Earlier this week, a former colleague forwarded me a video of Airbnb CEO Brian Chesky in an interview with Fortune saying he doesn’t believe in one-on-one meetings.

The full context might reveal nuances specific to certain managerial levels. For example, he could have been referring to CEOs having one-on-ones with the rest of the C-suite who report to them. However, most of his references were to “employees,” and most of the comments on the video seem to generalize across all one-on-ones. Based on the video and related commentary, there appears to be growing skepticism about the value of one-on-ones.

I’ve worked for bosses who didn’t see the value in one-on-ones, and I’ve worked for bosses who would use them to drive their agenda. When managers ignore or misuse one-on-ones, employees feel undervalued, disconnected, and unsupported.

I’ve also been fortunate to work for bosses who modeled what a one-on-one should be. When managers prioritize regular one-on-ones, employees feel heard, supported, and valued. This fosters trust, alignment, and engagement, benefiting both the employee and the organization.

Based on my experience, getting rid of one-on-ones is a terrible idea. (However, I favor getting rid of bad one-on-ones.)

A few comments from the video highlighted misconceptions about one-on-ones or are signals of a bad one-on-one.

“The employee owns the agenda. And what happens is they often don’t talk about the things you want to talk about.”

One-on-ones are more than just about the agenda — they’re about building trust, understanding what motivates your team, and catching minor issues before they become big problems. Even if the employee’s agenda doesn’t directly overlap with your immediate goals, it gives you insight into what they’re thinking and feeling, which can help you guide them more effectively.

That said, there are ways to make the meeting productive for both sides. The beauty of one-on-ones is that they’re a two-way conversation. While employees should have space to bring up what’s important to them, the manager also has an opportunity to steer the conversation toward topics they find valuable. It doesn’t have to be one or the other — it can be a balance.

One way to address this is by co-creating the agenda. Before each meeting, you could ask the employee to suggest a couple of items they want to discuss, and you can add one or two topics that align with what you want to address. That way, both sides feel heard, and the meeting stays focused.

In the spirit of the statement in the video, resist the temptation to control the full agenda. Remember, the one-on-one should be about the employee…not everything needs to be about you.

“You become their therapist” and “They’re bringing you problems but often times they’re bringing you problems that you want other people in the room to hear. In other words, there’s very few times an employee should come to you one-on-one without other people.”

One aspect of this comment I agree with is that some conversations are more appropriate in a team setting. Employees sometimes talk about their work or the project status they should bring up with the full team, such as surfacing a new issue. The nod to Jensen Huang’s quote, “I don’t do one-on-ones because I want everyone to be part of the solution and get the wisdom” is appropriate.

But often, employees bring these topics up because they think that’s what their manager wants to hear. After all, that’s the only thing their manager asks about in one-on-ones.

Sometimes, an employee, especially a junior one, doesn’t know how to bring a difficult topic up to the team. As a leader, those present opportunities to coach them and help shape how to bring those items to the team in a way that supports your organization’s culture.

Finally, if an employee is bringing you items that are genuinely more appropriate for a therapist, you, as a leader, should set those boundaries and guide them to a more appropriate forum. However, don’t dismiss these topics when they relate to workplace well-being…the employee may be asking for accommodations, not solutions.

“If they’re concerned about something, if they’re having a difficult time in their personal life, if they want to confide in something; they don’t feel safe telling a group. But that should be infrequent.”

As I mentioned above, if the employee brings challenges in their personal life, look for opportunities to provide accommodations, not solutions. If the employee expects more and you are not willing, capable, or permitted to engage further, guide them to appropriate resources.

But if they don’t feel safe bringing a topic to a group, coming to you is a gift. It’s a sign that your team has a perceived lack of safety or a potentially unhealthy dynamic that needs to be addressed.

Also, while these items should be infrequent, this is not an exhaustive list of topics appropriate for a one-on-one conversation. Career development, goals, feedback, and recognition should be regular topics, too.

Even with the expanded list of potential topics, there’s also no requirement that one-on-ones be weekly. It’s less about the frequency and more about the regularity and building a strong, trusting relationship that empowers the employee to thrive.

A final note on bad one-on-ones…

One of my first managers to schedule one-on-ones (probably from a corporate directive) said, “We’re going to have one-on-ones. Send me an agenda beforehand.”

“Send me an agenda” is ambiguous and intimidating, especially for junior employees. I had no other context, no list of suggested topics, and no idea what I was doing. I would send a status-focused agenda because that’s all I knew. I don’t think either of us got much out of those meetings.

Eventually, I reported to a different manager who also scheduled regular one-on-ones. When I sent the agenda, my manager stopped by to apologize for assuming that I understood the purpose of the meeting. They helped me move from a status-focused agenda to one that balanced my work, career, and where I needed help. I felt seen and supported, and that showed up in my work.

While both the employee and the manager can be responsible for bad one-on-one meetings, the balance of responsibility skews toward the manager because they hold the leadership role and set the tone for the meetings.

As a leader, take the responsibility and focus it on what is best for your employees and organization.

Don’t abolish one-on-ones.

Make them better.