Part one of this article, Agility in the company: How digital transformation and agile management are shaping everyday corporate lifefocused on the need for agility in the company: What significance does it have? On closer analysis, it becomes clear that the perspectives here differ greatly - sometimes to such an extent that (emotionally charged) conflicts can arise within the company. However, in order to understand these and incorporate them into the corporate culture in a results-oriented manner, it is essential to consider emotions in everyday corporate life. The following Part Two is therefore dedicated to the questions of the social function of emotions, how emotions both connect and differentiate groups, and what elementary role emotions actually play in everyday corporate life.

Social function of emotions

The functional nature of emotions makes it possible to solve problems and, for example, to fight back or flee from an attacker with the help of fear. In context Change management However, the focus is on "social survival". However, this only works with the help of the ability to form social bonds and overcome social problems such as isolation or loss of influence. The central argument is to ensure social well-being. This is achieved through the perception and expression of emotions, which on the one hand help to establish and maintain positive social relationships. On the other hand, they make it possible to maintain a social position in relation to others while protecting one's own identity and self-esteem, sometimes even exercising power at the expense of others. As both sides are diametrically opposed, maintaining a balanced relationship is of great importance (Fischer & Manstead, 2016).

In other words, emotions serve to create closeness, for example gratitude, happiness, love, shame, guilt, regret, as well as to maintain distance, for example by showing anger, hatred, contempt or pride. In the social context of a development project in a company, however, numerous teams, departments or divisions are also in competition with each other, so that emotions between the groups inevitably play an important role.

Intergroup Emotions

In every company, every employee is a member of a group, a team, a department and a team. Member of the overall company. As outlined above, openness, appreciation, closeness and distance are key issues in day-to-day work and in the introduction of agile management methods. The extent to which someone behaves openly, approachably or distantly in the social context of work is strongly determined by individual emotions. Emotions are not purposeless, but have a strongly adaptive and functional character on a biological and individual level.

Accordingly, much research has focused on the study of individually perceived emotions and neglected social aspects. But how emotions appear in social contexts and what meaning is assigned to these emotions by team members, for example, is of central importance in any introduction of innovative, team-oriented working methods. This is particularly true if these are to follow the principle of self-organization.

This section is dedicated to "intergroup emotions", which arise when people identify with a certain social group, for example their department. This can be recognized, for example, when they react emotionally to events, announcements or other things that affect the groups (Smith & Mackie, 2016).

Theoretical basis: How emotions and group identity are connected

This approach is based on the "Social Identity Theory" (Ashforth & Mael, 1989; Tajfel, 1978) and the "Self-Categorization Theory" (Turner, Hogg, Oakes, Reicher, & Wetherell, 1987). The basic message of these theoretical approaches is that important members of a group are part of an individual's identity. of the same group become. This includes their unique personal characteristics, such as being open, choleric or reliable. The group size can vary from very small to very large. In this dimension, for example, teams, political parties or companies as a whole face each other.

In a wide variety of group situations, members no longer see themselves as unique individuals, but as interchangeable members of the group. This process is also known as "depersonalization" and is the prerequisite for "intergroup situations" in which social comparisons, competition or conflicts take place. This leads to various consequences. At the cognitive level, conformity to norms takes place, i.e. attitudes towards certain topics and behaviors are adapted to the group norm. At the behavioral and motivational level, there is also an alignment: everything that advances the group is seen as desirable and useful. Emotionally, the members of one's own group (ingroup) are classified as similar and treated more favorably than other groups (outgroup). The group therefore has a high emotional significance for each member.

An important difference lies in group-based emotions and group emotions. The latter describes an emotional state of a group that is rooted in a shared experience. A classic example of this is a soccer match in which all group members are happy about a goal or the victory of their team, regardless of the relationships between them. What both categories have in common, however, is the fact that all emotions are perceived individually, i.e. there is no "group-mind" or group feeling (Tajfel, 1978).

How emotions influence identity and behavior within the company

Emotions are shared by individuals and expressed through language, facial expressions and gestures. Group-based emotions presuppose a process of "depersonalization", i.e. that individuals react to the external environment as group members as individuals. However, the emotions are classified as relevant to the group and not as personally relevant. The functional aspect of this process involves the regulation of group-related or collective behavior and not personal, individual behavior. Relevance and functionality are therefore the distinguishing criteria for "group-based" and "group" emotions. To check whether an emotion is group-based or individual, this can be determined by asking a question: Is an emotional reaction to the same event similar if this event had happened to another group member? If so, this is a group-based emotion.

Intergroup emotions motivate people to carry out certain activities that relate to specific situations in the group. For example, a need or desire may exist,

• confronting, attacking or avoiding another group, or even
• to support members of their own group, or
• to seek their proximity without benefiting from it personally.

This is the result of the prevailing intergroup emotions: Here, an assessment of emotions is made at group level and a tendency for certain activities is linked to this. This is expressed, for example, in statements such as "They are threatening us!" or "We are angry with them". These are important reasons for certain forms of behavior in groups. This is because it is the only way to change or improve a certain situation that a group is exposed to.

Emotions such as anger directed at a particular group can then be linked to prejudicial attitudes and discriminatory behavior (Fischer & Manstead, 2016).

Changes in the company trigger emotions and have an immense influence on the corporate culture

This emotion management complex also includes other elements. Change projects such as the introduction of Agile management principles regularly trigger feelings in the members of the organization. The corporate culture and thus the rules that apply within this culture play a major role in this (Schein, 1988; Smollan & Sayers, 2009). A closer look at the following categories could provide initial ideas for solving the problems, for example by means of questions:

• How are emotions experienced in intergroup conflicts?
• How are which emotions regulated and why?
• How are group-based emotions socially shared or disseminated?
• Which behavior results from which emotions?
• What role do language - "words into emotions or emotions into words?" (Barrett, 2017b) - and social background?
• What instruments already exist for recording group emotions? (Kupiek, 2018)

With the help of a heightened awareness of these issues and the relevance of emotions in everyday corporate life, managers have an essential tool at their disposal. Ultimately, this is a fundamental prerequisite for maintaining competitiveness and the company's success in general. Thus, the presentation of the connection between culture, change management and emotions can make a valuable contribution to improving the understanding of the challenges in the age of change. digital transformation perform.

You will find specific tips on how to apply these findings in the continuation of this article: Dealing with emotions correctly in everyday business life.

Bibliography on emotions in everyday business life

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: © fizkes | stock.adobe.com)