The current challenges for companies in Germany could not be greater: Global political and economic crises and armed conflicts, the diesel scandal in Germany and, to top it all off, the digital transformation. Bosses' agendas are overflowing and they are desperately looking for viable ways to overcome the problems of the present. The pressure to adapt to the various situations is becoming ever greater, as the pace of change is increasing massively. The Maintaining competitiveness - and therefore the survival of the company - is therefore the essential driver for initiating change. This is linked to increasing uncertainty with regard to strategic and operational decision-making. This raises the question of how complexity, ambiguity and volatility can be addressed simultaneously while at the same time achieving profitable growth (Aulinger, 2017)?

The call for more agility in the company

"Our company needs to become more agile" (Küster, 2014) or "We need a better organization": this or similar wording is often used to formulate an answer. But what does agility actually mean? What exactly should change and why? Not to mention the how, everything often remains in the dark.

The term and categories of agility are often blurred, although the topic has been around for more than 70 years (Fischer, Weber, & Zimmermann, 2017). Agility is often associated with software development and the Scrum method, but other functions are often not addressed at all or only to a limited extent, including

• Guidance
• Strategy
• Organization
• Knowledge management
• Supply Chain
• Project Management.

This is despite the fact that a holistic approach would be more than appropriate. If the drivers for the necessary agile, company-wide behavior lie in the increasing dynamics of the markets with the accompanying complexity of digital technologies, this creates massive pressure to act faster and adapt flexibly to new circumstances. Much has already been published on the approach to digital transformation (Matzler, Bailom, Anschober, & Eichen, 2016). There is a consensus that technology on its own will not bring the hoped-for success. Brynjolfsson and McAfee (2014) estimate that for every dollar invested in technology, ten times that amount must be spent to make the corresponding adjustments to the organization, processes and management structures. Agile management could be a solution.

What we (don't) know about agility in the company

But what does agility actually mean? Agile management? Various studies describe the status of development and the most important elements and functions as well as the advantages and disadvantages of the available implementation strategies (Weckmüller, 2016; Fischer, 2017). Information on who should / can / must introduce Agile Management is also frequently cited. The same applies to the differences in implementation depending on the size of the company, including the framework conditions. After all, there are not only conducive framework conditions, such as openness, proximity and transparency, but also obstructive ones, including distance in the relationships between members of the organization. Of course, managers are highlighted with regard to their special role model function in the context of the self-organization of teams.

However, it is noticeable in these studies that no or only very few cross-references or connections are made to the existing corporate culture and the change character of these activities and the significance of the associated emotions (Smollan & Sayers, 2009). The outstanding relevance of these two categories always becomes apparent when problems arise. One example is the finance department, which has the task of preparing audit-proof annual financial statements and shows no great interest in swarm management. Because here Compliance important and not the next stand-up, sprint or retro. This very often leads to conflicts and emotionally charged discussions, which can have a major impact on the success of the entire project.

The interaction between emotions and agility in the company

The question that now arises is: How do you actually deal with emotions in companies (Ashforth & Humphrey, 1995)? One prerequisite is to clarify this,

• what emotions actually are (Barrett, Lewis, & Haviland-Jones, 2016; Plamper, 2012),
• which emotions are mentioned in this context, and
• how these findings can be condensed into a group picture,

so that regulatory and control instruments can be developed. This is the only way to ensure a sensible and targeted approach to emotions (Kupiek, 2016; Kupiek, 2018).

In part two of this article, you will find out exactly how this works and what different functions and effects emotions have in the company: The importance of emotions in everyday corporate life in the age of digital transformation and agile management.

Bibliography on the topic of agility in the company

The following works were cited in the double article:

• Ashforth, B., & Humphrey, R. 1995. Emotion in the Workplace: A Reappraisal. Human Relations, 48(2): 97-125.
• Ashforth, B. E., & Mael, F. 1989. Social Identity Theory and the Organization. Academy of Management Review, 14(1): 20-39.
• Aulinger, A. 2017. The three pillars of agile organizations. In I. f. O. M. Steinbeis University Berlin (Ed.). Berlin.
• Barrett, L. F. 2017b. How Emotions are Made. New York: Macmillan.
• Barrett, L. F., Lewis, M. W., & Haviland-Jones, J. M. 2016. Handbook of Emotions (4 ed.). New York: Guilford.
• Brynjolfsson, E., & McAfee, A. 2014. The Second Machine Age: How the next digital revolution will change all our lives. Kulmbach: Börsenmedien.
• Fischer, A. H., & Manstead, S. S. R. 2016. Social Function od Emotion and Emotion Regulation. In L. F. Barrett, & M. W. Lewis (Eds.), Handbook of Emotions (4 ed.): pp. 424-439. New York: Guilford.
• Fischer, S., Weber, S., & Zimmermann, A. 2017. How organizations become agile. personnel magazine, 6: 46-49.
• Kupiek, M. 2016. Exploring the Potential of Neuroscience in Change Management. Saarbrücken: SVH.
• Kupiek, M. 2018. Emotions in digital transformation projects - meaning and implications for organizational change management. In M. A. Pfannstiel, & P. F. J. Steinhoff (Eds.), The Enterprise Transformation Cycle: theory, application, practiceWiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien.
• Küster, H. 2014. leadership agility - effective leadership in a digitalized world. In M. Lang (Ed.), CIO 3.0: The new role of the IT managerKissing: Symposion Publishing.
• Matzler, K., Bailom, F., Anschober, M., & Eichen, v. d., S.F. 2016. Digital disruption. Munich: Vahlen.
• Plamper, J. 2012. History and emotion. Basics of the history of emotions. Munich: Siedler.
• Schein, E. H. 1988. Organizational Psychology (3 ed.). London: Prentice Hall.
• Smith, E. R., & Mackie, S. M. 2016. intergroup emotions. In L. F. Barrett, M. W. Lewis, & J. M. Haviland-Jones (Eds.), Handbook of Emotions (4 ed.): 412-423. New York: Guilford
• Smollan, R. K., & Sayers, J. G. 2009. Organizational Culture, Change and Emotions: A Qualitative Study. Journal of Change Management, 9(4): 435-457.
• Tajfel, H. 1978. The achievement of group differentiation. In H. Tajfel (Ed.), Differentiation between social groups Studies in the social psychology of intergroup relationsLondon: Academic Press.
• Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D., & Wetherell, M. S. 1987. Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. Cambridge, MA, US: Basil Blackwell.

(Cover image: © rh2010 | stock.adobe.com)