We measure OEE, scrap, service. We rarely measure whether the team meeting took place. Yet it’s the first indicator to check when an initiative loses steam: meetings were skipped first, then gaps stopped being raised, then actions dragged.
Definition
Hold rate = meetings held ÷ meetings planned, per ritual and per team, over a rolling four-week period. A meeting is “held” if it was opened and closed in the tool, by the facilitator, in its time slot. A meeting entered after the fact doesn’t count.
Reading thresholds
| Rate | Reading | What we do |
|---|---|---|
| ≥ 90 % | The ritual is a habit | Look at duration and number of actions created |
| 70–90 % | The ritual depends on one person | Name a backup facilitator per team |
| < 70% | The ritual doesn’t really exist | Cut the template to 10 minutes and go back to the three topics that matter |
The two indicators that go with it
- Average duration : a meeting slipping from 15 to 25 minutes signals numbers arriving late.
- Actions created per meeting : zero actions over three meetings in a row signals an information meeting, not a decision meeting.
The traps
Counting “made-up” meetings (that’s a different meeting), showing the rate per facilitator (we track actions, not people), and setting a 100% target (a justified missed meeting, due to a breakdown or an absence, is information, not a fault).
Frequently asked questions
How to measure it without re-entry?
When meeting slots are generated by the ritual and the facilitator opens and closes the meeting on the screen, the rate calculates itself.
Should it be displayed on the team board?
Yes, per team. It’s an indicator of collective discipline, never by name.
What’s the link with OEE?
Indirect, and medium-term. Nobody should promise one OEE point per point of hold rate.
See Daystream on your cases, not on a generic demo
Thirty minutes: a floor walk, a gap, a team meeting on the big screen. A human replies within one business day.
To train first: theLean Academy is free, in four languages.