During the meeting: capture signals (without changing how you meet)

In Parallel is designed to help you run better execution meetings without turning the meeting into “the tool meeting.” You shouldn’t have to tag moments, narrate decisions, or run a special process. Your job is to run the meeting. In Parallel’s job is to remember what matters for execution.

What In Parallel captures during the meeting

When a recurring meeting is connected to an execution scope, In Parallel can:

transcribe discussion in real time
identify decisions, actions, risks, ownership shifts, unresolved topics
link those signals directly to the scope

These are treated as execution signals, not raw notes.

Examples of “execution signals”

Decisions: “We’re moving the deadline,” “We’re prioritizing A over B,” “We’re pausing X.”
Actions: “Taylor will send the update,” “Jordan will confirm with Legal.”
Risks / dependencies: “We’re blocked on data access,” “This depends on team Y.”
Ownership shifts: “This moves to the platform team,” “Sam owns this now.”

The goal is to capture what changes execution reality—not every word said.

What it ignores (and why)

In Parallel intentionally does not try to preserve everything that happens in a meeting.

It’s not designed to be:

a full meeting notes archive
a brainstorming capture tool
a transcript-first knowledge base
a task manager replacement

Delivery detail (tickets, subtasks, backlog management) should remain in systems like Jira/Asana/etc.
In Parallel focuses on keeping the scope’s execution plan coherent over time.

How to run meetings naturally (recommended)

1) Don’t change your meeting style

Run the meeting the way you normally would. Avoid “talking to the tool.”

2) Make decisions explicit when they matter

You don’t need a script—but if you want better clarity, state decisions clearly when they happen:

“Decision: we will…”
“We’re choosing A instead of B.”
“This is now owned by…”

This improves alignment for humans and improves capture quality for the system.

3) Use the post-meeting report as your review point

Don’t try to police capture live. After the meeting:

review the report
confirm decisions/actions
approve plan updates

That review step is where trust is built: nothing material becomes “truth” without confirmation.

Best practices for better signal (without extra process)

Start aligned: “what changed?”

If you begin the meeting with the pre-read (“what changed since last time?”), discussion naturally centers on execution reality.

Keep ownership crisp

Whenever you assign something:

ensure there is a clear owner
ensure the owner is present or explicitly agrees

This prevents the most common failure mode: actions that exist but don’t move.

Separate “ideas” from “commitments”

Brainstorming is fine, but when something becomes real, make it explicit:

“This is an idea / exploration”
“This is now a commitment / action”

That keeps the system high-signal and prevents accidental overload.

End with a quick closure

A simple 60-second close improves everything:

“What did we decide?”
“What actions are we committing to?”
“What changed?” (priority/risk/ownership)

That closure usually becomes the clean spine of the post-meeting report.

Common issues (and fixes)

“Capture missed something important”

Most common reasons:

the decision was implied, not stated
ownership was ambiguous
the key moment happened after the formal meeting ended

Fix:

confirm or add the missing decision/action during report review
if it matters, make the decision explicit next time (“Decision: …”)

“People get awkward / guarded”

Fix:

be transparent about capture and consent expectations
emphasize that the output is execution reality (decisions, actions, risks), not surveillance
use stakeholder visibility intentionally (don’t over-broadcast raw operational detail)