Automate your meeting notes
without losing control of your decisions.

01The task, as it is done today

The team meeting is on Monday at 9 am, on a video call, because part of the team is out on site or with a client. In the small businesses I visit between Arlon and Luxembourg City, the notes go out on Thursday, if they go out at all. In between, everyone has kept their own version, and the following Monday starts with the whole team agreeing all over again on what was said.

Nobody has forgotten. Everyone remembers something different.

And it is hardly ever the organiser who writes them up. It is whoever took notes, often the same person from one week to the next, in between two other jobs. The actions stay in the head of whoever said “I’ll look into it”. An action with no name and no date cannot be chased. It gets forgotten.

02Can AI write my meeting notes for me?

AI drafts the notes and sets out the actions, it does not decide what was decided, and it sends nothing. The question fits on one line, and so does the answer.

Your video-conferencing tool can already record and transcribe. Everything that separates a transcript from meeting notes happens afterwards. What follows is the full circuit, as it is built in a company of three to fifty people: twenty-four stations, five places where everything stops so that a person can decide, and only five stations where a model is involved.

03From the recorded meeting to everyone’s actions

Eight zones, and one node where a person has the final say: the organiser. Click on a zone to see its stations, or let the sequence play.

04The twenty-four stations, and who does what

The same circuit, unfolded. Every station shows who owns it, and the tally at the foot of the table says what video-conferencing tools do not: the drafting is the small part.

05What the AI does, and what it never does

Five stations out of twenty-four. The model judges whether a transcript is usable, corrects misheard names against your glossary, separates what was decided from what was said and from what remains open, sets out the actions, and flags what it is unsure about. That is the part video-conferencing tools sell as if it were the whole thing.

Three hard limits, which do not change from one meeting to the next. It does not turn a discussion into a decision: “we could look into that” commits nobody to anything, and notes that turn it into a decision assign, in writing, work that nobody agreed to. It does not guess an owner or a date: an action missing either comes out marked “to be confirmed”, and it is the organiser who completes it. It sends nothing: the draft goes to the organiser, and to the organiser alone. Once the notes are approved, it is the scenario that publishes them, not the model.

The tools are Claude, Make and whatever you already use: your video-conferencing tool, which records and transcribes, your calendar, your email, the space where your team works, whether that is Teams, Slack, Notion, monday.com or Asana, and your task manager. I connect to them, I do not replace them. One limit matters more here than anywhere else: Luxembourgish is not among the languages Teams can transcribe. A meeting that switches from French to Luxembourgish partway through produces a transcript that gets the Luxembourgish passages wrong, and the circuit hands it to a person instead of patching it by guesswork.

06What cannot be bought, and what holds everything together

Three stations belong neither to the scenario nor to the model. Your company’s template for meeting notes: what was decided, who does what by when, what remains open, and nothing else. The glossary and the register of people: your clients, your products, your acronyms, and for each colleague their exact name and their account in the task manager, without which no action ever reaches the right person. And the rules: what is never recorded, such as one-to-one reviews, staff matters and disputes; who receives which notes, and in which channel; how long the recording is kept. A management committee’s notes are not posted in the channel where your subcontractors are guests.

Those three pieces are built with you, out of what you know and what has never been written down. No video-conferencing tool supplies them, because they describe your business, not the meeting. They are what make the notes read like the ones you would have written yourself.

To those three, add one habit, which plays out the week after: the next meeting opens with the actions from the last one. Without that loop, the notes get filed away. With it, they get read again.

07What can go wrong

Four failures. The first is as old as meeting notes themselves; the other three arrive with the recording.

A passing remark becomes a decision. “We could look into that” ends up written as “Julie is handling it by Friday”, and Julie never said so. It is the failure that turns meeting notes into a source of conflict. The safeguard does not depend on the organiser’s attention: a decision that points to no passage in the transcript stops the notes, and an action with no owner comes out marked “to be confirmed”.

People speak differently when they know they are being recorded. The objections come out in the corridor after the meeting, and the notes become an accurate record of a meeting that no longer settles anything. That is handled by choosing in advance what gets recorded, and by keeping out of the circuit whatever has no business being in it.

The glossary goes out of date. A new client, a new product, a new hire, and the transcript mangles them every week without anyone correcting the source. The notes stay readable but get the names wrong, which is exactly where they hold people to account.

Three people around a single microphone. In a meeting room with one shared microphone, the transcript may see a single speaker where there were three, and the actions lose their owner. The circuit flags the speaker as unidentified instead of guessing. The organiser decides.

08How long it takes, and what it costs

I put no timescale on this page. What sets it is not the scenario, it is the state of your meetings: how many kinds there are, whether a template for the notes has to be invented or is already in use, whether a glossary has to be written or already exists in your documents. I only know once I have seen one of your meetings. The audit sets the timescale as it sets the price, and that is why it is free.

What I can say now: we start with a single kind of meeting, the one that comes round every week, and the circuit only extends to the others once that one holds. Keeping your data safe, the cost and the timing are covered in the frequently asked questions, and my background is on my page.