[tehjoker]

That works sometimes, but only if it makes sense for one side of the meeting spending the necessary time to make such a presentation. If the meeting takes 2x as long unprepared, but it took you longer to make materials it can be more of a toss up. I wouldn't look at such prep as the hallmark of a good meeting, but more as an adaptation to a particular constraint.

Of course, difficult to communicate ideas (such as in science) require preparation or they are unintelligible and the meetings are a waste of time.

[brnt]

No prep often means two things:

1) the meeting will be as fast as the slowest reader/understander. Personally I dislike having to wait until the meeting to learn about its content in depth. 2) No recall. Many people do not remember things that weren't written down. Good minutes may help, but given the effort investment I prefer good prep docs. More succinct.

Making good materials usually means you can reuse them, so in my experience that pays for itself.

[watwut]

"Preparation for meeting" and "presentation" are two different things. Preparation means you know what you want, you know what to say and that you dont use time during meeting to figure it out. It means we are all not waiting while you are struggling with words or go to tangents or are going through jira figuring out which issues are relevant.

It does nor have to be polished presentation.