Emotion in organisations is the dysfunctional antithesis of rationality Discuss
Emotion in organisations is the dysfunctional antithesis of rationality. Discuss. Though the functionality of emotion may appear less salient than its potential dysfunctions, the pervasiveness and utility of emotion in organisational life rivals that of rationality. Further, under certain conditions emotion serves organisational ends that are unattainable through rational means. Moreover, as performance-enhancing vehicles at the organisational level, emotionality and rationality are not mutually exclusive; a ‘functional complementarity’ exists between them, to the extent that norms of rationality are invoked to regulate emotionality and emotion assists rational choice. The following analysis seeks first to explore earlier organisational behaviour research that culminated in the privileged status of rationality and the pejorative view of emotions in the workplace. Next, emotional labour and role expectations illustrate the functionality of expressing emotion towards organisational productivity and effectiveness. The application of emotions to motivation, leadership, and group dynamics then advances the unique utility of emotion, and norms of rationality reveal the degree to which emotion acts as a complement to rationality. Finally, emotional capability theory demonstrates the potential of emotion to contribute to strategic action, followed by a brief discussion of the limitations of the analysis. Previous research on organisational behaviour treats emotions, defined as intense feelings directed at someone or something , as inferior to rationality in the promotion of company goals. ... The subsequent emergence of conglomerates and bureaucratic management precipitated rationality as an administrative paradigm, and in turn advanced the idea of emotion as its antithesis, as evidenced by Weber’s statement in 1968 that bureaucracy progresses “the more it is ‘dehumanised,’ the more completely it succeeds in eliminating from official business love, hatred, and all purely personal, irrational, and emotional elements which escape calculation.” Argyris argued in 1985 that “the great paradox of managerial behaviour” is the conflict between the rational approach to accomplishing tasks and the emotional barrier to rationality, and the following year Stearns and Stearns noted that American organisations had waged a campaign throughout the 20th century to control workplace emotions, principally anger. ... Emotional labour explores the expression of organisationally desired emotion during interpersonal transactions at work. ... Thus emotional labour distinguishes the expression of emotion as a marketplace commodity, as part of the service itself. ... Using formal and informal practices of recruitment and selection, socialization, and rewards and punishments, large organisations influence and encourage certain emotions displayed by their members.