Bounded emotionality
Bounded emotionality is a concept within communication theory that stems from emotional labor and bounded rationality. It was proposed by Dennis K. Mumby and Linda L. Putnam [1] and defines an alternative form of organizing that encourages the expression of a greater spectrum of emotions in organizational communication. Mumby and Putnam (1992) stress that bounded emotionality encourages emotions of nurturance, care, community, supportiveness, and interrelatedness fused with individual responsibility to shape organizational experiences. Emotions are encouraged to be expressed but must fall within variable boundaries, which differs from traditional and normative organizations.[2]
Origin
Prior to Mumby and Putnam’s specific articulation of bounded emotionality research on the role of emotion had focused more on its relationship with work performance and attitudes towards work. Two concepts, bounded rationality and emotional labor were used to describe conventional organization theory as “involving boundary maintenance that includes stripping away or attempting to control those aspects of personal identity and external commitments that would interfere with rational decision making”(p. 246). [3] Bounded rationality is typically defined as intentional, reasoned, goal directed behavior where “human decision-making, whether individual or organizational, is concerned with the discovery and selection of satisfactory alternatives” (p.141). [4] Organizational actors generate options prospectively and select the best or optimal alternative for reaching a particular goal [1]. Simon introduced this concept and cast it as “bounded” because he depicted holistic forms of reasoning such as intuition and judgment as non-rational and decisions based on emotions as irrational [4]. Emotions are devalued, trivialized, or treated as inappropriate at work, because emotional experience is seen as weak and a handicap to organizational decision-making. Emotional labor refers to the way individuals change or manage emotions to make them appropriate with a situation, a role, or an expected organizational behavior. [3] Emotions are used as public displays to achieve organizational goals [3] Hochschild addresses this concept in more depth in her book The Managed Heart : Commercialization of Human Feeling. [5]
Seven defining characteristics
In order to create a distinction of what exactly bounded emotionality entails, Mumby and Putnam established seven defining characteristics. [1] These include:
Intersubjective limitations: In organizations, individuals must recognize another person’s subjectivity. That is, be aware that people have different levels of comfort when it comes to emotional expression, some may be very expressive, whereas others may be more reserved. Individuals must be able to tailor their communication based on emotional limitations and preferences both individuals bring to the relationship.
Spontaneously emergent work feelings: Work feelings should appear naturally through everyday tasks; they should not be assigned. Feelings can and should emerge in a way that is not controlled by the organization’s management or appointed for the organization’s benefit.
Tolerance of ambiguity: Unlike bounded rationality, which requires the same specified emotions to be utilized in interactions with every person in every context, bounded emotionality includes room for contradictory feelings, positions and demands to coexist.
Heterarchy of goals and values: There is not one universal set of values; instead each individual holds his/her own perspective on values. These unique sets of values held by individuals should be considered and respected in all interactions.
Integrated self-identity and authenticity: Individuals should be allowed and encouraged to express themselves genuinely in their organizations, without feeling a need to falsely state emotions due to work pressures.
Community: Bounded emotionality is used in organizations to promote strong feelings of community between all members of the organization. Emotions are used to create a tighter-knit group that understands each other.
Relational feeling rules: Feeling rules are used to help individuals recognize the other person’s subjectivity and to encourage receptiveness in relationships. These rules are guidelines of meanings for different experiences instead of guidelines for organizational norms.
A comparison of bounded rationality and bounded emotionality
| Bounded Rationality | Bounded Emotionality |
|---|---|
| Organizational limitations | Intersubjective limitations |
| Reduction of ambiguity through satisficing | Tolerance of ambiguity |
| Hierarchy-means-end chain | Heterarchy of goals and values |
| Mind-body dualism | Integrated self-identity |
| Fragmented labor | Community |
| Gendered and occupational feeling rules | Relational feeling rules |
^ [1]
References
- ^ a b c d Mumby, D. & Putnam, L. (1992). "The politics of emotion: A feminist reading of bounded rationality". Academy of Management Review. 17: 465–486.
{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - ^ Martin, J., Knopoff, K., & Beckman, C (1998). "An alternative to bureaucratic impersonality and emotional labor: Bounded emotionality at The Body Shop". Administrative Science Quarterly. 43 (2): 429–469. doi:10.2307/2393858.
{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - ^ a b c Jayasinghe, K., Thomas, D., & Wickramasinghe, D (2008). "Bounded emotionality in entrepreneurship: an alternative framework". International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research. 14 (4): 242–258.
{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - ^ March, J. G., & Simon, H.A (1959). Organizations. USA: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - ^ Hochschild, A. R. (1983). The managed heart: Commercialization of human feeling. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.