Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-fwgfc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-10T06:46:17.611Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

14 - Toward a Theory of Strategic Meeting Interaction

from Capturing and Understanding Dynamics and Processes of the Meeting

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 August 2015

By
Stephenson J. Beck ,
Emily A. Paskewitz  and
Joann Keyton
Edited by
Joseph A. Allen ,
Nale Lehmann-Willenbrock  and
Steven G. Rogelberg
Joseph A. Allen
Affiliation:
University of Nebraska, Omaha
Nale Lehmann-Willenbrock
Affiliation:
Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam
Steven G. Rogelberg
Affiliation:
University of North Carolina, Charlotte
Get access

Summary

Abstract

Organizations are increasingly reliant on meetings to disseminate their vision, make decisions, and coordinate responses to societal and organizational demands (Rogelberg, Scott, & Kello, 2007). This chapter applies a communicative perspective to meetings, which promotes a process-based approach to meeting interaction. After reviewing the interdisciplinary literature on meeting interaction, we offer propositions about meeting communication as a starting point for a theory of strategic meeting interaction. Building from the work of Kellerman (1992) and Beck and Keyton (2009), we emphasize the importance of viewing meeting interaction as inherently strategic. Specifically, we argue that all meeting interaction is strategic, and this premise is the foundation for meaning creation and contextual influence in meetings. This perspective encourages researchers to view interaction messages as the evidence of meeting member goals and to recognize the importance of process for understanding the relationship between inputs and outputs. We conclude by providing methodological considerations for the propositions, along with an example study using this perspective.

Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Meeting Science , pp. 305 - 324
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2015

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adelswärd, V., & Öberg, B. M. (1998). The function of laughter and joking in negotiating activities. International Journal of Humor Research, 11, 411–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allen, J. A., Rogelberg, S. G., & Scott, J. (2008). Meaningful meetings: Improve your organization's effectiveness one meeting at a time. Quality Progress, 41, 48–53.Google Scholar
Bales, R. F. (1950). Interaction process analysis. Cambridge, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Bales, R. F. (1954). In conference. Harvard Business Review, 31, 44–50.Google Scholar
Bales, R. F. (2002). Social interaction systems: Theory and measurement. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.Google Scholar
Barge, J. K., & Keyton, J. (1994). Contextualizing power and social influence in groups. In Frey, L. R. (Ed.), Group communication in context: Studies of natural groups (pp. 85–105). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Beck, S. J. (2008). The communicative creation of meetings: An interaction analysis of meeting thought units and meeting activities in three natural meeting contexts (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS.Google Scholar
Beck, S. J. (2013). Moving beyond disciplinary differences in group research. Small Group Research, 44, 158–161. doi:10.1177/1046496412471862CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beck, S. J., Gronewold, K., & Western, K. (2012). Intergroup argumentation in city government decision making: The Wal-Mart dilemma. Small Group Research, 43, 587–612. doi:10.1177/1046496412455435CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beck, S. J., & Keyton, J. (2009). Perceiving strategic meeting interaction. Small Group Research, 40, 223–246. doi:10.1177/1046496408330084CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beck, S. J., & Keyton, J. (2012). Team cognition, communication, and message interdependence. In Salas, E., Fiore, S., & Letsky, M. (Eds.), Theories of team cognition: Cross-disciplinary perspectives (pp. 471–494). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
Beck, S. J., & Keyton, J. (2014). Facilitating social support: Member-leader communication in a breast cancer support group. Cancer Nursing, 37, 36–43. doi:10.1097/NCC.0b013e3182813829CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beck, S. J., Littlefield, R. S., & Weber, A. J. (2012). Public meeting facilitation: A naïve theory analysis of crisis meeting interaction. Small Group Research, 42, 211–235. doi:10.1177/1046496411430531CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Black, L., Leighter, J., & Gastil, J. (2009). Communicating trust, community, and process in public meetings: A reflection on what close attention to interaction can contribute to the future of public participation. International Journal of Public Participation, 3, 143–159.Google Scholar
Boden, D. (1994). The business of talk: Organization in action. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Brown, P., & Levinson, S. (1978). Universals in language usage: Politeness phenomena. In Goody, E. N. (Ed.), Questions and politeness: Strategies in social interaction. Cambridge papers in social anthropology (Vol. 8, pp. xx–xx). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Burleson, B. (1992). Taking communication seriously. Communication Monographs, 59, 79–86. doi:10.1080/03637759209376250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burnett, A., & Badzinski, D. M. (2000). An exploratory study of argument in the jury decision-making process. Communication Quarterly, 48(4), 380–396. doi: 10.1080/01463370009385605CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buttny, R. (2010). Citizen participation, metadiscourse, and accountability: A public hearing on a zoning change for Wal-Mart. Journal of Communication, 60, 636–659. doi:10.1111/j.1460–2466.2010.01507.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buttny, R., & Cohen, J. R. (2007). Drawing on the words of others at public hearings: Zoning, Wal-Mart, and the threat to the aquifer. Language in Society, 36, 735–756. doi:10.1017/S0047404507070674CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Canary, D. J., Ratledge, N. T., & Seibold, D. R. (1982, November). Argument and group decision-making: Development of a coding scheme. Paper presented at the meeting of the Speech Communication Association, Louisville, KY.Google Scholar
Coates, J. (2007). Talk in a play frame: More on laughter and intimacy. Journal of Pragmatics, 39, 29–49. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2006.05.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DiStefano, J. J., & Maznevski, M. L. (2000). Creating value with diverse teams in global management. Organizational Dynamics, 29, 45–63. doi:10.1016/S0090–2616(00)00012–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. Cambridge, MA: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Glenn, P. J. (1999). Initiating shared laughter in multi-party conversation. Western Journal of Speech Communication, 53, 127–149. doi:10.1080/10570318909374296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hirokawa, R. Y. (1987). Considerations for the use of interaction analysis in group communication research. In Tardy, C. H. (Ed.), Handbook for communication research (pp. 229–245). New York, NY: Ablex.Google Scholar
Hollingshead, A. B., Jacobsohn, G. C., & Beck, S. J. (2007). Motives and goals in context: A strategic analysis of information-sharing groups. In Fiedler, K. (Ed.), Social communication, (pp. 257–280). New York, NY: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Hollingshead, A. B., Wittenbaum, G. M., Paulus, P. B., Hirokawa, R. Y., Ancona, D. G., Peterson, R. S., Jehn, K. A., & Yoon, K. (2005). Understanding theory and research on groups from the functional perspective. In Poole, M. S. & Hollingshead, A. B. (Eds.), Theories of small groups: An interdisciplinary perspective (pp. 21–62). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holmes, J., & Marra, M. (2004). Leadership and managing conflict in meetings. Pragmatics, 14, 439–462.Google Scholar
Janis, I. L. (1982). Groupthink: Psychological studies of policy decisions and fiascoes. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
Kangasharju, H., & Nikko, T. (2009). Emotions in organizations: Joint laughter in workplace meetings. Journal of Business Communication, 46, 100–119. doi: 10.1177/0021943608325750CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kauffeld, S., & Lehmann-Willenbrock, N. (2012). Meetings matter: Effects of team meetings on team and organizational success. Small Group Research, 43, 130–158. doi: 10.1177/1046496411429599CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kauffeld, S., Lehmann-Willenbrock, N., Henschel, A., & Neininger, A. (2009). Empirical discussion types: The good, the bad, and the indifferent. Paper presented at the meeting of the Interdisciplinary Network for Group Research, Colorado Springs, CO.Google Scholar
Kauffeld, S., & Meyers, R. (2009). Complaint and solution-oriented circles: Interaction patterns in work group discussions. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 18, 267–294. doi:10.1080/1359432070169320910.1080/13594320701693209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kellerman, K. (1992). Communication: Inherently strategic and primarily automatic. Communication Monographs, 59, 288–300. doi:10.1080/03637759209376270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelly, J. R., & Spoor, J. R. (2006). Affective influence in groups. In Forgas, J. P. (Ed.), Affect in social thinking and behavior (pp. 311–325). New York, NY: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Kelly, J. R., & Spoor, J. R. (2007). Naïve theories about the effects of mood in groups: A preliminary investigation. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 10, 203–222. doi: 10.1177/1368430207074727CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelshaw, T., & Gastil, J. (2007). When citizens and officeholders meet (Part 1): Variations in the key elements of public meetings. International Journal of Public Participation, 1, 1–17.Google Scholar
Kelshaw, T., & Gastil, J. (2008). When citizens and officeholders meet (Part 2): Variations in the key elements of public meetings. International Journal of Public Participation, 2, 33–54.Google Scholar
Keyton, J. (1999). Relational communication in groups. In Frey, L. R., Gouran, D. S., & Poole, M. S. (Eds.), The handbook of group communication theory and research (pp. 192–222). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Keyton, J. (2013). Accepting rotation in the method prism. Small Group Research, 44, 175–179. doi:10.1177/1046496412471734CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keyton, J., & Beck, S. J. (2009). The influential role of relational messages in group interaction. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 13, 14–30. doi:10.1037/a0013495CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keyton, J., & Beck, S. J. (2010). Examining laughter functionality in jury deliberations. Small Group Research, 41, 386–407. doi:10.1177/1046496410366311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keyton, J., & Beck, S. J. (2011, July). The use of questions to create shared meaning. Paper presented at the meeting of the Interdisciplinary Network for Group Research, Minneapolis, MN.Google Scholar
Keyton, J., Beck, S. J., & Asbury, M. B. (2010). Macrocognition: A communicative perspective. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 11, 272–286. doi:10.080/14639221003729136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Köhler, T., Cramton, C. D., & Hinds, P. J. (2012). The meeting genre across cultures: Insights from three German-American collaborations. Small Group Research, 43, 159–185. doi: 10.1177/1046496411429600CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lehmann-Willenbrock, N., Allen, J. A., & Kauffeld, S. (2013). A sequential analysis of procedural meeting communication: How teams facilitate their meetings. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 41, 365–388. doi:10.1080/00909882.2013.844847CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lehmann-Willenbrock, N., Allen, J. A., & Meinecke, A. L. (2014). Observing culture: Differences in U.S.-American and German team meeting behaviors. Group Process & Intergroup Relations, 17, 252–271. doi:10.1177/1368430213497066CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lehmann-Willenbrock, N., Meyers, R. A., Kauffeld, S., Neininger, A., & Henschel, A. (2011). Verbal interaction sequences and group mood: Exploring the role of team planning communication. Small Group Research, 42, 639–668. doi:10.1177/1046496411398397CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leighter, J. L., & Black, L. (2010). “I'm just raising the question”: Terms for talk and practical metadiscursive argument in public meetings. Western Journal of Communication, 74, 547–569. doi:10.1080/10570314.2010.512281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, S. S. (2007). Computer-mediated communication and group decision making. Small Group Research, 38, 593–614. doi:10.1177/1046496407304335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McComas, K. A. (2001). Theory and practice of public meetings. Communication Theory, 11, 36–55. doi:10.1111/j.1468–2885.2001.tb00232.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
McComas, K. A. (2003). Trivial pursuits: Participant views of public meetings. Journal of Public Relations Research, 15, 91–115. doi:10.1207/S1532754XJPRR1502_1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mehrabian, A. (1971). Silent messages. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
Meyers, R. A., Seibold, D. R., & Kang, P. (2010). Examining argument in a naturally occurring jury deliberation. Small Group Research, 41, 452–473. doi: 10.1177/1046496410366308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mirivel, J. C., & Tracy, K. (2005). Premeeting talk: An organizationally crucial form of talk. Research on Language & Social Interaction, 38, 1–34. doi:10.1207/s15327973rlsi3801_1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Putnam, L., & Stohl, C. (1990). Bona fide groups: A reconceptualization of groups in context. Communication Studies, 41, 248–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rogelberg, S. G., Scott, C., & Kello, J. (2007). The science and fiction of meetings. MIT Sloan Management Review, 48, 18–21.Google Scholar
Rogelberg, S. G., Shanock, L. R., & Scott, C. W. (2012). Wasted time and money in meetings: Increasing return on investment. Small Group Research, 43, 236–245. doi: 10.1177/1046496411429170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scheerhorn, D., Geist, P., & Teboul, J. C. B. (1994). Beyond decision making in decision-making groups: Implications of the study of group communication. In Frey, L. R. (Ed.), Group communication in context: Studies of natural groups (pp. 247–262). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Schwartzman, H. B. (1989). The meeting: Gatherings in organizations and communities. New York, NY: Plenum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seibold, D. R., & Meyers, R. A. (2007). Group argument: A structuration perspective and research program. Small Group Research, 38, 312–336. doi: 10.1177/1046496407301966CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sonnentag, S. (2001). High performance and meeting participation: An observational study in software design teams. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 5, 3–18. doi:10.1037/1089–2699.5.1.3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spoor, J. R., & Kelly, J. R. (2004). The evolutionary significance of affect in groups: Communication and group bonding. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 7, 398–412. doi:10.1177/1368430204046145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stivers, T. (2010). An overview of the question-response system in American English conversation. Journal of Pragmatics, 42, 2772–2781. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2010.02.011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tracy, K. (2007). The discourse of crisis in public meetings: Case study of a school board's multimillion dollar error. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 35, 418–441. doi:10.1080/00909880701617133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tracy, K. (2012). Public hearings about same-sex marriage: How the context “makes” an argument. Qualitative Communication Research, 1, 83–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tracy, K., & Dimock, A. (2004). Meetings: Discursive sites for building and fragmenting community. In. Kalbfleisch, P. J. (Ed.), Communication yearbook (Vol. 28, pp. 127–165) Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
van Dijk, T. (2008). Discourse and context. A sociocognitive approach. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watzlawick, P., Beavin, J. H., & Jackson, D. D. (1967). Pragmatics of human communication: A study of interactional patterns, pathologies, and paradoxes. New York, NY: Norton.Google Scholar
Wittenbaum, G. M., Hollingshead, A. B., & Botero, I. C. (2004). From cooperative to motivated information sharing in groups: Moving beyond the hidden profile paradigm. Communication Monographs, 71, 286–310. doi:10.1080/0363452042000299894CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wodak, R., Kwon, W., & Clarke, I. (2011). “Getting people on board”: Discursive leadership for consensus building in team meetings. Discourse and Society, 22, 592–644. doi: 10.1177/0957926511405410CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×