The wider argument3 min read16 September 2026
Executive presence in meetings
Ask anyone who has experienced real executive presence to describe it and the answer is almost never about voice or posture. It is "they made me feel like the only person in the room". That decomposes into two ordinary, buildable things: undivided attention during the conversation, and accurate recall of what you said in the last one. Neither is a personality trait. Both are defeated by the same thing — a person half-managing a documentation task while you talk to them.
The two things, and how to actually do them
01 / Attention is scarce enough to be a signal
Complete, undivided attention is unusual enough now that receiving it is memorable. It does not require a technique — it requires removing the things competing for it, which for most people in most meetings is a phone and a note-taking task.
02 / Being remembered is what people read as being valued
Referencing what someone said three months ago lands as recognition rather than as good filing. It reads as evidence that the conversation mattered to you, which is a claim nothing else makes as convincingly.
03 / Recall can be systematised, and that is not cheating
A leader with a reliable record is operationally indistinguishable from one with extraordinary memory, and more consistent — natural recall is good for the relationships that already have your attention and poor for the rest. The system is fairer than the talent.
04 / Consistency is what builds the reputation
Attentive in some meetings and distracted in others creates uncertainty, and people who are uncertain hedge. They bring the polished version instead of the honest one, and the quality of what you hear drops. Consistency is what makes people candid.
05 / The five minutes before
Review the last conversation before you walk in. That is the entire practice, and it is why the record matters — not for the archive, but for the five minutes that turn it into continuity.
Questions
How do you develop executive presence?
Remove what competes for your attention in the room, and build a reliable way to recall what people told you last time. The theatrical parts — voice, posture, gravitas — get far more attention in the coaching material than they seem to deserve.
Why does remembering what people say matter for leadership?
Because being remembered is read as being valued, and it is one of the few signals that cannot be faked in the moment. It also changes what people tell you: candour follows the belief that you are listening.
How do executives take notes without losing presence?
They mostly do not take notes during the conversation. Either someone else does, or the conversation is captured with disclosure, or they write immediately afterwards. Writing while someone talks is what costs the presence.
Is this just about meetings?
It generalises, but meetings are where it is most visible and most measurable, because there is a before and an after and someone else is watching.
Does a record make attention less genuine?
It is the opposite: the record is what frees the attention. What is not genuine is pretending to remember something you looked up — there is no reason to pretend, and "I looked back at my notes from March" is a perfectly good sentence.
Scriben is recording people know about. You say what the pen is and what it does, they agree, and then it stays out of the way for the rest of the conversation — that second half is the product, and it only works after the first. Recording law varies by jurisdiction and by profession: see recording people lawfully before you start.
Read next
- For fractional executives — Five companies, one head.
- Board meeting notes — What the minutes deliberately leave out.
- Remembering a meeting — Four strategies, and where each one fails.
- Running effective meetings — Four decisions, and the three meetings to cancel.
- Return to office — The documentation layer that quietly left.