Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
research-article

Meeting Effectiveness and Inclusiveness in Remote Collaboration

Published: 22 April 2021 Publication History

Abstract

A primary goal of remote collaboration tools is to provide effective and inclusive meetings for all participants. To study meeting effectiveness and meeting inclusiveness, we first conducted a large-scale email survey (N=4,425; after filtering N=3,290) at a large technology company (pre-COVID-19); using this data we derived a multivariate model of meeting effectiveness and show how it correlates with meeting inclusiveness, participation, and feeling comfortable to contribute. We believe this is the first such model of meeting effectiveness and inclusiveness. The large size of the data provided the opportunity to analyze correlations that are specific to sub-populations such as the impact of video. The model shows the following factors are correlated with inclusiveness, effectiveness, participation, and feeling comfortable to contribute in meetings: sending a pre-meeting communication, sending a post-meeting summary, including a meeting agenda, attendee location, remote-only meeting, audio/video quality and reliability, video usage, and meeting size. The model and survey results give a quantitative understanding of how and where to improve meeting effectiveness and inclusiveness and what the potential returns are. Motivated by the email survey results, we implemented a post-meeting survey into a leading computer-mediated communication (CMC) system to directly measure meeting effectiveness and inclusiveness (during COVID-19). Using initial results based on internal flighting we created a similar model of effectiveness and inclusiveness, with many of the same findings as the email survey. This shows a method of measuring and understanding these metrics which are both practical and useful in a commercial CMC system. By improving meeting effectiveness, companies can save significant time and money. Improving meeting inclusiveness is hypothesized to improve meeting effectiveness, but also improves the working environment and employee retention at organizations.

References

[1]
Joseph A. Allen, Nale Lehmann-Willenbrock, and Nicole Landowski. 2014. Linking pre-meeting communication to meeting effectiveness. Journal of Managerial Psychology 29, 8 (November 2014), 1064--1081.
[2]
Joseph A. Allen, Nale Lehmann-Willenbrock, and Stephanie J. Sands. 2016. Meetings as a positive boost? How and when meeting satisfaction impacts employee empowerment. Journal of Business Research 69, 10 (October 2016), 4340--4347.
[3]
Joseph A. Allen, Jiajin Tong, and Nicole Landowski. 2020. Meeting effectiveness and task performance: meeting size matters. JMD ahead-of-print, ahead-of-print (March 2020).
[4]
Sebastian Arndt, Jan-Niklas Antons, Robert Schleicher, Sebastian Moller, and Gabriel Curio. 2014. Using Electroencephalography to Measure Perceived Video Quality. IEEE J. Sel. Top. Signal Process. 8, 3 (June 2014), 366--376.
[5]
Tanachia Ashikali and Sandra Groeneveld. 2013. Diversity Management in Public Organizations and Its Effect on Employees' Affective Commitment. Review of Public Personnel Administration (November 2013).
[6]
Julia Bear and Anita Woolley. 2011. The Role of Gender in Team Collaboration and Performance. Interdisciplinary Science Reviews 36, (June 2011).
[7]
Ana Cristina Bicharra Garcia, John Kunz, and Martin Fischer. 2004. Cutting to the chase: improving meeting effectiveness by focusing on the agenda. In Proceedings of the 2004 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work - CSCW '04, ACM Press, Chicago, Illinois, USA, 346.
[8]
Melissa A. Cohen, Steven G. Rogelberg, Joseph A. Allen, and Alexandra Luong. 2011. Meeting design characteristics and attendee perceptions of staff/team meeting quality. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice 15, 1 (2011), 90--104.
[9]
Owen Daly-Jones, Andrew Monk, and Leon Watts. 1998. Some advantages of video conferencing over high-quality audio conferencing: fluency and awareness of attentional focus. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 49, 1 (July 1998), 21--58.
[10]
Annette J. Dobson. 2002. An introduction to generalized linear models (2nd ed ed.). Chapman & Hall/CRC, Boca Raton.
[11]
Paul Van Eecke and Raquel Fernández. 2016. On the Influence of Gender on Interruptions in Multiparty Dialogue. 2070--2074.
[12]
Bernardo M. Ferdman and Barbara Deane (Eds.). 2014. Diversity at work: the practice of inclusion. Jossey-Bass, A Wiley Brand, San Francisco, CA.
[13]
Jennifer L. Geimer, Desmond J. Leach, Justin A. DeSimone, Steven G. Rogelberg, and Peter B. Warr. 2015. Meetings at work: Perceived effectiveness and recommended improvements. Journal of Business Research 68, 9 (September 2015), 2015--2026.
[14]
Zixiu Guo, John D'Ambra, Tim Turner, Huiying Zhang, and Tong Zhang. 2006. Effectiveness of Meeting Outcomes in Virtual vs. Face-to-Face Teams: A Comparison Study in China. (2006), 13.
[15]
Tony F. Habash. 1999. The impact of audio- or video-conferencing and group decision tools on group perception and satisfaction in distributed meetings. The Psychologist-Manager Journal 3, 2 (1999), 211--230.
[16]
T Hastie, R Tibshirani, and J Friedman. 2001. The Elements of Statistical Learning. Springer, New York, NY, USA.
[17]
Holger Höfling and Robert Tibshirani. 2009. Estimation of Sparse Binary Pairwise Markov Networks using Pseudo-likelihoods. Journal of machine learning research. JMLR 10, (2009), 883--906.
[18]
Deborah James and Janice Drakich. 1993. Understanding gender differences in amount of talk: A critical review of research. In Gender and conversational interaction. Oxford University Press, New York, NY, US, 281--312.
[19]
Rex B. Kline. 2015. Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling, Fourth Edition. Guilford Publications.
[20]
Chinmay Kulkarni, Julia Cambre, Yasmine Kotturi, Michael S. Bernstein, and Scott R. Klemmer. 2015. Talkabout: Making Distance Matter with Small Groups in Massive Classes. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing, ACM, Vancouver BC Canada, 1116--1128.
[21]
Desmond J. Leach, Steven G. Rogelberg, Peter B. Warr, and Jennifer L. Burnfield. 2009. Perceived Meeting Effectiveness: The Role of Design Characteristics. Journal of Business and Psychology 24, 1 (March 2009), 65--76.
[22]
Campbell Leaper and Melanie M. Ayres. 2007. A Meta-Analytic Review of Gender Variations in Adults' Language Use: Talkativeness, Affiliative Speech, and Assertive Speech. Pers Soc Psychol Rev 11, 4 (November 2007), 328--363.
[23]
Ioanna Lykourentzou, Angeliki Antoniou, Yannick Naudet, and Steven P. Dow. 2016. Personality Matters: Balancing for Personality Types Leads to Better Outcomes for Crowd Teams. In Proceedings of the 19th ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing (CSCW '16), Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 260--273.
[24]
Joseph E. Mroz, Joseph A. Allen, Dana C. Verhoeven, and Marissa L. Shuffler. 2018. Do We Really Need Another Meeting? The Science of Workplace Meetings. Current Directions in Psychological Science 27, 6 (December 2018), 484--491.
[25]
Nicol L. Davidson. 2013. Trust and Member Inclusion as Communication Factors to Foster Collaboration in Globally Distributed Teams.
[26]
Carol T. Nixon and Glenn E. Littlepage. 1992. Impact of meeting procedures on meeting effectiveness. J Bus Psychol 6, 3 (1992), 361--369.
[27]
Isabelle Odermatt, Cornelius J. König, Martin Kleinmann, Maria Bachmann, Heiko Röder, and Patricia Schmitz. 2018. Incivility in Meetings: Predictors and Outcomes. J Bus Psychol 33, 2 (April 2018), 263--282.
[28]
Judith S. Olson and Gary M. Olson. 2013. Working Together Apart: Collaboration over the Internet. Synthesis Lectures on Human-Centered Informatics 6, 5 (November 2013), 1--151.
[29]
Jone L. Pearce and Amy E. Randel. 2004. Expectations of organizational mobility, workplace social inclusion, and employee job performance. J. Organiz. Behav. 25, 1 (February 2004), 81--98.
[30]
Angie Pendergrass. 2019. Inclusive scientific meetings: Where to start. Retrieved from https://opensky.ucar.edu/islandora/object/manuscripts%3A983/datastream/PDF/view
[31]
Sunil Ramlall. 2004. A Review of Employee Motivation Theories and their Implications for Employee Retention within Organizations. (2004), 13.
[32]
Darryl B. Rice, Nicole C. J. Young, and Sharon Sheridan. 2020. Improving employee emotional and behavioral investments through the trickle-down effect of organizational inclusiveness and the role of moral supervisors. J Bus Psychol (January 2020).
[33]
Steven Rogelberg, Desmond Leach, Peter Warr, and Jennifer Burnfield. 2006. "Not Another Meeting!" Are Meeting Time Demands Related to Employee Well-Being? The Journal of applied psychology 91, (February 2006), 83--96.
[34]
Abigail Sellen. 1995. Remote Conversations: The Effects of Mediating Talk With Technology. Human-Computer Interaction 10, 4 (December 1995), 401--444.
[35]
Ana-Maria ?imundi?. 2009. Measures of Diagnostic Accuracy: Basic Definitions. EJIFCC 19, 4 (January 2009), 203--211.
[36]
Lee Sproull and Sara Kiesler. 1988. Reducing Social Context Cues: Electronic Mail in Organizational Communication. Management Science 32, (January 1988), 1492--1512.
[37]
Willem Standaert, Steve Muylle, and Amit Basu. 2016. An empirical study of the effectiveness of telepresence as a business meeting mode. Inf Technol Manag 17, 4 (December 2016), 323--339.
[38]
John C. Tang and Ellen Isaacs. 1992. Why do users like video?: Studies of multimedia-supported collaboration. Comput Supported Coop Work 1, 3 (September 1992), 163--196.
[39]
María del Carmen Triana, Bradley L. Kirkman, and María Fernanda Wagstaff. 2012. Does the Order of Face-to-Face and Computer-Mediated Communication Matter in Diverse Project Teams? An Investigation of Communication Order Effects on Minority Inclusion and Participation. J Bus Psychol 27, 1 (March 2012), 57--70.
[40]
Elizabeth S. Veinott, Judith Olson, Gary M. Olson, and Xiaolan Fu. 1999. Video helps remote work: speakers who need to negotiate common ground benefit from seeing each other. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems the CHI is the limit - CHI '99, ACM Press, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States, 302--309.
[41]
Martin J. Wainwright, Pradeep Ravikumar, and John D. Lafferty. 2006. High-dimensional graphical model selection using ?1-regularized logistic regression. In In Neural Information Processing Systems, MIT Press.
[42]
Anita Williams Woolley, Christopher F. Chabris, Alex Pentland, Nada Hashmi, and Thomas W. Malone. 2010. Evidence for a Collective Intelligence Factor in the Performance of Human Groups. Science 330, 6004 (October 2010), 686--688.
[43]
glmnet: Lasso and Elastic-Net Regularized Generalized Linear Models. https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/glmnet/index.html. Retrieved from https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/glmnet/index.html

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Hybridge: Bridging Spatiality for Inclusive and Equitable Hybrid MeetingsProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36870408:CSCW2(1-39)Online publication date: 8-Nov-2024
  • (2024)The CoExplorer Technology Probe: A Generative AI-Powered Adaptive Interface to Support Intentionality in Planning and Running Video MeetingsProceedings of the 2024 ACM Designing Interactive Systems Conference10.1145/3643834.3661507(1638-1657)Online publication date: 1-Jul-2024
  • (2024)Meeting Effectiveness and Inclusiveness: Large-scale Measurement, Identification of Key Features, and Prediction in Real-world Remote MeetingsProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36373708:CSCW1(1-39)Online publication date: 26-Apr-2024
  • Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction
Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction  Volume 5, Issue CSCW1
CSCW
April 2021
5016 pages
EISSN:2573-0142
DOI:10.1145/3460939
Issue’s Table of Contents
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 22 April 2021
Published in PACMHCI Volume 5, Issue CSCW1

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. computer-mediated communication
  2. machine learning
  3. meeting effectiveness
  4. meeting inclusiveness
  5. statistical modeling

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)337
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)26
Reflects downloads up to 05 Feb 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Hybridge: Bridging Spatiality for Inclusive and Equitable Hybrid MeetingsProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36870408:CSCW2(1-39)Online publication date: 8-Nov-2024
  • (2024)The CoExplorer Technology Probe: A Generative AI-Powered Adaptive Interface to Support Intentionality in Planning and Running Video MeetingsProceedings of the 2024 ACM Designing Interactive Systems Conference10.1145/3643834.3661507(1638-1657)Online publication date: 1-Jul-2024
  • (2024)Meeting Effectiveness and Inclusiveness: Large-scale Measurement, Identification of Key Features, and Prediction in Real-world Remote MeetingsProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36373708:CSCW1(1-39)Online publication date: 26-Apr-2024
  • (2024)CoExplorer: Generative AI Powered 2D and 3D Adaptive Interfaces to Support Intentionality in Video MeetingsExtended Abstracts of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3613905.3650797(1-10)Online publication date: 11-May-2024
  • (2024)Mental Models of Meeting Goals: Supporting Intentionality in Meeting TechnologiesProceedings of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3613904.3642670(1-17)Online publication date: 11-May-2024
  • (2024)Efficient High-Performance Bark-Scale Neural Network for Residual Echo and Noise SuppressionICASSP 2024 - 2024 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP)10.1109/ICASSP48485.2024.10446427(1386-1390)Online publication date: 14-Apr-2024
  • (2024)The differential effects of self-view in virtual meetings when speaking vs. listeningEuropean Journal of Information Systems10.1080/0960085X.2024.2325350(1-19)Online publication date: 29-Mar-2024
  • (2024)Virtual voices: Exploring individual differences in chat and verbal participation in virtual meetingsJournal of Vocational Behavior10.1016/j.jvb.2024.104015152(104015)Online publication date: Aug-2024
  • (2023)Active Noise Cancellation in Microsoft Teams Using AI & NLP Powered AlgorithmsInternational Journal of Computer Science and Information Technology10.5121/ijcsit.2023.1510315:1(31-42)Online publication date: 27-Feb-2023
  • (2023)CrossTalk: Intelligent Substrates for Language-Oriented Interaction in Video-Based Communication and CollaborationProceedings of the 36th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology10.1145/3586183.3606773(1-16)Online publication date: 29-Oct-2023
  • Show More Cited By

View Options

Login options

Full Access

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Figures

Tables

Media

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media