What makes a meeting bad? Is it getting off-topic, non productive, that sort of thing? If so, wouldn't it make more sense to re-orient the group than to stop it?
Stopping a meeting seems like a massive waste of resources, especially when you've already gathered the folks that can fix it.
A good meeting should generally be transmitting information effectively or driving to a decision. If a meeting is unable to do that, it should be stopped.
Stopping a meeting in the middle of the planned duration is a bit dramatic, but if it’s clear after 15 minutes the group collectively doesn’t have the information needed to make a decision, its worth stopping.
I’m currently spending a quarter of my day or more in status meetings of various types. I will absolutely tell people I’m dropping (which is a the “lite” version of stopping a meeting) if they stop providing value.
Sometimes the meeting turns into a discussion among 2-3 people with a large audience, sometimes the discussion turns circular where everyone just repeats themselves.
> when you've already gathered the folks that can fix it.
Far too many people gather the wrong people, and stopping to excuse people is critical.
Stopping a meeting seems like a massive waste of resources, especially when you've already gathered the folks that can fix it.