Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-grxwn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-13T21:08:50.361Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

3 - Five Theoretical Lenses for Conceptualizing the Role of Meetings in Organizational Life

from Part I - Introduction

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 August 2015

By
Cliff Scott ,
Joseph A. Allen ,
Steven G. Rogelberg  and
Alex Kello
Edited by
Joseph A. Allen ,
Nale Lehmann-Willenbrock  and
Steven G. Rogelberg
Joseph A. Allen
Affiliation:
University of Nebraska, Omaha
Nale Lehmann-Willenbrock
Affiliation:
Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam
Steven G. Rogelberg
Affiliation:
University of North Carolina, Charlotte
Get access

Summary

Abstract

Although work meetings remain an enduring and commonplace organizational communication activity, scholars have only recently begun to theorize the meeting as a phenomenon unto itself. When meetings have been studied, they have usually been analyzed as settings for the exploration of other phenomena. Recent research that examines meetings addresses a broad range of issues, but often leaves theoretical questions and assumptions regarding the nature of meeting communication itself and the role of meetings in shaping organizational life underspecified or completely unarticulated. What are meetings really? Why should practitioners and scholars see them as more significant than any other organizational phenomenon? Why should they believe that work meetings actually play an important role in shaping (i.e., rather than merely reflecting) larger attitudes and perceptions about organizations and the individuals who facilitate and participate in them? This chapter presents a set of metaphors that capture the various ways in which meetings are approached in contemporary research. Each metaphor reflects and sustains distinct assumptions about what meetings are, what role they play in organizational life, and the manner in which they constitute organizations. We argue that meeting science should deploy both practical and theoretical assumptions that position meetings as generative activities through which groups and organizations are constituted and sustained. The chapter also describes related directions for future research that would add to our understanding of the various ways that meeting communication shapes individual and organizational outcomes.

Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Meeting Science , pp. 20 - 46
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.)

References

Aakhus, M. (2001). Technocratic and design stances toward communication expertise: How GDSS facilitators understand their work. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 29, 341–371. doi: 10.1080/00909880128113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allen, J., Baran, B. E., & Scott, C. W. (2010). After-action reviews: A venue for the promotion of safety climate. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 42, 750–757. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2009.11.004CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Axley, S. R. (1984). Managerial and organisational communication in terms of the conduit metaphor. Academy of Management Review, 9, 428–37 doi: 10.5465/AMR.1984.4279664CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ballard, D., & Gomez, F. (2006). Time to meet: Meetings as sites of organizational memory. Time and Memory, 301–312.Google Scholar
Ballard, D., & Seibold, D. R. (2003). Communicating and organizing in time: A meso-level model of organizational temporality. Management Communication Quarterly, 16, 380–415. doi: 10.1177/0893318902238896CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bantz, C. R. (1990). Organizing and enactment: Karl Weick and the production of news. In Corman, S., Banks, S., Bantz, C. R., & Mayer, M. (Eds.), Foundations of organizational communication: A reader (pp. 133–141). New York, NY: Longman.Google Scholar
Barker, J. R., & Cheney, G. (1994). The concept and the practice of discipline in contemporary organizational life. Communication Monographs, 61, 19–43. doi: 10.1080/03637759409376321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barker, J. R., Melville, C. W., & Pacanowsky, M. E. (1993). Self-directed teams at Xel: Changes in communication practices during a program of cultural transformation. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 21, 297–314. doi: 10.1080/00909889309365375CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barley, S. R., & Tolbert, P. S. (1997). Institutionalization and structuration: Studying the links between institutions and actions. Organization Studies, 18, 93–117. doi: 10.1177/017084069701800106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barrick, M. R., Stewart, G. L., & Piotrowski, M. (2002). Personality and job performance: Test of the mediating effects of motivation among sales representatives. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 43–51. doi: 10.1037/0021–9010.87.1.43CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Berger, C. R. (1979). Beyond initial interaction: Uncertainty, understanding, and the development of interpersonal relationships. In Giles, H. & Clair, R. St. (Eds.), Language and social psychology (pp. 122–124). Baltimore, MD: University Park Press.Google Scholar
Berger, C. R. (1997). Planning strategic interaction: The cognitive bases of interpersonal communication. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Bluedorn, A. C., Turban, D. B., & Love, M. S. (1999). The effects of stand-up and sit-down meeting formats on meeting outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 277–285. doi: 10.1037/0021–9010.84.2.277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boden, D. (1994). The business of talk: Organizations in action. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Browning, L. D. (1992). Lists and stories as organizational communication. Communication Theory, 2, 281–302. doi: 10.1111/j.1468–2885.1992.tb00045.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caspi, A., Bolger, N., & Eckenrode, J. (1987). Linking person and context in the daily stress process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 184–195. doi:10.1037/0022–3514.52.1.184CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Coburn, C. E. (2001). Collective sensemaking about reading: How teachers mediate reading policy in their professional communities. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 23, 145–170. doi:10.3102/01623737023002145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conrad, C., & Haynes, M. (2001). Development of key constructs. In Jablin, F. & Putnam, L. (Eds.), New handbook of organizational communication (pp. 47–77). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Cooren, F. (Ed.). (2007). Interacting and organizing: Analyses of a management meeting. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Cornelissen, J. P., Oswick, C., Christensen, L. T., & Phillips, N. (2008). Metaphor in organizational research: Context, modalities, and implications for research. Organization Studies, 29, 7–22. doi: 10.1177/0170840607086634CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Courtright, J. A., Fairhurst, G. T., & Rogers, L. E. (1989). Interaction patterns in organic and mechanistic systems. Academy of Management Journal, 32, 773–802. doi: 10.2307/256568CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daft, R. L., & Lengel, R. H. (1986). Organizational information requirements, media richness, and structural design. Management Science, 32, 554–571. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.32.5.554CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, C. S. (2008). Dueling narratives: How peer leaders use narrative to frame meaning in community mental health care teams. Small Group Research, 39(6), 706–727. doi:10.1177/1046496408323068CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davison, R. (1997). An instrument for measuring meeting success: Revalidation and modification. Information & Management, 36, 321–328. doi: 10.1016/S0378–7206(99)00026–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deetz, S. A. (1992). Democracy in an age of corporate colonization: Developments in communication and the politics of everyday life. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Deetz, S., & Mumby, D. (1985). Metaphors, information, and power. In Ruben, B. D. (Ed.), Information and behavior (Vol. 1, pp. 369–386). Piscataway, NJ: Transaction.Google Scholar
Deetz, S. A., & Simpson, J. (2004). Critical organizational dialogue. In Anderson, R., Baxter, L. A., & Cissna, K. N. (Eds.), Dialogue: Theorizing difference in communication studies (pp. 141–158). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diefendorff, J. M., Richard, E. M., & Yang, J. (2008). Linking emotion regulation strategies to affective events and negative emotions at work. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 73, 498–508. doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2008.09.006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eisenberg, E. M. (2007). Strategic ambiguities: Essays on communication, organization, and identity. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eisenberg, E. M., & Phillips, S. R. (1990). What is organizational miscommunication? In Wiemann, J., Coupland, N., & Giles, H. (Eds.), Handbook of miscommunication and problematic talk (pp. 244–258). Oxford, UK: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Ellis, S., Mendel, R., & Nir, M. (2006). Learning from successful and failed experience: The moderating role of kind of after-event review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 669–680. doi: 10.1037/0021–9010.91.3.669CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Farace, R. V., Monge, P. R., & Russell, H. M. (1977). Communicating and organizing. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Fisher, C. D. (2002). Antecedents and consequences of real-time affective reactions at work. Motivation and Emotion, 26, 3–30. doi:10.1023/A:1015190007468CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ford, R. C., & Fottler, M. D. (1995). Empowerment: A matter of degree. Academy of Management Executive, 9, 21–29. doi: 10.5465/AME.1995.9509210269Google Scholar
Forsyth, D. R. (2009). Group dynamics (5th ed.). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.Google Scholar
Frost, P. J., Moore, L. F., Louis, M. R., Lundberg, C. C., & Martin, J. (1985). Organizational culture. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Fulk, J., & Collins-Jarvis, L. (2001). Wired meetings: Technological mediation of organizational gatherings. In Jablin, F. M. & Putnam, L. L. (Eds.), The new handbook of organizational communication: Advances in theory, research, and methods (pp. 624–663). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures. New York, NY: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Gouran, D. S., Hirokawa, R. Y., Julian, K. M., & Leatham, G. B. (1993). The evolution and current status of the functional perspective on communication in decision-making and problem-solving groups: A critical analysis. In Deetz, S. A. (Ed.), Communication yearbook 16 (pp. 573–600). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Handford, M., & Koester, A. (2010). “It's not rocket science”: Metaphors and idioms in conflictual business meetings. Talk & Text, 30, 27–51. doi: 10.1515/text.2010.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawes, L. C. (1974). Social collectivities as communication: Perspective on organizational behavior. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 60, 497–502. doi: 10.1080/00335637409383259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hesse, M. B. (1966). Models and analogies in science. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
Jarzabkowski, P., & Seidl, D. (2008). The role of meetings in the social practice of strategy. Organization Studies, 29, 1391–1426. doi: 10.1177/0170840608096388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jett, Q. R., & George, J. M. (2003). Work interrupted: A closer look at the role of interruptions in organizational life. Academy of Management Review, 28, 494–507. doi: 10.5465/AMR.2003.10196791CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keyton, J. (2005). Communication and organizational culture: A key to understanding work experiences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Keyton, J., & Stallworth, V. (2002). On the verge of collaboration: Identifying group structure and process. In Frey, L. R. (Ed.), Group communication in context: Studies of bona fide groups (2nd ed., pp. 235–262). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Kirmeyer, S. L. (1988). Coping with competing demands: Interruption and the Type A pattern. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73, 621–629. doi: 10.1037/0021–9010.73.4.621CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kramer, M. W. (1993). Communication and uncertainty reduction during job transfers: Leaving and joining processes. Communication Monographs, 60, 178–198. doi: 10.1080/03637759309376307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lantz, A. (2001). Meetings in a distributed group of experts: Comparing face-to-face, chat and collaborative virtual environments. Behaviour and Information Technology, 20, 111–117. doi: 10.1080/01449290010020693CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal and coping. New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
Leach, D. J., Rogelberg, S. G., Warr, P. B., & Burnfield, J. L. (2009). Perceived meeting effectiveness: The role of design characteristics. Journal of Business and Psychology, 24, 65–76. doi:10.1007/s10869–009–9092–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lovett, P. D. (1988). Meetings that work: Plans bosses can approve. Harvard Business Review, 39, 38–44. doi: 10.1225/88608Google Scholar
Luong, A., & Rogelberg, S. G. (2005). Meetings and more meetings: The relationship between meeting load and the daily well-being of employees. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 9, 58–67. doi: 10.1037/1089–2699.9.1.58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, J. (2001). Organizational culture: Mapping the terrain. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Martin, J., & Meyerson, D. (1988). Organizational cultures and the denial, channeling, and acknowledgement of ambiguity. In Pondy, L. R., Boland, R. J., & Thomas, H. (Eds.), Managing ambiguity and change (pp. 93–125). New York, NY: Wiley.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.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
McComas, K. A., & Scherer, C. W. (1998). Reassessing public meetings as participation in risk management decisions. Risk: Health, Safety, & Environment, 9, 347–360.Google Scholar
McComas, K. A., Tuit, L. S., Waks, L., & Sherman, L. A. (2007). Predicting satisfaction and outcome acceptance with advisory committee meetings: The role of procedural justice. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 37, 905–927. doi: 10.1111/j.1559–1816.2007.00192.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
MCI Inc. (1998). Meetings in America: A study of trends, costs, and attitudes toward business travel, teleconferencing and their impact on productivity. Retrieved from https://e-meetings.verizonbusiness.com/global/en/meetingsinamerica/uswhitepaper.phpGoogle Scholar
McPhee, R. D. (1985). Formal structure and organizational communication. In Tomkins, P. & McPhee, R. D. (Eds.), Organizational communication: Traditional themes and new directions (pp. 149–177). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
McPhee, R. D., & Zaug, P. (2000). The communicative constitution of organizations: A framework for explanation. Electronic Journal of Communication (La Revue Electronique de Communication), 10. Retrieved from http://www.cios.org/getfile/MCPHEEV10N1200Google Scholar
Miller, V. D., & Jablin, F. M. (1991). Information seeking during organizational entry: Influences, tactics, and a model of the process. Academy of Management Review, 16, 92–120. doi:10.2307/258608CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mirivel, J. C., & Tracy, K. (2005). Premeeting talk: An organizationally crucial form of talk. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 38, 1–34. doi: 10.1207/s15327973rlsi3801_1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morgan, G., Frost, P. & Pondy, L. (1983). Organizational symbolism. In Pondy, L., Frost, P., Morgan, G., Dandridge, T. (Eds.), Organizational symbolism (pp. 3–35). Greenwich, CT: JAI.Google Scholar
Nielsen, M. (2009). Interpretative management in business meetings. Journal of Business Communication, 46, 23–56. doi: 10.1177/0021943608325752CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nixon, C. T., & Littlepage, G. E. (1992). Impact of meeting procedures on effectiveness. Journal of Business and Psychology, 6, 361–369. doi: 10.1007/BF01126771CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pacanowsky, M. E., & O'Donnell-Trujillo, N. (1982). Communication and organizational cultures. Western Journal of Communication, 46(2), 115–130. doi: 10.1080/10570318209374072Google Scholar
Poole, M. S., & DeSanctis, G. (1992). Microlevel structuration in computer-supported group decision making. Human Communication Research, 19, 5–49. doi: 10.1111/j.1468–2958.1992.tb00294.xGoogle Scholar
Poole, M. S., & Roth, J. (1989). Decision development in small groups IV: A typology of group decision paths. Human Communication Research, 15, 323–356. doi: 10.1111/j.1468–2958.1989.tb00188.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poole, M. S., Seibold, D. R., & McPhee, R. D. (1985). Group decision-making as a structurational process. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 71, 74–102. doi: 10.1080/00335638509383719CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Putnam, L. L., Phillips, N., and Chapman, P. (1996). Metaphors of communication and organization. In Clegg, S. R., Hardy, C., Nord, W. (Eds.), Handbook of organizational studies (pp. 375–408). London, UK: Sage.Google Scholar
Putnam, L. L., & Stohl, C. (1990). Bona fide groups: A reconceptualization of groups in context. Communication Studies, 41, 248–265. doi: 10.1080/10510979009368307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reinig, B. A., & Shin, B. (2002). The dynamic effects of group support systems on group meetings. Journal of Management Information Systems, 19, 303–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rogelberg, S. G., Allen, J. A., Shanock, L., Scott, C. W., & Shuffler, M. (2010). Employee satisfaction with their meetings: A unique predictor of job satisfaction. Human Resource Management, 49(2), 149–172. doi: 10.1002/hrm.20339CrossRefGoogle 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: 10.1037/0021–9010.91.1.83CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
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: 10.1177/1046496411429170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Romano, N. C., & Nunamaker, J. F.. (2001). Meeting analysis: Findings from research and practice. Paper presented at the 34th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Maui.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rousseau, D. M., & House, R. J. (1994). Meso organizational behavior: Avoiding three fundamental biases. In Cooper, C. L. & Rousseau, D. M. (Eds.), Trends in organizational behavior (Vol. 1, pp. 13–30). New York, NY: Wiley.Google Scholar
Sanna, L. J., & Parks, C. D. (1997). Group research trends in social and organizational psychology: Whatever happened to intragroup research? American Psychological Society, 8, 261–267. doi: 10.1111/j.1467–9280.1997.tb00436.xGoogle Scholar
Schein, E. H. (1990). Organizational culture. American Psychologist, 45, 109–119. doi: 10.1037/0003–066X.45.2.109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwartzman, H. B. (1986). The meeting as a neglected social form in organizational studies. Research in Organizational Behavior, 8, 233–258.Google Scholar
Schwartzman, H. B. (1989). The meeting: Gatherings in organizations and communities. New York, NY: Plenum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwartzman, H. B., & Berman, R. H. (1994). Meetings: The neglected routine. In Hamada, T. & Sibley, W. E. (Eds.), Anthropological perspectives on organizational culture (pp. 63–93). Lanham, MD: University Press of America.Google Scholar
Schwarz, R. M. (1994). The skilled facilitator: Practical wisdom for developing effective groups. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Scott, C. W., Allen, J., Bonilla, D. L., Baran, B. E., & Murphy, D. (2013). Ambiguity and freedom of dissent in post incident discussion. Journal of Business Communication, 50, 383–402. doi: 10.1177/0021943613497054Google Scholar
Scott, C. W., & Myers, K. K. (2005). The socialization of emotion: Learning emotion management at the fire station. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 33, 67–92. doi: 10.1080/0090988042000318521CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott, C. W., & Myers, K. K. (2010). Toward an integrative theoretical perspective on organizational membership negotiations: Socialization, assimilation, and the duality of structure. Communication Theory, 20, 79–105. doi: 10.1111/j.1468–2885.2009.01355.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott, C. W., Shanock, L., & Rogelberg, S. G. (2012). Meetings at work: Advancing the theory and practice of meetings. Small Group Research, 43, 127–129. doi: 10.1177/1046496411429023CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott, C. W., & Trethewey, A. C. (2008). Organizational discourse and the appraisal of occupational hazards. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 36, 298–317. doi:10.1080/00909880802172137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seibold, D. R. (1979). Making meetings more successful: Plans, formats, and procedures for group problem-solving. Journal of Business Communication, 16, 3–20. doi: 10.1177/002194367901600401CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seibold, D. R., & Krikorian, D. H. (1997). Planning and facilitating group meetings. In Frey, L. & Barge, K. (Eds.), Managing group life (pp. 270–305). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
Seibold, D. R., & Shea, C. (2001). Participation and decision making. In Jablin, F. M. & Putnam, L. L. (Eds.), Handbook of organizational communication: Advances in theory, research, and methods (pp. 664–703). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shin, B., & Higa, K. (2005). Meeting scheduling: Face-to-face, automatic scheduler, and email based coordination. Journal of Organizational Computing & Electronic Commerce, 15, 137–159. doi: 10.1207/s15327744joce1502_3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, R. C., & Eisenberg, E. M. (1987). Conflict at Disneyland: A root metaphor analysis. Communication Monographs, 54, 367–380. doi:10.1080/03637758709390239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, R. C., & Turner, P. (1995). A social constructionist reconfiguration of metaphor analysis: An application of “SCMA” to organizational socialization theorizing. Communication Monographs, 62, 152–181. doi: 10.1080/03637759509376354CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sproull, L., & Kiesler, S. (1992). Connections: New ways of working in the networked organization. Boston, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Stephens, K. K., & Davis, J. D. (2009). The social influences on electronic multitasking in organizational meetings. Management Communication Quarterly, 23, 63–83. doi: 10.1177/0893318909335417CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stohl, C., & Cheney, G. (2001). Participatory processes/paradoxical practices: Communication and the dilemmas of organizational democracy. Management Communication Quarterly, 14, 349–407. doi: 10.1177/0893318901143001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thackaberry, J. A. (2004). Discursive opening and closing in organizational self-study: Culture as trap and tool in wildland firefighting safety. Management Communication Quarterly, 17, 319–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tracy, K., & Ashcraft, C. (2001). Crafting policies about controversial values: How wording disputes manage a group dilemma. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 29, 297–316. doi: 10.1080/00909880128115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tracy, K., & Dimock, A. (2004). Meetings: Discursive sites for building and fragmenting community. In Kabfleisch, P. J. (Ed.), Communication yearbook (Vol. 28, pp. 127–165). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Tracy, K., & Muller, H. (2001). Diagnosing a school board's interactional trouble: Theorizing problem formulation. Communication Theory, 11, 84–104. doi: 10.1111/j.1468–2885.2001.tb00234.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tracy, K., & Standerfer, C. (2003). Selecting a school superintendent: Interactional sensitivities in the deliberative process. In Frey, L. (Ed.), Group communication in context: Studies of bona fide groups (pp. 109–134). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Tracy, S. J., Myers, K. K., & Scott, C. (2006). Cracking jokes and crafting selves: Sensemaking and identity management among human service workers. Communication Monographs, 73, 283–308. doi: 10.1080/03637750600889500CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trevino, L. K., Lengel, R. K., & Daft, R. L. (1987). Media symbolism, media richness and media choice in organizations. Communication Research, 14, 553–574. doi: 10.1177/009365087014005006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Vree, W. (1999). Meetings, manners and civilization: The development of modern meeting behaviour. London, UK: Leicester University Press.Google Scholar
Weick, K. E. (1988). Enacted sensemaking in crisis situations. Journal of Management Studies, 25, 305–317. doi: 10.1111/j.1467–6486CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Weick, K. E. (1998). Improvisation as a mindset for organizational analysis. Organization Science, 9, 543–555. doi: 10.1287/orsc.9.5.543CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weick, K. E. (2001). Making sense of the organization. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Weick, K. E., & Roberts, K. H. (1993). Collective mind in organizations: Heedful interrelating on flight decks. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38, 357–381. doi: 10.2307/2393372CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weick, K. E., & Sandelands, L. E. (1990). Social behavior in organizational studies. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 20, 323–346. doi: 10.1111/j.1468–5914.1990.tb00192.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weiss, H. M., & Cropanzano, R. (1996). Affective Events Theory: A theoretical discussion of the structure, causes and consequences of affective experiences at work. In Staw, B. M. & Cummings, L. L. (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior: An annual series of analytical essays and critical reviews (Vol. 18, pp. 1–74). New York, NY: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Witmer, D. F. (1997). Communication and recovery: Structuration as an ontological approach to organizational culture. Communication Monographs, 64, 324–349. doi: 10.1080/03637759709376427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yates, J., & Orlikowski, W. J. (1992). Genres of organizational communication: A structurational approach to studying communication and media. Academy of Management Review, 17, 299–326. doi: 10.5465/AMR.1992.4279545CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zijlstra, F. R., Roe, R. A., Leonora, A. B., & Krediet, I. (1999). Temporal factors in mental work: Effects of interrupted activities. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 72, 163–185. doi: 10.1348/096317999166581CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zohar, D. (1999). When things go wrong: The effect of daily work hassles on effort, exertion, and negative mood. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 72, 265–283. doi: 10.1348/096317999166671CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×