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

by (2013)
20 Flashcards & Notes
4 Students
  • This summary
  • +380.000 other summaries
  • A unique study tool
  • A rehearsal system for this summary
  • Studycoaching with videos
Remember faster, study better. Scientifically proven.

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

  • 1 1

  • Lag sequential analysis revealed that procedural meeting behaviors are sustained by supporting statements within the team interaction process
  • the more evenly distributed procedural meeting behaviors were across team members, the more team members were satisfied with their discussion processes and outcomes.
  • Managers should encourage procedural communication to enhance meeting effectiveness, and team members should share the responsibility of procedurally facilitating their meetings.
  • Negative procedural behaviors;
    - losing the train of thoughts
    - getting hung up on details
    - rambling
  • Procedural statements like
    - setting goals,
    - giving directions 
    - summarizing
    are important predictors of decision quality. 
  • -Procedural behaviors; positive means structuring the meeting process and negative means a loss of structure 
  • -Problem-focused behaviors; analyzing problems, generating ideas and developing solutions 
  • -Action-oriented behaviors; whether a team is willing to take responsibility for and actively try to improve their work (vs. Denying and complaining)
  • -Socioemotional behaviors; positive (feedback) and negative (interrupting the others) social behaviors between team members 
  • Proactive (functional) statements strongly impact meeting satisfaction and team productivity. It includes signaling interest in change, taking responsibility and plan concrete follow up steps. 
  • Dysfunctional meeting behaviors son the other hand - such as complaining, criticizing others, getting of track or losing the train of thought - might be diminished or eliminated by procedural statements
  • How another behaves (descriptive) and what you should behave like (injunctive). 
  • not the quantity of procedural meeting behaviors is of great interest but moreover the distribution between the participants of a meeting 
  •  
    H1: Only a few of the possible procedural statements were followed by a supportive statement one on Lag 1 and 2. H1 is therefore only somewhat supported 
  • H2: 7 of the 9 possible procedural meeting behaviors were significantly followed by action planning. H2 is largely supported 
  • H3:
    a) A significant inhibitive function was found by 8 of the 9 procedural meeting
         behaviors on the loss of structure. H3a is therefore supported 
  • b) 7 of the 9 procedural meeting behaviors significantly inhibited criticizing
          behavior for both Lag1 and Lag 2. H3b is highly supported
    c) Also a inhibited function was found for procedural meeting behaviors on
         complaining behavior on Lag 1 and 2. H3c is also supported
  • Proactive meeting behaviors are rare. An avarage team meeting contains 69 counteractive statements such as complaining and only 17 proactive statements.
  • Procedural behaviors can actively promote proactive behvior thus offers promising opportunities for creating more efficient meeting processes and outcomes.
  • The link between procedural communication and perceived meeting effectiveness depended on the degree to which procedural meeting behaviors were shared.
Read the full summary
This summary. +380.000 other summaries. A unique study tool. A rehearsal system for this summary. Studycoaching with videos.