The number and size of meeting rooms is one of the decisions that most often turns out to be wrong. Usually, several large rooms are created, while the actual demand is for short conversations between two or three people. The result is a paradox: rooms are fully booked, yet at the same time, they remain mostly empty.

Calculate actual needs

Instead of estimating, it is worth checking. If a booking system is in place in the company, data on how many people actually participated in meetings and how long they lasted is the best starting point. Without such a system, a two-week observation is enough. The most common conclusion is: short meetings in small groups dominate.

Sizes that work

• Spaces for conversations between two people, including phone calls and online meetings.

• Rooms for four to six people, accommodating most working meetings.

• One larger room for presentations and whole-team meetings.

The proportions should reflect the distribution of actual meetings, not the largest ones that happen a few times a month.

Technical equipment

In a hybrid model, every room where online meetings take place needs a predictable setup: a screen, good audio, and facial lighting. A room without this equipment is practically excluded from use for most meetings, which further increases pressure on the remaining ones.

Booking and utilization

Even a well-chosen number of rooms will not help if bookings do not reflect reality. Meetings that are canceled but not released in the system block resources. A simple check-in mechanism or automatic release of bookings can increase availability more than building another room.

Summary

Start with data on actual meetings, focus primarily on small rooms, equip every room for online meetings, and ensure that bookings match actual use. This is usually cheaper and more effective than increasing space.