Abstract
Since the COVID-19 pandemic, student online meetings have become
increasingly common. This study investigates whether previously found
negative effects of meeting lateness on meeting satisfactions can be
found in the context of virtual student meetings. In an online study,
students from Germany and Italy (N = 279) rated their last
meeting experience. We investigate the prevalence of delays in student
online meetings and their relationship with participants’ process and
outcome satisfaction. About 26 % of virtual student meetings were
delayed. Satisfaction with the process and output was significantly
lower in late (vs. on-time) meetings. No differences between countries
were found.
Keywords: online meeting, meeting satisfaction, meeting lateness,
student meetings, country comparison
On time online? Effects of lateness on satisfaction in virtual student
meetings
In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, higher education institutions were
challenged to implement new digital teaching and learning methods
(Mishra et al., 2020). Students attended online lectures and held group
project meetings via digital tools. Even before, the technology industry
for online meetings had experienced tremendous growth (Sox et al., 2017)
and by now digital tools to conduct meetings are commonplace (Reed &
Allen, 2021). This provides many benefits (e.g., better organization,
mobile working) as well as challenges (Briggs et al., 2006), such as
virtual meeting fatigue (Shockley et al., 2021), underdeveloped digital
skills (Bennett et al., 2008; Hatlevik et al., 2015), and access
dependencies (Blanchard & McBride, 2020). The time spent in meetings
has changed as well, with an increase in meeting frequency, and a 10 %
decline in meeting duration, compared to the pre-pandemic period
(DeFilippis et al., 2020). While a large body of literature investigates
in-person meetings and their characteristics, these findings have
limited applicability to virtual meetings (Reiter-Palmon et al., 2021).
In this paper, we present data on virtual student meetings, focusing on
the characteristic of meeting lateness. Specifically, we investigate
whether lateness in online meetings is negatively related to meeting
satisfaction in an international student sample.
Theoretical background
We conceptualize meetings within the input-process-output model (IPO
model; McGrath, 1964). This heuristic concept represents the
relationship between input variables (input), group interactions
(process), and group outcomes (output). Time factors, such as meeting
lateness, and other so-called design criteria (Kauffeld & Sauer, 2021;
Cohen et al., 2011) are input variables that can affect the process and
output of a virtual student meeting (Leach et al., 2009), while
satisfaction with the process and outcome of the meeting are components
of the output of the meeting.
Internationally, about half of all meetings start late (Allen et al.,
2021; Rogelberg et al., 2014). Lateness is generally viewed as
counterproductive, but unlike absenteeism, it tends to be tolerated
(Rogelberg et al., 2014; Dishon-Berkovits & Berkovits, 1997) and is
seldomly sanctioned (Koslowski, 2000), encouraging future delay behavior
(Blau, 1995). Meeting lateness has been shown to negatively impact
meeting experiences (Allen et al., 2018). While previous research on
meeting lateness has focused primarily on the professional context,
lateness also occurs in the educational context (Back et al., 2006;
Werner et al., 2014). Generally, good time management positively affects
student performance (Nasrullah & Khan, 2015) and impressions from
educational meetings lay the foundation for later work experience (Iksan
et al., 2012). Moreover, as typical participants in psychological
studies, students should be of particular interest and add other formats
to previous meeting research (Rogelberg et al., 2014; Dipboye &
Flanagan, 1979). Therefore, this paper will expand research questions on
meeting lateness examined in the professional context to the educational
context.
A subjective measure of meeting effectiveness is the satisfaction of
participants with the meeting (Burba, 2017). Meeting satisfaction
influences how engaged participants are with the organization and how
committed they are to their work (Rogelberg et al., 2010). Moreover,
meeting satisfaction is related to participant interaction in the
meeting (Kauffeld, 2006) and empowerment during subsequent work
processes (Allen et al., 2016). The importance here lies in the
potential for current as well as future collaboration (Hackman, 2012):
Those who are satisfied with the current work in the team will also be
happy to work together in the future. However, studies suggest that more
than half of participants are dissatisfied with their meetings (Geimer
et al., 2015).
Meeting lateness as an input variable is related to negative
interpersonal relationships, lower group cohesion and lower meeting
effectiveness as process and output variables (Allen et al., 2021;
Koslowsky, 2000; Rogelberg et al., 2014). If delays occur, meeting
participants are more likely to be frustrated (Mroz & Allen, 2017). In
an experimental laboratory study, students showed more negative
socio-emotional behaviors (e.g., interrupting each other) in meetings
that started late (Allen et al., 2018). If meeting lateness occurs, the
resulting overlength (i.e., making up for the delay) often creates
stress for participants to complete routine activities and decreases
their subsequent work engagement (Lehmann-Willenbrock et al., 2017).
This meeting recovery syndrome poses a health risk (Schulte et al.,
2013) and can lead to turnover intentions on the part of participants
(Rogelberg et al., 2006; 2010) and poor decision-making in organizations
(Tropman, 2014). It demonstrates that meeting lateness as a seemingly
trivial violation of meeting rules can have wide-ranging consequences.
Although meeting research often draws on the construct of satisfaction,
there has been no consistent approach to measuring it (Briggs et al.,
2012; Mejias, 2007). Some studies describe meeting satisfaction merely
as a special facet of general job satisfaction (Cohen et al., 2011),
while others use an affective approach (Reinig, 2003) in which
satisfaction with the meeting process (SP) and satisfaction with the
meeting outcome (SO) are differentiated. SP refers to satisfaction with
the interactions during the meeting, while SO describes the
participants’ attitude towards the achieved goals. The separate
measurement of process and outcome satisfaction is not consistently
practiced (e.g., Rogelberg et al., 2010; Wageman et al., 2005), even
though Briggs and de Vreede (1997) and Reinig (2003) warn that the lack
of distinction can lead to false predictions. Satisfaction with the
process does not necessarily establish satisfaction with the outcome
(and vice versa). In addition to SP and SO, the perceived goal
attainment of the participants (PGA; perceived net goal attainment) is
measured. PGA includes the change in judgment of the likelihood of
achieving goals within a given time period (e.g., the duration of a
meeting; Briggs et al., 2003).
Current study
In the current study, we extend previous research on the relationship
between meeting lateness and meeting satisfaction to the study of
virtual student meetings (Lehmann-Willenbrock & Allen, 2020). We
conduct an online survey in an international student sample (Germany and
Italy) to gain insights into the prevalence of meeting lateness in
virtual student meetings as well as its relationship with meeting
satisfaction. Additionally, we explore how students appraise meeting
lateness.
Derived
from previous research on meeting lateness, a lateness rate of about 40
% is expected (Allen et al., 2021). However, due to the flexibility of
student compared to professional life, somewhat weaker correlations of
lateness with the process and output variable of meeting satisfaction
are expected than is known from the workplace (Werner et al., 2014).
Hypothesis 1: Lateness occurs widely (40 %) in virtual student
meetings.Hypothesis 2: Satisfaction with perceived meeting process (SP)
will be significantly lower in late meetings than in on-time meetings.Hypothesis 3: Satisfaction with perceived meeting outcome (SO)
will be significantly lower for late meetings than for on-time meetings.Hypothesis 4: Perceived goal achievement (PGA) is significantly
lower in late meetings than in on-time meetings.
Perceptions of lateness are not the same everywhere (van Eerde & Azar,
2020; White et al., 2011). Across contexts and cultures, different
values are shaped to guide individual experiences (Minkov & Hofstede,
2012; Javidan et al., 2006). However, practices shared in the
globalization process are increasingly aligning experiences (Adler &
Aycan, 2018). In a study by Allen and colleagues (2021), no differences
in meeting lateness across five countries were found, including Italy
and Germany. For the younger generation, the confluence can be assumed
to be even stronger (Eringa et al., 2015).
Comparisons: There is no difference in the association of
meeting lateness with the constructs of meeting satisfaction between the
countries Italy and Germany.