Brought to you by:
Franz Design Group Conference Tables

David B. Givens, Ph.D., Director
CENTER FOR NON-VERBAL STUDIES
COPYRIGHT DAVID B. GIVENS, ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
Defines art + game of conference tables


If you are really looking for control, spread your notebooks, pens, manuals, and anything else you brought along over as broad an area as possible--without bursting anyone else's [territorial] bubble. This will give you further claim to the territory. --Susan Bixler (The Professional Image, p. 236)

Consumer product. 1. A flat, smooth piece of furniture designed as a stage to dramatize face-to-face meetings. 2. A corporate "level playing field" upon which speakers may address colleagues on matters of business. 3. A horizontal flatland, or territory, in which to send defensive and offensive messages with the eyes, face, hands, and shoulders.

Usage: Nonverbally, conference tables showcase the upper body's signs, signals, and cues. The table's shape, size, and seating plan a. influence group dynamics, and b. may also affect the emotional tone and outcome of discussions. (N.B.: Because torso height varies less than standing height, people seated around conference tables appear to be roughly the same size; thus, conference tables neutralize physical advantages of stature [see LOOM].) Meanwhile, the lower body's features are securely masked below the tabletop, and do not compete for notice with heads, hands, or eyes. A conference table may symbolize corporate status and power in business, politics, and military affairs.

Observation. The conference table is a nonverbal battlefield. 1. To promote key points, speakers should lean forward over the table and use palm-down gestures. (N.B.: Leaning backward, away from the table and palm-up gestures may suggest submissiveness, i.e., lack of conviction.) 2. Cuffs, bracelets, and wristwatches add visibility to hand gestures. 3. Nonverbal impacts of angular distance, arm wear, business suits, cut-off, hairstyles, and neckwear are exaggerated by close-quarters interaction at the conference table.

RESEARCH REPORTS: 1. Dominant individuals choose central seats and do most of the talking (Hare and Bales 1973). 2. Leadership and "central" seating positions (i.e., "opposite the most others") "go hand in hand" (Burgoon et al. 1989:389). 3. Competence across a boardroom table shows in a well-moderated voice tone, rapid speech, few verbal disfluencies or hesitations, fluid gestures, and eye contact. Listeners respond negatively to dominance cues, on the other hand, such as a loud voice, eyebrow-lowering, staring, postures stiff with muscle tension, and pointing (Driskell and Salas 1993).

STEINZOR EFFECT

Group dynamic. The finding that a. with minimal leadership, members of a discussion group address most remarks to colleagues sitting across a conference table; b. with a strong leader, members address colleagues seated beside them; and c. where leadership is shared, no spatial effect is seen (Sommer 1967).

Usage: The Steinzor effect reveals a telling link between eye contact and dominance. We may find it difficult, e.g., to gaze directly at, or even to cross lines of sight with, a dominant individual seated nearby at the same table.

RESEARCH REPORT: "In task discussions, people direct more comments to those seated across from them in a circle or at a table, whereas in social discussions, they are more likely to talk to the person seated next to them. The presence of a directive leader may also encourage more talking to those in adjacent seats" (Burgoon et. al 1989:389).

See also ANGULAR DISTANCE, PROXEMICS.



David B. Givens, Ph.D., Director
CENTER FOR NON-VERBAL STUDIES
Defines art + game of conference tables
Copyright © 1998 - 2001 (David B. Givens/Center for Nonverbal Studies)
Permission for rights granted to Franz Design Conference Tables
All Links in this content quote linked to CENTER FOR NON-VERBAL STUDIES definitions