Communication

 In today’s world, there are so many ways to communicate! I would like you to evaluate the communication within your company.  Are meetings run effectively?  Does your manager do a good job of communicating ideas, performance, expectations?  What could be improved upon?  While you are not required to formally cite your sources within the forum, you should make sure that you are incorporating information from the readings into your responses.

APA format with using ONLY the information and references from the attached material.  If you are to use a direct quote you must use quotation marks

300 word minimum!!

The Effects of Euphemism Usage in Business Contexts

Terri L. Rittenburg • George Albert Gladney •

Teresa Stephenson

Received: 19 April 2014 / Accepted: 8 December 2014 / Published online: 6 February 2015

� Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Abstract Transparency is important in today’s business

environment. The use of euphemisms decreases trans-

parency yet is increasing in business and business educa-

tion. This study examines the effects of euphemism on

people’s attitudes toward actions and their intentions to

perform those actions. It also measures the effect of over-

sight on attitudes and behavioral intentions. Using a 2 9 2

experimental design, we measured participants’ attitudes by

employing a semantic differential scale and behavioral in-

tentions by using a simple yes/no question regarding the

action described. A questionnaire with 20 brief scenarios

provided the euphemistic (transparent) versus non-e-

uphemistic (less-transparent) condition. Oversight versus

non-oversight conditions were manipulated through in-

structions to participants. Hypotheses regarding the effects

of euphemism were supported; participants were both more

likely to rate an action as appropriate and to indicate they

would take that action when stated euphemistically. Over-

sight did not have a significant effect on attitude toward the

action, but did significantly affect participants’ intentions to

take that action. Findings suggest both managerial and

ethical implications for businesses. Greater transparency

includes more straight talk and less euphemism and is

recommended to ensure employees’ understanding and

implementation of ethical business actions.

Keywords Business ethics � Communication �
Euphemism � Managerial oversight � Transparency

Introduction

How often do we say what we really mean? In the business

environment, as in our personal lives, euphemisms color

our language and soften the hard edges of our meanings.

Being ‘selectively separated’ or ‘dehired’ sounds nicer than

being fired, although the result of both, of course, is the loss

of one’s job. Norman et al. (2010) note that a critical

challenge facing today’s leaders is gaining their subordi-

nates’ trust. Transparency in communication positively

affected participants’ ratings of their manager’s trustwor-

thiness and effectiveness. They operationalized trans-

parency with statements regarding things such as the

importance of talking openly and freely across organiza-

tional levels. We argue, however, that part of transparency

is eliminating unnecessary use of euphemism.

Allan and Burridge (1991, p. 11) define euphemism as

‘‘an alternative to a dispreferred expression, in order to

avoid possible loss of face: either one’s own face or,

through giving offense, that of the audience, or of some

third party.’’ Euphemisms serve several purposes, includ-

ing reducing the impact and thus the transparency of

negative terms. While euphemisms are generally used to

avoid confrontation, avoid hurting people’s feelings, or

substitute for profanity, they are also used to mislead or

obfuscate the real meaning of what is being said.

Effective communication is crucial in business, between

both internal and external stakeholders. In fact, because of

T. L. Rittenburg

College of Business, University of Wyoming, Dept. 3275, 1000

E. University Avenue, Laramie, WY 82071, USA

G. A. Gladney

College of Arts and Sciences, University of Wyoming, Dept.

3904, 1000 E. University Avenu, Laramie, WY 82071, USA

T. Stephenson (&)
Beacom School of Business, University of South Dakota, 414 E.

Clark Street, Vermillion, SD 57069, USA

e-mail: teresa.stephenson@usd.edu

123

J Bus Ethics (2016) 137:315–320

DOI 10.1007/s10551-014-2501-4

http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1007/s10551-014-2501-4&domain=pdf

http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1007/s10551-014-2501-4&domain=pdf

modern communication technologies and electronic com-

merce, the need for clear communication is particularly

pertinent today (Ober 2007). But, as noted by Bové (1986),

corporate communication has deteriorated, at least in part

because of the over-usage of buzzwords that do not clearly

communicate meaning. Bing (2001) deduced that euphe-

mism usage increases in hard times, while people speak

plainly in good times. LaRocque (1998) cautions the need

to deliver the truth, not just empty words. Excessive use of

euphemism in business is often ridiculed (for example, see

Gibbons 2001; Grazian 1997; Leche, 2004a, b; Zane 1996).

At worst, the use of ‘spin’ creates misinformation and

outright deception (Banyard 2003).

As a practical matter, how can business practitioners

determine how much euphemism is too much? Where is

the ‘line in the sand’ to demarcate when euphemism begins

to dilute transparency? The purpose of this study is to

explore these questions. We examine the use of euphemism

in business contexts to determine its effects on communi-

cation receivers’ response to various situations and in-

tended actions. We use an experimental design to compare

responses to euphemistic versus non-euphemistic scenar-

ios. We discuss the implications of the use of euphemisms

in business based on our findings.

The organization of this paper is as follows. The next

section provides a literature review. Following that is the

hypothesis development, then an overview of the method-

ology. Then there is a results section and the paper concludes

with a discussion including limitations and suggestions for

future research.

Literature Review

Taylor (1987) described euphemism as ‘‘the masking of true

meaning beneath palatable phrases’’ (p. 600). In our words,

‘masking a true meaning’ is the same as reducing trans-

parency in communication. Although euphemisms have been

used by humans throughout the ages, some people believe

their usage has increased substantially in recent years to

‘‘become a fit medium for the expression of just about ev-

erything’’ (Murphy 1996, p. 16). Examples abound in every

arena—journalism, education, politics, business, and family

life—to encompass topics that may be taboo or politically

incorrect.

While much has been written about the use of euphemism,

few empirical studies have examined its usage or effects.

Loftus and Palmer (1974) conducted experiments in which

participants viewed films of automobile accidents; the use of

different verbs (smashed, collided, bumped, contacted, or hit)

elicited different responses among participants regarding the

perceived speed of the cars and whether participants believed

they saw broken glass in the film. Gruner and Tighe (1995)

studied doublespeak—euphemisms used to obscure or distort

meanings for selfish purposes, rather than simply to spare the

feelings of others. Their findings suggest that users of dou-

blespeak are at least partially successful in what they are

attempting to achieve through its use; further, they found that

embedding a euphemistic term in a typical sentence creates a

context likely to evoke the intended connotations. In a study

of motives for use of euphemisms, McGlone and Batchelor

(2003) found that people tend to euphemize more to save face

for themselves than to spare the feelings or sensibilities of

others, and that euphemizing occurs more often when people

expect to meet others face to face rather than when they will

remain anonymous.

Pfaff et al. (1997) studied the role of metaphorical

knowledge in people’s use and understanding of euphemisms

and offensive expressions, finding that euphemisms are easier

to comprehend when there is a conceptual match between

them and the context. More recently, Gladney and Rittenburg

(2005) studied the use of euphemism in a journalistic context;

they found that euphemisms can favorably affect people’s

assessments or opinions of given situations and may affect

people’s behavior as well. Further, they found that overuse of

euphemisms appeared to have the opposite effect; in other

words, one or two euphemisms may be effective, but several

euphemisms on the same topic or issue will not be.

In a case study, Vickers (2002) found that use of euphe-

misms exacerbated the painful outcomes of downsizing for

employees who lost their jobs. Aucoin and Haynes (1998)

employed an ethical analysis that demonstrated, in the case of

downsizing, that it is likely in the company’s long-term best

interest to communicate openly and honestly with employees

rather than use deceptive euphemisms. We interpret this

evidence to mean that transparent communications lead to

better outcomes.

In summary, use of euphemisms in business settings

seems to be increasing. Although euphemism is an integral

component of language, its overuse may have detrimental

effects. Previous findings suggest that euphemisms can be

effective in changing people’s perceptions of a communi-

cation, particularly when embedded into a sentence that

evokes the intended context. Further, there is evidence that

they are used more often to protect the source than the

sensibilities of the communication receiver. Finally, some

studies suggest that use of euphemisms to deceive or mask

negative consequences may tend to backfire—that frank,

transparent communication may serve a company better in

the long run.

Hypothesis Development

Based on previous findings regarding euphemism, we hy-

pothesize that use of a euphemistic term would be likely to

316 T. L. Rittenburg et al.

123

affect people’s response to a communication. Rawson

(1981) makes a distinction between positive and negative

euphemisms. Positive euphemisms inflate and magnify,

making the euphemized item appear better or more im-

portant, while negative euphemisms downplay or deflate

the seriousness of a negative consequence. So for either a

positive or negative euphemism, it would be expected to

elicit a more positive response than a more direct term.

Therefore, our first hypothesis is as follows:

H1a Participants are more likely to consider an action

appropriate when described using euphemized text.

H1b Participants are more likely to state intention to take

an action when described using euphemized text.

As McGlone and Batchelor (2003) found, people tend to

use euphemism more in face-to-face situations than when

they will remain anonymous. In responding to euphe-

misms, it may follow that people may rate a negative action

as more appropriate when there is no oversight (so their

actions are less visible or not observed by others) than

when there is oversight. In other words, if one action seems

more socially desirable than another, it is likely people will

respond differently if they believe their actions will be

observed. Based on this expectation, a second hypothesis is

proffered:

H2a Participants are more likely to consider an action

appropriate in non-

oversight conditions.

H2b Participants are more likely to state intention to take

an action in non-oversight conditions.

Methodology

In order to test the hypotheses, we employed a 2 9 2 ex-

perimental design. The participant sample consisted of 159

students at a western United States university, most of

whom were juniors and seniors (77 %), the remainder

evenly divided between freshmen, sophomores, and grad-

uate students. The majority were 20–23 years old, nearly

all Caucasian and from the U.S. The gender of the sample

was split 45 % male and 55 % female. Participants repre-

sented a variety of religions. There were students from

various majors, though most were concentrated in either

business or arts and sciences. None of these demographic

variables were significant covariates in testing the study’s

hypotheses.

The experiment was conducted in a computer lab with

independent proctors who were unaware of the purposes of

the research. We strived to recruit a broad cross section of

students from different majors; most received some in-

centive for participating by one of their instructors. The

proctors read the instruction condition, which was also

given in the survey instrument for each group. Then the

proctors gave participants the web site and pass code to

access the survey and the participants completed it online.

We tested Hypothesis 1 using conditions of euphemistic

and non-euphemistic text, and Hypothesis 2 by varying

instructions to participants to create oversight and non-

oversight conditions. Because of the importance of context

in perception of euphemisms (Gruner and Tighe 1995;

Pfaff et al. 1997), brief scenarios were created describing

typical business situations. The only differences in these

scenarios were specific euphemized terms that replaced

more blunt terms in the non-euphemistic condition. The

perception of oversight was created by informing the par-

ticipants that, ‘‘The completed exam may ultimately be

scrutinized by the press, juries, and senior executives.’’

The use of scenarios is an established approach in

studies of business ethics to effectively evaluate the ethical

reasoning process (Alexander and Becker 1978; Ca-

vanaugh et al. 1985; Fritzsche and Becker 1982; Reiden-

bach and Robin 1988, 1990; Reidenbach et al. 1991;

Treviño 1992; Weber 1992). The euphemistic terms used in

these scenarios were drawn from a variety of current

textbooks in the areas of management, marketing, and in-

ternational business, as well as a dictionary of euphemisms

(Holder, 2002). Example scenarios are as follows:

Euphemistic Version

Poor people generally cannot afford new cars. Frequently,

however, they can be enticed to finance pre-owned vehicles

at

attractive rates to you, the seller.

Non-euphemistic Version

Poor people generally cannot afford new cars. Frequently,

however, they can be enticed to finance used vehicles at

attractive rates to you, the seller.
Euphemistic Version

You are about to explain operations in the Third World.

Part of doing business in some of these countries is offering

soft commissions to host country officials. You are deciding

whether

to do so.

Non-euphemistic Version
You are about to explain operations in the Third World.
Part of doing business in some of these countries is offering

bribes to host country officials. You are deciding whether

to do so.

Effects of Euphemism Usage 317

123

Twenty similar scenarios were included in the instru-

ment (italics were not in the instrument). Participants were

given all scenarios in either the euphemized or non-e-

uphemized version, and given instructions that either

indicated their responses would be scrutinized (oversight

condition) or a simple instruction that did not indicate any

oversight of their responses, creating the four conditions:

Euphemism/oversight, euphemism/no oversight, non-e-

uphemism/oversight, non-euphemism/no oversight.

Participants were asked for two types of responses to

each scenario. First they indicated where their opinion fell

on a 7-point Likert scale with appropriate/inappropriate as

endpoints. Then they answered a forced-choice yes/no

question as to whether the subject would take the action

illustrated in the scenario.

Results

Tests of Hypotheses

First we tested to determine if there were significant in-

teraction effects. Finding none, we continued with our tests

of the hypotheses.

We conducted tests of H1a and H2a based on responsesto

the Likert Scale for the 20 scenarios. We tested for differ-

ences between groups using univariate analysis of variance

(ANOVA) (see Table 1). Levene’s test of equality of error

variances was non-significant (p \ .181), indicating no
substantial differences in error variances across groups.

There is a significant difference for the euphemistic vs. non-

euphemistic conditions, p \ .000, supporting Hypothesis
1a; however, Hypothesis 2a was not supported. Based on

these results, participants were more likely to think an ac-

tion was appropriate when expressed euphemistically than

when it was expressed non-euphemistically.

Tests of the forced-choice behavioral items represented

in H1b and H2b were conducted through logistic regression

and log linear analysis. In the logistic regression, a forward

stepwise elimination method was employed. Results of the

logistic regression are given in Table 2. Significance tests

based on the Wald statistic showed significant differences

in behavioral intentions toward the actions under both

euphemistic versus non-euphemistic and oversight vs. non-

oversight conditions, supporting Hypothesis 1b at the

p \ .000 level and 2b at the p \ .05 level.
A backward hierarchical log linear analysis generated its

best model for euphemistic/behavior and oversight/

Table 1 ANOVA results

* p \ .000
a
R

2
= .101 (Adjusted

R
2
= .083)

Condition Mean SD N

Dependent variable = Perception of appropriateness

Euphemism/non-oversight 4.36 .74850 40

Euphemism/oversight 4.14 .77755 45

Non-euphemism/non-oversight 3.71 .89866 36

Non-euphemism/oversight 3.82 .65379 38

Total 159

Source Type III sum of squares df Mean square F Significance

Between-Participants Effects

Corrected model 10.358
a

3 3.453 5.784 .001

Intercept 2535.389 1 2535.389 4246.973 .000

Euphemism/non-euphemism 9.354 1 9.354 15.669 .000*

Oversight/non-oversight .148 1 .148 .248 .619

Interaction Euph.*Over. 1.086 1 1.086 1.820 .179

Error 92.533 155 .597

Total 2673.360 159

Corrected total 102.892 158

Table 2 Logistic regression results

B S.E. Wald df Signif. Exp(B)

Step 1
a

Euphemism (1) -.364 .071 25.927 1 .000 .695

Constant .108 .052 4.320 1 .038 1.114

Step 2
b

Euphemism (1) -.367 .072 26.351 1 .000 .693

Oversight (1) -.171 .071 5.759 1 .016 .842

Constant .192 .063 9.351 1 .002 1.211

a
Variable(s) entered on step 1: euphemism

b
Variable(s) entered on step 2: oversight

318 T. L. Rittenburg et al.

123

behavior conditions with a likelihood ratio Chi-square

value of 1.61672 with df = 2 and P = .446. This model

supports the main effects represented in H1b and H2b for

the euphemism vs. non-euphemism and oversight vs. non-

oversight conditions.

Discussion

Several interesting findings emerge from these results. The

strong main effects for the euphemism/non-euphemism

condition, for both the semantic differential scale and the

forced-choice item, indicate that use of euphemistic terms

can strongly affect people’s attitudes and behavioral in-

tentions. With respect to the oversight condition, expecta-

tion of scrutiny made a significant difference for the

behavioral intentions measure, but not the attitudinal one.

This should not be surprising; if the oversight of others is

likely have an effect, it would be more likely on behavior

(which is socially visible) than attitude (which is not).

The purpose of euphemisms is to sugar-coat terms that

people may find offensive or objectionable, that is, to reduce

the transparency of the communication. Therefore, it is not

surprising to find that people respond more favorably to a

euphemistic term than to a blunter one. In the business

context, however, the use of euphemism may mask actions

that have negative consequences for stakeholders such as

employees, suppliers, distributors, customers, or investors.

More transparent communication might lead to better un-

derstanding of the real consequences of actions. For exam-

ple, calling a bribe a ‘soft commission,’ makes it sound like

something legitimate, muting the legal, not to mention

ethical, ramifications of this action. Business managers run

less risk of confusing or misleading employees by speaking

plainly and using more transparent language. Moreover,

overuse of euphemisms may damage management’s cred-

ibility with employees and other stakeholders.

There are strong ethical implications of the findings in

this study. Participants perceived an action as more appro-

priate when stated euphemistically, and they were more

likely to say they would take the action as well. Managerial

oversight appears to have a slight effect on behavioral in-

tentions, with participants more likely to take actions they

viewed as inappropriate when no oversight was expected;

however, the lack of a significant interaction effect leaves

the effects of oversight and euphemism combined a bit

fuzzy. Based on these findings, we conclude that oversight

may provide a deterrent to inappropriate actions, but the use

of euphemism is likely to increase intent to act.

These findings may have particular import for employees

still learning the business and the ethical parameters of an

industry. Newer, younger employees are more likely to en-

gage in misconduct (Brigham 2005); they are also likely to

rely on superiors as role models, and a boss’s bad behavior

can influence young employees just beginning their careers

(Sandberg 2005). It follows that by soft-pedaling negative or

inappropriate actions with euphemistic labels, employees

newer to the business may be more likely to take such ac-

tions than those with more experience. This is likely to be

especially true in organizations that do not have strong ex-

ecutive role models, reward systems or corporate cultures

that guide ethical behavior (Baumhart 1961; James 2000;

Loe et al. 2000; Nill and Schibrowsky 2005; Robin and

Reidenbach 1987). Therefore, these findings suggest the

need for transparent communication in order to avoid the

ethical pitfalls associated with many euphemisms.

As with any study involving human participants, there are

limitations that may affect its outcomes. Foremost was the use

of student participants; while convenient, further research

with a more representative sample of business people would

allow greater generalizability to the broader business

population. Future research also could test a broader array of

euphemisms and examine a greater variety of negative and

positive actions. For example, the effects of oversight might

be stronger where the magnitude of a negative action is

greater; a larger study might allow researchers to ‘tease out’

such nuances. More specific examination of the ethicality of

actions could be measured as well, in addition to the appro-

priateness/inappropriateness of these actions.

Years ago, Orwell (1933) decried the decay of the English

language. While the effect of this decay seems merely aca-

demic at first glance, the findings of this study demonstrate

that unethical actions may ensue from overuse of euphe-

mism. As Orwell (1933) suggested, ‘‘… if thought corrupts
language, language can also corrupt thought’’ (p. 364).

People’s willingness to assess actions less critically

when they are labeled euphemistically has harsh implica-

tions for business practice. More transparent communica-

tion may better serve employees as well as the businesses

they serve, particularly in ensuring understanding and im-

plementation of corporate ethical guidelines and codes of

conduct.

Acknowledgments The authors wish to thank Jennifer Weatherford
and the late James N. Smithson for their assistance with this project.

We also wish to thank the anonymous reviewers and editorial staff of

the Journal of Business Ethics.

References

Alexander, C. S., & Becker, H. J. (1978). The use of vignettes in

survey research. Public Opinion Quarterly, 42(Spring), 93–104.

Allan, K., & Burridge, K. (1991). Euphemism and dysphemism. New

York: Oxford University Press.

Aucoin, J. L. & Haynes, J. R. (1998). Downsizing, rightsizing, and

other euphemisms: The questionable ethics of some corporate

Effects of Euphemism Usage 319

123

communications. Presented to the media ethics interest group,

AEJMC, annual meeting, Baltimore.

Banyard, P. (2003). The art of deception. Credit Management,

2(September), 28–29.

Baumhart, R. C. (1961). How ethical are businessmen? Harvard

Business Review 39(July–August), 7–19, 156–176.

Bing, S. (2001). A glossary for hard times. Fortune, 143(7), 61–62.

Bové, R. (1986). Is this the dawn of the non-information age?

Training and Development Journal, 40(4), 44–45.

Brigham, A. (2005, July 20–22). Innovative methods for teaching

business ethics (panel presentation), Teaching Business Ethics

Conference, Boulder, Colorado.

Cavanaugh, G. F., Fritzsche, S. J., & Fritzsche, D. J. (1985). Using

vignettes in business ethics research. Research in Corporate

Social Performance and Policy, 7, 279–293.

Fritzsche, D. J., & Becker, H. (1982). Business ethics of future

marketing managers. Journal of Marketing Education, 4(Fall),

2–7.

Gibbons, B. J. (2001). Avoiding confrontation through euphemism.

Across the Board, 38(March/April), 54.

Gladney, G. A., & Rittenburg, T. L. (2005). Euphemistic text affects

attitudes, behavior. Newspaper Research Journal, 26(1), 28–41.

Grazian, F. (1997). On euphemisms, gobbledygook and doublespeak.

Public Relations Quarterly, 42(Summer), 21–22.

Gruner, C. R., & Tighe, M. R. (1995). Semantic differential

measurements of connotations of verbal terms and their

doublespeak facsimiles in sentence contexts. Psychological

Reports, 77(3, Pt. 1), 778.

Holder, R. W. (2002). How not to say what you mean: A dictionary of

euphemisms (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

James, H. S., Jr. (2000). Reinforcing ethical decision making through

organizational structure. Journal of Business Ethics, 28(1),

43–58.

LaRocque, P. (1998). Deliver the truth, not just empty words. Quill,

86(7), 63.

Leche, P. (2004a). Say what? Policy & Practice, 62(June), 32.

Leche, P. (2004b). Say what? Policy & Practice, 62(December), 32.

Loe, T. W., Ferrell, L., & Mansfield, P. (2000). A review of empirical

studies assessing ethical decision making in business. Journal of

Business Ethics, 25(3), 185–204.

Loftus, E. F., & Palmer, J. C. (1974). Reconstruction of automobile

destruction: an example of the interaction between language and

memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior,

13(October), 585–589.

McGlone, M. S., & Batchelor, J. A. (2003). Looking out for number

one: Euphemism and face. Journal of Communication, 53(June),

251–264.

Murphy, Cullen. (1996). The E word. Atlantic Monthly, 278(3),

16–18.

Nill, A., & Schibrowsky, J. A. (2005). The impact of corporate

culture, the reward system, and perceived moral intensity on

marketing students’ ethical decision making. Journal of Mar-

keting Education, 27(1), 68–80.

Norman, S. M., Avolio, B. J., & Luthans, F. (2010). The impact of

positivity and transparency and trust in meters and perceived

effectiveness. The Leadership Quarterly, 21, 350–364.

Ober, S. (2007). Contemporary business communication (7th ed.).
Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company.

Orwell, G. (1933). The Orwell reader. New York: Harcourt, Brace

and Company.

Pfaff, K. L., Gibbs, R. W., Jr, & Johnson, M. D. (1997). Metaphor in

using and understanding euphemism and dysphemism. Applied

Psycholinguistics, 18(1), 59–83.

Rawson, H. (1981). A dictionary of euphemisms and other doubletalk.

New York: Crown.

Reidenbach, R. E., & Robin, D. P. (1988). Some initial steps toward

improving the measurement of ethics evaluations in marketing

activities. Journal of Business Ethics, 7(11), 871–879.

Reidenbach, R. E., & Robin, D. P. (1990). Toward the development

of multidimensional scale for improving evaluations of business

ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 9(8), 639–653.

Reidenbach, R. E., Robin, D. P., & Dawson, L. (1991). An application

and extension of a multidimensional ethics scale to selected

marketing practices and marketing groups. Journal of the

Academy of Marketing Science, 19(2), 83–92.

Robin, D. P., & Reidenbach, R. E. (1987). Social responsibility,

ethics, and marketing strategy: Closing the gap between concept

and application. Journal of Marketing, 51(January), 44–58.

Sandberg, J. (2005). A boss’s bad behavior can forever influence

employees starting out. Wall Street Journal, Eastern Edition

245(March 23), B1.

Taylor, H. (1987). The strength of words. Vital Speeches of the Day,

53(19), 600–602.

Treviño, L. (1992). Moral reasoning and business ethics: Implications

for research, education, and management. Journal of Business

Ethics, 11(5/6), 445–459.

Vickers, M. H. (2002). ‘People first—Always’: Euphemism and

rhetoric as troublesome influences on organizational sense-

making—A downsizing case study. Employee Responsibilities

and Rights Journal, 14(September), 105–118.

Weber, J. (1992). Scenarios in business ethics research: Review,

critical assessment, and recommendations. Business Ethics

Quarterly, 2(2), 137–160.

Zane, J. P. (1996). Word for word/doublespeak it is fundamentally

true that the terms below are in English. The New York Times,

1(May 26), 7.

320 T. L. Rittenburg et al.

123

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without
permission.

• c.10551_2014_Article_2501

The Effects of Euphemism Usage in Business Contexts
Abstract
Introduction
Literature Review
Hypothesis Development
Methodology
Euphemistic Version
Non-euphemistic Version
Euphemistic Version
Non-euphemistic Version
Results
Tests of Hypotheses
Discussion
Acknowledgments
References

Communicating virtually
in a global organization

Céleste M. Brotheridge
ESG UQAM, Montréal, Canada

Derrick J. Neufeld
Richard Ivey School of Business,

The University of Western Ontario, London, Canada, and
Bruno Dyck

I.H. Asper School of Business, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada

Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to consider the extent to which changes in communication
media are associated with changes in the nature of manager-expatriate employee communications.
Using an affordance lens, the authors explore how hierarchical level and communication medium
interact to influence status dynamics manifested in communication attributes.
Design/methodology/approach – The hypothesis was tested with a 2 (hierarchical level) × 3
(communication media) multivariate analysis of covariance (experience level) in a sample of 1,193
messages that were transmitted between managers and field employees in a global organization over a
ten year period.
Findings – The authors found significant interaction effects between communication media and
hierarchical level on communication attributes such that changes in communication media intensified
status differences between managers and their employees.
Research limitations/implications – Communications media may be appropriated differently
depending on one’s hierarchical level.
Practical implications – Managers should adopt new communication media more consciously given
their potential influence of how people communicate.
Originality/value – Unlike many computer-mediated communications (CMC) effects studies that
compare face-to-face communications with CMC or employ self-report questionnaires or laboratory
designs with student samples, this study examines a complete set of manager-employee
communications over an extended period of time.
Keywords Expatriates, Communication technologies, Managers, Virtual work, Electronic mail
Paper type Research paper

Organizations are increasingly adopting distributed structures such as virtual
teams and remote work arrangements (Beranek and Martz, 2005). Fostering effective
communication between managers and their employees in such settings is particularly
challenging (Fiol and O’Conner, 2005). Unlike traditional workplaces where managers
and employees communicate face-to-face, geographically dispersed work settings often
involve multiple time zones, languages and cultures and the use of computer-mediated
communications (CMC). CMC are at the heart of communications and, indeed, managing
in virtual organizations since they enable managers and employees to bridge “space, time
and cultural distances” (Riemer et al., 2008). But, their use is not necessarily neutral, given
their potential to influence message transmittal (DeRosa et al., 2007). Consequently, there
is ongoing interest in understanding how CMC, especially e-mail, affects how people
communicate and how this influences an important aspect of organizational life: the
manager-employee relationship.

Journal of Managerial Psychology
Vol. 30 No. 8, 2015

pp. 909-

924

© Emerald Group Publishing Limited

0268-3946
DOI 10.1108/JMP-06-2013-0191

Received 25 June 2013
Revised 31 January 2014

16 April 2014
Accepted 10 July 2014

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/0268-3946.htm

909

Communicating
virtually

This study employs an affordance lens (Leonardi, 2011; Treem and Leonardi, 2012)
to understand how communication media shape status dynamics in a manager-
employee dyad in a global organization. It examines manager-employee interactions in
a virtual organization as the dominant communication medium shifts from written
letters to faxes and, finally, to e-mail over a ten year period. This study addresses
several gaps in the media effects literature. First, few studies have compared the effects
of two or more non-face-to-face media on communications (Walther, 2012). Media
effects studies typically assume that face-to-face communications and CMC are
available to organizational members. Although usually employed to supplement
face-to-face communications, CMC may be the central communication medium
employed in global organizations since it allows geographically dispersed workers to
readily communicate with each other (Monge and Fulk, 1999). By “controlling” for
face-to-face communications, this study provides a more accurate view of
communications in global organizations.

Also, existing research tends to consider status effects in relation to team-based
communications such as group decision support systems (Tan et al., 1998).
Such research is typically undertaken in an experimental setting with students as
participants. When undertaken in field settings, it focusses on the perceptions of
organizational members and/or team decision making. Very little research has
examined CMC within a manager-employee dyad in a natural setting (Zack and
McKenney, 1995).

Finally, we know very little about how the manager-employee relationship plays out
on a micro level (Fairhurst et al., 1987). Most studies solicit the perceptions of leaders
or their followers. As argued by Fairhurst et al., this emphasis on perceptions and
interpretations is subject to numerous weaknesses (e.g. social desirability, rating errors),
provides little understanding of how leadership is exercised at the microstructure level,
and loses the dynamism that is possible when organizations are studied in situ.

We begin this paper by presenting the theoretical grounding for our paper. We then
consider the affordances of various communication media in relation to six attributes and
how differences in these attributes reflect status dynamics. Next, we discuss the context
and design of our study and the nature of the data set. We then present our findings and
discuss their implications for understanding CMC’s introduction in organizations.

Theoretical perspectives
There are two primary perspectives regarding the potential for the introduction of
communication media to alter existing social arrangements: constructivism and
determinism. First, the constructivist perspective suggests that managers and
employees appropriate CMC in a manner that reinforces or echoes existing social
structures and, thus, preserves the existing system of relations (Ducheneaut, 2002;
Yates et al., 1999). In other words, introducing new communication technology
essentially has no effect on status because existing assumptions about how work gets
done and how hierarchical interaction should proceed are retained (Poole, 1999).
Although support for this constructivist perspective is limited, two noteworthy
studies are Gutek et al.’s (1984) self-report survey of the impact of new office
information technology on employees’ task activities, and Arrow’s (1997) finding that
introducing CMC in groups that had otherwise met on a face-to-face basis caused only
a slight and temporary fluctuation in member influence structures.

Second, the deterministic perspective views technology as a catalyst of change in
organizational functioning and, thus, posits that CMC has the potential to alter the

910

JMP
30,8

nature of hierarchical communications that occurs within an organization (Lemke,
1999; Sherblom, 1988). However, it is unclear whether changes in CMC serve to reduce
or widen any status differences between organizational members. Some argue that
CMC results in status leveling because employees view the introduction of CMC as an
opportunity to increase their influence levels, resulting in reduced hierarchical
differences in communications (Bryant, 1988) and balanced participation. What little
support exists for this status leveling perspective comes primarily from group
decision-making experiments that found that lower and higher level participants
contributed more equally in e-mail discussions than in face-to-face discussions
(Chidambaram, 1996). Since these laboratory studies relied heavily on the use of ad hoc
groups of students, their results may not be generalizable to ongoing manager-employee
relationships dealing with real issues (Spears and Lea, 1992).

Others argue that, in contrast to the foregoing no effects and status leveling
perspectives, the introduction of new communications media are associated with
intensified status differences. According to this perspective, managers are expected to
appropriate CMC in a manner that increases their oversight and control of remote
operations, thus enabling them to makes decisions that may have previously been
made by employees (Malone, 1997). Because CMC permits increased centralization of
information and control by managers over distant sites, its introduction may erode
employees’ relative status level. Consistent with this perspective, field research
indicates that CMC participants draw on social contexts and norms in deciding how to
communicate (DeSanctis and Monge, 1999), and, over time, occupational roles become
even more salient in determining communication patterns (Saunders et al., 1994).

Affordances of communication media
Hutchby (2001) and Boudreau and Robey (2005) bridge the constructivism-determinism
gap using the notion of affordances. Gibson (1979) coined the term “affordances” as a
way of explaining “how people and other animals orient to the objects in their world in
terms of the possibilities that objects afford for action” (Zammuto et al., 2007, p. 752).
Thus, each communications medium has features or characteristics associated with it
(Walther, 2012), and individuals appropriate a medium based on what it affords or
permits them to do. Organizational researchers have employed this concept as a means
of understanding the effects of information and communication technologies (Conole
and Dyke, 2004), social media (Treem and Leonardi, 2012) and flexible technologies
(Leonardi, 2011) on social arrangements. Consistent with this perspective, our study
explicitly examines the affordances associated with the various media, which is in
contrast to constructivist and deterministic approaches that look at changes in
communications media without giving much consideration to the qualities of the media
themselves. Thus, unlike constructivism and determinism:

[…] technology is enacted from an evolving human agency, but it may also constrain that
agency. […] Although IT [information technology] and organization features may exist
independently of each other, their value for explaining organizational form and function
comes from how they are enacted together (Zammuto et al., 2007, p. 753).

We propose that the status dynamics evident in hierarchical communications are
informed by what a communication medium allows. The following discussion
considers the affordances of various communication media in relation to six attributes:
communications frequency; feedback immediacy; message length; information seeking;
idea generation; and socio-emotional expression.

911

Communicating
virtually

Frequency of communications
Relative to letters and faxes, e-mail allows people to communicate more frequently
and more easily at less cost (Fulk and DeSanctis, 1999; Louhiala-Salminen, 1995).
An increase in the frequency of employee initiated communication (i.e. an increase
in the number of messages) has been associated with increased decentralization
(Harrison, 1985) and trust ( Jarvenpaa and Leidner, 1999). Frequent shared
communication amplifies the quality of the relationship and denotes active
participation and an increased sense of control as well as a more open flow of
information (Yum and Hara, 2005). However, higher status individuals tend to
initiate more communications and participate more frequently than lower status
members, regardless of the communication medium used (Bonito and Hollingshead,
1997; Weisband et al., 1995). Whereas status leveling would be evidenced by no
hierarchical differences in communications frequency, intensified status differences
would be demonstrated by more frequent managerial communications. The latter
may increase managers’ knowledge of distant operations and, as such, provide them
with more opportunities for involvement and control in these operations (Straub and
Wetherbe, 1989).

Feedback immediacy
Feedback immediacy refers to how quickly one person responds to a communication
received from another person. Of the three media in our study, letters are likely to
offer the lowest feedback immediacy. Although faxes may be transmitted reasonably
quickly, because fax machines are typically not located in individual offices, faxes often
take longer than e-mail to reach their addressee. In contrast, empirical studies have
demonstrated the near instantaneous feedback potential of e-mail (Lucas, 1998). In sum,
we expect feedback immediacy to be higher (faster) for e-mail compared with letters
and faxes. However, given that e-mail permits relatively immediate feedback, it is also
associated with an increased expectation of responsiveness (Slembrouck, 1998). Delays
in responding to others’ communications may suggest that an individual is otherwise
occupied or that the communication is not considered to be urgent or important. It is
possible that higher status individuals may be less responsive to communications
initiated by lower status individuals (and vice versa). When two parties are of relatively
equal status, the responsiveness to each other’s communications is not likely to
differ significantly.

Message length
Faxes tend to be more succinct than written letters. The relatively high transaction cost
of transmitting facsimiles constrains their length, the frequency with which they are
sent and the ability to include lengthy informational documents (Louhiala-Salminen,
1995). Fax communications are likely to invoke Grice’s et al. (1975) maxim of
communicative efficiency which favors brevity, with little attention paid to social
niceties or explaining decisions or requests. However, the added cost of using fax vs
letters may imply that whatever is being communicated by fax is more urgent
(Thornton, 1993). E-mails tend to be significantly briefer than letters (Bertacco, 2007;
Slembrouck, 1998). Since longer messages may be attempts to influence the receiver
and engage in sense-making or sense-giving (Vuori, 2011), they would be expected from
higher status individuals. Communications between two parties who are of relatively
equal status would more likely be of equivalent length.

912

JMP
30,8

Information seeking
Due to their ease of access, savings in time and money, the opportunity to consult
multiple experts simultaneously, and benefits related to asynchronous channels
(Savolainen, 1999), information seeking behavior is likely to be more frequent in e-mails
than in faxes or letters. Such behavior is often at the heart of arguments for CMC’s
potential for either status leveling or increased managerial oversight of local
operations. CMC can provide geographically dispersed employees with the global
information they need to make decisions and do so fairly rapidly (Fulk and DeSanctis,
1999). However, it can also facilitate the centralization of decision making: it can “make
distance less important in determining where decisions should be made by bringing
information to decision makers wherever they are” (Malone, 1997, p. 28). While status
leveling would be signaled by relatively equal levels of information seeking by
employees and managers, higher levels information seeking by managers indicate that
they may be involving themselves more frequently in local operations.

Idea generation
Information seeking and idea generation represent proactive task management and
involvement. Although the idea generation potential of letters has not been considered
in past research, numerous group support systems studies have reported that
electronic brainstorming is more effective in generating ideas than is face-to-face
brainstorming (Baruah and Paulus, 2009). Thus, we anticipate that idea generation will
be higher for e-mails relative to faxes and letters. Whereas mutual sharing of ideas at
relatively equivalent levels indicates status leveling, relatively higher levels of idea
generation by managers may be attempts to shape local operations.

Socio-emotional expression
An important attribute of relationships and the communication media used to
establish and maintain those relationships is the capacity to communicate emotions
(Walther et al., 2010). This study examined primarily socio-emotional content; i.e., the
sharing of basic personal and emotional issues. Research has linked a shift from
synchronous to asynchronous communications with reduced socio-emotional content
(Sarbaugh-Thompson and Feldman, 1998), which may have important consequences
for relationship building and perspective taking. In contrast to faxes, which tend to be
concise and task-oriented, letters and e-mails permit more socio-emotional content to be
communicated. Relative to letters, e-mails tend to be less formal, more conversation-like,
and they contain more humor, topic shifts and tangential asides (Slembrouck, 1998).
Socio-emotional expression, combined with responsiveness, signal relationship
building (Yum and Hara, 2005). However, managers are less likely than lower status
employees to send socio-emotional content in e-mails (Ku, 1996). Given the foregoing,
status leveling is indicated by relatively equivalent levels socio-emotional expression.
Reductions in socio-emotional expression signal increased psychological distance and
reduced social presence (Golden, 2000); i.e., the outcome of intensified status differences.

Based on the foregoing discussion, we present the following hypothesis:

H1. There are significant interaction effects between communication media and
hierarchical level on communication attributes.

H1 posits that the introduction of CMC will be associated with specific communication
attributes, and that their association depends on the hierarchical level of the communicator.

913

Communicating
virtually

Intensified status differences are indicated by: increasing volume and length of
communications from managers, lower managerial responsiveness to employee messages,
increased information seeking and idea generation by managers and less socio-emotional
expression in communications from managers.

Methods
Study context
The Mennonite Central Committee (MCC) is the cooperative relief, service and
development agency of the Mennonite and Brethren churches in North America.
It seeks to build mutually transformative relationships, peace, justice and the dignity of
all people by sharing critical resources with those in need. MCC espouses a
consultative, “listen and learn” approach to dealing with clients and seeks to carry out
its mission in a “participatory, transforming process leading to greater dignity and
self-reliance, greater vision and possibility, greater community and interdependence”
(Mennonite Central Committee, 1999). With field operatives in 63 countries, typically
with minimal financial, social or other support locally, senior managers recognize the
importance of maintaining close communication ties with their distant staff. To keep
expenses low, most communications between field employees and their North
American managers are in written form. On average, they have a face-to-face meeting
once per year. Until the early 1990s, MCC relied almost entirely on the postal system or
couriers to deliver letters between its North American managers and its field
employees. Letters could take weeks to arrive at their destination. Telephone was
rarely used because of its high cost and logistical difficulties related to time zone
differences. Reliance on postal communication declined with the introduction of
facsimile technology and, later, the adoption of electronic mail. Today, headquarters
(HQ) and field employees communicate almost exclusively via e-mail.

The specific research site for the present study is MCC’s Burkino Faso operation.
During this study, MCC employed a Country Manager, approximately ten expatriate
volunteers and 25 local staff in Burkina Faso. Burkina Faso was selected as the research
site given its economic and political stability relative to other countries in which MCC
operates. During a crisis, communications become more frequent (Danowski and
Edison-Swift, 1985). Also, high levels of uncertainty affect managerial behaviors such as
assertiveness and information search (Hannaway, 1985). Thus, CMC’s introduction was
“relatively uncontaminated by other forms of social intervention” (Gutek et al., 1984, p. 235).

Data collection
Through MCC’s archives, we accessed the complete set of written communications
(n ¼ 1,198) across several media between the HQ manager and the field employee
located in Burkina Faso over a ten year period. A total of 32.4 percent of these messages
were sent by postal mail or courier, 34.4 percent by facsimile and 33.2 percent by e-mail
(see Table I). Two shifts in media usage occurred. First, when facsimile technology was
introduced, the growth in fax usage was accompanied by a decline in letters sent. The
second shift began when e-mail usage became predominant. By Year 9, letter and fax
communications had dropped off completely.

Measures
Feedback immediacy. Feedback immediacy for each document was calculated as the
elapsed number of days since the date of the most recent message sent from the

914

JMP
30,8

remote location. For example, consider four messages beginning with Message no. 87,
sent from the field employee to the HQ manager on June 1st:

• Message no. 88, HQ→field, June 11 ¼ 10 days since last message from field.
• Message no. 89, field→ HQ, June 14 ¼ 3 days since last message from HQ.
• Message no. 90, HQ→field, June 18 ¼ 7 days since last message from field.

Message length. The total number of words for each document was calculated using
Microsoft Word’s word count feature.

Information seeking. We performed a detailed examination of the messages to identify
requests for information. We included requests for specific information (e.g. “We’re
beginning to feel concerned about the Hounde/Bombi placement, and because of that
delay, we’re antsy about this year’s, I guess. Any hopeful news?”), rather than requests
that were routine or social in nature (e.g. “How are you?”).

Idea generation. We examined the messages to determine the extent to which
individuals generated new ideas. We included discussions that specifically addressed
program-related issues or the strategic direction of MCC’s work in Burkina Faso
(e.g. “It seems to me that MCC might wish to establish a longer term food assistance
program agreement with FEME. Such an agreement would first of all enable FEME to
not only count on MCC’s commitment, but also plan and strategize more effectively.
Further, if MCC would do a three-or five-year commitment, then we would on an annual
basis build this commitment into our total picture […]”). We ignored ideas generated
about mundane things (e.g. travel arrangements or other day-to-day matters).

Socio-emotional expression. We analyzed messages for communication of a clearly
social nature. We did not code any salutations, greetings or casual references to the
weather. Rather, we included multi-sentence discourse that was not work-related
such as lengthy discussions of personal health, spiritual concerns or family matters
(e.g. “I write to you from the village of Zam, where I have been staying for the past
few days and will be staying for several weeks to come. The day of a Burkinabe
villager revolves around the very basics of life, and I imagine that its activity is much
the same as it was one hundred or one thousand years ago. Yet amidst the mud huts,
the bare women, the termite hills, the roaming goats, the nasal language, I forget that
I am in Africa. It ceases to be the mysterious, romantic far-away land that it once was
in my mind”).

Year Letter (n ¼ 388) Fax (n ¼ 412) E-mail (n ¼ 398) Total (n ¼ 1198)
Field HQ Field HQ Field HQ Field HQ Total

1 58 43 5 4 0 0 63 47 110
2 49 43 19 30 0 0 68 73 141
3 24 12 32 44 0 0 56 56 112
4 21 19 35 55 2 0 58 74 132
5 16 10 21 48 8 0 45 58 103
6 26 16 37 30 2 2 65 48 113
7 18 14 32 19 14 25 64 58 122
8 11 3 0 0 16 44 27 47 74
9 2 1 1 0 28 123 31 124 155
10 0 1 0 0 33 101 34 102 136
Total 226 162 182 230 103 295 511 687 1198

Table I.
Number of

documents sent
using each

communication
medium

915

Communicating
virtually

Organizational level. Messages were coded as originating from either the field employee
or the HQ manager.

Experience with medium. We used experience with a medium as a control
variable given that communication attributes may change over time as individuals
become more familiar with a medium (Carlson and Zmud, 1999). To operationalize
this variable, we first numbered each message chronologically for each medium.
For example, the first letter sent in Year 1 was coded no. 1, the second no. 2 and so on
until the last one in Year 10, no. 388. The first fax sent in Year 1 was no. 1, and the last
fax sent in Year 9 was no. 412. The first e-mail sent in Year 4 was no. 1, and the final
one in Year 10 was no. 398. In other words, experience for each message was
calculated simply as the number of prior messages sent using the same medium. We
then split the data set into three groups based on the median prior experience score
(low prior experience; n ¼ 299, medium prior experience; n ¼ 598, high prior
experience; n ¼ 300).

Results
Preliminary analyses
Table II presents the overall means and correlations for the study variables. Table III
presents the mean scores for the communication attributes per communication medium
for managers and employees. As indicated in Table III, facsimiles appear to serve as an
approximate midpoint for half of the communication attributes (five of ten), as the
transition from letter-to-fax-to-e-mail unfolded. With the introduction of e-mail,
feedback immediacy lengthened for managers (from 6.1 to 15.6 days) and shortened for
field employees (from 7.8 to 4.3 days). Similarly, whereas message length doubled for

Variable M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

1. Feedback immediacy 8.52 13.35 –
2. Message length 584.98 940.11 0.08* –
3. Information seeking 1.40 2.28 −0.05* 0.05* –
4. Idea generation 0.10 0.30 −0.05* 0.10* 0.16** –
5. Socio. expression 0.19 0.54 0.02 0.14** 0.01 0.00 –
6. Medium – – 0.17** −0.02 0.07* −0.03 −0.15** –
7. Experience – – 0.20** 0.13** −0.03 −0.04 0.11** 0.10** –
8. Level – – 0.14** −0.13** −0.23** −0.10** −0.15** 0.27** 0.14**
Notes: **p ⩽ 0.01; *p ⩽ 0.05

Table II.
Descriptive statistics
and correlations
between study
variables

HQ managers Field employees
Letter Fax E-mail Letter Fax E-mail

Variable M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD

Feedback
immed. 6.11 7.48 5.87 7.96 15.66 21.25 7.84 9.74 5.69 7.83 4.31 5.94
Length 305.54 347.38 348.26 310.10 681.67 1178.28 960.20 1460.45 563.69 461.14 492.15 545.82
Information
seeking 0.42 0.92 1.53 1.47 0.79 1.25 0.90 2.10 3.48 3.67 1.91 2.38
Idea generation 0.09 0.35 0.10 0.34 0.11 0.40 0.20 0.53 0.17 0.48 0.18 0.54
Socio-emot. exp. 0.09 0.39 0.17 0.47 0.10 0.41 0.45 0.80 0.16 0.49 0.09 0.35

Table III.
Mean scores per
communication
medium

916

JMP
30,8

managers (from 305 to 681 words), it dropped by approximately 50 percent for field
employees (from 960 to 492 words). Also, information seeking doubled for both
managers (from 0.42 to 0.79 incidents) and field employees (from 0.90 to 1.91 incidents).
Although there were no significant changes in levels of idea generation with the
introduction of e-mail for either managers (from 0.09 to 0.11) or field employees (from
0.20 to 0.18), the latter consistently generated more ideas that the former. Finally,
although there were no significant differences in socio-emotional expression with the
introduction of e-mail for managers (from 0.09 to 0.10), levels of this attribute dropped
significantly for field employees (from 0.45 to 0.09).

We performed a χ2 test of goodness-of-fit to determine whether managers and
employees used the three media to the same extent. Relative to employees, managers
sent significantly fewer letters ( χ2 ¼ 84.75, p ⩽ 0.05) and significantly more faxes
( χ2 ¼ 86.86, p ⩽ 0.05) and e-mails ( χ2 ¼ 84.18, p ⩽ 0.05). Indeed, managers sent almost
three times more e-mails than did employees.

Hypothesis testing
The hypothesis concerned the presence of interaction effects between communication
media and hierarchical level on communication attributes. It was tested with a 2 × 3
multivariate analysis of covariance (MANCOVA) in a sample of 1,193 documents.
Independent variables were hierarchical level (managers, employees) and
communication media (letters, faxes, e-mails). Experience level was the covariate.
Dependent variables consisted of five communication attributes.

The overall MANCOVA revealed significant multivariate main effects for both
independent variables as well as for the covariate and a significant multivariate
effect for the interaction between communication medium and hierarchical level on
communication attributes (see Table IV). With one exception, univariate results
indicated significant main effects of both communication medium and hierarchical
level on all communication attributes. The main effects of communication
medium were such that: feedback immediacy was slower for e-mails than for
letters or faxes; the length of e-mails was not significantly different than that of
letters, but it was significantly greater than the length of faxes; and information
seeking in e-mails was significantly more frequent than in letters, but significantly
less frequent than in faxes. The frequency of idea generation did not vary
significantly depending on the medium being used. Finally, the frequency of
socio-emotional expression in e-mails was not significantly different from faxes, but it
was significantly lower than in letters. The main effects of hierarchical levels were
such that feedback immediacy was lower for managers than for employees; message
length was greater for employees than for managers; and instances of information
seeking, idea generation and socio-emotional expression were more frequent for
employees than for managers.

Significant interactions were found for all DVs except idea generation. When e-mails
are used as the communication medium, managers’ feedback immediacy drops and
their message length increases, while employees’ message length drops significantly,
and information seeking and socio-emotional expression drop significantly for both
parties. Idea generation is not predicted by type of medium and hierarchical level
when experience level is controlled. Thus, the hypothesis was supported (except for
idea generation), and the results reveal the presence of intensified status differences.
Relative to employees, managers sent more e-mails, were slower in responding to
e-mails, sent longer e-mails, asked fewer questions, proposed more ideas, and did less

917

Communicating
virtually

M
ul
ti
va
ri
at
e
re
su
lt
s

U
ni
va
ri
at
e
re
su
lt
s

V
ar
ia
bl
e

F
df

(b
et
w
ee
n,
w
it
hi
n)

p
Z2 p

D
ep
en
de
nt

va
ri
ab
le

F
df
(b
et
w
ee
n,
w
it
hi
n)
p
Z2 p

H
ie
ra
rc
hi
ca
l
le
ve
l

22
.7
8

(6
,1
18
4)

<

0.
00

1

0.
10

F
ee
db

ac
k
im

m
ed
ia
cy

(d
ay
s)

8.
82

(1
,1
18
9)

0.
00
3

0.
01

L
en
gt
h
(w
or
ds
/d
oc
)

23
.0
9

(1
,1
18
9)

<

0.
00
1

0.
02

In
fo
rm

at
io
n
se
ek
in
g

92
.3
9

(1
,1
18
9)

< 0. 00 1

0.
07

Id
ea

ge
ne
ra
ti
on

8.
46

1,
11
89
)

0.
00
4

0.
01

So
ci
o-
em

ot
io
na
l
ex
pr
es
si
on

17
.8
9

(1
,1
18
9)

0.
00
0

0.
02

C
om

m
un

ic
at
io
n

m
ed
iu
m

19
.0
2

(1
2,
23
68
)

< 0. 00 1

0.
09

F
ee
db
ac
k
im
m
ed
ia
cy
(d
ay
s)

10
.5
5

(2
,1
18
9)

< 0. 00 1 0. 02 L en gt h (w or ds /d oc )

4.
38

(2
,1
18
9)
0.
01
0.
01
In
fo
rm
at
io
n
se
ek
in
g

78
.5
5

(2
,1
18
9)
< 0. 00 1

0.
11

Id
ea
ge
ne
ra
ti
on

0.
17

(2
,1
18
9)

0.
85

0.
00
So
ci
o-
em
ot
io
na
l
ex
pr
es
si
on

10
.1
8

(2
,1
18
9)
< 0. 00 1 0. 02

E
xp

er
ie
nc
e

11
.0
1

(6
,1
18
4)
< 0. 00 1

0.
05

F
ee
db
ac
k
im
m
ed
ia
cy
(d
ay
s)

33
.8
2

(1
,1
19
5)

< 0. 00 1

0.
03

L
en
gt
h
(w
or
ds
/d
oc
)

15
.3
8

(1
,1
19
5)
< 0. 00 1 0. 01 In fo rm at io n se ek in g

3.
84

(1
,1
19
5)
0.
05
0.
00
Id
ea
ge
ne
ra
ti
on

1.
54

(1
,1
19
5)

0.
21

0.
00
So
ci
o-
em
ot
io
na
l
ex
pr
es
si
on

10
.2
8

(1
,1
19
5)
0.
00
1
0.
01

H
ie
ra
rc
hi
ca
l
le
ve
l×

C
om
m
un
ic
at
io
n
m
ed
iu
m

7.
91

(1
2,
23
68
)
< 0. 00 1

0.
04

F
ee
db
ac
k
im
m
ed
ia
cy
(d
ay
s)

12
.4
2

(2
,1
19
5)

< 0. 00 1 0. 02 L en gt h (w or ds /d oc )

9.
36

(2
,1
19
5)
< 0. 00 1 0. 02 In fo rm at io n se ek in g

13
.7
9

(2
,1
19
5)
< 0. 00 1 0. 02 Id ea ge ne ra ti on

0.
55

(2
,1
19
5)

0.
58

0.
00
So
ci
o-
em
ot
io
na
l
ex
pr
es
si
on

10
.1
2

(2
,1
19
5)
< 0. 00 1 0. 02

Table IV.
MANCOVA results
of the interaction
of hierarchical
level and
communication
medium controlling
for experience
on communication
richness

918

JMP
30,8

relationship building via socio-emotional expression. For their part, relative to
managers, employees sent fewer e-mails, were more responsive to e-mails, sent
shorter e-mails, asked fewer questions, proposed more ideas, and shared less
personal information.

Discussion
This study responds to Walther’s (2012) call for research that compares how individuals
use CMC and other forms of communication and that considers the relationship between
various affordances and status differences within an organization. The results suggest
that there are significant interaction effects between communication media and
hierarchical level on communication attributes; in other words, the introduction of CMC
was associated with intensified status differences. Thus, pre-existing communication and
status patterns were not simply preserved, nor did they simply evolve with gradual
changes (Poole and DeSanctis, 1992; Yates et al., 1999). Rather, significant variations in
the nature of manager-employee communications occurred. Although some aspects of
their communications were reproduced (idea generation levels, e.g.), changes in medium
were associated with changes in the communications that occurred depending on who
was doing the communicating.

Our study suggests that the use of communications media by managers and
employees can serve as an important occasion for changing communication processes
and, potentially, organizational outcomes (Sherblom, 1988). Even in an organization
that seeks to be egalitarian such as MCC, the introduction of new communications
media seemed to be associated with less egalitarian hierarchical relationships. Is this
something inherent in e-mail? Does its immediacy without “face” serve to undermine
egalitarianism?

Like many organizations, MCC was attracted to the promises of e-mail such as the
capability to instantaneously send and receive messages, frequently stay in touch with
remote personnel and easily share or broadcast information with multiple parties, all at
a low cost. And yet, senior managers shared with the researchers some concerns about
the communications media transition. For example, prior to e-mail, field employees
would make significant decisions autonomously (e.g. purchasing a $5,000 jeep from
their budget). The advent of e-mail, however, presented an opportunity to defer
decisions to managers, who in turn may be enticed and, perhaps, provoked to
micro-manage. As one manager put it, “E-mail is driving $100 decisions to the top.”
He explained that, in the days of postal communications, managers had more time for
reflective, strategic thinking, time to focus their attention on the oversized world maps
lining their walls and to consider how to best allocate MCC resources to meet the needs
of suffering people.

Limitations and implications for future research
This study overcame a longstanding obstacle in CMC effects research: the lack of
access to a complete set of employee/manager communications. Also, since the data
were collected from a single organization, any potential variations due to an
organization’s way of functioning were held constant (Barley, 1995). Finally, this
setting served as a critical test of existing theory (Yin, 1989) given that MCC’s
egalitarian culture is such that status dynamics were particularly unlikely to be found.

Although conducting research in a single organization offers the noted advantage,
it also requires that the results be interpreted in light of this context. The extent to
which the study’s results generalize to other settings is an empirical question that can

919

Communicating
virtually

only be determined in additional research. Examining CMC’s introduction in other
global organizations would permit researchers to determine if the results were unique
to the research setting or whether they can be replicated in more traditionally
structured, hierarchical organizations in other sectors of the economy. It is possible that
this study’s findings were an artifact of a regression toward the mean: MCC is relatively
egalitarian, and a new technology prompted communication patterns that were more
hierarchical. Perhaps, in hierarchical organizations, the introduction of CMC would be
associated with a move toward more egalitarian communications.

It would also be interesting to examine the nature of the communication patterns
and status differences that may be associated with the next wave of communications
media, such as video conferencing technologies like Skype. As these technologies
become more dependable and useful in international communication, and as
environmentally and/or cost-conscious organizations become more hesitant to burn
fossil fuels for international travel, it is possible that video conferencing will become
more popular. If so, will the greater emphasis on “face” that such technology affords be
associated with status leveling, intensification, or not have an effect?

Practical implications
This study has several implications for the effective management of new CMC. What
would have happened if managers in this study had used new communication media
with a more deliberate consideration of its implications for their organization’s culture
(Becerra and Gupta, 2003)? Perhaps the managers would have consciously reduced
message volume and length or ensured that they were being responsive to employees’
messages, and so on. Research suggests that managers tend to use communication
media frequently and repetitively in an overlearned manner, thus without deliberately
thinking through their implications of communication and status patterns
(Timmerman, 2002). Just as fish may be unaware of the water in which they swim,
communicators become oblivious to the underlying meaning of how their
communications are structured. Thus, managers must become conscious of what
they want to accomplish when they are communicating, set precedents early on to
ensure that their goals are met, and be more mindful of the ways in work context may
influence the use of technology (Swanson and Ramiller, 2004). As found by O’Kane et al.
(2007), although the introduction of e-mail has the potential to increase innovation
through idea generation (Damanpour, 1991), information sharing, collaboration and
participation in decision-making (Simonin, 1997) and to increase manager-employee
connections, unless its use is consciously managed, there is a risk that it will serve
primarily for information transfer and its negative aspects (such as information
overload and time wasting; Hiltz and Turoff, 1985) will emerge.

Managers should not automatically expect the introduction of CMC to deterministically
enrich or enhance communication patterns. As suggested by Ngwenyama and Lee (1997),
a medium’s richness or affordances are not inherent qualities, but, rather, occur as a result
of the interaction between the medium and its organizational context. It is not that e-mail
is incapable of engendering status leveling, for example, but simply that harnessing those
capabilities can be demanding and time-consuming.

Finally, this study reinforces the practical observation that socialization and
relationship building must be continuous in a virtual organization. Organizations
cannot simply rely on irregular face-to-face meetings to socialize employees about
organizational norms and expectations for performance and collaboration (Oshri et al.,
2007). Although task-oriented communication is especially important at the beginning

920

JMP
30,8

of a collaboration, social-oriented exchanges become even more important as a means
of maintaining trust, satisfaction and sense of belonging over time (Flammia et al., 2010;
Rico et al., 2009; Zornoza et al., 2009). In summary, although Handy (1995) believed that
touch was essential for trust, virtual organizations must strive to develop trust without
touch (Zheng et al., 2002).

Acknowledgments
Funding for this research was received from the Centre for International Business
Studies and the I.H. Asper School of Business at the University of Manitoba, and the
Richard Ivey School of Business at the University of Western Ontario. The authors also
wish to thank the Mennonite Central Committee for providing access to the data,
previous reviewers of this manuscript for their helpful feedback (Deborah Compeau,
Abhijit Gopal, and Sandy Staples), as well as Monique Grimard, Vern Klassen-Wiebe
and Brenda Doerksen for their outstanding research assistance.

References
Arrow, H. (1997), “Stability, bistability, and instability in small group influence patterns”, Journal

of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 72 No. 1, p. 75.

Barley, S.R. (1995), “Images of imaging: notes on doing longitudinal fieldwork”, in Huber, G.P.
and Van de Ven, A.H. (Eds), Longitudinal Field Research Methods, Sage, Thousand Oaks,
CA, pp. 1-37.

Baruah, J. and Paulus, P. (2009), “Enhancing group creativity: the search for synergy”, in Mannix, E.A.,
Neale, M.A. and Goncalo, J.A. (Eds), Creativity in Groups, Emerald, Bingley, pp. 29-56.

Becerra, M. and Gupta, A.K. (2003), “Perceived trustworthiness within the organization:
the moderating impact of communication frequency on trustor and trustee effects”,
Organization Science, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 32-44.

Beranek, P.M. and Martz, B. (2005), “Making virtual teams more effective: improving relational links”,
Team Performance Management: An International Journal, Vol. 11 Nos 5/6, pp. 200-213.

Bertacco, M. (2007), “Social norms and behavioral regulation in asynchronous communication:
the shift of attention during speed communication”, Human-Computer Interaction, Vol. 22
No. 3, pp. 299-324.

Bonito, J.A. and Hollingshead, A.B. (1997), “Participation in small groups”, in Burleson, B.R. (Ed.),
Communication Yearbook, Vol. 20, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 227-261.

Boudreau, M.-C. and Robey, D. (2005), “Enacting integrated information technology: a human
agency perspective”, Organization Science, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 3-18.

Bryant, A. (1988), “The information society: computopia, dytopia, myopia”, Prometheus, Vol. 6
No. 1, pp. 61-77.

Carlson, J.R. and Zmud, R.W. (1999), “Channel expansion theory and the experiential nature of
media richness perceptions”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 42 No. 2, pp. 153-170.

Chidambaram, L. (1996), “Relational development in computer-supported groups”, MIS
Quarterly, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 143-159.

Conole, G. and Dyke, M. (2004), “What are the affordances of information and communication
technologies?”, Association for Learning Technology Journal, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 113-124.

Damanpour, F. (1991), “Organizational innovation: a meta-analysis of effects of determinants and
moderators”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 34 No. 3, pp. 555-590.

Danowski, J.A. and Edison-Swift, P. (1985), “Crisis effects on intraorganizational computer-based
communication”, Communication Research, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 251-270.

921

Communicating
virtually

DeRosa, D., Smith, C. and Hantula, D. (2007), “The medium matters: mining the long-promised
merit of group interaction in creative idea generation tasks in a meta-analysis of the
electronic group brainstorming literature”, Computer Human Behavior, Vol. 23 No. 3,
pp. 1549-1581.

DeSanctis, G. and Monge, P. (1999), “Introduction to the special issue: communication processes
for virtual organizations”, Organization Science, Vol. 10 No. 6, pp. 693-703.

Ducheneaut, N.B. (2002), “The social impacts of electronic mail in organizations: a case study of
electronic power games using communication genres”, Information, Communication &
Society, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 153-188.

Fairhurst, G.T., Rogers, L.E. and Sarr, R.A. (1987), “Manager-subordinate control patterns and
judgments about the relationship”, Communication Yearbook, Vol. 10, pp. 395-415.

Fiol, C.M. and O’Conner, E.J. (2005), “Identification in face‐to‐face, hybrid, and pure virtual teams:
untangling the contradictions”, Organization Science, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 19-32.

Flammia, M., Cleary, Y. and Slattery, D.M. (2010), “Leadership roles, socioemotional
communication strategies, and technology use of Irish and US students in virtual
teams”, Professional Communication, IEEE Transactions, Vol. 53 No. 2, pp. 89-101.

Fulk, J. and DeSanctis, G. (1999), “Articulation of communication technology and organizational
form”, in DeSanctis, G. and Fulk, J. (Eds), Shaping Organization Form: Communication,
Connection, and Community, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 5-32.

Gibson, J.J. (1979), The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception, Houghton Mifflin, Boston, MA.

Golden, T.D. (2000), “Virtual impressions: the presentation of self in electronic mail”, presented at
the Annual meeting of the Academy of Management, Toronto, August 7.

Grice, H.P., Cole, P. and Morgan, J.L. (1975), “Syntax and semantics”, Logic and Conversation,
Vol. 3, pp. 41-58.

Gutek, B.A., Bikson, T.K. and Mankin, D. (1984), “Individual and organizational consequences of
computer-based office-information technology”, Applied Social Psychology Annual, Vol. 5,
pp. 231-254.

Handy, C. (1995), “Trust and virtual organization: how do you manage people whom you do not
see”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 73 No. 3, pp. 40-50.

Hannaway, J. (1985), “Managerial behavior, uncertainty and hierarchy: a prelude to a synthesis”,
Human Relations, Vol. 38 No. 11, pp. 1085-1100.

Harrison, T.M. (1985), “Communication and participative decision making: an exploratory study”,
Personnel Psychology, Vol. 38 No. 1, pp. 93-116.

Hiltz, S.R. and Turoff, M. (1985), “Structuring computer-mediated communication systems to
avoid information overload”, Communications of the ACM, Vol. 28 No. 7, pp. 680-689.

Hutchby, I. (2001), “Technologies, texts and affordances”, Sociology, Vol. 35 No. 2, pp. 441-456.

Ku, L. (1996), “Social and nonsocial uses of electronic messaging systems in organizations”,
Journal of Business Communication, Vol. 33 No. 3, pp. 297-325.

Jarvenpaa, S. and Leidner, D.E. (1999), “Communication and trust in global virtual teams”,
Organization Science, Vol. 10 No. 6, pp. 791-815.

Lemke, J.L. (1999), “Discourse and organizational dynamics: website communication and
institutional change”, Discourse and Society, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 21-47.

Leonardi, P.M. (2011), “When flexible routines meet flexible technologies: affordance, constraint,
and the imbrication of human and material agencies”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 35 No. 1,
pp. 147-167.

Louhiala-Salminen, L. (1995), “Drop me a fax, will you? A study of written business communication”,
Reports No. 10 from the Department of English, University of Jyvaskyla, Jyvaskyla.

922

JMP
30,8

Lucas, W. (1998), “Effects of e-mail on the organization”, European Management Journal, Vol. 16
No. 1, pp. 18-30.

Malone, T.W. (1997), “Is ‘empowerment’ just a fad? Control, decision-making, and information
technology”, Sloan Management Review, Vol. 38 No. 2, pp. 23-35.

Mennonite Central Committee (1999), Principles that Guide Our Mission, Mennonite Central
Committee, Akron, PA.

Monge, P. and Fulk, J. (1999), “Communication technology for global network organizations”,
in DeSanctis, G. and Fulk, J. (Eds), Shaping Organization Form: Communication,
Connection, and Community, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 71-100.

Ngwenyama, O.K. and Lee, A.S. (1997), “Communication richness in electronic mail: critical social
theory and the contextuality of meaning”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 145-167.

O’Kane, P., Palmer, M. and Hargie, O. (2007), “Workplace interactions and the polymorphic role of
e-mail”, Leadership and Organization Development Journal, Vol. 28 No. 4, pp. 308-324.

Oshri, I., Kotlarsky, J. and Willcocks, L.P. (2007), “Global software development: exploring
socialization and face-to-face meetings in distributed strategic projects”, Journal of
Strategic Information Systems, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 25-49.

Poole, M.S. (1999), “Organizational challenges for the new forms”, in DeSanctis, G. and Fulk, J.
(Eds), Shaping Organization Form: Communication, Connection, and Community,
Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 452-471.

Poole, M.S. and DeSanctis, G. (1992), “Microlevel structuration in computer-supported group
decision making”, Human Communication Research, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 5-49.

Rico, R., Alcover, C.M., Sanchez-Manzanares, M. and Gil, F. (2009), “The joint relationships of
communication behaviors and task interdependence on trust building and challenge in
virtual project teams”, Social Science Information, Vol. 48 No. 2, pp. 229-255.

Riemer, K., Vehring, N. and Klein, S. (2008), “Adoption of communication media in virtual
organisations: case evidence of structural dilemmas”, presented at the 16th European
Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), Galway.

Sarbaugh-Thompson, M. and Feldman, M.S. (1998), “Electronic mail and organizational
communication: does saying ‘hi’ really matter?”, Organization Science, Vol. 9 No. 6, pp. 685-698.

Saunders, C.S., Robey, D. and Vaverek, K.A. (1994), “The persistence of status differentials in
computer conferencing”, Human Communication Research, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 443-472.

Savolainen, R. (1999), “The role of the internet in information seeking: putting the networked
services in context”, Information Processing and Management, Vol. 35 No. 9, pp. 765-782.

Sherblom, J. (1988), “Direction, function, and signature in electronic mail”, Journal of Business
Communication, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 39-54.

Simonin, B.L. (1997), “The importance of collaborative know-how: an empirical test of the
learning organization”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 40 No. 5, pp. 1150-1174.

Slembrouck, S. (1998), Multi-Media and the Internet – A Project for Discourse Analysis, available at:
http://bank.rug.ac.be/da/mmda.htm (accessed July 12, 2006).

Spears, R. and Lea, M. (1992), “Social influence and the influence of the social in computer-mediate
communication”, in Lea, M. (Ed.), Contexts of Computer-Mediated Communication,
Harvester Wheatsheaf, New York, NY, pp. 30-65.

Straub, D.W. Jr and Wetherbe, J.C. (1989), “Information technologies for the 1990s: an
organizational impact perspective”, Communications of the ACM, Vol. 32 No. 11,
pp. 1328-1339.

Swanson, E.B. and Ramiller, N.C. (2004), “Innovating mindfully with information technology”,
MIS Quarterly, Vol. 28 No. 4, pp. 553-583.

923

Communicating
virtually

Tan, B.C.Y., Wei, K.-K., Watson, R.T. and Walczuch, R.M. (1998), “Reducing status effects with
computer-mediated communication: evidence from two distinct national cultures”, Journal
of Management Information Systems, Vol. 15, pp. 119-141.

Thornton, Z. (1993), “Skills and training: collecting by fax, telex and letter”, Credit Control,
Vol. 14, p. 15.

Timmerman, C.E. (2002), “The moderating effect of mindlessness/mindfulness upon media
richness and social influence explanations of organizational media use”, Communication
Monographs, Vol. 69 No. 2, pp. 111-131.

Treem, J.W. and Leonardi, P.M. (2012), “Social media use in organizations: exploring the
affordances of visibility, editability, persistence, and association”, Communication
Yearbook, Vol. 36, pp. 143-189.

Vuori, T. (2011), “Strategic sense-giving at the micro-level: facilitating and triggering coordinated
action”, International Journal of Management Development, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 1-14.

Walther, J.B. (2012), “Affordances, effects, and technology errors”, Communication Yearbook,
Vol. 36 No. 36, pp. 190-193.

Walther, J.B., Carr, C.T., Choi, S.S.W., DeAndrea, D.C., Kim, J., Tong, S.T. and Van Der Heide, B.
(2010), “Interaction of interpersonal, peer, and media influence sources online”, A Networked
Self: Identity, Community, and Culture on Social Network Sites, Vol. 17, pp. 17-38.

Weisband, S.P., Schneider, S.K. and Connolly, T. (1995), “Computer-mediated communication and
social information: status salience and status differences”, Academy of Management
Journal, Vol. 38 No. 4, pp. 1124-1151.

Yates, J., Orlikowski, W.J. and Okamura, K. (1999), “Explicit and implicit structuring of genres in
electronic communication: reinforcement and change of social interaction”, Organization
Science, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 83-103.

Yin, R.K. (1989), Case Study Research: Design and Methods, Applied Social Research Methods
Series, revised edition, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.

Yum, Y.O. and Hara, K. (2005), “Computer‐mediated relationship development: a cross-cultural
comparison”, Journal of Computer‐Mediated Communication, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 133-152.

Zack, M.H. and McKenney, J.L. (1995), “Social context and interaction in ongoing computer-
supported management groups”, Organization Science, Vol. 6 No. 4, pp. 394-422.

Zammuto, R.F., Griffith, T.L., Majchrzak, A., Dougherty, D.J. and Faraj, S. (2007), “Information
technology and the changing fabric of organization”, Organization Science, Vol. 18 No. 5,
pp. 749-762.

Zheng, J., Veinott, E., Bos, N., Olson, J.S. and Olson, G.M. (2002), “Trust without touch:
jumpstarting long-distance trust with initial social activities”, Proceedings of the SIGCHI
Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ACM, pp. 141-146.

Zornoza, A., Orengo, V. and Penarroja, V. (2009), “Relational capital in virtual teams: the role
played by trust”, Social Science Information, Vol. 48 No. 2, pp. 257-281.

Corresponding author
Dr Céleste M. Brotheridge can be contacted at: celeste_brotheridge@yahoo.ca

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com

924
JMP
30,8

mailto:celeste_brotheridge@yahoo.ca

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without
permission.

Organizational meetings:
management and benefits

Vincent Bagire
Department of Business Administration, Business School,

Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda, and
Jolly Byarugaba and Janet Kyogabiirwe

Department of Human Resources Management, Business School,
Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda

Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine the management and benefits of meetings so as to
draw conclusions on their effectiveness in organizations given the increasing discontent about their set up.
Design/methodology/approach – The study was a cross-sectional survey, data were collected from
325 respondents in 22 service organizations in Kampala, using a questionnaire and participant observations;
the instrument was tested for reliability and analysis done using descriptive and statistical techniques.
Findings – The key finding was that policy regarding meetings and reasons for convening them
jointly account for 57 percent variations in the benefits organizations have. The way meetings are
conducted was found to have no significant effect, contrary to anecdotal evidences. The internal and
external contextual factors did not affect the effectiveness of meetings. In general meetings have
benefited organizations but the discontent on how they are managed is still high.
Research limitations/implications – The lack of analytical and local literature on the study
variables limited this study. There were also methodological challenges especially operationalization of
variables, sampling and choice of respondents.
Practical implications – The study underpins policy as a key factor for effectiveness of meetings; the
literature supported this account. For governance boards there is need to review policy on meetings; and
for managers, the paper emphasizes the need for improving how meetings are convened, conducted and
the follow up action. The study has provided rich ground for scholars; the authors have extended the
debate on meetings, brought into view an African context and made it possible for further studies.
Social implications – Meetings involve many people in the organization and affect entire operations.
There are critical personal factors that are pertinent in the outcome of meetings. The finding that
personal factors do not have a significant relationship with effectiveness of meetings should not be
applauded till further investigations and conceptualization is done in similar contexts. There are social
implications on if meetings are not managed well as the authors have established like time wastage,
employee motivation and poor management among others.
Originality/value – Many papers that the authors accessed on meetings were on organizational
experiences from western countries, the authors have made an original focus on Uganda and
underpinned the debate on management development in Africa. The authors have also examined and
provided an empirical basis for understanding effectiveness of meetings using key factors of policy,
preparation, conduct and contextual factors.
Keywords Africa, Decision making, Uganda, Management, Meetings, Pretended agreement
Paper type Research paper

Introduction
The scholarly debate on the management and effectiveness of organizational

meetings

has not been concluded yet. The extant literature provides majorly illustrative papers
on meetings as an organizational function based on observation of practices in different

Journal of Management
Development
Vol. 34 No. 8, 2015
pp. 960-

972

© Emerald Group Publishing Limited
0262-1711
DOI 10.1108/JMD-03-2014-0023

Received 10 March 2014
Revised 2 January 2015
Accepted 6 March 2015

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/0262-1711.htm

The authors acknowledge the support provided by the Faculty of Management at Makerere
University Business School.

960

JMD
34,8

organizations. Organizational meetings derive from policy as a tenet for effective
management. They provide a platform at which key decisions are made and the
strategic direction of organizations is determined. Meetings bring together managers to
plan, evaluate and share feedback. Management scholars in Africa have recently raised
concerns whether models from the west apply locally. Management is about unison of
action and through common goals, aggregation of resources to make them productive
in a defined system (Lituchy et al., 2013). Zoogah and Nkomo (2013) noted that the poor
research in Africa has undermined the region’s ability to develop management
models that are appropriate to the local contexts. This is emphasized by Kiggundu
(2013) that management knowledge is associated with powerful policy and practices;
for example tenets of Ubuntu in Africa like generosity, charisma, humanism,
hospitality, self-enrichment, motivational leadership, tolerance, consideration,
integration, persuasiveness, representation and role assumption can be used to
explain the management of organizations. However, inadequate research has been
advanced in Africa on management practices. With scanty empirical studies on the
management and effectiveness of meetings from the African context, we were
motivated to conduct this study to examine how meetings are convened, conducted and
benefits accruing based on Ugandan organizations.

The increasing tendency of regarding meetings as unproductive in Ugandan
organizations is a challenge for practitioners and scholars. Anecdotal evidences show
that key meetings are convened last minute and in response to urgently needed quick
fix decisions. From different organizations members across the management divide
continued to regard meetings as time wasters, reactive and rubber stamping for
decisions. The follow up of decisions derived at such meetings becomes a dilemma.
With such openly heard expressions, the meetings hardly achieve the purpose for
which they are provided in organizational policy. In this paper we present findings on
how meetings are managed, their effectiveness and the benefits in Ugandan
organizations. The investigation was guided by the research question that:

RQ1. How are meetings convened, conducted and what benefits accrue to
organizations?

Literature review
The discontent on meetings finds support in extant management literature (Nelson
and Economy, 1995). Meetings are a key tool in effective management and a
common organizational activity. Meetings provide a forum for decision making,
communication, motivation, interpersonal relationships and dispute settlement.
Meetings should be participatory and a reflection of teamwork in an organization.
However, to achieve these objectives, meetings should be effectively managed.
The process and conduct of meetings is a skill that derives into effective
management of the entire organization. Meetings remain the essential mechanism
through which organizations create and maintain the practical activity of organizing.
According to Boden (1994), meetings are the occasioned expression of management
in action.

There is a host of papers on meetings illustrating how they are managed and the
frustrations organizational members have (Linda, 2000; Yoon and Lazarus, 1993).
Meetings were defined by Denyer (1980) as an organized session of members for
purposes of consulting and deriving decisions. Karen (2004) described meetings as
the windows on the soul of business, which reveal the quality of its management.

961

Organizational
meetings

He categorized into formal meetings and informal meetings. Meetings are essential
but a costly function in organizations. In America, meetings consume 30-80 percent
of managers’ daily time. A Fortune 50 company reported a loss of $75 million due to
poorly managed meetings (Briggs and Vreede, 1997). In the Caribbean, executives
have in the past spent more time in meetings of which 35 percent was surveyed
to be unproductive (Sayed et al., 1997). Meetings today dominate the way in which
business is done.

For meetings to play their central role in management, the three stage process of
preparation, conduct and follow up are essential. A good preparation for a meeting may
be laid to waste if it is not conducted well. Greta (2006) emphasized that organizational
meetings should have consistent form and be structured. Meetings generate new ideas,
facilitate decision making, build teams, enhance socialization and provide a platform to
share visions (Briggs and Vreede, 1997). In management, organizational problems are
complex that no individual can go it alone and thus meetings garner acceptance and
are a group reality check point while building synergy. Meetings build commitment
and are an established platform for leaders to demonstrate their role and authority and
for all managers to show the cross-functional collaboration (Clark, 2004). Allen and
Rogelberg (2013) used Kahn’s theory to confirm that meetings promote employee
engagement.

Meetings should be prepared for, and literature provides a long check list. The first
important issue emphasized by many authors is purpose. If there is no purpose to meet,
no meeting should be called otherwise it will be a recipe for disaster that management
should avoid (Clark, 2004; Wiggins, 2008). When the purpose is clear, then
communication should be sent specifying the agenda, the date, duration and materials
needed. The technical staff should ensure that materials are prepared and distributed
as required; the room and requisite facilities should be in place and set by the time the
meeting starts (Riegger, 2008; Sayed et al., 1997; Kemp and Williams, 2013). Rick (2009)
contends that meeting places can be intimidating, thus distorting the good intention
for which the meeting was called. Gail (1995) illustrates how effective group meetings
can be achieved using the electronic brain storming system. Technology can improve
effectiveness and communication.

The success of any meeting depends on how it is conducted. Research shows that
the role of the chairperson is central. It is an administrative role to ensure that the
meeting achieves the objectives for which it was convened. The facilitator should allow
a free flow of ideas. Brandit (2006) posits that many new managers or those newly
promoted to positions that require them to chair high-level organizational meetings are
often worried wondering if they will be effective. In a survey of 238 facilitators of
meetings, Niederman and Volkema (1999), concluded that their characteristics such as
experience and training correlate with multiple aspects of managing meetings. The
factor of time management in meetings is widely emphasized (Saville, 2008; Wiggins,
2008; Janice and Hayers, 1995; Walter and Lazarus, 1991). According to Oliver (2004)
every effective meeting is a timed process. Conversely, Kemp and Williams (2013)
found that in the Gulf Arab states time is not taken seriously in meetings thus affecting
their effectiveness. Lewis (1998) stipulates as good practices, having a clear agenda,
being focussed, ensuring full participation, humor, clearly defined action plan, good
scheduling, prompt starting and clear direction. Ken and Ramona (1994) illustrate
what they called common myths that often make meetings resemble a dramatic
performing art with predetermined cast of using 100 lb of energy to produce three
ounces of results.

962

JMD
34,8

The follow up of the outcome is regarded as an equally essential stage in the
process. The meeting is only a station in management. In many cases it is only the
beginning of a long demanding managerial engagement. Nolan (2003) noted that each
meeting should have springboards at the end. Many things should happen after the
meeting. Many organizational members develop negative attitudes toward meetings
because nothing is done after the meeting. All the important issues raised should
see a step ahead before any subsequent meeting. This simple rule enhances
commitment, dynamism and hard work.

Meetings are seen as vicious circles; they take precious time, lose focus and fail to
generate action items or get hijacked (Janice and Hayers, 1995; Clark, 2004). A narrow
view of organizational perspectives is that meetings generate decisions and that
participants address issues in a cognitive process (Borum and Christiansen, 2006). This
is labelled a linear view and it neglects other models available to portfolio managers
(Akrich et al., 2002; McCarthy et al., 2006). With the same concerns of negative attitudes
that crop up, Lewis (1998) demonstrated some of the problems that derail meetings
as not keeping to the agenda, lack of focus, time wasting, lack of action plan, hidden
agenda and domineering by a few. Many meetings suffer poor attendance or walk out
along the process. When group ideas are neglected at previous meetings as well as
continued domination by a few ardent members of the group, subsequently others will
lose enthusiasm and make less and lesser appearances. Walter and Lazarus (1991)
examined the time spent, productiveness or otherwise, functional group differences and
attitudes among other factors in achieving effective meetings. They concluded that
there is need for training to inculcate skills not for subordinates only but managers as
well. This position is emphasized by Niederman and Volkema (1999).

Meetings are also bogged down by pretended agreement. Swinton (2005) argues that
effective communication in business meetings is about disagreement, expressing
opinions, voicing concerns and harnessing the energy to create a solution that
people want and care about. It is difficult many times for the leader of the meeting to
know if members are genuine or not in their contributions. Some may give ideas to
delay action or to waste away the time and enjoy the fun of it, others may intentionally
want to fail the leader. In such cases decisions are a result of pretended agreement; this
is a situation of group thinking when members in a meeting support a decision but
individually none of them agrees with it (Harvey, 1988). This is often revealed shortly
after the meeting when individuals open up. This is confirmed in Bagire’s (2009)
empirical illustration of a meeting that was flawed with pretended agreement and the
scenic upshot that resulted into wastage of valuable organizational resources and
interpersonal conflict.

The need for effective management of meetings in organizations cannot be over
emphasized. Walter and Lazarus (1990) concluded that meetings not only mirror value
of management but also its ability. The necessity to have meetings conducted well is
evidently a desire of many organizational leaders. The skill to manage a meeting,
develop thoughts, motivate and move people with ideas to positive action is a critical
asset in management practice. Meeting effectiveness should be seen in various benefits
to the organization as an entire system.

Methodology
This study was guided by the positivistic philosophical paradigm. Management
practice is widely influenced by social constructions in the organizational
environment and thus can be observable without researcher interference. It means

963

Organizational
meetings

that a study of a management variable like meetings is better approached from an
inductive approach and triangulation of methods. A cross-sectional survey design
was selected with both qualitative and quantitative data. The target population
was managers and employees in both public institutions and private business
organizations. The study targeted 25 service organizations including educational
institutions, mass media companies and government departments. From each
organization 20 respondents were reached using simple random sampling. Of the
500 targeted respondents, the researchers had 325 usable questionnaires returned
from 22 organizations. We thus realized a 65 percent response rate providing
credence to the results.

Data were collected using a structured questionnaire with a total of 67 items in six
sections. The questionnaire was structured on a five-point Likert type scale ranging
from “not sure” to “strongly agree.” The tool was tested for reliability using the
Cronbach’s α for different items with outcomes all above the recommended 0.7
(Nachamias and Nachamias, 1996). The researchers also collected data through
participatory observation as they took part in a number of meetings taking note
of the processes. Quantitative data were analyzed using correlation and regression
techniques in SPSS. Qualitative data on the other hand were analyzed through a
summary sheet identifying themes in line with the study variables and subsequently
used in the discussion of the results.

Results and discussion
Demographic statistics
The results were obtained from data provided by 325 respondents in 22 service
organizations. The majority was from mass media firms (37 percent), followed by
secondary schools with 21 percent; others were from universities and corporations.
From the individual organizations, Parliament had the highest score with 18 percent
of the total respondents. Other demographical statistics pertinent for our

results

include gender where a high majority was male and aged above 50 years. Over half of
the respondents were of degree qualification and only 1 percent had secondary
education. Importantly, the highest number was in the middle level of management
who understand the organization well but not biased by top management experiences.
The details are reported in Table I. With these demographics, we note that the
responses were from people who are mature, educated and well placed to interpret
the instrument.

Descriptive statistics
Policy on meetings. The findings showed that organizations in Uganda had clearly
stipulated policies on meetings. These were in regard to expected members, quorum,
agenda items, time for notices, procedures of the meetings and mode of decision
making. These were in many cases documented especially in the public organizations.
Respondents in the private firms intimated that most behaviors in management of
meetings are based more on practices than policy. There is also influence by
characteristics of managers, members and departments. The key policy issues are
summarized in Table II for easier discernment.

Reasons for convening meetings. Our respondents from both management and non-
management positions indicated that they perceived meetings to be convened mainly to
receive communication on decisions of top management. The results also indicated a

964

JMD
34,8

high perception that meetings were convened as a routine, to handle particularly no
pressing issues. Respondents from bottom management highly agreed with the view
that meetings are for disciplinary action and conflict solving contrary to top managers
to whom communication and consultation were the key reasons. The other factors like
coordination of work tasks, share experiences and as routine had comparable
responses. The summary is in Table II.

Contextual factors. We were also interested in contextual factors that could affect the
effectiveness of meetings. We examined personal factors like family obligations,

Frequency Valid %

Gender
Male 213 65.5
Female 112 34.5

Age
8-29 24 8.1
30-30 97 32.7
40-49 130 43.8
50+ 46 15.5

Education
Secondary 5 1.6
Diploma 83 26.3
Degree 140 44.3
Postgrad. 88 27.8

Level of magt.
Top 33 10.9
Middle 139 45.7
Bottom 132 43.4

Table I.
Demographic
statistics of
respondents

Organizational policy Convening the meeting Conducting the meeting Contextual factors

Respondents agreed that
in their organizations,
there was policy on:
Types of meetings
Members expected
The quorum required
The notice for meetings
The agenda for
meetings
The procedure of
meeting
Decision procedure

Respondents agreed the
following to be reasons
why meetings are
convened:
For consultation
Means to communicate
To handle grievances
Carry out disciplinary
action
For solving conflicts
Brain storming on
issues
Share experiences
Check management
system

Confirmed reasons why
meetings are not
productive:
The agenda is not
consistently followed
The venue selected for
meetings is not suitable
The sitting arrangement
not favorable
Duration of the meetings
not adhered to
Hostilities building up
during meetings
Few members
dominating others
Inadequate reference
documents

Contextual factors
rated low in affecting
meetings:
Family factors
Community events
National events
Internal facilities
Weather patterns
Infrastructure
Competition
Legal issues
Economic situation

Table II.
The selected factors
in the management
of organizational

meetings

965

Organizational
meetings

national events in the country, community activities and others like public infrastructure.
All these factors were perceived to have a less cause on the effectiveness of meetings in
the organizations.

Why meetings are not productive. The examination of this issue was the motivation
of this study after overwhelming anecdotal evidences. Meetings as a management tool
have come under serious public scrutiny from both managers and staff in various
organizations. From the analysis of the findings, respondents generally agreed that
meetings in Ugandan organizations are productive although there are serious concerns
on how they are managed. We tested for perceptions on a number of items all of which
were rated high by respondents; top on the list was lack of quorum followed by hidden
agenda and short notice given for meetings. The other highly rated was
unimplemented resolutions. We used as a surrogate the factor of lack of follow up
action. The response to this item was closely the same with 92 percent confirming that
not following up resolutions is a key factor affecting productivity of meetings in
Uganda. Other factors were meetings lasting a long time, lack of suitable facilities, no
materials and the timing of meetings. The responses on these items are summarized by
descriptive statistics in Table III.

The results reaffirmed the views and agreed with previous scholars. We build a
strong case for the need to reexamine how meetings are conducted and the follow up
actions both at governance and management levels.

Benefits of meetings to organizations. To complete our model we sought perceptions of
respondents on the benefits of meetings to their organizations. The findings revealed that
meetings in Ugandan organizations have led to improved communication and thus better
human relations at work among employees. Meetings have been a forum for settlement of
conflicts and disputes. Sharing of experience among members and departments is
enhanced when meetings are convened and conducted well. Many respondents felt that
meetings are necessary in running their organizations as they generate new ideas for
management to ensure systematic organizational work procedures.

Inferential statistics. To make empirical inferences, statistical analyses were carried out
to test the relationships prevalent among the factors enumerated in our model. We first run
a correlation analysis to explore the associations among the variables (Table IV).

Score items n Mean SD

Lack of quorum at the meeting 321 4.6262 0.78490
Hidden agenda by the leaders 322 4.6211 0.69214
No follow up action after meetings 311 4.5916 0.86721
Unimplemented resolutions for the past meetings 322 4.5559 0.76017
Lack of reference documents like minutes 321 4.5452 0.94802
Short notice given for the meetings 321 4.5296 0.73733
Timing of the meeting (morning, evening, start of week,
end of week, end of month, etc.)

294 4.4694 1.04052

Unfamiliar agenda items at the meetings 321 4.4361 0.97298
Luck of openness during discussions 322 4.4317 0.96512
Duration of meeting always too long 320 4.4125 0.85930
Poor facilities at the meeting 322 4.3882 0.95127
None specification of who to attend 322 4.3199 1.00784
Personality of the chairperson 321 4.3146 1.10570
No seating allowance expected 320 4.2437 1.16504

Table III.
Descriptive statistics
– why meetings are
unproductive

966

JMD
34,8

The coefficients obtained ranged from low, moderate to high among the variables.
The associations were all positive and significant. The highest correlation was
between factors for convening meetings and how they are conducted; with a
subsequent high association with the benefits. The contextual factors that we chose
for the study had the lowest correlation coefficients with benefits of meetings. We
could not explain this outcome based on extant literature that we accessed. Having
established the correlations it was in our interest and model of this study to
examine the predictions of certain factors to the benefits organizations have from
meetings. This would enable us to draw conclusions on their effectiveness. We used
hierarchical regression to achieve this and the change statistics is presented
in Table V.

In the first model we tested for two control variables that we thought affect
effectiveness of meetings namely, the type of organization and the level of management
of the respondents. However, these two factors were not statistically significant. In
model 2 we entered policy as the key factor that determines meetings in organizations.
The result was significant with an R2 of 0.348 and p-value ¼ 0.000. In model 3 we added
reasons why meetings are convened and in the next model how they are conducted.
Factors of convening meetings led to a statistically significant result (R2 ¼ 0.567;
p-value ¼ 0.000) while it was not significant how they are conducted. The F-change was
a very low 0.310 compared to the 80.347 for convening of meetings. The policy and
reasons together accounted for 56.7 percent variations in the benefits of meetings to
organizations. In the final model we introduced contextual factors, which was an
aggregated variable capturing both internal and external factors. This item had a low
F-change and the model was not significant (p-value ¼ 0.258). The prediction power of
the model remained 57 percent.

The results therefore showed that the key factors leading to effective meetings that
have strong benefits to organizations are the policies and reasons for convening them.

1 2 3 4

1. Policy guiding meetings
2. Reasons for convening meetings 0.603**
3. Practices in conducting meetings 0.613** 0.749**
4. Contextual factors affecting meetings 0.360** 0.350** 0.443**
5. Benefits from meetings to organization 0.546** 0.741** 0.603** 0.272**
Note: **Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level

Table IV.
Correlation analysis

results

Change statistics
Model R R2 Adjusted R2 SE of the estimate R2-change F-change Sig. F-change

1 0.135 0.018 0.006 2.70469 0.018 1.501 0.226
2 0.590 0.348 0.336 2.21081 0.330 80.967 0.000
3 0.753 0.567 0.556 1.80758 0.219 80.347 0.000
4 0.754 0.568 0.554 1.81152 0.001 0.310 0.579
5 0.756 0.571 0.555 1.80987 0.004 1.287 0.258

Table V.
Regression analysis

results

967

Organizational
meetings

While as the policies in some sections provided for how meetings should be conducted,
our findings and analysis showed that the process of running the meeting was not a
significant factor determining the benefits accruing to organizations. Therefore our
aggregated variable of management of meetings (preparation, convening, conducting)
partially accounts for variations in their benefits to organizations.

In our participant observations during various meetings it was confirmed that the
policies on meetings were specified. For example in one of the universities where the
study took place, there were meetings for management, faculty boards, examiners
boards, staff associations and departments. The membership and items to handle in
these meetings were specified in the invitation. Although in some meetings the quorum
was mentioned, the chairperson would call for registration of members and apologies
received. The agenda for meetings was a contentious issue at times taking turns of
discussion before confirming the items. The duration of meetings was also
unstructured. In some cases the chairperson sought the view of members how long
they wished to get through with business; in other cases it depended on completion of
business while there were instances where members just raised contention that the
meeting had dragged on too long. This finding leaves gap in the ideas expressed by
Saville (2008) and Wiggins (2008) who emphasize that duration is a key factor to
effectiveness of meetings. Our results were in concert with the findings by Kemp and
Williams (2013) in the Gulf Arab states where lateness, haphazard sitting, open door
and other disruptions were noted.

Karen (2004) posited that meetings are the windows on the soul of business
meaning that they essentially reveal what is going on within the management
system. Our findings confirmed this position. Many authors argue that if there is no
sound reason to convene a meeting, management should not do so, lest it will be a
recipe for disaster (Clark, 2004; Wiggins, 2008). Our finding therefore confirms that
managers should not call meetings without a clear purpose; we observed long
discussions on items proposed for the agenda where some were deleted and others
combined implying that the facilitators had not adequately thought through the
reasons for convening the meeting.

The point of departure for this study was that meetings are becoming increasingly
unproductive. The results have confirmed that the process of conducting meetings does
not account for the expected benefits to the organization. The common problems
affecting meetings are listed by Lewis (1998) as well Walter and Lazarus (1991). Our
findings found the same factors but the analysis did not support the position that they
are significant. One item that had stood out in the way meetings are conducted was the
decision-making process. It was observed that lack of openness bred pretended
agreement in decision making. This was observed at one of the universities and
confirmed by cases from other organizations. We confirmed the case as highlighted by
Bagire (2009) in an earlier study of management in Ugandan organizations. This was a
case where university lecturers in a meeting of their academic staff association passed
a resolution to sue the Ministry of Education for preventing a high court order that had
pronounced that the affiliated college in which they taught was free to declare itself
a separate university. They even agreed to the monetary deductions from their
emoluments to finance the court process. Shortly after the meeting, many members
opened up revealing how they individually never supported the decision but had been
drawn by group thinking. The suit never took off and was overtaken by cabinet
decisions on the matter.

968

JMD
34,8

For Greta (2006), the issues of consistent form and structure in handling meetings
are very critical, both of which have not been confirmed by this study. Walter and
Lazarus (1991) posited that poorly managed meetings cost American businesses a
fortune in dollar value. We did not analyze monetary values of poorly conducted
meetings but speculate it to be high and recommend further research with such
analysis. Our measures of outcome of meetings reflected the quality aspect emphasized
by Karen (2004). This study confirms that meetings have enabled organizations to
improve in communication, human relations, management of conflict and policy
formulation. One contested benefit of meetings was on staff motivation. Our study did
not check cross-functional collaboration where we would have ascertained the
contribution of meetings toward staff motivation as proposed by Clark (2004). This
item had the lowest mean value and highest standard deviation in the descriptive
statistics. It is a rich area and it for further study.

Conclusions and practical implications
This study has initiated a critical analysis of meetings as a process of improving
management in Ugandan organizations. Meetings are a key practice in running
organizations although many studies confirm that there are key gaps in their
management. There are evidences of poor preparation, conducting and failed outcomes.
Among many Ugandan organizations, these have been viewed from anecdotal
evidences but we have now reaffirmed them empirically. This study has determined the
key factors pertinent in management and benefits of meetings in Uganda as
advancement of management scholarship in Africa. While our key findings have
agreed with previous studies, we emphasize that Africa’s unique context is important
in understanding the behavior of some factors. From results of our model, we draw the
conclusion that meetings are generally embedded in policies and have benefitted
organizations; however, the manner in which they are convened and conducted is still
wanting. There was reaffirmation of negative opinion against meetings. Being an
integrated process, the management of meetings is still a problem and affecting overall
management of organizations.

The study has various practical implications for policy, practice and research. With
increased organizational dynamics and changes in management practice, have come
new models like management by objectives, result oriented and total quality
management. Governance boards should therefore review the policies and practices of
organizational meetings. They are a key tool in management and must be given
adequate attention to contribute toward organizational efficiency from corporate to
management levels. Managers should use meetings as a spring board to improve
communication, employee engagement, planning, team building and management
development. There are internal occurrences that require to be addressed by meetings;
they are thus a routine event for effective managerial work. Managers should review
policy frameworks on meetings especially how they are convened, conducted and
follow up of outcomes. Increasingly, ICT should be used positively to improve
management of not only meetings but organizations as a whole.

For researchers, studies on the management of organizations in the Ugandan
context are still in nascent stages. Our focus on meetings has not exhausted this aspect
among others. There is need for more analytical studies using a larger sample of
organizations, examination of the personality and competencies of managers, costs,
resource capability and technology levels. Studies on the relationship or mediation

969

Organizational
meetings

effects of meetings with performance of employees and the organizations are needed.
To contribute to better management, scholars should document best practices and
analyze differences in samples drawn from various sectors and organizational
demographics.

The results in this study are limited by the lack of analytical literature on the factors
that we studied from the local context. Some aspects of our methodology especially
sampling the individual respondents may have affected our results. Our
operationalization of the variables was not based on a clear theoretical framework.
We are not sure if a larger sample of organizations could have led to different and
more significant results. There could be limitations arising from cross-sectional
survey design. We however, contend that despite these limitations, our results
on the management and benefits of meetings can be relied upon for practice and
further research.

References

Akrich, M., Callon, M. and Latour B. (2002), “The key to success in innovation Part I”,
International Journal of Innovation and Management, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 187-206.

Allen, J.A. and Rogelberg, S.G. (2013), “Manager-led group meetings: a context for promoting
employee engagement”, Group & Organizational Management, Vol. 38 No. 5, pp. 543-569.

Bagire, V. (2009), “Pretended agreement in decision making: exploring the abilene paradox in
Uganda”, Journal of Management Policy and Practice, Vol. 5 No. 11, pp. 106-113.

Boden, D. (1994), The Business of Talk: Meetings as Occasioned Organizational Events,
Polity Press, Cambridge.

Borum, F. and Christiansen, J.K. (2006), “Actors and structure in IS Projects: what makes
implementation happen?”, Scandinavian Journal of Management, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 213-237.

Briggs, R.O. and Vreede, G.-J.de (1997), “Meetings of the future: enhancing group collaboration
with group support systems”, Creativity and Innovation Management, Vol. 6 No. 2,
pp. 106-116.

Brandit, R.J. (2006), “Brandit on leadership”, Industry Week, September, available at: www.
industryweek.com (accessed September 19, 2009).

Clark, M. (2004), “Oh no! Not another meeting!”, ASTD Golden Gate Reporter, Vol. 48 No. 1, pp. 1-2.

Denyer, J.C. (1980), Office Management, 5th ed., Pitman Publishing, Great Britain.

Gail, K. (1995), “Effective meetings through electronic brainstorming”, Journal of Management
Development, Vol. 14 No. 6, pp. 4-25.

Greta, T. (2006), “How to be effective in meetings”, Occupational Health, Vol. 58 No 7, pp. 24-24.

Harvey, B.J. (1988), The Abilene Paradox and other Meditations on Management, Jossy-Bass,
San Francisco, CA.

Janice, E. and Hayers, C. (1995), “Managers’ meeting: 9Am sharp!”, Black Enterprise, Vol. 25 No. 8,
p. 58.

Karen, C. (2004), “Effective meetings”, available at: www.effective meetings.com (accessed
September 19, 2009).

Kemp, L.J. and Williams, P. (2013), “In their own time and space, meetings behavior in the
Gulf Arab work place”, International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, Vol. 13 No. 2,
pp. 215-235.

Ken, M. and Ramona, J. (1994), “Meeting is such sweet sorrow”, Management Decision, Vol. 32
No. 4, pp. 62-64.

970

JMD
34,8

www.industryweek.com

www.industryweek.com

www.effective meetings.com

Kiggundu, M. (2013), “Practitioner view point. personal reflections on African management:
looking in, looking out and looking ahead”, African Journal of Economics and Management
Studies, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 177-200.

Lewis, B.J.P.E. (1998), “A small World after all”, Journal of Management in Engineering, Vol. 14
No. 4, pp. 4-15.

Linda, M. (2000), “Meeting sabotage: met and conquered”, Journal of Management Development,
Vol. 19 No. 10, pp. 870-885.

Lituchy, T.R., Punnett, B.J. and Puplampu, B.B. (2013), Management in Africa, Macro and Micro
Perspectives, Rutledge, New York, NY and London.

McCarthy, I.P., Tsinopolous, C., Allen, P. and Anderson, C. (2006), “New product development
as a complex adaptive system of decisions”, Journal of Product Innovation Management,
Vol. 23 No. 5, pp. 437-456.

Nachamias, C.F. and Nachamias, D. (1996), Research Methods in the Social Sciences, 5th ed.,
Arnold Publishing, London.

Nelson, R.B. and Economy, P. (1995), Better Business Meetings, Irwin Inc., Burr Ridge, IL.

Niederman, F. and Volkema, P.J. (1999), “The effects of facilitator characteristics on
meeting preparation, set up and implementation”, Small Group Research, Vol. 30 No. 3,
pp. 330-360.

Nolan, V. (2003), “Whatever happened to ‘synectics’?”, Creativity and Innovation Management,
Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 24-27.

Oliver, C. (2004), “The mighty meeting”, Board Leadership, No. 75, pp. 1-8.

Rick, W. (2009), “Effective kickoff meetings”, Internal Auditor, April 1.

Riegger, H.M. (2008), “9 Steps to effective staff meetings, implementing change”, DVM360
Magazine, October 1, 2008, available at: veterinarynews.dvm360.com (accessed December
30, 2014).

Saville, R. (2008), “Oh no! another meeting!”, PRO-DAIRY, August, p. 25.

Sayed, M.E., Lazarus, H. and Volville, F. (1997), “Why is a third of your time wasted in meetings?”,
Journal of Management Development, Vol. 16 No. 9, pp. 672-676.

Swinton, L. (2005), “The abilene paradox: 7 tips for effective communication in business
meetings”, Management for the rest of us, available at: www.mftrous.com (accessed
February 16, 2009).

Walter, A.G. and Lazarus, H. (1991), “Are today’s executive meetings with success?”, Journal of
Management Development, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 14-25.

Walter, A.G. and Lazarus, H. (1990), “Meeting with success?”, Executive Development, Vol. 4 No. 3.

Wiggins, M. (2008), “Overview of an effective staff meeting”, Dermatology Nursing, Vol. 20 No. 1,
p. 69.

Yoon, R.L. and Lazarus, H. (1993), “Business meetings in Giant Korean corporations – implications
for executive development”, Journal of Management Development, Vol. 12 No. 4,
pp. 4-12.

Zoogah, D. and Nkomo, S. (2013), “Management research in Africa, past, present and future”, in
Lituchy, T.R., Punnett, B.J. and Puplampu, B.B. (Eds), Management in Africa, Macro and
Micro Perspectives, Rutledge, New York, NY and London, pp. 9-31.

Further reading

Rosner, B. (1999), “What are your secrets for running a successful meeting?”, Workforce, Vol. 1
No. 1, p. 2.

971

Organizational
meetings

www.mftrous.com

About the authors
Dr Vincent Bagire is a Senior Lecturer in the Department of Business Administration at the
Makerere University Business School. His current focus is advancing management scholarship
as a theme for the Africa Academy of Management (AFAM). His research interests are the
practices of strategic and general management. He has published various papers on management
issues in the African context. He holds a PhD in Strategic Management from the University of Nairobi.
Dr Vincent Bagire is the corresponding author and can be contacted at: vbagire@mubs.ac.ug

Jolly Byarugaba is a Senior Lecturer in the Department of Human Resource Management
at the Makerere University Business School. Her research interest is in human resource
management field.

Janet Kyogabiirwe is a Senior Lecturer in the Department of Human Resource Management
at the Makerere University Business School. Her current research area is high-performing
organizations model.

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com

972
JMD
34,8

mailto:vbagire@mubs.ac.ug

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without
permission.