Leaders are still mostly terrible at weekly one-to-ones
It is difficult to recall what was more terrifying in the 1990s when I lived in Sydney – attempting to drive to an unfamiliar location without my Gregory’s (street atlas) or turning up unprepared to a one-to-one weekly meeting with Greg Savage.
Having been a mediocre recruiter and mediocre leader before eventually becoming better at both, I benefited from unambiguous expectations about each weekly meeting.
These clearly communicated expectations were simple:
- Be prepared
- Be on time
Specifically, preparation included printing my report (KPIs, margins and any other report that might be relevant for that meeting eg key client list) and calendar.
Before the meeting, I carefully reviewed all the documents I would be questioned about and ensured I could provide acceptable answers to predictable questions (about why I was visiting specific contacts, the number of times I had referred a ‘hit list’ candidate, etc.).
These weekly one-to-ones were non-negotiable. I wouldn’t have dared request a cancellation or reschedule nor did Greg initiate cancellations or reschedules.
I left each of these meetings crystal clear about three things
- My performance, compared to expectations
- My priorities for the coming week
- I still had plenty of upside and it was important to keep improving
These meetings reflected the culture of the company.
I was never confused about my progress or my priorities.
Yet, my experience seems to remain far from the norm for many employees, if the results of a recent survey in the U.S. can be extrapolated to Australia.
A lack of clarity from their manager about priorities has been identified as the most significant problem affecting new employees’ motivation with unproductive meetings with their boss a large contributing factor.
The Predictive Index’s 2026 Motivation At Work report surveyed over 1,000 adults in the United States and when asked what would most improve their motivation, clearer priorities ranked highest at 35%, ahead of recognition (33%), fewer meetings (31%) and autonomy (21%).
For younger employees, especially, that fragmentation cuts deeper. Millennials (44%) and Gen Z (42%) are far more likely than Baby Boomers (26%) to say clearer priorities would improve their motivation.
Meetings with their manager were rated poorly by employees, with only 10% reporting that their meetings are always productive.
A quarter (25%) of respondents rated their one-to-ones with their manager as “rarely or never productive”.
These are damning results and suggest that, whatever improvements AI might be making to productivity, there is much lower-hanging ‘productivity fruit’ to be picked by improving the quality of one-to-ones that leaders have with their direct reports.
Dr. Matt Poepsel, a vice president at The Predictive Index, said the three most common problems creating ambiguity about priorities and derailing employees’ motivation were:
· Cognitive overload: Too many competing demands and mental juggling.
· Process friction: Clunky workflows and unclear ways of getting things done.
· Poor role fit: A fundamental mismatch between a person’s natural strengths and the work they’re asked to do.
I can say with confidence that none of those three things applied to me.
I didn’t experience competing demands, lack of clarity about process or that my job was unsuited to my strengths.
The acronym I teach leaders in Leadership Coaching for High Performance, to assist them prepare for a weekly one-to-one, is FAB:
- Focus
- Accountability
- Belief
Focus – ensure the right things are being done and are scheduled to be done, for the right amount of time.
Accountability – refer to agreed expectations (results, high pay-off activities, and behaviour) and provide feedback about performance against these expectations.
Belief – accelerate, or reignite, motivation and self-belief by expressing confidence in the employee’s capability and potential to succeed.
Even if the meeting with Greg was uncomfortable due to my performance falling short of expectations, I always left the meeting knowing he believed in me and that I could be, and get, better.
It seems that many one-to-ones leaders have with their direct reports continue to fall a long way short of the standard I was lucky enough to experience more than three decades ago.
Related blogs
Team leader communication: How nothing has changed in 25 years