PART TWOPOSITIVE STATES, TRAITS AND

PART TWO
POSITIVE STATES, TRAITS AND
PROCESSES

Positive Emotion in Organizations:
A Multi-level Framework

Neal M. Ashkanasy and Claire E. Ashton-James The fundamental tenet of ‘Positive Organization Scholarship’ (Cameron et al., 2003) is that organizational management and decision settings need to be reframed in a positive light. It follows therefore that managers need to shift their focus to the positive aspects of organizational functioning
and achievement, rather than dwell on the defensive measures needed to deal with real and imagined negative contingencies. A corollary of this view, first advanced by Staw et al. (1994), and more recently confirmed by Lyubomirsky et al. (2005), is that such organizations need also to be characterized by positive, rather than negative emotion. More recently, Ashkanasy and Daus (2002) have described these organizations in terms of a ‘healthy emotional climate’. Consistent with this proposition and based on a multi-level model of emotions in organizations (Ashkanasy,2003a; Ashkanasy and Ashton-James, 2005), we outline in this chapter how organizations can engender positive emotion, and conclude that positive emotion is a necessary precondition of positive organizational behavior. Although Isen and Baron (1991) identified the importance of mild positive affect in organizational behavior 15 years ago, since then much of the literature that has dealt with emotions in the workplace has focused on negative emotions. For example, Fitness (2000) studied ‘anger in the workplace’, Ashkanasy and Nicholson (2003) studied the ‘climate of fear’, while Frost (2003) focused on ‘toxic emotions’, including their antecedents and consequences, and prescriptions for dealing with toxic emotions. In this chapter, we return to the spirit of Isen and Baron’s seminal article and emphasize the link between positive emotion and exceptional performance in organizational contexts. Also, and consistent with Isen (2003), we argue that positive emotions are associated with individual and group creativity. More recently, Lyubomirsky et al. (2005) found, in an extensive meta-analysis, that positive affect leads to more successful outcomes than negative affect across a range of contextual domains, including in the workplace. The theory of positive affect in organizations that we set out here thus provides a basis upon which to understand how and when organizations can foster positive emotion, and why positive emotions should be associated with positive behavior. The multi-level perspective we present in this chapter to address these issues is based on the 5-level model of emotion in organizations described by Ashkanasy (2003a):
Level 1. neuropsychological and cognitive correlates of positive emotion
at the within-person level of analysis;
Level 2. individual differences in positive emotion at the betweenpersons
level of analysis;
Level 3. communication of positive emotion at the dyadic (relationships)
level of analysis;
Level 4. promulgation of positive emotion at the group level of analysis;
and
Level 5. creation of a positive emotional climate at the organizational
level of analysis.
Antecedents of positive emotions in organizations
The majority of research on the antecedents of positive emotions focuses on the cognitive appraisal process that initiates emotional reactions to positive events (e.g. Lazarus, 1991). The nature of the specific events that trigger positive emotions in the organizational environment has only recently been considered, however (see Fredrickson and Brannigan, 2001). To address this in the specific context of the workplace, we base our discussion on Weiss and Cropanzano’s (1996) Affective Events Theory (AET), and use this as a basic framework to describe the situational determinants of positive emotion in workplace settings. Weiss and Cropanzano (1996) argue that events and conditions in the workplace that facilitate the attainment of workplace goals constitute positive ‘affective events’, and it is these events that ultimately determine the occurrence of moods and emotions. Such emotions and moods can lead to the formation of more long-term attitudes, reflected in job satisfaction and affective commitment, or even organizational loyalty (see Wright et al., 1993; Wright and Cropanzano, 1998). The seminal contribution of AET is that it represents an attempt to understand why employees’ moment to moment moods fluctuate in the workplace environment. A further outcome of AET is the importance of accumulation of hassles and uplifts. Thus, rather than the intensity of major events being the source of attitudes
and behavior at work, according to AET, emotions are determined more by the frequency with which hassles or uplifts occur (see Fisher, 2000;
58 Positive States, Traits and Processes
Fisher and Noble, 2004; Weiss and Beal, 2005). This conclusion implies in respect of negative emotions that people are more capable of handling once-off incidents than they are of dealing with ongoing hassles. A further corollary of this is that the accumulation of negative events can be offset by positive support from colleagues, friends, and family (see Grzywacz and Marks, 2000). Finally, this idea is consistent with Isen and Baron’s (1991) contention that ‘positive affect states induced by seemingly minor, everyday events can have significant effects on social behavior and cognitive processes that can be important for the functioning of organizations’ (p. 2). It is clear from AET that contextual factors play a pivotal role as determinants of employees’ fluctuating moods and emotions in the workplace. It is also important, however, first to understand the internal neurological and cognitive mechanisms that determine the impact of positive affective events on organizational behavior.
Level 1: Positive emotion at the within-person level of analysis
Neuropsychological correlates of positive emotion At the most basic level of understanding, neurobiological processes underlie the experience of emotion, including perception, and understanding and display of positive emotional expression. Mirroring the emphasis on negative emotions in organizational research, however, much of the literature in emotions research in general has been oriented towards the negative emotions. LeDoux, for example, based his pioneering work on a study of fear (see LeDoux, 1998). More recently, it has become clear that positive emotion is perceived, integrated and expressed by discrete neurobiological mechanisms that are quite distinct from the mechanisms associated with negative emotion (see LeDoux, 2000). In particular, recent research has revealed that positive environmental stimuli are recognized by the basal ganglia region of the brain, while negative or aversive environmental stimuli are processed primarily by the amygdala. The basal ganglia are programmed to encode sequences of behavior that, over time, have been repeated and rewarded – or at least not punished (Lieberman, 2000). The affective representations that are encoded by the basal ganglia support not only the execution of habitual behaviors but the prediction of what comes next in a sequence of thoughts or actions (LeDoux et al., 1989). These implicit skills are essential because they allow us to make automatic the sequences of thought and action that lead to adaptive success. Further, basal ganglia activation has been found to be associated with the experience of positive emotions in response to positive environmental stimuli (McPherson and Cummings, 1996). As such, and as Brieter and Rosen (1999) have shown, degeneration of the basal ganglia is associated
Positive Emotion in Organizations 59
with depression and a lack of motivation to adaptive environmental demands. The ability to perceive and integrate positive emotional stimuli thus has important implications for adaptive social functioning, and is mediated by the basal ganglia. Isen (2003) argues further that positive affect is a key facilitator of creativity. Consistent with the neuropsychological view noted earlier in this chapter, Isen and her colleagues (Ashby et al., 1999) posit that this process is mediated by the neurotransmitter dopamine. In their theory, dopamine levels in the blood are increased as a result of positive emotions, and the presence of this neurotransmitter in the anterior cingulate cortex is responsible for more creative and flexible cognitions. In effect, there is strong evidence that positive and negative affect are driven by distinct neural circuits. Moreover, in support of Ashkanasy’s (2003a) multi-level model, Isen (2003) argues that the impact of positive
affect on creativity at the group and organizational level derives from fundamental differences in mechanisms underlying the production of positive and negative affect, and differences in the impact of positive and negative affect on cognitive functioning. In the following, we describe theoretical frameworks for understanding the differential impact of positive and negative mood on cognitive processing. Cognitive correlates of positive emotion Several cognitive mechanisms have been proposed to underlie the differential impact of positive and negative affect on cognitive functioning. Affect influences both the content of cognition, and the strategies that people use to process information. As such, positive and negative mood have different effects on the content and processes of cognition.
Content effects
The content effects of mood have received considerable attention in affect and cognition research (Forgas and Bower, 1987). The primary finding here relates to the notion of ‘mood congruence’, which holds that individuals in a positive mood are likely to evaluate situational cues as correspondingly optimistic or positive, so that their associated judgments and decisions are also more likely to be positive. For example, people in a positive mood tend to form more positive impressions of others (Forgas et al.

Results (Indonesian) 1:

BAGIAN DUASERIKAT POSITIF, CIRI-CIRI DANPROSESEmosi positif dalam organisasi:Kerangka multi-levelNeal M. Ashkanasy dan Claire E. Ashton-James prinsip mendasar 'Positif organisasi beasiswa' (Cameron et al., 2003) adalah bahwa organisasi manajemen dan keputusan pengaturan perlu reframed dalam cahaya yang positif. Maka karena itu bahwa manajer perlu menggeser fokus mereka untuk aspek-aspek positif dari fungsi organisasiand achievement, rather than dwell on the defensive measures needed to deal with real and imagined negative contingencies. A corollary of this view, first advanced by Staw et al. (1994), and more recently confirmed by Lyubomirsky et al. (2005), is that such organizations need also to be characterized by positive, rather than negative emotion. More recently, Ashkanasy and Daus (2002) have described these organizations in terms of a ‘healthy emotional climate’. Consistent with this proposition and based on a multi-level model of emotions in organizations (Ashkanasy,2003a; Ashkanasy and Ashton-James, 2005), we outline in this chapter how organizations can engender positive emotion, and conclude that positive emotion is a necessary precondition of positive organizational behavior. Although Isen and Baron (1991) identified the importance of mild positive affect in organizational behavior 15 years ago, since then much of the literature that has dealt with emotions in the workplace has focused on negative emotions. For example, Fitness (2000) studied ‘anger in the workplace’, Ashkanasy and Nicholson (2003) studied the ‘climate of fear’, while Frost (2003) focused on ‘toxic emotions’, including their antecedents and consequences, and prescriptions for dealing with toxic emotions. In this chapter, we return to the spirit of Isen and Baron’s seminal article and emphasize the link between positive emotion and exceptional performance in organizational contexts. Also, and consistent with Isen (2003), we argue that positive emotions are associated with individual and group creativity. More recently, Lyubomirsky et al. (2005) found, in an extensive meta-analysis, that positive affect leads to more successful outcomes than negative affect across a range of contextual domains, including in the workplace. The theory of positive affect in organizations that we set out here thus provides a basis upon which to understand how and when organizations can foster positive emotion, and why positive emotions should be associated with positive behavior. The multi-level perspective we present in this chapter to address these issues is based on the 5-level model of emotion in organizations described by Ashkanasy (2003a):Level 1. neuropsychological and cognitive correlates of positive emotionat the within-person level of analysis;Level 2. individual differences in positive emotion at the betweenpersonslevel of analysis;Level 3. communication of positive emotion at the dyadic (relationships)level of analysis;Level 4. promulgation of positive emotion at the group level of analysis;andLevel 5. creation of a positive emotional climate at the organizationallevel of analysis.Antecedents of positive emotions in organizationsThe majority of research on the antecedents of positive emotions focuses on the cognitive appraisal process that initiates emotional reactions to positive events (e.g. Lazarus, 1991). The nature of the specific events that trigger positive emotions in the organizational environment has only recently been considered, however (see Fredrickson and Brannigan, 2001). To address this in the specific context of the workplace, we base our discussion on Weiss and Cropanzano’s (1996) Affective Events Theory (AET), and use this as a basic framework to describe the situational determinants of positive emotion in workplace settings. Weiss and Cropanzano (1996) argue that events and conditions in the workplace that facilitate the attainment of workplace goals constitute positive ‘affective events’, and it is these events that ultimately determine the occurrence of moods and emotions. Such emotions and moods can lead to the formation of more long-term attitudes, reflected in job satisfaction and affective commitment, or even organizational loyalty (see Wright et al., 1993; Wright and Cropanzano, 1998). The seminal contribution of AET is that it represents an attempt to understand why employees’ moment to moment moods fluctuate in the workplace environment. A further outcome of AET is the importance of accumulation of hassles and uplifts. Thus, rather than the intensity of major events being the source of attitudesand behavior at work, according to AET, emotions are determined more by the frequency with which hassles or uplifts occur (see Fisher, 2000;58 Positive States, Traits and ProcessesFisher and Noble, 2004; Weiss and Beal, 2005). This conclusion implies in respect of negative emotions that people are more capable of handling once-off incidents than they are of dealing with ongoing hassles. A further corollary of this is that the accumulation of negative events can be offset by positive support from colleagues, friends, and family (see Grzywacz and Marks, 2000). Finally, this idea is consistent with Isen and Baron’s (1991) contention that ‘positive affect states induced by seemingly minor, everyday events can have significant effects on social behavior and cognitive processes that can be important for the functioning of organizations’ (p. 2). It is clear from AET that contextual factors play a pivotal role as determinants of employees’ fluctuating moods and emotions in the workplace. It is also important, however, first to understand the internal neurological and cognitive mechanisms that determine the impact of positive affective events on organizational behavior.Level 1: Positive emotion at the within-person level of analysisNeuropsychological correlates of positive emotion At the most basic level of understanding, neurobiological processes underlie the experience of emotion, including perception, and understanding and display of positive emotional expression. Mirroring the emphasis on negative emotions in organizational research, however, much of the literature in emotions research in general has been oriented towards the negative emotions. LeDoux, for example, based his pioneering work on a study of fear (see LeDoux, 1998). More recently, it has become clear that positive emotion is perceived, integrated and expressed by discrete neurobiological mechanisms that are quite distinct from the mechanisms associated with negative emotion (see LeDoux, 2000). In particular, recent research has revealed that positive environmental stimuli are recognized by the basal ganglia region of the brain, while negative or aversive environmental stimuli are processed primarily by the amygdala. The basal ganglia are programmed to encode sequences of behavior that, over time, have been repeated and rewarded – or at least not punished (Lieberman, 2000). The affective representations that are encoded by the basal ganglia support not only the execution of habitual behaviors but the prediction of what comes next in a sequence of thoughts or actions (LeDoux et al., 1989). These implicit skills are essential because they allow us to make automatic the sequences of thought and action that lead to adaptive success. Further, basal ganglia activation has been found to be associated with the experience of positive emotions in response to positive environmental stimuli (McPherson and Cummings, 1996). As such, and as Brieter and Rosen (1999) have shown, degeneration of the basal ganglia is associatedPositive Emotion in Organizations 59
with depression and a lack of motivation to adaptive environmental demands. The ability to perceive and integrate positive emotional stimuli thus has important implications for adaptive social functioning, and is mediated by the basal ganglia. Isen (2003) argues further that positive affect is a key facilitator of creativity. Consistent with the neuropsychological view noted earlier in this chapter, Isen and her colleagues (Ashby et al., 1999) posit that this process is mediated by the neurotransmitter dopamine. In their theory, dopamine levels in the blood are increased as a result of positive emotions, and the presence of this neurotransmitter in the anterior cingulate cortex is responsible for more creative and flexible cognitions. In effect, there is strong evidence that positive and negative affect are driven by distinct neural circuits. Moreover, in support of Ashkanasy’s (2003a) multi-level model, Isen (2003) argues that the impact of positive
affect on creativity at the group and organizational level derives from fundamental differences in mechanisms underlying the production of positive and negative affect, and differences in the impact of positive and negative affect on cognitive functioning. In the following, we describe theoretical frameworks for understanding the differential impact of positive and negative mood on cognitive processing. Cognitive correlates of positive emotion Several cognitive mechanisms have been proposed to underlie the differential impact of positive and negative affect on cognitive functioning. Affect influences both the content of cognition, and the strategies that people use to process information. As such, positive and negative mood have different effects on the content and processes of cognition.
Content effects
The content effects of mood have received considerable attention in affect and cognition research (Forgas and Bower, 1987). The primary finding here relates to the notion of ‘mood congruence’, which holds that individuals in a positive mood are likely to evaluate situational cues as correspondingly optimistic or positive, so that their associated judgments and decisions are also more likely to be positive. For example, people in a positive mood tend to form more positive impressions of others (Forgas et al.