Progress in research is dependent on many success factors. In this review, we evaluate the importance of effective scientific meetings to achieve this progress. We focus on aspects that determine effective communication, such as length, size, interpersonal interactions, structure, and variety of meetings or conferences. Furthermore, we introduce the technique of a Syntegration® that offers a new tool to communicate effectively among managers today. It is discussed whether this process can be a useful structure for research meetings and whether it has the potential to generate decision-making and goals within this field.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
PetskoGA. The highs and lows of scientific conferences. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol2006;7:231–4
2.
DruckerPF. What makes an effective executive? In: PaschekPFDP, ed. Cardinal Virtues of Effective Managment. Frankfurt: Redline Wirtschaft, 2004
3.
DannemillerKD, JamesS, TolchinskyPD. Whole scale change. In: HolmanP, DevaneT, eds. The Change Handbook. Group Methods for Shaping the Future. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc., 1999:203–16
4.
JacobsRW, Mc KeownF. Real time strategic change. In: HolmanP, DevaneT, eds. The Change Handbook. Group Methods for Shaping the Future. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc., 1999:295–312
5.
OwenH. Expanding Our Now: The Story of Open Space Technology. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler, 1997
6.
O'DeaNA, de ChazalP, SaltmanDC, KiddMR. Running effective meetings: a primer for doctors. Postgrad Med J2006;82:454–61
7.
EnglishCB. The art of leading meetings. Am J Occup Ther1987;41:321–6
8.
WienerN. Cybernetics or control and communication in the animal and the machine. Cambridge, MA: MIT, 1961
9.
BeerS. Beyond dispute: The invention of team snytegrity. Chichester: Wiley, 1994
10.
Syntegration®, the revolutionary method for decision making, if complex problems need to be jointly accomplished. [Malik Management Zentrum St. Gallen web page]. 2006. See http://www.malik-mzsg.ch/syntegration/download/htm/3721/en/Syntegration%AE_Short_presentation_%28English%29.pdf
11.
malik-mzsg. Die Syntegration® im Praxistest [Malik Management Zentrum St. Gallen web page]. 2007. See http://www.malik-mzsg.ch/syntegration/download/htm/5174/de/Auswertung_Feedback.pdf
12.
TurnerP. Benefits and costs of continuing nursing education: an analytical survey. J Contin Educ Nurs1991;22:104–8
13.
FrankE, BaldwinG, LangliebAM. Continuing medical education habits of US women physicians. J Am Med Womens Assoc2000;55:27–8
14.
GouletF, GagnonRJ, DesrosiersG, JacquesA, SindonA. Participation in CME activities. Can Fam Physician1998;44:541–8
15.
Lecoq-D'AndreF, BalblancJC. Continuing medical education for rheumatologists in France. Results of a national survey. Rev Rhum Engl Ed1999;66:717–23
16.
NylennaM, AaslandOG. Primary care physicians and their information-seeking behaviour. Scand J Prim Health Care2000;18:9–13
17.
O'BrienMA, FreemantleN, OxmanAD, Continuing education meetings and workshops: effects on professional practice and health care outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2001;2:CD003030
18.
Editorial. Foo's paradise. Nature2006;442:848
19.
LubchencoJ, MehtaG. International science meetings. Science2004;305:1531
20.
AlbaneseM. Problem-based learning: why curricula are likely to show little effect on knowledge and clinical skills. Med Educ2000;34:729–38
21.
DolmansDH, WolfhagenIH, van der VleutenCP. Motivational and cognitive processes influencing tutorial groups. Acad Med1998;73:S22–4
22.
Van der LindenJ, ErkensG, SchmidtH, RenshawP. Collaborative learning. In: SimonsPRJ, van der LindenJ, DuffyT, eds. New Learning. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2000:37–54
23.
Das CarloM, SwadiH, MpofuD. Medical student perceptions of factors affecting productivity of problem-based learning tutorial groups: does culture influence the outcome?Teach Learn med2003;15:59–64
24.
Visschers-PleijersAJ, DolmansDH, de LengBA, WolfhagenIH, van der VleutenCP. Analysis of verbal interactions in tutorial groups: a process study. Med Educ2006;40:129–37
