I think it helps to think about what will produce the best meeting. Attendees are more likely to accept a meeting request if it comes from your boss, rather than the assistant. Therefore, you should create the appointment in your boss' calendar, on that person's behalf.

In that scenario, there is no need to take an extra step to add the boss to the list of attendees. Your boss doesn't need an invitation because, in theory, you've already discussed and agreed on the date of the meeting.

If you are arranging a meeting between two people but won't be attending yourself, create the meeting in your own Calendar folder, so that you can track acceptances. Maybe you can use a color code to distinguish a meeting that you're not actually attending.

To make someone aware of the meeting but not invite them, create a regular email message and insert the appointment as an attachment.

--
Sue Mosher, Outlook MVP
Author of Configuring Microsoft Outlook 2003
http://www.turtleflock.com/olconfig/index.htm
and Microsoft Outlook Programming - Jumpstart for
Administrators, Power Users, and Developers
http://www.outlookcode.com/jumpstart.aspx


"Eric M" wrote in message oups.com...
I am the assistant to an executive, and one of my jobs is organizing
meetings. Some questions:

1) Is it better to set up meetings while in my calendar -- which would
make me the organizer? Or is it better to set up meetings up in his
calendar -- which would make him the organizer? Is there a
standard/recommended procedure? Does it make a big difference? I
currently use the latter method, as do many of the assistants in our
company, but it is not clear what the designers of the software
intended.

Differences I would notice:
1a. If I'm the organizer, the item would appear on my calendar, even
though I'm not attending the meeting.
1b. If my boss is the organizer, meeting invitations in a recipient's
inbox would appear to come from him. When opened, them message header
would show that the message came from me on my boss's behalf.
1c. If my boss is the organizer, he can't 'accept' the invitation.

2) If using the method where my boss is the organizer, should I add my
boss to the list of attendees? This would make his appear in the list
twice -- once as the organizer, and once as an attendee. A few of the
assistants in our comany do it this way, but not everyone does. I'm
wondering if there is a standard/recommended method, or if there are
pros & cons to each approach.

3) What is the proper way to organize a meeting between two or more
people where my boss is *not* one of the attendees? I wouldn't be
attending either.

4) Can a person be Cc'd on a meeting invitation if they are not invited
to the meeting? Another person that I support "invites" me to make sure
I am aware of the meeting, but doesn't expect/want me there. I always
have to verify that he doesn't actually want me to attend.

Thank you,
Eric