Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Title
Abstract
Key Takeaways
Figures
Conclusion
Implications for Research
Implications for Practice
References
All Topics
Psychology
Cognitive Psychology

Sensemaking and emotion in organizations

Profile image of Timothy VogusTimothy Vogus

2013, Organizational Psychology Review

https://doi.org/10.1177/2041386613489062
visibility

…

description

26 pages

link

1 file

Abstract

Emotion is a critical but relatively unexplored dimension of sensemaking in organizations. Existing models of sensemaking tend to ignore the role of emotion or portray it as an impediment. To address this problem, we explore the role that felt emotion plays in three stages of individual sensemaking in organizations. First, we examine emotion's role in mediating the relationship between unexpected events and the onset of sensemaking processes. We argue that emotion signals the need for and provides the energy that fuels sensemaking, and that different kinds of emotions are more and less likely to play these roles. Second, we explore the role of emotion in shaping sensemaking processes, focusing on how emotions make sensemaking a more solitary or more interpersonal process, and a more generative or more integrative process. Third, we argue that sensemakers' felt emotion plays an important role in concluding sensemaking, particularly through its effect on the plausibility of sensemaking accounts.

Key takeaways
sparkles

AI

  1. Emotion is integral to sensemaking, influencing its onset, processes, and conclusions.
  2. Moderately intense negative emotions are most likely to trigger engagement in sensemaking.
  3. Sensemaking processes can vary between generative and integrative, influenced by the emotional state of the sensemaker.
  4. Self-conscious emotions like guilt and pride affect whether sensemaking is social or solitary.
  5. A plausible sensemaking account aligns with the sensemaker's felt emotions and action orientations.
Figures (4)
such that sensemaking is most likely to occur when prevention-focused (promotion-focused)
such that sensemaking is most likely to occur when prevention-focused (promotion-focused)
Figure 2. The role of emotion in shaping sensemaking processes. (e.g., nuclear power plants) that face extremely trying environments where error must be avoided (Rerup, 2009; Schulman, 1993; Weick & Sutcliffe, 2007). more critical analyses of new information (Schulman, 1993). One form of sensemaking is not necessarily “better” than the other. Gen- erative sensemaking processes might be espe- cially appropriate in contexts in which creativity, improvisational action, and bri- colage (i.e., novel recombination of existing routines) are required (Baker & Nelson, 2005; Drazin et al., 1999; Weick, 1998). Other orga- nizational contexts may favor simpler, more precise interpretations and more cautious action (Levinthal & Rerup, 2006; Turner & Rindova, 2012). For instance, frequently updating and deepening one’s evolving understanding of a situation to incorporate weak signals of emer- ging threats is a hallmark of individual sense- making within high reliability organizations —— Evidence from a number of research areas suggests that a sensemaker’s felt emotion may play a key role in fostering generative or inte- grative sensemaking processes. (See Figure 2 for a summary of the relationships we propose in this section). Research on individual decision making shows that felt emotion can be valuable for deeper processing of novel situations (For- gas, 1995; Forgas & George, 2001; Ketelaar & Clore, 1997). More specifically, positive felt emotion has been found to encourage creative cognition by expanding or combining existing cognitive frameworks. suggesting new ideas Evidence from a number of research areas
Figure 2. The role of emotion in shaping sensemaking processes. (e.g., nuclear power plants) that face extremely trying environments where error must be avoided (Rerup, 2009; Schulman, 1993; Weick & Sutcliffe, 2007). more critical analyses of new information (Schulman, 1993). One form of sensemaking is not necessarily “better” than the other. Gen- erative sensemaking processes might be espe- cially appropriate in contexts in which creativity, improvisational action, and bri- colage (i.e., novel recombination of existing routines) are required (Baker & Nelson, 2005; Drazin et al., 1999; Weick, 1998). Other orga- nizational contexts may favor simpler, more precise interpretations and more cautious action (Levinthal & Rerup, 2006; Turner & Rindova, 2012). For instance, frequently updating and deepening one’s evolving understanding of a situation to incorporate weak signals of emer- ging threats is a hallmark of individual sense- making within high reliability organizations —— Evidence from a number of research areas suggests that a sensemaker’s felt emotion may play a key role in fostering generative or inte- grative sensemaking processes. (See Figure 2 for a summary of the relationships we propose in this section). Research on individual decision making shows that felt emotion can be valuable for deeper processing of novel situations (For- gas, 1995; Forgas & George, 2001; Ketelaar & Clore, 1997). More specifically, positive felt emotion has been found to encourage creative cognition by expanding or combining existing cognitive frameworks. suggesting new ideas Evidence from a number of research areas
research. First, we propose a major shift in thinking about how sensemaking is triggered. Traditionally, sensemaking has been seen as a natural reaction to interruptions and so the surprise was when sensemaking did not occur (Weick, 1995). In contrast, we reframe sense- making as an effortful and potentially negative experience that individuals may avoid, and thus it is the onset of sensemaking that requires explanation. We argue that the emotional reaction to a triggering event provides individ- uals with the energy to engage in sensemaking, and that certain emotions are more likely to provide this energy than others. We identify the psychological processes that link a novel or unexpected event and emotions that energize sensemaking, as well as the conditions under was motivated by a recognition that the rela- tively undeveloped status of emotion in sense- making theory was inconsistent with recent research that has pointed to its importance and with lived experience that shows the deeply interconnected nature of sensemaking and emotion. The framework we have developed and arguments made extend current research and writing that has shown the deep integration of emotion into a wide range of information processing activities by individuals (Forgas & George, 2001; Frijda, 1987; Lieberman, 2000).
research. First, we propose a major shift in thinking about how sensemaking is triggered. Traditionally, sensemaking has been seen as a natural reaction to interruptions and so the surprise was when sensemaking did not occur (Weick, 1995). In contrast, we reframe sense- making as an effortful and potentially negative experience that individuals may avoid, and thus it is the onset of sensemaking that requires explanation. We argue that the emotional reaction to a triggering event provides individ- uals with the energy to engage in sensemaking, and that certain emotions are more likely to provide this energy than others. We identify the psychological processes that link a novel or unexpected event and emotions that energize sensemaking, as well as the conditions under was motivated by a recognition that the rela- tively undeveloped status of emotion in sense- making theory was inconsistent with recent research that has pointed to its importance and with lived experience that shows the deeply interconnected nature of sensemaking and emotion. The framework we have developed and arguments made extend current research and writing that has shown the deep integration of emotion into a wide range of information processing activities by individuals (Forgas & George, 2001; Frijda, 1987; Lieberman, 2000).
different emotions will have very different impacts on sensemaking processes: the experience of positive emotions by sense- makers, we propose, is likely to lead to more generative sensemaking and negative emotions to more integrative sensemaking; specific self- conscious emotions such as pride and guilt, we argue, engender more social sensemaking, while global self-conscious emotions such as hubris and shame will be associated with more solitary sensemaking. Such highly differen- tiated impacts of emotion on sensemaking point to the need for much more sensitive analyses of the role of emotion in understanding how sense- making processes vary across sensemaker and sensemaking context. These arguments suggest that both individual differences and organiza- tional contexts may play significant roles in affecting how sensemaking processes play out, particularly through their impact on the valence of felt emotions, and the degree to which success and failure are attributed specifically to events or globally to persons. which this is most likely to occur. These arguments significantly extend current con- ceptions of sensemaking and emotion, which have either theorized emotion as arousal (Weick, 1995), or embraced a more complex understanding of emotion but left unexplored the impacts of emotions differing in valence and intensity (George & Jones, 2001). While our propositions are consistent with research that suggests intense negative emotions may prevent sensemaking (Walsh & Bartunek, 2011; Weick, 1993), we extend these ideas by highlighting the importance of sensemakers’ regulatory focus as an important moderator of the emotion—sensemaking relationship. a i a cr a a Ee es ee ee to more integrative sensemaking; specific self-
different emotions will have very different impacts on sensemaking processes: the experience of positive emotions by sense- makers, we propose, is likely to lead to more generative sensemaking and negative emotions to more integrative sensemaking; specific self- conscious emotions such as pride and guilt, we argue, engender more social sensemaking, while global self-conscious emotions such as hubris and shame will be associated with more solitary sensemaking. Such highly differen- tiated impacts of emotion on sensemaking point to the need for much more sensitive analyses of the role of emotion in understanding how sense- making processes vary across sensemaker and sensemaking context. These arguments suggest that both individual differences and organiza- tional contexts may play significant roles in affecting how sensemaking processes play out, particularly through their impact on the valence of felt emotions, and the degree to which success and failure are attributed specifically to events or globally to persons. which this is most likely to occur. These arguments significantly extend current con- ceptions of sensemaking and emotion, which have either theorized emotion as arousal (Weick, 1995), or embraced a more complex understanding of emotion but left unexplored the impacts of emotions differing in valence and intensity (George & Jones, 2001). While our propositions are consistent with research that suggests intense negative emotions may prevent sensemaking (Walsh & Bartunek, 2011; Weick, 1993), we extend these ideas by highlighting the importance of sensemakers’ regulatory focus as an important moderator of the emotion—sensemaking relationship. a i a cr a a Ee es ee ee to more integrative sensemaking; specific self-

Related papers

Making Sense of Sensemaking in Organization Studies
Annie Pye, Ian Colville, Andrew Brown

Organization Studies, 2015

‘Sensemaking’ is an extraordinarily influential perspective with a substantial following among management and organization scholars interested in how people appropriate and enact their ‘realities’. Organization Studies has been and remains one of the principal outlets for work that seeks either to draw-on or to extend our understanding of sensemaking practices in and around organizations. The contribution of this paper is fourfold. First, we review briefly what we understand by sensemaking and some key debates which fracture the field. Second, we attend critically attention to eight papers published previously in Organization Studies which we discuss in terms of five broad themes: (i) how sense is made through discourse; (ii) the politics from which social forms of sensemaking emerges and the power that is inherent in it; (iii) the intertwined and recursive nature of micro-macro sensemaking processes; (iv) the strong ties which bind sensemaking and identities, and (v) the role of sensemaking processes in decision making and change. Third, while not designed to be a review of extant literature, we discuss these themes with reference to other related work notably that published in this journal. Finally, we raise for consideration a number of potentially generative topics for further empirical and theory-building research.

View PDFchevron_right
Organizational Disruptions and Triggers for Divergent Sensemaking
Matthew Weber, Gail Thomas

In recent years, scholars and practitioners alike have sought to better understand the emergent communicative processes involved in the implementation of strategic organizational initiatives. In response, this article builds on sensemaking and sensegiving theory to understand the interactions that developed between internal and external stakeholders in response to a post-9/11 change in the Maritime Transportation Security Act. A detailed, emergent account of a failed initiative was derived from public comments in the Federal Register, transcripts from public meetings, newspaper articles, and semi-structured interviews with key internal informants. In-depth analysis of these data allowed us to examine a divergent sensemaking process and identify four critical triggers that led to a communication breakdown: 1) unidirectional and parsimonious communication, 2) multifaceted understandings of organizational identities, 3) misaligned cues, and 4) an emergence of inter-organizational sensemaking. A first-order analysis presents data from an in-depth case analysis, and a second-order analysis uses the analysis to develop a divergent sensemaking conceptual model. From a strategic communication perspective, our findings demonstrate the importance of taking a broad perspective of the legitimate participants in a sensemaking process, as well as reconciling sensemaking trajectories to avoid contradictions between perspectives. We offer implications for theory, future research, and practice.

View PDFchevron_right
Sensemaking in organizations
Shimona Malaihollo
View PDFchevron_right
Sensemaking and sensegiving as predicting organizational crisis
galit klein

Risk Management, 2017

The current study examined crisis management and the signals that indicate its appearance. Based on cognitive and social psychology theories, we explored how senior and non-senior employees engage in sensemaking and sensegiving activities prior to and during crisis. Based on natural language processing, we analyzed a database of 86,643 emails sent by Enron employees before Enron declared bankruptcy and after the bankruptcy event. Our findings showed that employees could sense the impending crisis and applied informal scanning methods in an attempt at sensemaking of their unstable reality. In parallel, managers used sensegiving by deploying more positive confidence words in their emails. This tendency escalated after the crisis broke out. We explain this increase as the need to resolve feelings of cognitive dissonance related to their identity and reality. Our findings suggest both theoretical and practical contributions for the survival of organizations.

View PDFchevron_right
Making Sense of Sensemaking in <i>Organization Studies</i>
Andrew Brown

Organization Studies, 2014

'Sensemaking' is an extraordinarily influential perspective with a substantial following among management and organization scholars interested in how people appropriate and enact their 'realities'. Organization Studies has been and remains one of the principal outlets for work that seeks either to draw on or to extend our understanding of sensemaking practices in and around organizations. The contribution of this paper is fourfold. First, we review briefly what we understand by sensemaking and some key debates which fracture the field. Second, we attend critically to eight papers published previously in Organization Studies which we discuss in terms of five broad themes: (i) how sense is made through discourse; (ii) the politics from which social forms of sensemaking emerge and the power that is inherent in it; (iii) the intertwined and recursive nature of micro-macro sensemaking processes; (iv) the strong ties which bind sensemaking and identities; and (v) the role of sensemaking processes in decision making and change. Third, while not designed to be a review of extant literature, we discuss these themes with reference to other related work, notably that published in this journal. Finally, we raise for consideration a number of potentially generative topics for further empirical and theory-building research.

View PDFchevron_right
The Signal Provision of Emotion: Using Emotions to Enhance Reliability via Sensemaking.
Sarah Tracy, J C, Cliff Scott, Joseph A Allen

High reliability organization (HRO) theory suggests that early detection of and swift responses to potentially hazardous and situation changing events in organizational environments is central to the sustainability of reliable operations. Limited research on HRO’s (e.g. military groups and firefighters) considers how normative demands on feeling and emotion help to explain why some events are recognized and responded to while others not. In this article, we propose a model of enactment of anomalous events (i.e., situation changing events) that considers the manner in which emotions are regulated in high reliability contexts and how this influences the extent to which early indicators of anomalous events are heeded or dismissed. In this article, we seek to provide a theoretical framework for explaining both the enabling mechanisms by which emotions may function as a signaling resource in the detection of anomalous events and the constraining mechanisms through when emotion regulation processes may inhibit reliability. We discuss implications of the model for researchers and practitioners in high reliability organizations.

View PDFchevron_right
The Signal Provision of Emotion: Using Emotions to Enhance Reliability Via Sensemaking Recommended Citation
J C, Joseph A Allen

High reliability organization (HRO) theory suggests that early detection of and swift responses to potentially hazardous and situation changing events in organizational environments is central to the sustainability of reliable operations. Limited research on HRO’s (e.g. military groups and firefighters) considers how normative demands on feeling and emotion help to explain why some events are recognized and responded to while others not. In this article, we propose a model of enactment of anomalous events (i.e., situation changing events) that considers the manner in which emotions are regulated in high reliability contexts and how this influences the extent to which early indicators of anomalous events are heeded or dismissed. In this article, we seek to provide a theoretical framework for explaining both the enabling mechanisms by which emotions may function as a signaling resource in the detection of anomalous events and the constraining mechanisms through when emotion regulation processes may inhibit reliability. We discuss implications of the model for researchers and practitioners in high reliability organizations.

View PDFchevron_right
Making Sense of Sensemaking Process in the Face of Organizational Environment
ANSAR WASEEM

2020

Modern organization theory suggests that external environment is central to the organizational phenomena. Similarly, sensemaking is widely used to describe organizational actors and processes. Despite this significance of both constructs and their suggested interwoven occurrence in organizational landscape, sensemaking processes in the face of different types of organizational environments have not been studied. This paper furnishes a framework to describe which forms of sensemaking are useful in various types of organizational environment. At first, based on review of literature, we synthesized that sensemaking is a multifaceted process; which is retrospective as well prospective and continuous as well as episodic. Moreover, it involves both individual and social cognition, and hence becomes individual as well as organizational process. Subsequently, we have presented propositions regarding sensemaking processes in the face of simple, complex, dynamic and stable environments.

View PDFchevron_right
56. Helms Mills, Jean, Thurlow, Amy, and Mills, Albert J. (2010) Making Sense of Sense Making: The Critical Sensemaking approach, Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management, 5(2): 182-195
Albert Mills
View PDFchevron_right
Epistemes and Structures of Sensemaking in Organizational Life
Robert Chia

Journal of Management Inquiry, 2007

The issue of organisational sense-making has been much researched and written about in recent years. However, despite the extensive literature that has been devoted to articulating the crucial aspects of sense-making little has been written about how structurally such sense-making attempts are enabled and realised. Instead much of the attention tends to be focused on the manifest features of sense-making or the sequence of steps involved. In this paper we explore the underlying organising logic of alternative systems of thought that enable the local sense-making process to be accomplished, sustained and extended. 'Episteme', the underlying code of a culture that govern its language, its logic, its schemas of perception, its values and its techniques, etc., is what makes collective meaning and sense-making possible and in this paper we examine three epistemes of organizational sense-making for legitimising and justifying managerial actions and decision-making within the context of a family-owned newspaper called the Courier. We do this through a study of the justifying narratives employed in the sense-making process.

View PDFchevron_right

References (162)

  1. Adler, P. S, & Obstfeld, D. (2007). The role of affect in creative projects and exploratory search Industrial and Corporate Change, 16(1), 19-50.
  2. Antaki, C. (1994). Explaining and arguing: The social organisation of accounts London, UK: Sage.
  3. Ashforth, B. E, & Kreiner, G. E. (2002). Normalizing emotion in organizations: Making the extraordi- nary seem ordinary Human Resource Manage- ment Review, 12(2), 215-235.
  4. Ashforth, B. E, & Saks, A. M. (1996). Socialization tactics: Longitudinal effects on newcomer adjust- ment The Academy of Management Journal, 39(1), 149-178.
  5. Averill, J. R. (1982). Anger and aggression: An essay on emotion New York, NY: Springer-Verlag Baker, T, & Nelson, R. E. (2005). Creating some- thing from nothing: Resource construction through entrepreneurial bricolage Administrative Science Quarterly, 50(3), 329-366.
  6. Barrett, L. F, & Russell, J. A. (1999). The structure of current affect: Controversies and emerging consensus Current Directions in Psychological Science, 8(1), 10-14.
  7. Barton, M. A, & Sutcliffe, K. M. (2009). Overcom- ing dysfunctional momentum: Organizational safety as a social achievement Human Relations, 62(9), 1327-1356.
  8. Bartunek, J. M. (1984). Changing interpretive schemes and organizational restructuring: The example of a religious order Administrative Sci- ence Quarterly, 29, 355-372.
  9. Bartunek, J. M, Balogun, J, & Do, B. (2011). Consider- ing planned change anew: Stretching large group interventions strategically, emotionally, and mean- ingfully Academy of Management Annals, 5(1), 1-52.
  10. Bartunek, J. M, Rousseau, D. M, Rudolph, J. W, & DePalma, J. A. (2006). On the receiving end: Sensemaking, emotion, and assessments of an organizational change initiated by others Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 42, 182-206.
  11. Baumeister, R. F, Bratslavsky, E, Finkenauer, C, & Vohs, K. D. (2001). Bad is stronger than good Review of General Psychology, 5(4), 323-370.
  12. Baumeister, R. F, Stillwell, A. M, & Heatherton, T. F. (1994). Guilt: An interpersonal approach Psy- chological Bulletin, 115(2), 243-267.
  13. Baumeister, R. F, Vohs, K. D, DeWall, C. N, & Zhang, L. (2007). How emotion shapes behavior: Feedback, anticipation, and reflection, rather than direct causation Personality and Social Psychol- ogy Review, 11(2), 167-203.
  14. Beal, D. J, Weiss, H. M, Barros, E, & MacDermid, S. M. (2005). An episodic process model of affec- tive influences on performance Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(6), 1054-1068.
  15. Blatt, R, Christianson, M. K, Sutcliffe, K. M, & Rosenthal, M. M. (2006). A sensemaking lens on reliability Journal of Organizational Beha- vior, 27(7), 897-917.
  16. Bosk, C. L. (2003). Forgive and remember: Manag- ing medical failure (2nd ed) Chicago, IL: Univer- sity of Chicago Press
  17. Brockner, J, & Higgins, E. T. (2001). Regulatory focus theory: Its implications for the study of emotions in the workplace Organizational Beha- vior and Human Decision, 86, 35-66.
  18. Brown, A. D. (2000). Making sense of inquiry sense- making Journal of Management Studies, 37(1), 45-75.
  19. Brown, A. D. (2004). Authoritative sensemaking in a public inquiry report Organization Studies, 25(1), 95-112.
  20. Brown, A. D, & Humphreys, M. (2003). Epic and tragic tales: Making sense of change Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 39(2), 121-144.
  21. Cacioppo, J. T, Gardner, W. L, & Berntson, G. G. (1999). The affect system has parallel and inte- grative processing components: Form follows function Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76(5), 839-855.
  22. Cannon, M. D, & Edmondson, A. C. (2001). Confront- ing failure: Antecedents and consequences of shared beliefs about failure in organizational work groups Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22(2), 161-177.
  23. Cantril, H. (1941). The psychology of social move- ments Washington, DC: Transaction
  24. Carroll, J. S, & Quijada, M. A. (2004). Redirecting traditional professional values to support safety: Changing organisational culture in health care Quality and Safety in Health Care, 13(Supple- ment 2), ii16-ii21.
  25. Carver, C. S, Sinclair, S, & Johnson, S. L. (2010). Authentic and hubristic pride: Differential relations to aspects of goal regulation, affect, and self-control Journal of Research in Personality, 44(6), 698-703.
  26. Casciaro, T, Carley, K. M, & Krackhardt, D. (1999). Positive affectivity and accuracy in social network perception Motivation and Emotion, 23, 285-306.
  27. Christianson, M. K, Farkas, M. T, Sutcliffe, K. M, & Weick, K. E. (2009). Learning through rare events: Significant interruptions at the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Museum Organization Science, 20(5), 846-860.
  28. Cornelissen, J. P, & Clarke, J. S. (2010). Imagining and rationalizing opportunities: Inductive reason- ing and the creation and justification of new ven- tures Academy of Management Review, 35(4), 539-557.
  29. Cropanzano, R, Paddock, L, Rupp, D. E, Bagger, J, & Baldwin, A. (2008). How regulatory focus impacts the process-by-outcome interaction for perceived fairness and emotions Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 105(1), 36-51.
  30. Dougherty, D. S, & Drumheller, K. (2006). Sense- making and emotions in organizations: Account- ing for emotions in a rational(ized) context Communication Studies, 57(2), 215-238.
  31. Drazin, R, Glynn, M. A, & Kazanjian, R. K. (1999). Multilevel theorizing about creativity in organi- zations: A sensemaking perspective Academy of Management Review, 24(2), 286-307.
  32. Dunbar, R. L M, & Garud, R. (2009). Distributed knowledge and indeterminate meaning: The case of the Columbia shuttle flight Organization Studies, 30(4), 397-421.
  33. Dutton, J. E, & Dukerich, J. M. (1991). Keeping an eye on the mirror: Image and identity in organizational adaptation Academy of Manage- ment Journal, 34(3), 517-554.
  34. Edmondson, A. C. (1996). Learning from mistakes is easier said than done: Group and organizational influences on the detection and correction of human error Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 32(1), 5-28.
  35. Edmondson, A. C. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350-383.
  36. Elfenbein, H. A. (2007). Emotion in organizations: A review and theoretical integration Academy of Management Annals, 1, 315-386.
  37. Ellis, S, & Davidi, I. (2005). After-event reviews: Drawing lessons from successful and failed expe- rience Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(5), 857-871.
  38. Ellis, S, Mendel, R, & Nir, M. (2006). Learning from successful and failed experience: The moderating role of kind of after-event review Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(3), 669-680.
  39. Estrada, C. A, Isen, A. M, & Young, M. J. (1997). Positive affect facilitates integration of informa- tion and decreases anchoring in reasoning among physicians Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 72(1), 117-135.
  40. Fehr, B, & Baldwin, M. W. (1996). Prototype and script analyses of laypeople's knowledge of anger In G. Fletcher (Eds), Knowledge structures and interaction in close relations: A social psychologi- cal approach (pp 219-245.) Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum Fiske, S. T, & Taylor, S. E. (2007). Social cognition: From brains to culture New York, NY: McGraw- Hill Fitness, J. (2000). Anger in the workplace: An emotion script approach to anger episodes between workers and their superiors, co-workers and subordinates Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21(2), 147-162.
  41. Forgas, J. P. (1995). Mood and judgment: The affect infusion model (AIM) Psychological Bulletin, 117(1), 39-66.
  42. Forgas, J. P. (1998). On being happy and mistaken: Mood effects on the fundamental attribution error Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75(2), 318-331.
  43. Forgas, J. P, & George, J. M. (2001). Affective influ- ences on judgments and behavior in organiza- tions: An information processing perspective Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 86(1), 3-34.
  44. Fredrickson, B. L. (2001). The role of positive emotions in positive psychology: The broaden- and-build theory of positive emotions American Psychologist, 56(3), 218-226.
  45. Fredrickson, B. L, Tugade, M. M, Waugh, C. E, & Larkin, G. R. (2003). What good are positive emo- tions in crisis? A prospective study of resilience and emotions following the terrorist attacks on the United States on September 11th, 2001 Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(2), 365-376.
  46. Frijda, N. H. (1986). The emotions Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press
  47. Frijda, N. H. (1987). Emotion, cognitive structure, and action tendency Cognition & Emotion, 1(2), 115-143.
  48. Frijda, N. H. (1994). Emotions require cognitions, even if simple ones In P Ekman & R. J. Davidson (Eds), The nature of emotions: Fundamental questions (pp 197-202.) Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press
  49. Garud, R, Dunbar, R. L M, & Bartel, C. A. (2011). Dealing with unusual experiences: A narrative perspective on organizational learning Organiza- tion Science, 22(3), 587-601.
  50. George, J. M. (2011). Dual tuning: A minimum condi- tion for understanding affect in organizations? Organizational Psychology Review, 1(2), 147-164.
  51. George, J. M, & Jones, G. R. (2001). Towards a pro- cess model of individual change in organizations Human Relations, 54(4), 419-444.
  52. George, J. M, & Zhou, J. (2007). Dual tuning in a supportive context: Joint contributions of positive mood, negative mood, and supervisory behaviors to employee creativity Academy of Management Journal, 50(3), 605-622.
  53. Gephart, R. P. (1993). The textual approach: Risk and blame in disaster sensemaking Academy of Management Journal, 36(6), 1465-1514.
  54. Gergen, K. J. (2009). An invitation to social con- struction (2nd ed) London, UK: Sage
  55. Gioia, D. A, & Chittipeddi, K. (1991). Sensemaking and sensegiving in strategic change initiation Strategic Management Journal, 12(6), 433-448.
  56. Gioia, D. A, & Mehra, A. (1996). Review of ''sense- making in organizations'' Academy of Manage- ment Review, 21(4), 1226-1230.
  57. Gioia, D. A, & Thomas, J. B. (1996). Identity, image and issue interpretation: Sensemaking during strategic change in academia Administrative Science Quarterly, 41, 370-403.
  58. Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press Gooty, J, Gavin, M, & Ashkanasy, N. M. (2009). Emo- tions research in OB: The challenges that lie ahead Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30(6), 833-838.
  59. Grandey, A. A. (2008). Emotions at work: A review and research agenda In C Cooper & J. Barling (Eds), Handbook of organizational behavior (pp 235-261.) Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
  60. Grandey, A. A, Rafaeli, A, Ravid, S, Wirtz, J, & Stei- ner, D. D. (2010). Emotion display rules at work in the global service economy: The special case of the customer Journal of Service Management, 21(3), 388-412.
  61. Greenberg, L. S, & Pascual-Leone, J. (2001). A dialec- tical constructivist view of the creation of personal meaning Journal of Constructivist Psychology, 14(3), 165-186.
  62. Hayward, M. L A, & Hambrick, D. C. (1997). Explaining the premiums paid for large acquisi- tions: Evidence of CEO hubris Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(1), 103-127.
  63. Higgins, E. T. (1997). Beyond pleasure and pain American Psychologist, 52(12), 1280-1300.
  64. Higgins, E. T. (1998). Promotion and prevention: Reg- ulatory focus as a motivational principle In M. P. Zanna (Ed), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol 30, pp 1-46.) San Diego, CA: Academic Press
  65. Hill, R. C, & Levenhagen, M. (1995). Metaphors and mental models: Sensemaking and sensegiving in innovative and entrepreneurial activities Journal of Management, 21, 1057-1074.
  66. Hodgkinson, G. P, & Healey, M. P. (2011). Psychological foundations of dynamic capabilities: Reflexion and reflection in strategic management Strategic Management Journal, 32(13), 1500-1516.
  67. Huy, Q. N. (2002). Emotional balancing of organiza- tional continuity and radical change: The contri- bution of middle managers Administrative Science Quarterly, 47(1), 31-69.
  68. Huy, Q. N. (2005). An emotion-based view of strate- gic renewal In G Szulanski, J Porac, & Y. Doz (Eds), Advances in strategic management (Vol 22, pp 3-37.) Bingley, UK: Emerald (MCB UP)
  69. Huy, Q. N. (2011). How middle managers' group- focus emotions and social identities influence strategy implementation Strategic Management Journal, 32(13), 1387-1410.
  70. Isen, A. M. (2008). Some ways in which positive affect influences decision making and problem solving In M Lewis, J. M Haviland-Jones, & L. F. Barrett (Eds), Handbook of emotions (3rd ed, pp 548-573.) New York, NY: Guilford Press
  71. Ketelaar, T, & Clore, G. L. (1997). Emotion and reason: The proximate effects and ultimate func- tions of emotions In G. Matthews (Ed), Cognitive science perspectives on personality and emotion (Vol 124, pp 355-396.) Amsterdam, the Nether- lands: Elsevier Science
  72. Klein, G. (2003). Intuition at work: Why developing your gut instincts will make you better at what you do (1st ed) New York, NY: Doubleday
  73. Koestler, A. (1964). The act of creation: A study of the conscious and unconscious in science and art New York, NY: Dell Kooij-de Bode, H. J M, van Knippenberg, D, & van Ginkel, W. P. (2010). Good effects of bad feel- ings: Negative affectivity and group decision- making British Journal of Management, 21(2), 375-392.
  74. Kreiner, G. E, Hollensbe, E. C, & Sheep, M. L. (2006). Where is the ''me'' among the ''we''? Identity work and the search for optimal balance Academy of Management Journal, 49(5), 1031-1057.
  75. Labianca, G, & Brass, D. J. (2006). Exploring the social ledger: Negative relationships and negative asym- metry in social networks in organizations Academy of Management Review, 31(3), 596-614.
  76. Larson, R. (1989). Is feeling ''in control'' related to happiness in daily life? Psychological Reports, 64(3), 775-784.
  77. Lazarus, R. S. (1991). Emotion and adaptation New York, NY: Oxford University Press Lee, F. (1997). When the going gets tough, do the tough ask for help? Help seeking and power moti- vation in organizations Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 72(3), 336-363.
  78. Levenson, R. W. (1992). Autonomic nervous system differences among emotions Psychological Science, 3(1), 23-27.
  79. Levinthal, D, & Rerup, C. (2006). Crossing an appar- ent chasm: Bridging mindful and less-mindful perspectives on organizational learning Organi- zation Science, 17(4), 502-513.
  80. Lewis, M. (2000). Self-conscious emotions: Embar- rassment, pride, shame, and guilt In M Lewis & J. M. Haviland (Eds), Handbook of emotions (2nd ed, pp 623-636.) New York, NY: Guilford Press
  81. Lieberman, M. D. (2000). Intuition: A social cogni- tive neuroscience approach Psychological Bulle- tin, 126(1), 109-137.
  82. Loewenstein, G, & Lerner, J. S. (2003). The role of affect in decision making In R. J Davidson, K. R Scherer, & H. H. Goldsmith (Eds), Handbook of affective sciences (pp 619-642.) Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press
  83. Louis, M. R. (1980). Surprise and sense making: What newcomers experience in entering unfami- liar organizational settings Administrative Sci- ence Quarterly, 25(2), 226-251.
  84. Louis, M. R, & Sutton, R. I. (1991). Switching cog- nitive gears: From habits of mind to active think- ing Human Relations, 44(1), 55-76.
  85. Lyubomirsky, S, King, L, & Diener, E. (2005). The ben- efits of frequent positive affect: Does happiness lead to success? Psychological Bulletin, 131(6), 803-855.
  86. Magala, S. J. (1997). Sense making in organizations Organization Studies, 18(2), 317-338.
  87. Maguire, R, Maguire, P, & Keane, M. T. (2011). Making sense of surprise: An investigation of the factors influencing surprise judgments Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37(1), 176-186.
  88. Maitlis, S. (2005). The social processes of organiza- tional sensemaking Academy of Management Journal, 48(1), 21-49.
  89. Maitlis, S, & Lawrence, T. B. (2007). Triggers and enablers of sensegiving in organizations Academy of Management Journal, 50(1), 57-84.
  90. Malmendier, U, & Tate, G. (2005). CEO overconfi- dence and corporate investment Journal of Finance, 60(6), 2661-2700.
  91. Mantere, S, Schildt, H. A, & Sillince, J. A A. (2012). Reversal of strategic change Academy of Management Journal, 55(1), 172-196.
  92. McAdams, D. P. (2001). The psychology of life stor- ies Review of General Psychology, 5(2), 100-122.
  93. Michie, S. (2009). Pride and gratitude Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 15(4), 393-403.
  94. Murray, N, Sujan, H, Hirt, E. R, & Sujan, M. (1990). The influence of mood on categorization: A cognitive flexibility interpretation Journal of Per- sonality and Social Psychology, 59(3), 411-425.
  95. Nigam, A, & Ocasio, W. (2010). Event attention, environmental sensemaking, and change in insti- tutional logics: An inductive analysis of the effects of public attention to Clinton's health care reform initiative Organization Science, 21(4), 823-841.
  96. O ¨hman, A, Flykt, A, & Esteves, F. (2001). Emotion drives attention: Detecting the snake in the grass Journal of Experimental Psychology, 130(3), 466-478.
  97. Orlikowski, W. J, & Yates, J. (1994). Genre reper- toire: The structuring of communicative practices in organizations Administrative Science Quar- terly, 39(4), 541-574.
  98. Park, C. L. (2010). Making sense of the meaning lit- erature: An integrative review of meaning mak- ing and its effects on adjustment to stressful life events Psychological Bulletin, 136(2), 257-301.
  99. Popper, M, & Lipshitz, R. (1998). Organizational learning mechanisms Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 34(2), 161-179.
  100. Pratt, M. G. (2000). The good, the bad, and the ambivalent: Managing identification among Amway distributors Administrative Science Quarterly, 45(3), 456-493.
  101. Quinn, R. W. (2005). Flow in knowledge work: High performance experience in the design of national security technology Administrative Science Quarterly, 50(4), 610-641.
  102. Quinn, R. W, & Worline, M. C. (2008). Enabling courageous collective action: Conversations from United Airlines Flight 93 Organization Science, 19(4), 497-516.
  103. Rafaeli, A, & Vilnai-Yavetz, I. (2004). Emotion as a connection of physical artifacts and organizations Organization Science, 15(6), 671-686.
  104. Rerup, C. (2009). Attentional triangulation: Learning from unexpected rare crises Organization Science, 20(5), 876-893.
  105. Rerup, C, & Feldman, M. S. (2011). Routines as a source of change in organizational schemata: The role of trial-and-error learning Academy of Management Journal, 54(3), 577-610.
  106. Roberson, Q. M, & Stevens, C. K. (2006). Making sense of diversity in the workplace: Organiza- tional justice and language abstraction in employ- ees' accounts of diversity-related incidents Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(2), 379-391.
  107. Ron, N, Lipshitz, R, & Popper, M. (2006). How organi- zations learn: Post-flight reviews in an F-16 fighter squadron Organization Studies, 27(8), 1069-1089.
  108. Roseman, I. J, Wiest, C, & Swartz, T. S. (1994). Phe- nomenology, behaviors, and goals differentiate discrete emotions Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(2), 206-221.
  109. Rouleau, L, & Balogun, J. (2011). Middle managers, strategic sensemaking, and discursive competence Journal of Management Studies, 48(5), 953-983.
  110. Rozin, P, & Royzman, E. B. (2001). Negativity bias, negativity dominance, and contagion Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5(4), 296 -320
  111. Rudolph, J. W, & Repenning, N. P. (2002). Disaster dynamics: Understanding the role of quantity in organizational collapse Administrative Science Quarterly, 47(1), 1-30.
  112. Russell, J. A. (1980). A circumplex model of affect Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(6), 1161-1178.
  113. Russell, J. A, & Barrett, L. F. (1999). Core affect, pro- totypical emotional episodes, and other things called emotion: Dissecting the elephant Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76(5), 805-819.
  114. Sanchez-Burks, J, & Huy, Q. N. (2009). Emotional aperture and strategic change: The accurate recognition of collective emotions Organization Science, 20(1), 22-34.
  115. Scherer, K. R. (1984). On the nature and function of emotion: A component process approach In K. R Scherer & P. Elkman (Eds), Approaches to emotion (pp 293-317.) Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum Schmidt, G, & Weiner, B. (1988). An attribution- affect-action theory of behavior Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 14(3), 610-621.
  116. Scho ¨n, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action New York, NY: Basic Books
  117. Schulman, P. R. (1993). The negotiated order of organizational reliability Administration & Soci- ety, 25(3), 353-372.
  118. Schwarz, N, & Clore, G. L. (1983). Mood, misattri- bution, and judgments of well-being: Informative and directive functions of affective states Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(3), 513-523.
  119. Schwarz, N, & Clore, G. L. (2007). Feelings and phenomenal experiences In E. T Higgins & A. Kruglanski (Eds), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (2nd ed, pp 385-407.) New York, NY: Guilford
  120. Schwenk, C. R. (1984). Cognitive simplification processes in strategic decision-making Strategic Management Journal, 5(2), 111-128.
  121. Sheikh, S, & Janoff-Bulman, R. (2010). The ''shoulds'' and ''should nots'' of moral emotions: A self- regulatory perspective on shame and guilt Personal- ity and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36(2), 213-224.
  122. Shrivastava, P. (1992). Bhopal: Anatomy of a crisis London, UK: Paul Chapman
  123. Shweder, R. (1993). Everything you ever wanted to know about cognitive appraisal theory without being conscious of it Psychological Inquiry, 4(4), 322-342.
  124. Sims, D. (2005). You bastard: A narrative explora- tion of the experience of indignation within organizations Organization Studies, 26(11), 1625-1640.
  125. Sluss, D. M, Ployhart, R. E, Cobb, M. G, & Ashforth, B. E. (2012). Generalizing newcomers' relational and organizational identifications: Processes and prototypicality Academy of Management Journal, 55(4), 949-975.
  126. Smircich, L, & Morgan, G. (1982). Leadership: The management of meaning Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 18(3), 257-273.
  127. Smith, C. A, & Ellsworth, P. C. (1985). Patterns of cognitive appraisal in emotion Journal of Person- ality and Social Psychology, 48(4), 813-838.
  128. Snook, S. A. (2000). Friendly fire: The accidental shootdown of US Black Hawks over Northern Iraq Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press Sonenshein, S. (2007). The role of construction, intuition, and justification in responding to ethical issues at work: The sensemaking-intuition model Academy of Management Review, 32(4), 1022-1040.
  129. Starbuck, W. H, & Farjoun, M. (2005). Organization at the limit: Lessons from the Columbia disaster Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell
  130. Staw, B. M, Sutton, R. I, & Pelled, L. H. (1994). Employee positive emotion and favorable out- comes at the workplace Organization Science, 5(1), 51-71.
  131. Stein, M. (2004). The critical period of disasters: Insights from sense-making and psychoanalytic theory Human Relations, 57(10), 1243-1261.
  132. Sutcliffe, K. M, Lewton, E, & Rosenthal, M. M. (2004). Communication failures: An insidious contributor to medical mishaps Academic Medi- cine, 79(2), 186-194.
  133. Tangney, J. P. (1999). The self-conscious emotions: Shame, guilt, embarrassment and pride In T Dal- gleish & M. J. Power (Eds), Handbook of cogni- tion and emotion (pp 541-568.) Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons
  134. Thagard, P. (2000). Coherence in thought and action Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
  135. Thagard, P. (2003). Why wasn't OJ convicted? Emo- tional coherence in legal inference Cognition & Emotion, 17(3), 361-383.
  136. Tracy, J. L, & Robins, R. W. (2004). Show your pride Psychological Science, 15(3), 194-197.
  137. Tracy, J. L, & Robins, R. W. (2007a). Emerging insights into the nature and function of pride Current Direc- tions in Psychological Science, 16(3), 147-150.
  138. Tracy, J. L, & Robins, R. W. (2007b). The psychologi- cal structure of pride: A tale of two facets Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(3), 506-525.
  139. Tracy, J. L, Robins, R. W, & Tangney, J. P. (Eds) (2007). The self-conscious emotions: Theory and research New York, NY: Guilford Press
  140. Turner, S. F, & Rindova, V. (2012). A balancing act: How organizations pursue consistency in routine functioning in the face of ongoing change Organization Science, 23(1), 24-46.
  141. Tversky, A, & Kahneman, D. (1992). Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of uncertainty Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 5(4), 297-323.
  142. Van Kleef, G. A, Homan, A. C, & Cheshin, A. (2012). Emotional influence at work: Take it EASI Organizational Psychology Review, 2(4), 311-339.
  143. Vashdi, D. R, Bamberger, P. A, Erez, M, & Weiss-Mei- lik, A. (2007). Briefing-debriefing: Using a reflex- ive organizational learning model from the military to enhance the performance of surgical teams Human Resource Management, 46(1), 115-142.
  144. Vaughan, D. (1996). The Challenger launch deci- sion: Risky technology, culture, and deviance at NASA Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press Walsh, I. J, & Bartunek, J. M. (2011). Cheating the fates: Organizational foundings in the wake of demise Academy of Management Journal, 54(5), 1017-1044.
  145. Wang, L, Northcraft, G. B, & van Kleef, G. A. (2012). Beyond negotiated outcomes: The hidden costs of anger expression in dyadic negotiation Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 119(1), 54-63.
  146. Ward, J. (2004). Emotionally mediated synaesthesia Cognitive Neuropsychology, 21(7), 761-772.
  147. Ward, T. B, Smith, S. M, & Finke, R. A. (1999). Creative cognition In R. J. Sternberg (Ed), Hand- book of creativity (pp 189-212.) Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press
  148. Watson, D, Clark, L. A, & Tellegen, A.. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales Journal of Personality and Social Psychol- ogy, 54(6), 1063-1070.
  149. Watzlawick, P. (1976). How real is real? New York, NY: Random House
  150. Weick, K. E. (1979). The social psychology of orga- nizing (2nd ed) New York, NY: Random House
  151. Weick, K. E. (1988). Enacted sensemaking in crisis situations Journal of Management Studies, 25(4), 305-317.
  152. Weick, K. E. (1990). The vulnerable system: An analysis of the Tenerife air disaster Journal of Management, 16(3), 571-593.
  153. Weick, K. E. (1993). The collapse of sensemaking in organizations: The Mann Gulch disaster Adminis- trative Science Quarterly, 38(4), 628-652.
  154. Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
  155. Weick, K. E. (1998). Introductory essay: Improvisa- tion as a mindset for organizational analysis Organization Science, 9(5), 543-555.
  156. Weick, K. E, & Sutcliffe, K. M. (2007). Managing the unexpected: Resilient performance in an age of uncertainty (2nd ed) San Francisco, CA: Jos- sey-Bass
  157. Weick, K. E, Sutcliffe, K. M, & Obstfeld, D. (2005). Organizing and the process of sensemaking Organization Science, 16(4), 409-421.
  158. Weiner, B. (1980). A cognitive (attribution)- emotion-action model of motivated behavior: An analysis of judgments of help-giving Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(2), 186-200.
  159. Weiss, H. M, & Cropanzano, R. (1996). Affective events theory: A theoretical discussion of the structure, causes and consequences of affective experiences at work In B. M Staw & L. L Cummings (Eds), Research in organizational behavior (Vol 18, pp 1-74.) Greenwich, CT: JAI Press
  160. Wertheimer, M. (1945). Productive thinking New York, NY: Harper Row
  161. Wright, C. R, Manning, M. R, Farmer, B, & Gil- breath, B. (2000). Resourceful sensemaking in product development teams Organization Stud- ies, 21(4), 807-825.
  162. Zajonc, R. B. (1980). Feeling and thinking: Prefer- ences need no inferences American Psychologist, 35(2), 151-175.

Related papers

Sensemaking and Emotions in Organizations: Accounting for Emotions in a Rational(ized) Context
Debbie S. Dougherty

Communication Studies, 2006

Organizations tend to be guided by a rationality=emotionality duality in which rational behavior is privileged over emotional behavior. Consequently, emotions in organizations have historically been undervalued in favor of rationality. Despite the privileging of rationality, however, organizations are emotion-laden environments. The present study uses sensemaking theory to explore how employees manage the rationality=emotionality duality in the workplace. Using a qualitative analysis of 38 emotional experiences derived from 19 interviews, it was found that participants accept the duality by orienting toward emotions that are associated with the disruption or enhancement of ''rational'' business practices. Further, participants tended to reinforce the dichotomy by carefully controlling their emotions in organizations through denial of emotions, reframing their experiences, by rationally reciting their emotional experiences, or by relegating emotions at work to appropriate time and place.

View PDFchevron_right
Organizational Sensemaking
Ravi S . Kudesia

Since the 1980s, the management and organizations literature has grown substantially, turning over the years toward cognitive, discursive, and phenomenological perspectives. At the heart of this continued growth and its many turns is the matter of sensemaking. Construed narrowly, sensemaking describes the process whereby people notice and interpret equivocal events and coordinate a response to clarify what such events mean. More broadly, sensemaking offers a unique perspective on organizations. This perspective calls attention to how members of organizations reach understandings of their environment through verbal and embodied behaviors, how these understandings both enable and constrain their subsequent behavior, and how this subsequent behavior changes the environment in ways that necessitate new understandings. Whereas organizational psychology constructs typically fit most comfortably into a linear “boxes and arrows” paradigm, sensemaking highlights a recursive and ongoing process. Sense is never made in a lasting way: It is always subject to disruption and therefore must be continually re-accomplished. As a result, sensemaking is especially evident when equivocal events cause breakdowns in meaning. Such breakdowns render organizations incapable of answering two key questions: “What’s going on here?” and “What should we do about it?” Not coincidentally, such events—including crisis situations, strategic change episodes, firm formations and dissolutions, and new member socialization—are among the most pivotal events that occur in organizations. Sensemaking is therefore strongly implicated in organizational change, learning, and identity. Sensemaking can appear impenetrable to newcomers for precisely the same reason that it enables remarkably incisive analyses: the sensemaking perspective helps disrupt limiting rationality assumptions that are so often embedded in organizational theories. As such, sensemaking sensitizes scholars to counterintuitive aspects of organizational life. These aspects include how action in organizations often precedes understanding rather than following from it, how organizations are beset by a surplus of possible meanings rather than a scarcity of information, how retrospective thought processes often trump future-oriented ones, and how organizations help create the environments to which they must react. Nonetheless, despite these advances and insights, much remains to be learned about sensemaking as it relates to emotion and embodiment; as it occurs across individual, group, organizational, and institutional levels of analysis; and as it both shapes and is shaped by new technologies.

View PDFchevron_right
" DANCING ON HOT COALS " : HOW EMOTION WORK FACILITATES COLLECTIVE SENSEMAKING
kuchell cobain

While organizations and researchers have traditionally conceptualized customers as consumers of their services and products, there is a growing recognition that organizations need to develop more collaborative relationships with clients. In this research, I explore one implication of this shift-how employees respond to client conflicts. In a multi-method qualitative study, I studied patient advocates, hospital employees who mediate conflicts between patients, families, and staff. I develop a process model that shows how mediators construct a web of discrete social interactions that, over time, enables them to develop an empathetic account of the conflict. They then selectively deploy the account to engage in sensegiving. The process model integrates research on emotions and sensemaking in novel ways. I identify how emotion work triggers emotion dynamics in interactions that facilitate or disrupt sensemaking and sensegiving. I show how plausible accounts are developed over the course of social interactions and that mediators pivoted from sensemaking to sensegiving when the account was characterized by empathy. Overall, this research shows how mediators actively generate, interpret, and influence their own and others' emotions, and that mediators' emotion work contributes to the success of collective sensemaking.

View PDFchevron_right
Extending the Present Understanding of Organizational Sensemaking
Ralph Brower

Administration &amp; Society, 2008

Despite a growing literature on the topic, our understanding of organizational sensemaking remains somewhat fragmented, and discussions have not yet fully integrated related ideas into a conceptual framework that includes the contextual terrain in which these activities occur. This article offers such a model. We begin with a story from a Korean fire inspector, delineating the process of his sensemaking into three stages: noticing, interpretation, and action. We demonstrate how sensemaking can be understood in three separate contexts— the ecological, institutional, and social relational. We show how each context provides a setting for a unique account of the three stages of sensemaking. We derive four theoretical propositions and conclude with implications and discuss prospects for this promising research area.

View PDFchevron_right
Sensemaking revisited
Robin Holt

Management Learning, 2013

We critique and extend theory on organizational sensemaking around three themes. First, we investigate sense arising non-productively and so beyond any instrumental relationship with things; second, we consider how sense is experienced through mood as well as our cognitive skills of manipulation based on standard categories, frames or narratives and third, we consider sense being governed by exposure to unknown possibility rather than retrospective assessment. We set these themes in the context of the study of Heidegger and discuss the implications of our theorization for further sensemaking research by revisiting Weick’s seminal reading of Norman Maclean’s book surrounding the tragic events of a 1949 forest fire at Mann Gulch, USA.

View PDFchevron_right

Related topics

  • Organizational Psychology
  • Emotion

    • Cited by

    Vulnerability and trust in leader-follower relationships
    Ann-Marie Nienaber

    Personnel Review, 2015

    We introduce a theoretical framework which allows structuring the rather fuzzy discussed concept of vulnerability. We distinguish between trusting beliefs and actual trusting behaviour in order to separate the constructs of willingness-to-be-vulnerable and actual vulnerability. With the help of the framework developed, we point to the need for more work on vulnerability in order to take the study of trust to the next level. In this respect, we formulate several propositions that should be tested by future research.

    View PDFchevron_right
    Effects of managerial communication as moderated by LMX and trait NA
    Pat Sniderman

    Journal of Managerial Psychology, 2016

    Purpose – Using the concept of disconfirming communication to define interpersonal mistreatment, the purpose of this paper is to explore the impact of specific negative managerial communication behaviors on employee emotions, while taking into account both leader-member exchange (LMX) and employee trait negative affect (NA). Design/methodology/approach – In all, 275 working adults completed surveys about their managers’ confirming and disconfirming communication and their own emotional responses to these communications. Findings – The positive relationship between disconfirming managerial communication and employee negative felt emotion was reduced when LMX was high and was increased for employees with high trait NA personalities. Research limitations/implications – While the cross-sectional design exposes the study to potential common method bias, a priori and post hoc procedures minimized this risk, confirming it has a negligible impact on the results. Practical implications – Stu...

    View PDFchevron_right
    Employee experiences of HRM through daily affective events and their effects on perceived event‐signalled HRM system strength, expectancy perceptions, and daily work engagement
    Suja Chacko

    Human Resource Management Journal

    The importance of events to individual experiences and behaviour within organisational research is increasingly acknowledged. This research examines whether daily positive and negative affective HRM events signal employee perceptions of HRM system strength, which are expected to relate to daily work engagement via clear performancereward expectancies. Employees completed a daily diary over ten working days and reported positive and negative daily HR events as they arose. Positive HR events associated with higher perceived event-signalled HRM system strength compared with negative HR events, and expectancy perceptions partially mediated the effects of perceived HRM system strength on daily work engagement. The study's novel contributions include documenting the common occurrence of affective HRM events, identifying such events as an important antecedent to perceived event-signalled HRM system strength, and extending understanding of the daily consequences of perceived HRM system strength by showing how their effects on daily work engagement are mediated by expectancies.

    View PDFchevron_right
    Emergent Strategy from Spontaneous Anger: Crowd Dynamics in the First 48 Hours of the Ferguson Shooting
    Ravi S . Kudesia

    Organization Science

    The fatal August 9, 2014, officer-involved shooting of a Black teenager in Ferguson, Missouri, sparked a series of local protests that culminated in a national social movement: Black Lives Matter. In this study, through a minute-by-minute analysis of crowd dynamics, I find that the eventual social movement strategy emerged from spontaneous acts of anger in protest crowds within the first 48 hours of the shooting. This finding is surprising in light of social movement scholarship, in which strategy is thought to follow from rationality and decision making within formal organizations, not emotionality and spontaneous action within informal crowds. By coupling a historical analysis of protest and policing practices with a comparison of prominent theories of crowds, emotion, and strategy, I theorize how strategy can emerge from spontaneous acts of anger as part of a distributed sensemaking process in crowds, rather than conflating strategy with rationality and deliberate planning in org...

    View PDFchevron_right
    Emotional foundations of capability development: an exploration in the SME context
    Selen Kars

    Journal of Management & Organization

    Research uncovering the behavioural and cognitive foundations of capability development has gained traction in recent years. However, the emotional foundations of capability development have not been adequately addressed. This is an important gap; if emotions impact decisions and actions of key organisational actors, this suggests an influence on capability development processes in organisations, with implications for their survival and evolution. In this paper, we therefore explore ‘how do the emotions of key strategists enable and/or hinder capability development?’ Our in-depth qualitative research, based on five small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), shows that emotions of key strategists, including emotional tensions and ambivalence, have multi-faceted effects on capability development depending on the activation level of pleasant and unpleasant emotions experienced. This adds to extant understanding of idiosyncratic foundations of capability development and extends convers...

    View PDFchevron_right
    580 California St., Suite 400
    San Francisco, CA, 94104
    © 2025 Academia. All rights reserved