Quick TLDR

Edit: I've added this TLDR to the post. I hope it's helpful, but I do still encourage you to read the post to get a more nuanced sense of the advice, which includes real life examples of how things can go sub-optimally in 1:1s.  

Booking & punctuality

• Accept or decline meeting requests promptly so people can use their time slots
• Be roughly on time; let people know if you'll be >5 minutes late
• Cancel with as much notice as possible rather than no-showing

Be present

• Schedule breaks to avoid tiredness affecting your meetings
• If you're exhausted, acknowledge it honestly or postpone rather than being dismissive
• Don't check your phone constantly or look around for other people to talk to

Giving feedback constructively

• Ask questions before giving advice
• Don't be pushy about career changes; people have personal considerations you don't know
• Give criticism kindly - focus on the plan being suboptimal, not the person being wrong. Acknowledge positives where you see them

Professional Boundaries

• Give personal space and avoid unnecessary touching during conversation
• Don't use Swapcard or meetings for dating/romantic approaches
• Avoid intense eye contact

Context

One-on-one (1:1) meetings are widely recognized as one of the most valuable aspects of EA Global (EAG) and EAGx conferences, both anecdotally and in the survey data CEA receives. However, last year I noticed in the conference feedback forms that there was a slight rise in feedback about a small number of  1:1s that have left people feeling unwelcome or disrespected. From a preliminary skim of the EAG Bay Area feedback, this doesn’t seem to have continued, but I’ve decided to sneak this post in as a belated draft amnesty post, rather than letting it languish as a draft forever.

Despite it being only a small number of interactions, (the vast majority of 1:1s aren’t like this), it seemed worth writing up some thoughts and anonymising some anecdotes I’ve heard because if someone hasn’t yet had many of the valuable conversations that EAGs, or EA more widely so often offer, they can come away from an unpleasant 1:1 feeling really rough, and question their involvement with the movement.  
 

How I’m hoping you’ll orient to this

You might not conceptualise yourself as someone who’s rude at EAG, but in the busy-ness of a conference and travelling, where people might get really tired, it’s easier to accidentally slip into behaviours that might hurt someone else’s feelings, and not notice them. I think many things below are broadly common sense, but I’m hoping this post might be a useful thing to skim before a conference to check in and be more mindful about avoiding some failure modes.

That said, a busy conference is a busy conference, humans are humans, and lots of interactions with people from all over the world in a jam-packed weekend are bound to not go smoothly 100% of the time. I’m pleasantly surprised how much higher the ratio of positive comments is to negative ones, given the sheer number of interactions that are happening. I certainly don’t want people to be overly worried about this, or feel very anxious about making mistakes. This really is a minority of 1:1s as far as I can tell, so please don’t let this post put you off reaching out and requesting meetings!

Quick note — this post isn’t the best advice for newcomers on how to approach 1:1s generally — there’s a lot of Advice for getting the most out of one-on-ones, in other places, that might be a more useful starting point for you!

Epistemic status / what I’m basing this on

I’m using a mixture of anecdotes and survey responses that I’ve heard in my work both on the community health team and previously on EAG/x events. In the feedback forms, people don’t always say how someone was rude in a 1:1 meeting, so sometimes I’ve followed up, when people have left contact information to do so. The specific quotes I’ve shared below are from EAG and EAGx feedback forms over the last 2 years, usually in response to the ‘least valuable experience at EAG’ or ‘comments on culture’ questions. I’ve only included quotes where people have opted to allow their responses to be shared anonymously, but these are not the only comments that I’m drawing on. My role means I am more likely to hear about, and pay more attention to these stories than average. I’d be excited to see in the comments any thoughts, tips or feedback about other people’s experiences with 1:1s, and what makes them go well.  

On booking 1:1 meetings

Responding to people and punctuality

“People not responding to 1:1 requests. I had at least have a dozen times where someone just never accepted or declined my meeting request.”

“…  The problem with this is that the person sending the invite has their time blocked off and it can't be taken by someone else. And then that slot ends up getting wasted when it gets too close to use it for a 1-1. There should be a norm around proactively cancelling meetings as early as you can out of respect for people's time.”

• Do your best to be roughly on time — or let someone know you’ll be late and apologise.
  • It's very normal for meetings to start a few minutes after the scheduled start time. If you’re in back to back meetings, perhaps on the other side of the venue, or you need to run to the loo, this is of course completely understandable.
  • If you’ll be more than 5 minutes late, try to let your 1:1 partner know — letting them know in advance means they might be able to go grab a snack or water, or take a breather, rather than wondering if they’re at the wrong meeting point or trying hard to find you.
• If you need to cancel or reject a 1:1 — let them know, ideally with as much notice as possible so they can find something else to do with their time. It’s better to cancel the day before or even an hour before, rather than just not turning up.
• All else being equal, it’s better to respond to meeting requests than not, because then it can free up the other person to do something else with that slot, and it hopefully avoids the feeling that they’re not even worth the time to decline. But, like many things in life, all else is not equal, and it’s ok if sometimes you’re just too busy to respond or you don’t see the request on time — I’d encourage people waiting for an answer to hold the possibilities that the person might be in back to back meetings, have some personal stuff going on or some other reason that isn’t a reflection of you.  

Know your limits and commit accordingly

“A couple of interactions with "grumpy" people on Sun. I think people were tired”.

Looking after yourself at EAG is important for your own wellbeing — lots of people report being quite tired after such a busy weekend! But, it’s also important to consider the experience of other attendees. We generally hear about more community health related things towards the end of the conference, which correlates with people being tired.

It’s easy to not be on top social form at the end of a long day of EAG. I really sympathise with this, and I’m sure I’ve made mistakes here and maybe have hurt someone’s feelings unintentionally. That said, I think it is your responsibility to understand your limits and try to plan accordingly. Consider scheduling breaks to digest what you’re learning, consolidate notes and take a breather so you can show up ready and present for your next meeting.

To be clear — I don’t think you need to be on top form for 1:1s — just try not to accidentally be rude. A lot of things can be helped with honesty. If you’re tired and or distracted — acknowledge it.

• ‘Hey sorry, I’m a little tired and distracted. I’m going to do my best to focus, but I wanted to let you know so that if I yawn or fidget I don’t want you to think I’m uninterested in what you have to say’.
• Perhaps suggest walking around or getting some water so you can refresh your tired brain a little bit. You could also consider asking to postpone the meeting — ‘hey sorry, I’m really struggling to focus, do you mind if we have a call after the conference or I could send you some resources that might be helpful.’

My impression is that this can feel worse if there’s an experience or seniority gap; a more junior person may feel rejected or un-respected by EA as a whole, if several senior people don’t seem particularly interested in what they have to say, or they’re snappier during a disagreement. It’s tricky, because more experienced people at EAG may have a lot of demands on their time, and many people who would find their advice helpful.

My claim is that having a 1:1 might be worse than not having a 1:1, if the senior person is not just un-alert, but broaching rude or dismissive due to fatigue.

• If I had to explicitly choose between giving advice in 6 meetings as my best self, or 10 where I’m a bit tired, the 10 seems like the better choice, as more people get my advice.
• But, if the choice was 6 meetings where I’m a bit tired, or 10 where I’m sometimes far too harsh with feedback, the 6 is plausibly the better option.  

Actually commit* to your 1:1 meetings

“I had some 1:1 meetings where the person was completely disengaged and almost disrespectful.”

“There was a mentor who was using her phone while I was speaking to her, was very condescending with how she spoke to me.”

“A 1on1 where the other person was not interested in my perspective at all.”

If you're a more experienced person attending a conference, a valuable thing you can do is dedicate some time to meetings focused on helping others rather than seeking help yourself. Many EA community members already do this generously—sharing expertise, encouraging promising projects, and giving constructive feedback. This willingness to help others figure things out is something I find really special about EA conferences, and I'm personally grateful to the senior folks who offered me this support when I was new.

If you do decide to meet with people where you’ll mostly be helping, (or someone you’re not sure about meeting for some other reason) then try to make sure you’re doing that intentionally, and earnestly. You didn’t have to, but you chose to spend ~25 minutes* meeting with this other person. Actually be with them — show up, listen, ask questions, engage. Consider that there are things you might learn from them — even if it’s simply better models of the misconceptions newcomers might have or a better understanding of what type of attendee is a good fit for what you can offer in a 1:1. If you think that you actually can’t provide the advice that the junior person is asking for, you could consider kindly pointing that out, explaining which areas you’re more well-versed in, and asking them if that would be useful (it’s a great idea to do this beforehand too!).

If you think you might be the kind of person who is susceptible to getting frustrated or impatient with someone that isn’t fully up to speed, consider not saying yes to that meeting. While having a meeting request rejected can be disappointing, in my experience it can be more frustrating to sit (or walk) through 25 minutes with an uninterested 1:1 partner. I’m less confident on this — my role means I hear far more from people who weren’t happy with a meeting they did have, than a meeting they didn’t have. It’s also very plausible lots of people would much rather have the chance to meet, and get a lot of value from a meeting, even if it’s not socially as smooth.

*You could also consider meeting briefly, and seeing how it goes, but politely ask to leave early if you don’t think you’re the best fit to help them — remember EA Global meetings can be short. 

Focus

• Don’t check your phone or watch consistently throughout the meeting.
  • If you’re worried about running over, you can try setting a timer for 20 minutes and explain you’re doing that so you can be present and not worried about being late for your next meeting.
  • If you’re waiting on an important message, or need to respond to something urgently — just signal that “sorry, I don’t mean to be rude, but I do need to take a minute to respond to this urgent message”. Try to make a mental note of what you two were talking about before the pause, so you can resume the conversation with the person feeling like you had been listening to them.
• Be mindful of where your attention is
  • It’s normal to look around somewhat as you think, or to give a quick wave to a friend passing by, but if you’re constantly looking around or trying to catch the attention of other attendees, your 1:1 partner might feel like you’d rather be elsewhere.

  • If you need to leave the 1:1 mid-conversation, try to give some kind of explanation (eg., “I’m just grabbing some water, I’ll be right back” or “sorry I suddenly feel quite ill, I need to go”)

     

On giving feedback

They know more about their situation

"Talking to someone who felt like they want to convince/pressure me rather than just give me information."

"A 1:1 that went overtime which I should have ended earlier, where the other person seemed a bit pushy with what they advised me to do."

"One of my 1:1s was rather unpleasant and ended up making me feel quite a bit worse about my current career plans - it was generally geared towards trying to change my mind and not being super collaborative, which I found unhelpful and actively negative."

Remember that people have personal reasons and needs in their decision making, as well as impact related motivations. It's ok to nudge or ask people to consider a different plan if you think it could be better for them and their impact, but please be careful and gentle; you have far less information about their situation than they do, and people are allowed to have considerations and goals that aren't just impact related. It might be good to ask more questions than you think you need to to understand, but they may also not feel comfortable sharing details about those personal considerations. Also, it often takes some time and reflection to update a plan or change one’s mind (and I think this often is good). If someone doesn’t seem to update on your input immediately, it doesn’t mean they won’t after more reflection.

Even if you were giving objectively brilliant advice, I still don’t want people feeling pressured at conferences.

Give constructive feedback kindly

"I had one judgemental response to my plan to improve the world."

"I got negative feedback about [redacted] in a 1-1 that I felt was too aggressive/discouraging. It was quite demotivating. It was mostly useful feedback, but I think he could have delivered it better and been less aggressive. I had to decompress for ~30 minutes after the 1-1 to recover. I'm glad that other people I talked to in the field were less aggressive and more encouraging, while still giving feedback about their uncertainties on some aspects of [redacted]."

One of the ways in which EA Globals can be very valuable for people is getting feedback on their plans to have impact. Feedback needs to be true to be useful, I certainly don’t want you to tell someone their idea is great if you’re sure it’s not. This isn’t what I mean by kind. In fact, being overly encouraging might mean someone gets more brutal feedback, further along in the process such that it’s definitely not the kind thing to do (e.g., they then might spend many hours on a funding proposal and get their hopes up, but it then gets rejected). 

However, I do think giving constructive feedback in a way that doesn’t make people feel uncomfortable seems important for their wellbeing (which matters in and of itself) and plausibly for instrumental ~ 'they might actually be more likely to act on it’ reasoning.

Giving constructive feedback is an art, as it requires knowing how to adapt your approach to the needs and preferences of different people. I’d encourage you to take a moment to see what their demeanour is like — are they already seeming quite anxious? If so, maybe be softer in your approach, or begin with something reassuring. Even if you don’t think someone’s plan for improving the world is the best they could have, there are likely real and true positives to find that might make the experience better. Even if their plan isn’t great right now, they’re at a conference, trying to get input, and that usually is a good thing.

I don’t want to give too much advice here, because I think reassurance works best when it’s sincere and specific. I mostly just encourage you to just try and take care when you deliver constructive feedback.

My weak confidence guesses at some things that may help someone feel respected, even if you don’t agree with their actual plan:

• Nodding in a way that shows you’re listening to them talking, and nodding more enthusiastically when they do say something that’s reasonable or you agree with it.
• Clarifying that you’ve understood them correctly (and showing that you’re listening) ‘so it sounds like ____ and ____ are your main cruxes, have I understood that right?’
• Explicitly acknowledging that tradeoffs and career decisions are hard
• Acknowledging when they ask a good question
• Thank them for thinking hard about x, or for putting in work to try and make the world better
• “hey thanks for reaching out, I'm glad you're getting input”
• “hey I don't actually think I have an answer here, but it sounds like you're doing broadly the right things to figure it out"

Sometimes, someone might have a bad plan and you might need to tell them that. But make sure you're telling them that you think the plan is bad, not that you think they are bad.

EAG is a professional event

The vast majority of attendees are interacting at EAG in a professional setting (though some may know each other as friends). What should that look like? Different countries, cultures and even organisations have varied approaches and norms here, so there’s no one clear answer. EAG is less formal than some other professional environments, for example, most attendees’ attire is relatively casual. However, there are some key elements of professional etiquette that are important to maintain.

Personal space and body language

"A man has crossed my personal boundaries with physical touch, nothing too serious - but still touching my hand and shoulders when clearly unnecessary".

"One attendee I booked a 1-1 with kept getting inside my personal space. I suspect this may have just been cultural differences, but it made me kinda uncomfortable."

"There was one guy I had a 1:1 with who I'd never met before but who touched (e.g., my arm or hand etc.) several times and who stood a bit close sometimes in a way that maybe some people would've found slightly uncomfortable."

Be mindful about what personal space is appropriate in professional settings. Keeping roughly a metre of personal space is usually appropriate but this varies depending on location. If you’re at an event in a region you’re less familiar with, take into account what’s common there — both in terms of how you act, and how you interpret others’ actions. A handshake etc. is usually fine, and it’s not the end of the world if you accidentally bump into someone, so long as you apologise, but I think it’s likely a good norm to e.g. ask someone before initiating a hug (even if you’re friends and might hug in other circumstances).

Conversation topics

For the most part, interactions should be focused on professional and EA-related topics. Likely, there will be some discussion aimed more at building rapport or catching up with someone, but be mindful that different people have very different preferences on keeping their private life separate from work (as well as what level of detail they want to hear about someone else’s private life). You don’t have to talk about anything you don’t want to. If you’re happy to talk about your life in detail, try to first gauge what level of detail the other person is open to. If someone asks a personal question that you could give an in depth or private answer to, try testing out something akin to the onion test, where you give a non-detailed response first and see if they ask more.

If you don’t know someone, or only know them professionally, avoid commenting on their appearance where possible (even if it’s a compliment!). If you do want to say something related to their appearance but aren’t sure, a heuristic that can be helpful is sticking to choices people have made (like "I like your t-shirt" if they’re wearing an EA or science fiction t-shirt for example) rather than personal characteristics or more permanent things about themselves. If you’re not sure, best to avoid personal comments.

Do not use Swapcard/EAG as a dating opportunity. 

“I think as a woman and one of the younger I received quite a lot of ambiguous collab/job offers where someone was asking me out at the same time and I don’t feel this was useful professionally."

"I felt uncomfortable when people requested to meet and I got a non-platonic vibe (we had nothing in common, they couldn't explain why they chose to set up a meeting with me).”

“Someone said they thought I was really cute and asked for my number at the end of the conference, we hadn't had a conversation much before this (they forced one) and I felt it was obvious I wasn't interested in even a conversation. When I told them I need to get going is when they asked for it.”

People at EAGs are in a professional networking headspace, and are likely to feel uncomfortable if they’re approached romantically. It is against our code of conduct to use the event app to request meetings for romantic or sexual reasons. However, there are often many non-professional satellite social events around conferences, which may be a more appropriate place to bond socially with others (though I’d still encourage caution). I hope generally people have already gotten this memo, as I’ve noticed a few people have been commenting in the feedback form that they’ve noticed an absence of people approaching them romantically at conferences.

Eye contact

*Caveat: I am not an expert here, I am neither someone who has struggled with eye contact, nor an expert in human body language. But I’ve been asked for similar advice before and told that it was useful. I’d really welcome thoughts and advice in the comments from people who’ve thought about this more!*

Occasionally I’ve heard feedback that someone’s eye contact in a 1:1 has been a bit too intense. I think this is tricky because we’re so often told to look at someone when they’re talking as a way to show that we’re listening, or might just be very absorbed in what someone is saying and not pay attention to our body language. While I’m aware that earlier in this post, I emphasised that people had been unhappy when their 1:1 partner didn’t seem engaged, I’ve mostly heard about eye contact being too intense, and not heard (m)any people say they wished people gave more eye contact. So if you’re not sure how to approach this, I’d weakly suggest erring on the side of less eye contact, at least at EAG.

Various internet advice articles suggest aiming to look in their general direction about 60–70% of the time while they're speaking, and ~50% of the time when you’re speaking. I don’t have a lot of confidence in the articles or the research they’re citing (and don’t endorse myself doing a deep dive), but it points to the broad takeaway of ‘you don’t have to maintain eye contact the whole time’.

Some practical ideas for navigating eye contact in a 1:1:

• Suggest a walking meeting — you’ll both be looking ahead most of the time.
• Take notes — saying "I'd like to take notes to help me remember our conversation" and then noting things down is a way to show that you’re focused on the topic without needing to maintain eye contact, as there’ll be natural breaks when you look down to write (or if you are mostly writing the whole time, the breaks in writing can be good times to look up and make eye contact).
  • Letting someone know that’s what you’re doing is likely polite, particularly if you’re taking notes on a laptop — they then know you’re notetaking rather than replying to emails!
• Find an environmental focus point. You could look at a coffee cup/ laptop/ other item on the table, or taking a sip of water gives a natural moment to break eye contact.
• People often have their gaze wander — looking down, or up to one side while you’re thinking is totally normal.

To walk or not to walk

• Some people might prefer walking meetings because for example
  • It’s easier to concentrate while walking
  • It’s refreshing to walk outside, rather than sit still
  • They need a break from the conference venue, especially if it’s noisy
  • Getting outside away from the crowds is quieter
• Others will prefer to stay sat in the venue because for example
  • It’s easier to concentrate if they’re not tracking where they’re walking, or the changing environment
  • They might be tired, injured or have a disability that means being inside / sitting down is better
  • They might want to take notes
  • They prefer to stay in the venue that they know, and feels safe
  • They might be cautious about the sun, or sensitive to loud sounds outside the venue
  • They might want to eat during the meeting
• Given this variety of possible preferences, it’s best just to ask what your 1:1 partner wants to do, think about your preferences, and find a compromise (e.g., outside but in a shady spot, inside but in a quiet area etc.).

Closing thoughts

Most 1:1s are great and really useful for those who participate. The willingness to help others is such a special part of the EA community. I certainly don’t want people to be overly stressed about their behaviour in 1:1s, but hopefully something in here is a useful nudge to make 1:1s go even better.


Thank you very much to the several reviewers - I am an anxious forum poster and I appreciate your help getting it actually out of my drafts!