Participating in versus Researching University Meetings

The Gothenburg Meeting Science Symposium

This paper belongs to of the Gothenburg Meeting Science Symposium

Karen Tracy, University of Colorado Boulder (Communication)

Abstract 
As a longtime faculty member at a major US state university, I have participated in and, sometimes, run different kinds of university meetings. The kinds of meetings I have participated in have included decision making about personnel at department, college, and university levels; information-sharing and advice-seeking of upper administrators with chairs or faculty representatives regarding budget, recruitment, retention, technology, etc.; research groups with a few colleagues or graduate students; graduate committees to plan and approve students’ performance on comprehensive exams, theses, and dissertations; regularly recurring department meetings to share information and make decisions about both easy and contentions issues (e.g., who to hire); informal mentoring and complaining meetings with students and colleagues; research colloquia of many different formality levels; and acting as a representative of a university group to determine allocation of scarce resources. (…) Read more

Time for Meetings

The Gothenburg Meeting Science Symposium

This paper belongs to Open Session 2 of the Gothenburg Meeting Science Symposium

Helen Schwartzman, Northwestern University (Anthropology)

Abstract 
In this paper I will join the topics of time and meetings to explore several issues, including why it seems to be time for meetings to be a topic of research for so many disciplines (when they have existed in the background for so long for so many investigators). Why now? For example, how is the turn toward “meeting ethnographies” in anthropology (see Sandler and Thedvall, forthcoming 2017) related to researchers’ increased interest in understanding the work and effects of multiple organizations and institutions (NGOs, corporations, state and international bureaucracies)? (…) Read more

Scientist-Practitioner: “And”, Not “Or”.

The Gothenburg Meeting Science Symposium

This paper belongs to of the Gothenburg Meeting Science Symposium

John Kello, Davidson College (Psychology)

Abstract 
Organizational science is a multi-disciplinary area of research that has obvious relevance to practice. Our area of study is the real world of the organization. We embrace the scientist-practitioner model. And, the reality is that scientist-practitioner often equates to scientist or practitioner, rather than to scientist and practitioner.
Our professional conferences commonly offer science/research or practice/applied tracks. Many of the professional surveys we take ask us to self-identify as academic or practitioner, and the subsequent questions branch from there.
Organizational scientists who work primarily in academia do their research out of genuine interest, of course, but also out of the need to publish in top academic journals and get extramural funding, and thereby qualify for tenure and promotions. (…) Read more