Skip to main content
Original Article

If I Had Something to Add, I Would

Meeting Topic Competences and Participation

Published Online:https://doi.org/10.1027/1866-5888/a000255

Abstract. Most employees participate in workplace meetings, and their experiences in meetings can vary greatly, which can lead to positive or negative effects on both job attitudes and behavior. In this study, we examined the effect that a meeting attendee’s competence in the meeting topic had on their participation in the meeting and their perception of meeting effectiveness. Results indicated those with higher levels of competence in the meeting topic were more likely to participate and through participation found their meeting more effective; this relationship was stronger when employee dissent in the meetings was high. Leaders should ensure that those who are present in a meeting are competent in the topic of the meeting and encourage them to participate.

References

  • Allen, J. A., Beck, T., Scott, C. W., & Rogelberg, S. G. (2014). Understanding workplace meetings: A qualitative taxonomy of meeting purposes. Management Research Review, 37, 791–814. 10.1108/MRR-03-2013-0067 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Allen, J. A., Lehmann-Willenbrock, N., & Rogelberg, S. G. (2015). The Cambridge handbook of meeting science. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Allen, J. A., & Rogelberg, S. G. (2013). Manager-led group meetings. Group & Organization Management, 38, 543–569. 10.1177/1059601113503040 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Allen, J. A., Sands, S. J., Mueller, S. L., Frear, K. A., Mudd, M., & Rogelberg, S. G. (2012). Employees' feelings about more meetings: An overt analysis and recommendations for improving meetings. Management Research Review, 35, 405–418. 10.1108/01409171211222331. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Ashford, S. J., Sutcliffe, K. M., & Christianson, M. K. (2009). Speaking up and speaking out: The leadership dynamics of voice in organizations. In J. GreenbergM. S. Edwards (Eds.), Voice and silence in organizations (pp. 175–202). Bingley, UK: Emerald. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Avery, D. R., & Quiñones, M. A. (2002). Disentangling the effects of voice: The incremental roles of opportunity, behavior, and instrumentality in predicting procedural fairness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(1), 81–86. 10.1037/0021-9010.87.1.81 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84, 191–215. 10.1037//0033-295x.84.2.191 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Bandura, A., & Schunk, D. H. (1981). Cultivating competence, self-efficacy, and intrinsic interest through proximal self-motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 586–598. 10.1037/0022-3514.41.3.586 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Becker, T. E. (2005). Potential problems in the statistical control of variables in organizational research: A qualitative analysis with recommendations. Organizational Research Methods, 8, 274–289. 10.1177/1094428105278021 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Bies, R. J., & Shapiro, D. L. (1988). Voice and justification: Their influence on procedural fairness judgments. Academy of Management Journal, 31, 676–685. 10.5465/256465 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Chen, G., Gully, S. M., & Eden, D. (2001). Validation of a new general self-efficacy scale. Organizational Research Methods, 4(1), 62–83. 10.1177/109442810141004 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Cohen, M. A., Rogelberg, S. G., Allen, J. A., & Luong, A. (2011). Meeting design characteristics and attendee perceptions of staff/team meeting quality. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 15(1), 90–104. 10.1037/a0021549 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Colquitt, J. A., LePine, J. A., & Noe, R. A. (2000). Toward an integrative theory of training motivation: A meta-analytic path analysis of 20 years of research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 678–707. 10.1037//0021-9010.g5.5.67 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Conway, J. M., & Lance, C. E. (2010). What reviewers should expect from authors regarding common method bias in organizational research. Journal of Business and Psychology, 25, 325–334. 10.1007/s10869-010-9181-6 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2010). Intrinsic motivation. In I. B. WeinerW. E. Craighead (Eds.), The Corsini encyclopedia of psychology. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. 10.1002/9780470479216.corpsy0467 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Dierdorff, E. C., & Surface, E. A. (2008). If you pay for skills, will they learn? Skill change and maintenance under a skill-based pay system. Journal of Management, 34, 721–743. 10.1177/0149206307312507 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Grant, A. M., Gino, F., & Hofmann, D. A. (2011). Reversing the extraverted leadership advantage: The role of employee proactivity. Academy of Management Journal, 54, 528–550. 10.5465/AMJ.2011.61968043 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York, NY: Guildford Press. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Heller, F. (2003). Participation and power: A critical assessment. Applied Psychology, 52, 144–163. 10.1111/1464-0597.00128 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Herling, R. W. (2000). Operational definitions of expertise and competence. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 2(1), 8–21. 10.1177/152342230000200103 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Hinkel, H., & Allen, J. (2013). Speaking up and working harder: How participation in decision-making in meetings improves overall employee engagement. Journal of Psychological Inquiry, 18(1), 7–16. Retrieved from https://www.psychinquiry.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Vol18-1.pdf#page=9 First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Janis, I. L. (1982). Groupthink: Psychological studies of policy decisions and fiascos. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Jønsson, T., Unterrainer, C., Jeppesen, H.-J., & Jain, A. K. (2016). Measuring distributed leadership agency in a hospital context. Journal of Health Organization and Management, 30, 908–926. 10.1108/JHOM-05-2015-0068 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Judge, T. A., & Bono, J. E. (2001). Relationship of core self-evaluations traits – self-esteem, generalized self-efficacy, locus of control, and emotional stability – with job satisfaction and job performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(1), 80–92. 10.1037/0021-9010.86.1.80 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Kassing, J. W. (1997). Articulating, antagonizing, and displacing: A model of employee dissent. Communication Studies, 48, 311–332. 10.1080/10510979709368510 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Kassing, J. W. (1998). Development and validation of the organizational dissent scale. Management Communication Quarterly, 12, 183–229. 10.1177/0893318998122002 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Kassing, J. W. (2000). Exploring the relationship between workplace freedom of speech, organizational identification, and employee dissent. Communication Research Reports, 17, 387–396. 10.1080/08824090009388787 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Katz, I., & Assor, A. (2006). When choice motivates and when it does not. Educational Psychology Review, 19, 429–442. 10.1007/s10648-006-9027-y First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Kauffeld, S., & Lehmann-Willenbrock, N. (2012). Meetings matter: Effects of team meetings on team and organizational success. Small Group Research, 43, 130–158. 10.1177/1046496411429599 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle 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. 10.1007/s10869-009-9092-6 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Lehmann-Willenbrock, N., Chiu, M. M., Lei, Z., & Kauffeld, S. (2017). Understanding positivity within dynamic team interactions: A statistical discourse analysis. Group & Organization Management, 42(1), 39–78. 10.1177/1059601116628720 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Lind, E. A., Walker, L., Kurtz, S., Musante, L., & Thibaut, J. W. (1980). Procedure and outcome effects on reactions to adjudicated resolution of conflicts of interest. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 643–653. 10.1037/0022-3514.39.4.643 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle 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. 10.1037/1089-2699.9.1.58 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Morrison, E. W. (2014). Employee voice and silence. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 1(1), 173–197. 10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-031413-091328 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Nixon, C. T. & Littlepage, G. E. (1992). Impact of meeting procedures on effectiveness. Journal of Business and Psychology, 6, 361–369. 10.1007/BF01126771 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Odermatt, I., König, C. J., Kleinmann, M., Bachmann, M., Röder, H., & Schmitz, P. (2017). Incivility in meetings: Predictors and outcomes. Journal of Business and Psychology, 33, 263–282. 10.1007/s10869-017-9490-0 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. In Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes to attitude change (pp. 1–24) [Springer Series in Social Psychology]. New York, NY: Springer. 10.1007/978-1-4612-4964-1 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Pinder, C. C., & Harlos, K. P. (2001). Employee silence: Quiescence and acquiescence as responses to perceived injustice. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 20, 331–369. 10.1016/s0742-7301(01)20007-3 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879–903. 10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Pomerantz, A., & Denvir, P. (2007). Enacting the institutional role of chairperson in upper management meetings: The interactional realization of provisional authority. In F. Cooren (Ed.), LEA's communication series. Interacting and organizing: Analyses of a management meeting (pp. 31–51). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis /Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Rogelberg, S. G., Allen, J. A., Shanock, L., Scott, C., & Shuffler, M. (2010). Employee satisfaction with their meetings: A contemporary facet of job satisfaction. Human Resource Management, 49, 149–172. 10.1002/hrm.20339 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle 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(1), 83–96. 10.1037/0021-9010.91.1.83 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Schneider, K., Klünder, J., Kortum, F., Handke, L., Straube, J., & Kauffeld, S. (2018). Positive affect through interactions in meetings: The role of proactive and supportive statements. Journal of Systems and Software, 143, 59–70. 10.1016/j.jss.2018.05.001 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Shanock, L. R., Allen, J. A., Dunn, A. M., Baran, B. E., Scott, C. W., & Rogelberg, S. G. (2013). Less acting, more doing: How surface acting relates to perceived meeting effectiveness and other employee outcomes. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 86, 457–476. 10.1111/joop.12037 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Smith, L. G. E., Gillespie, N., Callan, V. J., Fitzsimmons, T. W., & Paulsen, N. (2017). Injunctive and descriptive logics during newcomer socialization: The impact on organizational identification, trustworthiness, and self-efficacy. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 38, 487–511. 10.1002/job.2131 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Solomon, M. (2006). Groupthink versus the wisdom of crowds: The social epistemology of deliberation and dissent. The Southern Journal of Philosophy, 44(1), 28–42. 10.1111/j.2041-6962.2006.tb00028.x First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Sonnentag, S., & Volmer, J. (2009). Individual-level predictors of task-related teamwork processes. Group & Organization Management, 34, 37–66. 10.1177/1059601108329377 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Stajkovic, A. D. & Luthans, F. (1998). Self-efficacy and work-related performance: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 240–261. 10.1037/0033-2909.124.2.240 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Thibaut, J. W., & Walker, L. (1975). Procedural justice: A psychological analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Tourangeau, R., Rips, L. J., & Rasinski, K. (2000). The psychology of survey response. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511819322 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Tracy, K., & Dimock, A. (2003). Meetings: Discursive sites for building and fragmenting community. Communication Yearbook, 28, 127–165. 10.1207/s15567419cy2801_4 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Weber, W. G., Unterrainer, C., & Höge, T. (2019). Psychological research on organisational democracy: A meta-analysis of individual, organisational, and societal outcomes. Applied Psychology, 69, 1009–1071. 10.1111/apps.12205 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Williams, G. C., Freedman, Z. R., & Deci, E. L. (1998). Supporting autonomy to motivate patients with diabetes for glucose control. Diabetes Care, 21, 1644–1651. 10.2337/diacare.21.10.1644 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Yoerger, M., Crowe, J., & Allen, J. A. (2015). Participate or else!: The effect of participation in decision-making in meetings on employee engagement. Consulting Psychology Journal, 67(1), 65–80. 10.1037/cpb0000029 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Yoerger, M., Mroz, J. E., Landowski, N. B., Crowe, J., & Allen, J. A. (2018, April). Evaluations of individuals who engage in deviant technology use in meetings. Poster session presented at the 33rd Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Chicago, IL. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar