Every call is either a Meeting or an Interview. You set it in the recording window while the call runs, or on the call afterwards.
| Meeting | Interview | |
|---|---|---|
| Original transcript | Yes | Yes |
| Cleaned transcript, as question-and-answer blocks | No | Yes |
| Summary | Yes | Yes |
| Key takeaways | Yes | Yes |
The difference that matters is the cleaned transcript. Meetings never get one.
Why they differ
An interview has a shape: you ask, someone answers, and the value is in the answers. That shape is what cleaning exploits. It can strip the throat-clearing and reorganise the conversation into questions with answers under them, because that is genuinely what happened.
An internal meeting has no such shape. Six people talking around a decision does not reduce to question-and-answer blocks without inventing a structure that was not there, so Junior does not try. You get the full transcript and a summary instead.
Which to pick
Interview for an expert call, a customer conversation, a client interview: anything where you were mostly asking.
Meeting for an internal discussion, a team call, a client update where everyone was contributing.
Changing the type on a finished call regenerates its type-specific output: takeaways go back to pending and are produced again. Worth doing when you spot a mistake, not worth flipping back and forth.
Questions
I filed an expert interview as a Meeting. What do I do?
Change the call type on the call. Junior reprocesses it and you get the cleaned transcript you were missing. Nothing is lost, and the audio is not touched.
What if the call was genuinely both?
Pick whichever the majority of it was, and lean towards Interview if you were mostly asking questions. An interview gives you both transcripts, so you lose nothing by choosing it, whereas a meeting gives you only the original.