Although meetings are, for most, an important part of the daily routine, they are easily disregarded. When viewed as a form of interaction, meetings become more problematic. While the form of interaction is important for the interpretation of content, it also opens up possibilities for manipulation.

The purpose of this study is to contribute to an increased understanding of the possibilities for constructing the form of interaction in meetings. This has been achieved through a study of narratives on meetings, here in terms of normative management literature.

The literature on meeting management offers distinct views on how meetings supposedly function. These views can be expressed in terms of two metaphors: meetings as organisms and meetings as machines. Metaphors serve to both highlight and conceal certain aspects of a phenomenon. The organism metaphor highlights the homogeneity and dynamics of meetings. In contrast, the machine metaphor helps explain how meetings work, as well as how they can be measured and evaluated.

Different metaphors are often portrayed as either totally distinct from, or directly related to each other. However, the literature on managing meetings reveals that the organism and machine metaphors are both related and discrete. Accordingly, the dialectics of highlighting and concealing aspects of a phenomenon must be complemented by the dialectics between the metaphors. The latter can be expressed in terms of links that integrate the metaphors, as well as links that separate the metaphors and define differences between them. In the literature these links emerge as options for action, i.e., alternatives for enacting a particular metaphor using specific techniques. Accordingly, certain techniques provide options for choosing the form of interaction. However, meetings in themselves can also be viewed as a kind of information technology in the same way as e-mail or videoconferencing technology. Normative statements, e.g. the literature on managing meetings, are important clues for the analysis of how different forms of social action can be designed.

In studying interaction and communication, an analysis of conscious attempts to design or influence situations should be considered. Such analysis is facilitated by working with a refined concept of form-the double dialectics of form/content and form/form-along with the concept of techniques.