A Sequential Analysis of Procedural Meeting Communication: How Teams Facilitate Their Meetings

References

• Arber, A. (2008). Team meetings in specialist palliative care: Asking questions as a strategy within interprofessional interaction. Qualitative Health Research, 18, 1323–1335. doi:10.1177/1049732308322588
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bakeman, R., & Gottman, J. M. (1997). Observing interaction: An introduction to sequential analysis (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bakeman, R., & Quera, V. (1995). Analyzing interaction: Sequential analysis with SDIS and GSEQ. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bales, R. F. (1950). Interaction process analysis: A method for the study of small groups. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Baran, B. E., Shanock, L. R., Rogelberg, S. G., & Scott, C. W. (2012). Leading group meetings: Supervisors' actions, employee behaviors, and upward perceptions. Small Group Research, 43, 330–355. doi:10.1177/1046496411418252
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benes, K. M., Gutkin, T. B., & Kramer, J. J. (1995). Lag sequential analysis: Taking consultation communication research methodology to the movies. School Psychology Review, 24, 694–709.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Booth, N. (2000). 75 icebreakers for great gatherings: Everything you need to bring people together. St. Paul, MN: Brighton.
   Google Scholar
• Burke, M. J., & Dunlap, W. P. (2002). Estimating interrater agreement with the average deviation index: A user's guide. Organizational Research Methods, 5, 159–172. doi:10.1177/1094428102005002002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burke, M. J., Finkelstein, L. M., & Dusig, M. S. (1999). On average deviation indices for estimating interrater agreement. Organizational Research Methods, 2, 49–68. doi:10.1177/109442819921004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cialdini, R. B., Reno, R. R., & Kallgren, C. A. (1990). A focus theory of normative conduct: Recycling the concept of norms to reduce littering in public places. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 1015–1026. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.58.6.1015
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen, J. (1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20, 37–46. doi:10.1177/001316446002000104
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen, S. G., Ledford, G. E. Jr., & Spreitzer, G. M. (1996). A predictive model of self-managing work team effectiveness. Human Relations, 49, 643–676. doi:10.1177/001872679604900506
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cooke, R. A., & Szumal, J. L. (1994). The impact of group interaction styles on problem-solving effectiveness. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 30, 415–437. doi:10.1177/0021886394304005
   Google Scholar
• Dawson, J. F., Gonzalez-Roma, V., Davis, A., & West, M. A. (2008). Organizational climate and climate strength in UK hospitals. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 17, 89–111. doi:10.1080/13594320601046664
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Farkas, D. K. (1999). The logical and rhetorical construction of procedural discourse. Technical Communication, 46, 42–54.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Futoran, G. C., Kelly, J. R., & McGrath, J. E. (1989). TEMPO: A time-based system for analysis of group interaction process. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 10, 211–232. doi:10.1207/s15324834basp1003_2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gersick, C. (1988). Time and transition in work teams: Toward a new model of group development. Academy of Management Journal, 31, 9–41. doi:10.2307/256496
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hiller, N. J., Day, D. V., & Vance, R. J. (2006). Collective enactment of leadership roles and team effectiveness: A field study. The Leadership Quarterly, 17, 387–397. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2006.04.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang, M. (2009). A conceptual framework of the effects of positive affect and affective relationships on group knowledge networks. Small Group Research, 40, 323–346. doi:10.1177/1046496409332441
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Janis, I. L. (1972). Victims of groupthink. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
   Google Scholar
• Kauffeld, S. (2007). Jammern oder Lösungsexploration? Zeitschrift für Arbeits- und Organisationspsychologie, 51, 55–67. doi:10.1026/0932-4089.51.2.55
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kauffeld, S., & Lehmann-Willenbrock, N. (2012). Meetings matter: Effects of work group communication on organizational success. Small Group Research, 43, 128–156. doi:10.1177/1046496411429599
   Web of Science ®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:10.1080/13594320701693209
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Komaki, J. L., Desselles, M. L., & Bowman, E. D. (1989). Definitely not a breeze: Extending an operant model of effective supervision to teams. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 522–529. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.74.3.522
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lapinski, M. K., & Rimal, R. N. (2005). An explication of social norms. Communication Theory, 15, 127–147. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.2005.tb00329.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lehmann-Willenbrock, N., & Kauffeld, S. (2010). The downside of communication: Complaining cycles in group discussions. In S. Schuman (Ed.), The handbook for working with difficult groups: How they are difficult, why they are difficult, what you can do (pp. 33–54). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass/Wiley.
   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 planning communication. Small Group Research, 42, 639–668. doi:10.1177/1046496411398397
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Littlejohn, S. W., & Domenici, K. (2001). Engaging communication in conflict: Systemic practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Mangold (2010). INTERACT quick start manual V2.4. Mangold International GmbH (Ed.). Retrieved from http://www.mangold-international.com
   Google Scholar
• Marks, M. A., Mathieu, J. E., & Zaccaro, S. J. (2001). A temporally based framework and taxonomy of team processes. Academy of Management Review, 26, 356–376.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McComas, K. A. (2003). Citizen satisfaction with public meetings used for risk communication. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 31, 164–184. doi:10.1080/0090988032000064605
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mesmer-Magnus, J. R., & DeChurch, L. A. (2009). Information sharing and team performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 535–546. doi:10.1037/a0013773
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Myrsiades, L. (2000). Meeting sabotage: Met and conquered. Journal of Management Development, 19, 870–885. doi:10.1108/02621710010379182
   Google Scholar
• Okhuysen, G. A., & Eisenhardt, K. M. (2002). Integrating knowledge in groups. Organization Science, 13, 370–386. doi:10.1287/orsc.13.4.370.2947
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pendry, L. F., Driscoll, D. M., & Field, S. C. T. (2007). Diversity training: Putting theory into practice. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 80, 27–50. doi:10.1348/096317906X118397
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pike, B., & Solem, L. (2000). 50 creative training openers and energizers: Innovative ways to start your training with a bang! San Francisco: Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer and Creative Training Techniques Press.
   Google Scholar
• Putnam, L. L. (1979). Preference for procedural order in task-oriented small groups. Communication Monographs, 46, 193–218. doi:10.1080/03637757909376006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Putnam, L. L. (1983). Small group work climates: A lag-sequential analysis of group interaction. Small Group Behavior, 14, 465–494. doi:10.1177/104649648301400405
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rogelberg, S. G., Allen, J. A., Shanock, L., Scott, C., & Shuffler, M. (2010). Employee satisfaction with meetings: A contemporary facet of job satisfaction. Human Resource Management, 49, 149–172. doi:10.1002/hrm.20339
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rogelberg, S. G., Leach, D. J., Warr, P. B., & Burnfield, J. L. (2006). “Not another meeting!” Are meeting time demands related to employee well-being? Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 86–96. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.91.1.83
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sackett, G. P. (1979). The lag sequential analysis of contingency and cyclicity in behavioral interaction research. In J. Osofsky (Ed.), Handbook of infant development (pp. 623–649). New York, NY: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Sackett, G. P. (1987). Analysis of sequential social interaction data: Some issues, recent developments, and a causal inference model. In J. D. Osofsky (Ed.), Handbook of infant development (2nd ed., pp. 855–878). New York, NY: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Schell, A. (2010). Meeting-Kultur in europäischen Unternehmen: Ad-hoc-Umfrage unter Mitarbeitern und Führungskräften, die regelmäßig an Business-Meetings teilnehmen [European business meeting culture: An ad-hoc survey of employees and managers who regularly participate in business meetings]. Munich: Schell Marketing Consulting.
   Google Scholar
• Schultz, B. (1974). Characteristics of emergent leaders of continuing problem-solving groups. Journal of Psychology, 88, 167–173. doi:10.1080/00223980.1974.9915726
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schultz, B. (1986). Communicative correlates of perceived leaders in small groups. Small Group Research, 17, 51–65. doi:10.1177/104649648601700105
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schultz, B., & Ketrow, S. M. (1996). Improving decision quality in the small group: The role of the reminder. In R. S. Cathcart, L. A. Samovar, & L. D. Herman (Eds.), Small group communication: Theory and practice (7th ed., pp. 404–410). Dubuque, IA: Brown & Benchmark.
   Google Scholar
• Schultz, R., Ketrow, S. M., & Urban, D. M. (1995). Improving decision quality in the small group: The role of the reminder. Small Group Research, 26, 521–541. doi:10.1177/1046496495264004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seibert, S. E., Wang, G., & Courtright S. H. (2011). Antecedents and consequences of psychological and team empowerment in organizations: A meta-analysis review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96, 981–1003. doi:10.1037/a0022676
   PubMed Web of Science ®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:10.1037/1089-2699.5.1.3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sonnentag, S., & Volmer, J. (2009). Individual-level predictors of task-related teamwork processes: The role of expertise and self-efficacy in team meetings. Group and Organization Management, 37, 37–66. doi:10.1177/1059601108329377
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sunwolf, & Frey, L. R. (2005). Facilitating group communication. In S. Wheelan (Ed.), The handbook of group research and practice (pp. 485–509). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Sunwolf, & Seibold, D. R. (1999). The impact of formal problem-solving procedures on group processes, members, and task outcomes. In L. R. Frey, D. S. Gouran, & M. S. Poole (Eds.), The handbook of group communication theory and research (pp. 395–431). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Tracy, K. (2007). The discourse of crisis in public meetings: Case study of a school district's multimillion dollar error. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 35, 418–441. doi:10.1080/00909880701617133
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Praet, E. (2009). Staging a team performance: A linguistic ethnographic analysis of weekly meetings at a British embassy. Journal of Business Communication, 46, 80–99. doi:10.1177/0021943608325754
   Google Scholar
• West, E. (1999). The big book of icebreakers: 50 quick, fun activities for energizing meetings and workshops. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Wittenbaum, G. M., Hollingshead, A. B., Paulus, P. B., Hirokawa, R. Y., Ancona, D. G., Peterson, R. S., … Yoon, K. (2004). The functional perspective as a lens for understanding groups. Small Group Research, 35, 17–43. doi:10.1177/1046496403259459
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wittenbaum, G. M., Vaughan, S. I., & Stasser, G. (1998). Coordination in task-performing groups. In R. S. Tindale, L. Heath, J. Edwards, E. J. Posavac, F. B. Bryant, J. Myers, … E. Henderson-King, Theory and research on small groups (pp. 177–204). New York, NY: Plenum Press.
   Google Scholar