Are Meetings Really Just Another Stressor? The Relevance of Team Meetings for Individual Well-Being

Lübstorf, Svea; Lehmann‐Willenbrock, Nale

doi:10.1108/s1534-085620200000020003

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 64 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In fact, managers report spending more time preparing for and leading meetings than any other workrelated activity (Allen et al, 2015). While meeting science continues to grow, nearly all published meetings research has focused on meetings of three or more people-despite most contemporary studies defining meetings as consisting of two or more individuals (c.f., Kello & Allen, 2020;Lübstorf & Lehmann-Willenbrock, 2020;Mroz, Allen, Verhoeven, & Shuffler, 2018;Rogelberg, Allen, Shanock, Scott, & Shuffler, 2010;Rogelberg, Leach, Warr, & Burnfield, 2006). This begs the question if current meeting science research findings always translate to meetings between two people (i.e., one-on-one meetings), which have been estimated to make up nearly half (47%) of all meetings (Keith, 2015).…”

Section: Plain Language Summarymentioning

confidence: 99%

One-on-one meetings between managers and direct reports: A new opportunity for meeting science

Flinchum

Kreamer

Rogelberg

et al. 2022

Organizational Psychology Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Meeting science has advanced significantly in its short history. However, one-on-one (1:1) meetings have not been studied empirically as a focal topic despite making up nearly half of all workplace meetings. While some meeting science insights may apply to 1:1 meetings, others may not (or may function differently) due to conceptual, theoretical, and practical differences between meetings involving dyads and groups. Although 1:1 meetings come in various forms (e.g., peer-to-peer, employee-to-customer), we chose to use manager-direct report 1:1 meetings as an exemplar given their prevalence, theoretical relevance, and practical implications. In this paper, we first review some conceptual differences between dyads and groups. We then discuss how these differences likely manifest in the meeting context (before, during, and after meetings), and outline related propositions. Last, we leverage this conceptual framework and subsequent propositions to provide guidance for future research and theory on 1:1 meetings. In doing so, we hope this paper will act as the impetus for research and theory development on 1:1 meetings. Plain Language Summary Meeting science has flourished over the past two decades, with research and theory exploring best practices for leading and attending workplace meetings. However, a large portion of this research has focused on meetings of three or more people – despite the fact that meetings are often defined as a gathering between two or more people. Ignoring the one-on-one (1:1) meeting is a missed opportunity, as 1:1 meetings have a large presence in industry. It has been estimated that nearly half (47%) of all meetings are 1:1s, and these dyadic meetings often have unique purposes (e.g., performance appraisals) and involve different interactions (e.g., more interpersonal) outside of larger group meetings. Industry and practice have begun to explore these 1:1 meeting-especially meetings between managers and direct reports. For example, internal studies conducted at Microsoft and Cisco found that direct reports who had more frequent and effectively run 1:1 meetings with their managers were more engaged than their counterparts. While companies have seemingly acknowledged the importance of these meetings, research lags behind. Little empirical or theoretical investigations have explored 1:1 meetings. Yet, with the continued growth in the number of meetings worldwide, it is important to obtain empirical insights specific to 1:1 meetings. Doing so will help inform best practices when it comes to leading and attending 1:1 meetings. Thus, in this conceptual review of 1:1 meetings, we provide a future research agenda encouraging researchers (and practitioners) to investigate this unique (and important) meeting type – the one-on-one meeting between a manager and their direct report.

show abstract

Section: Plain Language Summarymentioning

confidence: 99%

One-on-one meetings between managers and direct reports: A new opportunity for meeting science

Flinchum

Kreamer

Rogelberg

et al. 2022

Organizational Psychology Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Regarding these facts, researchers have been investigated how to increase the efficiency and quality of meetings [ 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 ]. After a survey of publications in social science and human-computer interaction (see Section 2 for details), we found that appearances (characteristics such as age and role) [ 9 ], verbal information (e.g., spoken content/context and audio characteristics) [ 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 ], and non-verbal information (e.g., body gesture and facial expressions) change the behaviors of meeting participants [ 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

DisCaaS: Micro Behavior Analysis on Discussion by Camera as a Sensor

Watanabe

Soneda

Matsuda

et al. 2021

Sensors

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The emergence of various types of commercial cameras (compact, high resolution, high angle of view, high speed, and high dynamic range, etc.) has contributed significantly to the understanding of human activities. By taking advantage of the characteristic of a high angle of view, this paper demonstrates a system that recognizes micro-behaviors and a small group discussion with a single 360 degree camera towards quantified meeting analysis. We propose a method that recognizes speaking and nodding, which have often been overlooked in existing research, from a video stream of face images and a random forest classifier. The proposed approach was evaluated on our three datasets. In order to create the first and the second datasets, we asked participants to meet physically: 16 sets of five minutes data from 21 unique participants and seven sets of 10 min meeting data from 12 unique participants. The experimental results showed that our approach could detect speaking and nodding with a macro average f1-score of 67.9% in a 10-fold random split cross-validation and a macro average f1-score of 62.5% in a leave-one-participant-out cross-validation. By considering the increased demand for an online meeting due to the COVID-19 pandemic, we also record faces on a screen that are captured by web cameras as the third dataset and discussed the potential and challenges of applying our ideas to virtual video conferences.

show abstract

Unraveling the effects of “living the brand”: a resource generating outlook

Kashyap,

Singh Kang

2024

Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Are Meetings Really Just Another Stressor? The Relevance of Team Meetings for Individual Well-Being

Cited by 3 publications

References 64 publications

One-on-one meetings between managers and direct reports: A new opportunity for meeting science

One-on-one meetings between managers and direct reports: A new opportunity for meeting science

DisCaaS: Micro Behavior Analysis on Discussion by Camera as a Sensor

Unraveling the effects of “living the brand”: a resource generating outlook

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About