In Hybrid Meetings, Conversations Can Be Chaotic. Science Can Help

Competitive overlaps, acknowledgement tokens, back channels: the more you know about meeting mechanics, the easier it will be to keep things running smoothly

Originally Published by Microsoft Worklab | August 17, 2022

No, no, go ahe—” “Oh, no, I can wait, what were you—” “I just wanted to say—.” “Oh.” (Two beats of silence.) “I’ll just put it in the chat.”

If you are in a lot of hybrid meetings, you’re familiar with the awkward overlaps and pauses that can riddle those digital interactions. The chat thread and the hand-raise function help, but as (some) people return to work together in person, side conversations in the on-site conference room and office setups that aren’t equipped for a hybrid experience add to the complexity.

To understand how to make meetings flow more naturally, Microsoft researchers are studying the science behind interruptions and looking at how leaders can facilitate better communication for all meeting participants, regardless of locale.

A Map of Interruption Patterns

Research into turn taking isn’t new—scientists have long studied how interruptions or snippets of encouragement shape our verbal interactions. The rise of the telephone prompted early statistical research into the subject , and scientists have since investigated everything from how plain-tailed wrens create a duet to whether bonobos engage in cooperative conversational back-and-forths. (They do.)

In a recent study, a group of Microsoft scientists that included Sean Rintel, a principal researcher in human-computer interaction, explored whether it was possible to map out and evaluate interruptions by analyzing anonymous meeting transcripts. Could they use the system to characterize communication styles and behaviors?

What We Talk About When We Talk About Talking

Scientists use a range of terms to describe the various forms of interruptions

• Acknowledgement tokens: Supportive interruptions like right, okay, or yeah
• Back channels/continuers: Cooperative interruptions that signify support, agreement, or that the listener is paying attention. Words/sounds like uh-huh, wow, hmm.
• Choral sounds: Laughter, groans, coughing, etc.
• Competitive overlaps: An attempt to take over from the speaker, for a variety of reasons, including process or content control.
• Conversational equity: When speakers in a conversation have roughly equal time and ability to contribute.
• Cooperative overlaps: Interruptions that are supportive or helpful.
• Power interruptions: Truly hostile takeovers, whether deliberate or by someone totally unaware.
• VSUs: Very short utterances, a subset of back channels.

The team used a custom app to analyze anonymous transcripts, assigning speakers numerical IDs and tracking metrics like the number of times each person spoke, the duration of their speech, and the number of words they uttered. They then mapped that data into a timeline graph to make it easier to spot patterns. The data revealed that, not only did it appear to be possible to categorize turn-taking behaviors, Rintel says, but “You could clearly find patterns of people taking long turns or interrupting somebody else on a regular basis.”

The tricky part is understanding context. Something that might seem like an interrupter being particularly dominant might also be the speaker ceding the floor. (Imagine a teacher giving a lesson and asking students to jump in with questions. Or a colleague struck with nerves in front of a room who gets bailed out by a helpful co-worker.) “Depending on the kind of meeting it is, you may be able to make judgments about whether or not it’s inclusive or effective,” Rintel says.

Rintel points out that this research is in its infancy, but in the not-so-distant future, these systems could lead to data dashboards that business leaders could combine with training to evaluate inclusion in meetings. If you ran a series of allyship seminars, for example, you might use this approach afterward to determine if the number of speakers in a meeting changed. Would competitive interruptions drop? Would people at home get comparable speaking time to those in person?

“Ultimately what would be really interesting here is giving companies, teams, and organizations the opportunity to run experiments themselves,” Rintel says. “Helping teams understand their own processes so they can work better in ways we can never anticipate…” [MORE]

+

To read the entire article, visit the Microsoft WorkLab website, via: In Hybrid Meetings, Conversations Can Be Chaotic. Science Can Help