste a chief executive's time, and complaints about colleagues should be redirected to the colleague instead. MPMark Pincus2 Jun 2026
• In-person interaction with coworkers cannot be replaced by remote or asynchronous work. BCBoris Cherny10 Dec 2023
• Leaders are trained fastest by an apprentice who shadows every meeting, which is an unscalable way of scaling an organisation. MPMark Pincus2 Jun 2026

On the map

Open the map on its own page