Toward a Theory of Strategic Meeting Interaction

doi:10.1017/CBO9781107589735.014

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

Stephenson J. Beck ,

Emily A. Paskewitz and

Joann Keyton

Edited by

Joseph A. Allen ,

Nale Lehmann-Willenbrock and

Steven G. Rogelberg

Show author details

Joseph A. Allen: Affiliation:
University of Nebraska, Omaha
Nale Lehmann-Willenbrock: Affiliation:
Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam
Steven G. Rogelberg: Affiliation:
University of North Carolina, Charlotte

Book contents

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

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107589735.014 [Opens in a new window]

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.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Adelswärd, V., & Öberg, B. M. (1998). The function of laughter and joking in negotiating activities. International Journal of Humor Research, 11, 411–429.CrossRef Google 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:10.1177/1046496412471862CrossRef Google 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:10.1177/1046496412455435CrossRef Google Scholar

Beck, S. J., & Keyton, J. (2009). Perceiving strategic meeting interaction. Small Group Research, 40, 223–246. doi:10.1177/1046496408330084CrossRef Google 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.0b013e3182813829CrossRef Google 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:10.1177/1046496411430531CrossRef Google 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:10.1080/03637759209376250CrossRef Google 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: 10.1080/01463370009385605CrossRef Google 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.xCrossRef Google 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/S0047404507070674CrossRef Google 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.2006.05.003CrossRef Google 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)00012–7CrossRef Google 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:10.1080/10570318909374296CrossRef Google 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.CrossRef Google 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: 10.1177/0021943608325750CrossRef Google 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: 10.1177/1046496411429599CrossRef Google 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:10.1080/1359432070169320910.1080/13594320701693209CrossRef Google Scholar

Kellerman, K. (1992). Communication: Inherently strategic and primarily automatic. Communication Monographs, 59, 288–300. doi:10.1080/03637759209376270CrossRef Google 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: 10.1177/1368430207074727CrossRef Google 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:10.1177/1046496412471734CrossRef Google 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/a0013495CrossRef Google Scholar

Keyton, J., & Beck, S. J. (2010). Examining laughter functionality in jury deliberations. Small Group Research, 41, 386–407. doi:10.1177/1046496410366311CrossRef Google 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:10.080/14639221003729136CrossRef Google 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: 10.1177/1046496411429600CrossRef Google 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:10.1080/00909882.2013.844847CrossRef Google 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:10.1177/1368430213497066CrossRef Google 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:10.1177/1046496411398397CrossRef Google 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:10.1080/10570314.2010.512281CrossRef Google Scholar

Li, S. S. (2007). Computer-mediated communication and group decision making. Small Group Research, 38, 593–614. doi:10.1177/1046496407304335CrossRef Google Scholar

McComas, K. A. (2001). Theory and practice of public meetings. Communication Theory, 11, 36–55. doi:10.1111/j.1468–2885.2001.tb00232.xCrossRef Google Scholar

McComas, K. A. (2003). Trivial pursuits: Participant views of public meetings. Journal of Public Relations Research, 15, 91–115. doi:10.1207/S1532754XJPRR1502_1CrossRef Google 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: 10.1177/1046496410366308CrossRef Google 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_1CrossRef Google Scholar

Putnam, L., & Stohl, C. (1990). Bona fide groups: A reconceptualization of groups in context. Communication Studies, 41, 248–265.CrossRef Google 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: 10.1177/1046496411429170CrossRef Google 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.CrossRef Google Scholar

Seibold, D. R., & Meyers, R. A. (2007). Group argument: A structuration perspective and research program. Small Group Research, 38, 312–336. doi: 10.1177/1046496407301966CrossRef Google 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:10.1037/1089–2699.5.1.3CrossRef Google 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:10.1177/1368430204046145CrossRef Google 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.CrossRef Google 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:10.1080/00909880701617133CrossRef Google Scholar

Tracy, K. (2012). Public hearings about same-sex marriage: How the context “makes” an argument. Qualitative Communication Research, 1, 83–107.CrossRef Google 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.CrossRef Google 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:10.1080/0363452042000299894CrossRef Google 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: 10.1177/0957926511405410CrossRef Google Scholar