Skip to main content

Body · Work - Body - Mind

Walking Meetings: Useful for Some Conversations, Wrong for Others

Offer an optional format for exploration, with equally useful seated and call alternatives.

Two colleagues discuss an idea on a level office-courtyard path.
Illustrative image
More from Body

Make room for movement and recovery in the working day.

See all body articles

The short answer

Choose walking only when the conversation, access, privacy, and participants fit. Offer seated or call alternatives, and record outcomes afterwards. Sensitive or document-heavy reviews need a suitable setting.

A one-to-one conversation about a new idea might work outside. A compensation discussion, a spreadsheet review, or a confidential client problem probably needs a different setting. “Let's walk” should be an invitation, not a decision someone must accept to remain included.

Use a walking meeting when the conversation fits, everyone freely agrees, and access and privacy are adequate. Offer an equally useful seated or call-based alternative. The format does not make a meeting better by itself.

Start with the job the conversation must do

Ask what participants need to see, decide, and record. A conversation that relies on diagrams or precise wording can become frustrating when nobody has the material in front of them. A discussion that needs privacy should not move to a public path simply because the weather is pleasant.

ConversationLikely fitReason to choose differently
Optional one-to-one exploration of an early ideaWalk, sit, or call, by agreement.Access, weather, noise, or personal preference.
Detailed contract, design, or spreadsheet reviewSeated with shared materials.The work needs close reference and accurate notes.
Sensitive feedback or personal informationA private, suitable room or secure call.Passing people may overhear. A public route is not confidential.
Final approval with several ownersA setting where everyone can inspect the evidence.The decision needs participation, a record, and clear authority.

This table is a practical recommendation, not evidence that one format produces better decisions. Do not use a walking meeting as a substitute for a break either. Talking through a work problem is still work.

Offer alternatives before anyone has to explain themselves

A useful invitation names the task and makes the alternative ordinary: “We need to explore two onboarding ideas. Would you prefer a short walk on the level courtyard route, a seated conversation, or a call? Each is fine. We will record options afterwards rather than approve anything on the move.”

Do not ask for medical justification when someone prefers to sit. Do not describe the seated choice as less energetic or less collaborative. A manager's suggestion carries authority even when it sounds casual, so the response must be safe to decline.

Agree on the route and stopping point if a walk is chosen. Check practical conditions such as level access, places to rest, weather, and background noise. People using different mobility options should be able to participate without being asked to match another person's pace.

Keep the conversation and the decision separate

Illustrative scenario: Luis and Helen need ideas for helping new customers identify the right setup path. They choose an optional courtyard walk. They discuss a guided checklist and a shorter welcome call, but neither has current support-volume data with them.

Back at the workspace, Luis writes three lines: the two options, the unresolved question about support demand, and Helen's next action to check recent tickets. They do not treat an enthusiastic conversation as approval to build either option. The product owner will decide after the evidence is available.

If Helen had preferred a seated discussion, the same question and follow-up would still apply. The format is not the outcome. Their written note preserves the useful part without requiring a recording of the entire conversation.

A compact follow-up can say: “Options discussed: checklist or welcome call. Not decided: staffing and accessibility implications. Helen checks ticket patterns before Thursday. Luis drafts the comparison for product review.” Name an owner and a review point, not a vague promise to continue talking.

Access, privacy, and consent come first

Do not move a sensitive conversation into public space. Avoid discussing identifiable client or employee information where it can be overheard. If a recording is genuinely needed, follow the organization's policy and obtain the required consent. Do not quietly turn on a phone or AI transcription tool because carrying a notebook is inconvenient.

Cancel or change the format when conditions are unsuitable. If moving causes discomfort, dizziness, or another concerning symptom, stop and use an appropriate alternative. Existing individual advice takes priority over a general suggestion.

For leaders, the important behavior is accepting alternatives without judgment. A walking meeting should not become another informal place where decisions happen without colleagues who cannot join. Bring the resulting proposal back to the proper owners.

Test one conversation, not a team-wide rule

Choose a low-stakes exploratory discussion with a clear question. Offer the alternatives, agree on the format, and write down what remains unresolved afterwards. Review whether everyone could participate and whether the conversation left a usable next step.

If the work required frequent references, choose a seated review next time. If it produced options but not a decision, that may be exactly the right result. For the narrower research question about generating ideas while walking, read Walk to Generate Ideas. Return to Evaluate Them.