Publications

Journal Article

Based on a three-year inductive field study of an attempt at radical change in a large firm, the author shows how middle managers displayed two seemingly opposed emotion-management patterns that facilitated beneficial adaptation for their work groups:
1) emotionally committing to personally championed change projects, and 2) attending to recipients’ emotions.

Low emotional commitment to change led to organizational inertia, whereas high commitment to change with little attending to recipients' emotions led to chaos.

The enactment of both patterns constituted emotional balancing and facilitated organizational adaptation: change, continuity in providing quality in customer service, and developing new knowledge and skills.