Understanding emotion at work

By Stephen J. Fineman. 2003

361 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Public Administration, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/3fc969eeb469f0b0a825c1cea00f5f5427a14957

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Public Administration

1. D. Goss
2. M. Fotaki
3. T. Morrison
4. Janet G. Sayers
5. Roy K. Smollan
6. Stephen J. Fineman

In Sociology and Political Science

1. D. Goss
2. M. Fotaki
3. Roy K. Smollan
4. T. Morrison
5. Janet G. Sayers
6. Stephen J. Fineman
7. Russ Vince

Citations in the corpus

• Emotional Intelligence, Emotion and Social Work: Context, Characteristics, Complications and Contribution (2006, background): “Fineman (2005) notes that organizations are shaped by members’ unconscious desires, hopes and fantasies for attention, security and order, which replicate early family experiences.”
• Getting the Measure of Emotion - and the Cautionary Tale of Emotional Intelligence (2004, background): “More sharply, emotion draws attention to the psychological injuries of working, such as harassment, bullying, violence, stress and emotional labour (e.g. see Fineman, 2003a).”
• Organizations in a State of Darkness: Towards a Theory of Organizational Miasma (2012, neutral): “…forms of organizational oppression, bullying and humiliation (Clegg, Courpasson, & Phillips, 2006; Czarniawska, 2002; Diamond, 1997; Faÿ, 2008; Fineman, 2003; Fortado, 1998; Frost & Robinson, 1999; Gabriel, 1998a; Martin, 2000; Pearson, Andersson, & Wegner, 2001; Sims, 2003; M. Stein, 2000,…”
• Entrepreneurship and ‘the social’: Towards a deference-emotion theory (2005, background): “One of the most notable omissions is the role of emotion which, despite its growing significance in other areas of organizational theory, has made virtually no impact within the field of entrepreneurship (Lupton, 1998; Fineman, 2000, 2003; Barbalet, 2002).”
• Enterprise Ritual: A Theory of Entrepreneurial Emotion and Exchange (2008, neutral): “First, it suggests that entrepreneurship research is failing fully to capitalise on developments that are widely recognised to have benefited explanation and understanding in related areas of social science (Ashkanasy et al, 2002; Fineman, 2003; Gabriel and Griffiths, 2002; Lupton, 1998).”
• Choice is yours: A psychodynamic exploration of health policymaking and its consequences for the English National Health Service (2006, background): “…effects of interventions, or their absence, assuming rational utility maximization principle as the prime driver of human action although related disciplines including organizational and management studies have long since questioned this assumption (see Bain, 1998; Gabriel, 1999; Fineman, 2003).”
• Thinking critically about affect in organization studies: Why it matters (2017, neutral): “…important, and while we acknowledge the relevance of on-going work on emotions for organization studies (Barsade and Gibson, 2007; Elfenbein, 2008; Fineman, 2003, 2004, 2010; Loseke, 2009; Stearns and Stearns, 1985; Wright and Nyberg, 2012), for the purpose of this Special Issue, we distinguish…”
• Organizational Culture, Change and Emotions: A Qualitative Study (2009, background): “…in emotions being ‘captured’, ‘harnessed’, ‘managed’, ‘controlled’, ‘sanitized’, ‘codified’ and ‘commodified’ by organizations for their own ends, and often at the expense of the employee (Kunda and van Maanen, 1999; Fineman, 2000, 2001, 2003, 2005, 2008; Sturdy and Fineman, 2001; Zembylas, 2006).”