Department of Psychology

Forschungsfrage: Wie wirkt sich die Kommunikation von Mitarbeitern unmittelbar vor Meetings auf die Meetingeffektivität aus? Der „Ripple-Effekt“ legt nahe, dass Small Talk vor dem eigentlichen Meeting auf den Meetingverlauf und das Meetingergebnis einwirkt.
Methodik: Online-Befragung von 252 Mitarbeitern; ein neuer Fragebogen zur Kommunikation vor dem Meeting wurde entwickelt.
Praktische Implikationen: Führungskräfte sollten ihre Mitarbeiter motivieren, frühzeitig zu Meetings zu erscheinen. So werden die positiven Effekte von Small Talk vor dem Meeting auf die Meetingeffektivität nutzbar.

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to investigate the importance of communication that occurs just before workplace meetings (i.e. pre-meeting talk). The paper explores how four specific types of pre-meeting talk (small talk, work talk, meeting preparatory talk, and shop talk) impact participants’
experiences of meeting effectiveness. Moreover, the authors investigate the role of participants’ personality in the link between pre-meeting talk and perceived meeting effectiveness.
Design/methodology/approach – Data were obtained using an online survey of working adults. Because pre-meeting talk has not been studied previously, a new survey measure of meeting talk was developed.
Findings – Pre-meeting small talk was a significant predictor of meeting effectiveness, even while considering good meeting procedures. Extraversion was identified as a moderator in this context, such that the relationship between pre-meeting talk and perceived meeting effectiveness was stronger for less extraverted participants.
Research limitations/implications – The findings provide the first empirical support for the ripple effect, in terms of meetings producing pre-meeting talk, and suggest that pre-meeting
talk meaningfully impact employees’ meeting experiences and perceptions of meeting effectiveness. To address limitations inherent in the cross-section correlational design of the study, future research should experimentally test whether pre-meeting talk actually causes changes in meeting processes and
outcomes.
Practical implications – Managers should encourage their employees to arrive in time to participate in pre-meeting talk. Side conversations before a scheduled meeting starts can have beneficial effects for meeting outcomes and should be fostered.
Originality/value – There is very limited research on the role of pre-meeting talk. The authors identify that small talk is a predictor of meeting effectiveness even after considering previously
studied good meeting procedures.

Research on humor in organizations has rarely considered the social context in which humor occurs. One such social setting that most of us experience on a daily basis concerns the team context. Building on recent theorizing about the humor–performance link in teams, this study seeks to increase our understanding of the function and effects of humor in team interaction settings. We examined behavioral patterns of humor and laughter in real teams by videotaping and coding humor and laughter during 54
regular organizational team meetings. Performance ratings were obtained immediately following the team meetings as well as at a later time point from the teams’ supervisors. At the behavioral unit level within the team interaction process, lag sequential analysis identified humor and laughter patterns occurring above chance (e.g., a joke followed by laughter, followed by another joke). Moreover, humor patterns triggered positive socioemotional communication, procedural structure, and new solutions. At
the team level, humor patterns (but not humor or laughter alone) positively related to team performance, both immediately and 2 years later. Team-level job insecurity climate was identified as a boundary condition: In low job insecurity climate conditions, humor patterns were positively related to performance,
whereas in high job insecurity climate conditions, humor patterns did not relate to team performance. The role of job insecurity as a boundary condition persisted at both time points. These findings underscore the importance of studying team interactions for understanding the role of humor in organizations and considering team-level boundary conditions over time.

Although previous research has theorized about team interaction differences between the German and U.S. cultures, actual behavioral observations of such differences are sparse. This study explores team meetings as a context for examining intercultural differences. We analyzed a total of 5,188 meeting behaviors in German and U.S. student teams. All teams discussed the same task to consensus. Results from behavioral process analyses showed that German teams focused significantly more on problem analysis, whereas U.S. teams focused more on solution production. Moreover, U.S. teams showed significantly more positive socioemotional meeting behavior than German teams. Finally, German teams showed significantly more counteractive behavior such as complaining than U.S. teams. We discuss theoretical and pragmatic implications for understanding these observable differences and for improving interaction in intercultural teams.

How do teams facilitate their own meetings? Unmanaged (or free) social interaction often leads to poor decision-making, unnecessary conformity, social loafing, and ineffective communication processes, practices, and products. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the potential benefits of procedural communication in team meetings. The role of procedural communication, defined as verbal behaviors that structure group discussion to facilitate goal accomplishment, was examined in 59 team meetings from 19 organizations. Meeting behaviors were videotaped and coded. Lag sequential analysis revealed that procedural meeting behaviors are sustained by supporting statements within the team interaction process. They promote proactive communication (e.g., who will do what and when) and significantly inhibit dysfunctional meeting behaviors (e.g., losing the train of thought, criticizing others, and complaining). These patterns were found both at lag1 and lag2. Furthermore, the more evenly distributed procedural meeting behaviors were across team members, the more team members were satisfied with their discussion processes and outcomes. For practice, these findings suggest that managers should encourage procedural communication to enhance meeting effectiveness, and team members should share the responsibility of procedurally facilitating their meetings.

This first volume to analyze the science of meetings offers a unique perspective on an integral part of contemporary work life. More than just a tool for improving individual and organizational effectiveness and well-being, meetings provide a window into the very essence of organizations and employees' experiences with the organization. The average employee attends at least three meetings per week and managers spend the majority of their time in meetings. Meetings can raise individuals, teams, and organizations to tremendous levels of achievement. However, they can also undermine effectiveness and well-being. The Cambridge Handbook of Meeting Science assembles leading authors in industrial and organizational psychology, management, marketing, organizational behavior, anthropology, sociology, and communication to explore the meeting itself, including pre-meeting activities and post-meeting activities. It provides a comprehensive overview of research in the field and will serve as an invaluable starting point for scholars who seek to understand and improve meetings.

Positivity in the workplace has been heralded to produce individual, social and organizational benefits. Although we know more about how positivity “broadens” and “builds” within individuals, little research has explicitly studied how positivity naturally occurs and dynamically unfolds in the flow of team interactions. This study aims to address this research gap by integrating existing knowledge on team processes with the notions of emotional cycles and “energy-in-conversation.” We observed meeting interactions of 43 ...