Abstract

Since the COVID-19 pandemic, student online meetings have become increasingly common. This study investigates whether previously found negative effects of meeting lateness on meeting satisfactions can be found in the context of virtual student meetings. In an online study, students from Germany and Italy (N = 279) rated their last meeting experience. We investigate the prevalence of delays in student online meetings and their relationship with participants’ process and outcome satisfaction. About 26 % of virtual student meetings were delayed. Satisfaction with the process and output was significantly lower in late (vs. on-time) meetings. No differences between countries were found.
Keywords: online meeting, meeting satisfaction, meeting lateness, student meetings, country comparison
On time online? Effects of lateness on satisfaction in virtual student meetings
In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, higher education institutions were challenged to implement new digital teaching and learning methods (Mishra et al., 2020). Students attended online lectures and held group project meetings via digital tools. Even before, the technology industry for online meetings had experienced tremendous growth (Sox et al., 2017) and by now digital tools to conduct meetings are commonplace (Reed & Allen, 2021). This provides many benefits (e.g., better organization, mobile working) as well as challenges (Briggs et al., 2006), such as virtual meeting fatigue (Shockley et al., 2021), underdeveloped digital skills (Bennett et al., 2008; Hatlevik et al., 2015), and access dependencies (Blanchard & McBride, 2020). The time spent in meetings has changed as well, with an increase in meeting frequency, and a 10 % decline in meeting duration, compared to the pre-pandemic period (DeFilippis et al., 2020). While a large body of literature investigates in-person meetings and their characteristics, these findings have limited applicability to virtual meetings (Reiter-Palmon et al., 2021). In this paper, we present data on virtual student meetings, focusing on the characteristic of meeting lateness. Specifically, we investigate whether lateness in online meetings is negatively related to meeting satisfaction in an international student sample.

Theoretical background

We conceptualize meetings within the input-process-output model (IPO model; McGrath, 1964). This heuristic concept represents the relationship between input variables (input), group interactions (process), and group outcomes (output). Time factors, such as meeting lateness, and other so-called design criteria (Kauffeld & Sauer, 2021; Cohen et al., 2011) are input variables that can affect the process and output of a virtual student meeting (Leach et al., 2009), while satisfaction with the process and outcome of the meeting are components of the output of the meeting.
Internationally, about half of all meetings start late (Allen et al., 2021; Rogelberg et al., 2014). Lateness is generally viewed as counterproductive, but unlike absenteeism, it tends to be tolerated (Rogelberg et al., 2014; Dishon-Berkovits & Berkovits, 1997) and is seldomly sanctioned (Koslowski, 2000), encouraging future delay behavior (Blau, 1995). Meeting lateness has been shown to negatively impact meeting experiences (Allen et al., 2018). While previous research on meeting lateness has focused primarily on the professional context, lateness also occurs in the educational context (Back et al., 2006; Werner et al., 2014). Generally, good time management positively affects student performance (Nasrullah & Khan, 2015) and impressions from educational meetings lay the foundation for later work experience (Iksan et al., 2012). Moreover, as typical participants in psychological studies, students should be of particular interest and add other formats to previous meeting research (Rogelberg et al., 2014; Dipboye & Flanagan, 1979). Therefore, this paper will expand research questions on meeting lateness examined in the professional context to the educational context.
A subjective measure of meeting effectiveness is the satisfaction of participants with the meeting (Burba, 2017). Meeting satisfaction influences how engaged participants are with the organization and how committed they are to their work (Rogelberg et al., 2010). Moreover, meeting satisfaction is related to participant interaction in the meeting (Kauffeld, 2006) and empowerment during subsequent work processes (Allen et al., 2016). The importance here lies in the potential for current as well as future collaboration (Hackman, 2012): Those who are satisfied with the current work in the team will also be happy to work together in the future. However, studies suggest that more than half of participants are dissatisfied with their meetings (Geimer et al., 2015).
Meeting lateness as an input variable is related to negative interpersonal relationships, lower group cohesion and lower meeting effectiveness as process and output variables (Allen et al., 2021; Koslowsky, 2000; Rogelberg et al., 2014). If delays occur, meeting participants are more likely to be frustrated (Mroz & Allen, 2017). In an experimental laboratory study, students showed more negative socio-emotional behaviors (e.g., interrupting each other) in meetings that started late (Allen et al., 2018). If meeting lateness occurs, the resulting overlength (i.e., making up for the delay) often creates stress for participants to complete routine activities and decreases their subsequent work engagement (Lehmann-Willenbrock et al., 2017). This meeting recovery syndrome poses a health risk (Schulte et al., 2013) and can lead to turnover intentions on the part of participants (Rogelberg et al., 2006; 2010) and poor decision-making in organizations (Tropman, 2014). It demonstrates that meeting lateness as a seemingly trivial violation of meeting rules can have wide-ranging consequences.
Although meeting research often draws on the construct of satisfaction, there has been no consistent approach to measuring it (Briggs et al., 2012; Mejias, 2007). Some studies describe meeting satisfaction merely as a special facet of general job satisfaction (Cohen et al., 2011), while others use an affective approach (Reinig, 2003) in which satisfaction with the meeting process (SP) and satisfaction with the meeting outcome (SO) are differentiated. SP refers to satisfaction with the interactions during the meeting, while SO describes the participants’ attitude towards the achieved goals. The separate measurement of process and outcome satisfaction is not consistently practiced (e.g., Rogelberg et al., 2010; Wageman et al., 2005), even though Briggs and de Vreede (1997) and Reinig (2003) warn that the lack of distinction can lead to false predictions. Satisfaction with the process does not necessarily establish satisfaction with the outcome (and vice versa). In addition to SP and SO, the perceived goal attainment of the participants (PGA; perceived net goal attainment) is measured. PGA includes the change in judgment of the likelihood of achieving goals within a given time period (e.g., the duration of a meeting; Briggs et al., 2003).

Current study

In the current study, we extend previous research on the relationship between meeting lateness and meeting satisfaction to the study of virtual student meetings (Lehmann-Willenbrock & Allen, 2020). We conduct an online survey in an international student sample (Germany and Italy) to gain insights into the prevalence of meeting lateness in virtual student meetings as well as its relationship with meeting satisfaction. Additionally, we explore how students appraise meeting lateness. Derived from previous research on meeting lateness, a lateness rate of about 40 % is expected (Allen et al., 2021). However, due to the flexibility of student compared to professional life, somewhat weaker correlations of lateness with the process and output variable of meeting satisfaction are expected than is known from the workplace (Werner et al., 2014).
Hypothesis 1: Lateness occurs widely (40 %) in virtual student meetings.Hypothesis 2: Satisfaction with perceived meeting process (SP) will be significantly lower in late meetings than in on-time meetings.Hypothesis 3: Satisfaction with perceived meeting outcome (SO) will be significantly lower for late meetings than for on-time meetings.Hypothesis 4: Perceived goal achievement (PGA) is significantly lower in late meetings than in on-time meetings.
Perceptions of lateness are not the same everywhere (van Eerde & Azar, 2020; White et al., 2011). Across contexts and cultures, different values are shaped to guide individual experiences (Minkov & Hofstede, 2012; Javidan et al., 2006). However, practices shared in the globalization process are increasingly aligning experiences (Adler & Aycan, 2018). In a study by Allen and colleagues (2021), no differences in meeting lateness across five countries were found, including Italy and Germany. For the younger generation, the confluence can be assumed to be even stronger (Eringa et al., 2015).
Comparisons: There is no difference in the association of meeting lateness with the constructs of meeting satisfaction between the countries Italy and Germany.