Level 5: Positive emotion at the or

Level 5: Positive emotion at the organizational level of analysis
Finally, at Level 5, the conditions necessary for positive emotion at the other levels of the model must be built and sustained across the whole organization through a healthy emotional climate (Ashkanasy and Daus, 2002). Level 5 of Ashkanasy’s (2003a) multi-level model is qualitatively different from the other levels. At the lower levels, organizational policies and values are interpreted in the context of face-to-face interactions, where all the basic biological and neurophysiological and physiological mechanisms we have discussed up to this point are salient. Thus, at this level of organization, a manager can recognize cues of real or felt emotion, and identify the positive emotional indicators of employees who are genuinely motivated toward goal achievement and confident of achieving their goals. When dealing with the organization-wide or macro view, on the other hand, the situation is much less clear. Although some members of a large organization will have meetings with senior managers, these meetings are likely to be brief and infrequent (Mintzberg, 1973), and are also likely to be constrained by power differences (Gibson and Schroeder, 2002). Instead, it is necessary to deal with the more nebulous concept of emotional climate, defined by De Rivera (1992) as ‘an objective group phenomenon that can be palpably sensed – as when one enters a party or a city and feels an attitude of gaiety
or depression, openness or fear’ (p. 197). In the context of work organizations, organizational climate has been studied for some time now (see Ashkanasy et al., 2000; Reichers and Schneider, 1990), and constitutes the collective mood of organizational members toward their jobs, the organization, and management. The concept is distinct from organizational culture, in that climate is essentially an emotional phenomenon, while culture is more stable, and rooted in beliefs, values, and embedded assumptions (Ashkanasy et al., 2000; Ott, 1989; Schein, 1985). Nonetheless, Schein makes it clear that assumptions underlying organizational culture are associated with deeply felt feelings. More recently, Beyer and Niño (2001) demonstrated how culture and organizational members’ emotional views and states are intimately and reciprocally related. As such, both organizational climate and organizational culture arguably have emotional underpinnings. A number of writers in the organizational literature have noted the emotional basis of organizational culture (e.g. Beyer and Niño, 2001; Fineman, 2001; Hochschild, 1983; Rafaeli and Sutton, 1987, 1989; Van Maanen and Kunda, 1989), but primarily in the context of displayed emotional states, rather than felt emotion. This begs the question as to how to ascertain real emotional climate (or culture) in organizations. Although Härtel et al. (in press) measured emotional climate and reported a correlation with job satisfaction, most advocates of an ethnographic approach (e.g. Schein, 1985; Trice and Bayer, 1993) argue that only through active day-to-day involvement in organizations is it possible to sense real as opposed to displayed emotion. De Rivera (1992) notes, however, that emotional climate is an objective phenomenon and is therefore amenable to objective perception and interpretation, provided the observer knows what to look for. In effect, his point is that observers need to be sensitive to markers of felt rather than displayed emotion. In this case, however, the markers are not so much in the individual expressions of organizational
members, but in the social structures and patterns of behavior that are manifest in the organization. De Rivera argues further that people are sensitive to such cues, and shape their beliefs and behaviors accordingly. It follows that the arguments developed earlier in the present paper in respect of interpersonal relationships and small groups may be extendable to the organization as a whole, especially since organizational policies ultimately come down to the perceptions, understanding, and
behavior of individuals, interacting dyads, and groups.
Conclusions
In this chapter, we have outlined the 5-level model of emotions set out in Ashkanasy (2003a), with an emphasis on positive emotion. We argue, consistent with Isen and Baron (1991) and Lyubomirsky et al. (2005), that mild, positive affect, experienced as a result of everyday events, is a catalyst for creativity and effectiveness in organizational settings. The logical sequence was presented from the bottom-up, in that we began with the neurobiological bases of within-person emotion, and then moved progressively to the individual, dyadic, group, and organizational levels of analysis. We also argued, consistent with Ashkanasy (2003b), that the neurobiological processes represent the integrating medium across these levels of analysis. The important point here is that the view we present is internally consistent
across all five levels of organizations. From a strategic perspective, this means that a manager who engenders a positive emotional climate can expect that this will lead to positive emotions at all of the other levels. Members in an organization characterized by a positive climate can therefore expect to work in cohesive groups where positive emotion is transferred from leaders to member, and between members, and where the resulting positive affect is likely to create the conditions that facilitate positive organizational behavior, and where genuine creativity can flourish. Finally, we note that research in this field is still at an early stage of development. Although research on the role played by emotion in organizational settings has progressed enormously over the 15 years since Isen and Baron (1991) published their seminal article on positive affect, there still remains considerable scope for research to understand in more detail the role of affect and emotions in organizational life in general, and positive emotions in particular. We hope the multi-level perspective outlined in this chapter will provide a framework to advance this research further into the future.
Acknowledgment
This research was funded by a grant of the Australian Research Council. We acknowledge with thanks the assistance of Kaylene W. Ascough and Marie T. Dasborough in preparing this manuscript. An earlier version of this chapter was presented in an All-Academy Symposium at the 64th Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA (August 2004), chaired by A. Caza and L.E. Sekerka.

Results (Indonesian) 1:

Level 5: Emosi positif di tingkat organisasi analisisAkhirnya, di lantai 5, kondisi yang diperlukan untuk emosi positif di tingkat lain model harus dibangun dan berkelanjutan di seluruh organisasi melalui iklim emosional yang sehat (Ashkanasy dan Daus, 2002). Tingkat 5 Ashkanasy (2003a) multi level model kualitatif berbeda dari tingkat lain. Di tingkat yang lebih rendah, kebijakan organisasi dan nilai-nilai diinterpretasikan dalam konteks tatap muka interaksi, mana semua dasar biologis dan neurophysiological dan fisiologis mekanisme kita bahas pada titik inilah menonjol. Dengan demikian, pada tingkat organisasi, seorang manajer dapat mengenali isyarat nyata atau merasa emosi, dan mengidentifikasi emosional indikator positif karyawan yang benar-benar termotivasi menuju pencapaian tujuan dan percaya diri untuk mencapai tujuan mereka. Ketika berhadapan dengan tampilan seluruh organisasi atau makro, di sisi lain, situasi ini jauh lebih jelas. Meskipun beberapa anggota organisasi besar akan memiliki pertemuan dengan manajer senior, pertemuan ini cenderung singkat dan jarang (Mintzberg, 1973), dan juga mungkin untuk dapat dibatasi oleh power perbedaan (Gibson dan Schroeder, 2002). Sebaliknya, ini perlu untuk menangani konsep lebih samar-samar iklim emosional, didefinisikan oleh De Rivera (1992) sebagai ' fenomena tujuan grup yang dapat dgn jelas merasakan – sebagai ketika seseorang memasuki sebuah partai atau sebuah kota dan merasa sikap gaietyor depression, openness or fear’ (p. 197). In the context of work organizations, organizational climate has been studied for some time now (see Ashkanasy et al., 2000; Reichers and Schneider, 1990), and constitutes the collective mood of organizational members toward their jobs, the organization, and management. The concept is distinct from organizational culture, in that climate is essentially an emotional phenomenon, while culture is more stable, and rooted in beliefs, values, and embedded assumptions (Ashkanasy et al., 2000; Ott, 1989; Schein, 1985). Nonetheless, Schein makes it clear that assumptions underlying organizational culture are associated with deeply felt feelings. More recently, Beyer and Niño (2001) demonstrated how culture and organizational members’ emotional views and states are intimately and reciprocally related. As such, both organizational climate and organizational culture arguably have emotional underpinnings. A number of writers in the organizational literature have noted the emotional basis of organizational culture (e.g. Beyer and Niño, 2001; Fineman, 2001; Hochschild, 1983; Rafaeli and Sutton, 1987, 1989; Van Maanen and Kunda, 1989), but primarily in the context of displayed emotional states, rather than felt emotion. This begs the question as to how to ascertain real emotional climate (or culture) in organizations. Although Härtel et al. (in press) measured emotional climate and reported a correlation with job satisfaction, most advocates of an ethnographic approach (e.g. Schein, 1985; Trice and Bayer, 1993) argue that only through active day-to-day involvement in organizations is it possible to sense real as opposed to displayed emotion. De Rivera (1992) notes, however, that emotional climate is an objective phenomenon and is therefore amenable to objective perception and interpretation, provided the observer knows what to look for. In effect, his point is that observers need to be sensitive to markers of felt rather than displayed emotion. In this case, however, the markers are not so much in the individual expressions of organizationalmembers, but in the social structures and patterns of behavior that are manifest in the organization. De Rivera argues further that people are sensitive to such cues, and shape their beliefs and behaviors accordingly. It follows that the arguments developed earlier in the present paper in respect of interpersonal relationships and small groups may be extendable to the organization as a whole, especially since organizational policies ultimately come down to the perceptions, understanding, andbehavior of individuals, interacting dyads, and groups.ConclusionsIn this chapter, we have outlined the 5-level model of emotions set out in Ashkanasy (2003a), with an emphasis on positive emotion. We argue, consistent with Isen and Baron (1991) and Lyubomirsky et al. (2005), that mild, positive affect, experienced as a result of everyday events, is a catalyst for creativity and effectiveness in organizational settings. The logical sequence was presented from the bottom-up, in that we began with the neurobiological bases of within-person emotion, and then moved progressively to the individual, dyadic, group, and organizational levels of analysis. We also argued, consistent with Ashkanasy (2003b), that the neurobiological processes represent the integrating medium across these levels of analysis. The important point here is that the view we present is internally consistentacross all five levels of organizations. From a strategic perspective, this means that a manager who engenders a positive emotional climate can expect that this will lead to positive emotions at all of the other levels. Members in an organization characterized by a positive climate can therefore expect to work in cohesive groups where positive emotion is transferred from leaders to member, and between members, and where the resulting positive affect is likely to create the conditions that facilitate positive organizational behavior, and where genuine creativity can flourish. Finally, we note that research in this field is still at an early stage of development. Although research on the role played by emotion in organizational settings has progressed enormously over the 15 years since Isen and Baron (1991) published their seminal article on positive affect, there still remains considerable scope for research to understand in more detail the role of affect and emotions in organizational life in general, and positive emotions in particular. We hope the multi-level perspective outlined in this chapter will provide a framework to advance this research further into the future.AcknowledgmentThis research was funded by a grant of the Australian Research Council. We acknowledge with thanks the assistance of Kaylene W. Ascough and Marie T. Dasborough in preparing this manuscript. An earlier version of this chapter was presented in an All-Academy Symposium at the 64th Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA (August 2004), chaired by A. Caza and L.E. Sekerka.

Results (Indonesian) 2:

Level 5: emosi positif pada tingkat organisasi analisis
Akhirnya, pada tingkat 5, kondisi yang diperlukan untuk emosi positif pada tingkat lain dari model harus dibangun dan dipertahankan di seluruh organisasi melalui iklim emosional yang sehat (Ashkanasy dan Daus 2002 ). Level 5 dari (2003a) model multi-tingkat Ashkanasy adalah kualitatif berbeda dari tingkat lainnya. Pada tingkat yang lebih rendah, kebijakan dan nilai-nilai organisasi diinterpretasikan dalam konteks tatap muka interaksi, di mana semua mekanisme biologis dan neurofisiologis dan fisiologis dasar yang telah kita bahas sampai saat ini adalah penting. Dengan demikian, pada tingkat organisasi, manajer dapat mengenali isyarat emosi nyata atau dirasakan, dan mengidentifikasi indikator emosional yang positif dari karyawan yang benar-benar termotivasi menuju pencapaian tujuan dan percaya diri untuk mencapai tujuan mereka. Ketika berhadapan dengan pandangan organisasi-lebar atau makro, di sisi lain, situasinya jauh kurang jelas. Meskipun beberapa anggota sebuah organisasi besar akan memiliki pertemuan dengan manajer senior, pertemuan ini cenderung singkat dan jarang (Mintzberg, 1973), dan juga kemungkinan akan dibatasi oleh perbedaan daya (Gibson dan Schroeder, 2002). Sebaliknya, perlu untuk berurusan dengan konsep yang lebih samar-samar iklim emosional, didefinisikan oleh De Rivera (1992) sebagai 'fenomena kelompok obyektif yang dapat dgn ​​jelas dirasakan - seperti ketika seseorang memasuki sebuah pesta atau kota dan merasa sikap keceriaan
atau depresi, keterbukaan atau takut '(hal. 197). Dalam konteks organisasi kerja, iklim organisasi telah dipelajari untuk beberapa waktu sekarang (lihat Ashkanasy et al, 2000;. Reichers dan Schneider, 1990), dan merupakan mood kolektif anggota organisasi terhadap pekerjaan mereka, organisasi, dan manajemen. Konsep ini berbeda dari budaya organisasi, iklim yang pada dasarnya merupakan fenomena emosional, sedangkan budaya lebih stabil, dan berakar pada keyakinan, nilai-nilai, dan asumsi tertanam (Ashkanasy et al, 2000;. Ott, 1989; Schein, 1985). Meskipun demikian, Schein menjelaskan bahwa asumsi yang mendasari budaya organisasi terkait dengan perasaan sangat terasa. Baru-baru ini, Beyer dan Nino (2001) menunjukkan bagaimana budaya dan pandangan emosional dan negara anggota organisasi 'sangat erat dan timbal balik terkait. Dengan demikian, baik iklim organisasi dan budaya organisasi bisa dibilang memiliki dasar-dasar emosional. Sejumlah penulis dalam literatur organisasi telah mencatat dasar emosional budaya organisasi (misalnya Beyer dan Niño, 2001; Fineman, 2001; Hochschild, 1983; Rafaeli dan Sutton, 1987, 1989; Van Maanen dan Kunda, 1989), tetapi terutama dalam konteks ditampilkan emosi, daripada merasa emosi. Hal ini menimbulkan pertanyaan tentang bagaimana untuk memastikan iklim nyata emosional (atau budaya) dalam organisasi. Meskipun Hartel dkk. (in press) diukur iklim emosional dan melaporkan korelasi dengan kepuasan kerja, sebagian besar pendukung dari pendekatan etnografi (misalnya Schein, 1985; Trice dan Bayer, 1993) berpendapat bahwa hanya melalui aktif sehari-hari keterlibatan dalam organisasi adalah mungkin untuk arti sebenarnya sebagai lawan emosi ditampilkan. De Rivera (1992) mencatat, bagaimanapun, bahwa iklim emosional adalah fenomena obyektif dan oleh karena itu setuju untuk persepsi obyektif dan interpretasi, disediakan pengamat tahu apa yang harus dicari. Akibatnya, maksudnya adalah bahwa pengamat harus peka terhadap penanda merasa daripada emosi ditampilkan. Dalam kasus ini, bagaimanapun, penanda tidak begitu banyak dalam ekspresi individu organisasi
anggota, tetapi dalam struktur sosial dan pola perilaku yang terwujud dalam organisasi. De Rivera berpendapat lebih lanjut bahwa orang yang sensitif terhadap isyarat tersebut, dan bentuk keyakinan dan perilaku mereka sesuai. Ini mengikuti bahwa argumen dikembangkan di awal tulisan ini dalam hal hubungan interpersonal dan kelompok kecil mungkin diperpanjang untuk organisasi secara keseluruhan, terutama karena kebijakan organisasi akhirnya datang ke persepsi, pemahaman, dan
perilaku individu, berinteraksi diad, dan kelompok.
Kesimpulan
Dalam bab ini, kita telah diuraikan model 5-tingkat emosi yang ditetapkan dalam Ashkanasy (2003a), dengan penekanan pada emosi positif. Kami berpendapat, konsisten dengan Isen dan Baron (1991) dan Lyubomirsky dkk. (2005), yang ringan, positif mempengaruhi, dialami sebagai akibat dari peristiwa sehari-hari, adalah katalis untuk kreativitas dan efektivitas dalam pengaturan organisasi. Urutan logis disajikan dari bawah ke atas, bahwa kita mulai dengan dasar neurobiologis dari dalam-orang emosi, dan kemudian pindah progresif untuk individu, diad, kelompok, dan tingkat organisasi analisis. Kami juga berpendapat, konsisten dengan Ashkanasy (2003b), bahwa proses neurobiologis mewakili media mengintegrasikan seluruh tingkat ini analisis. Titik penting di sini adalah bahwa pandangan kami sajikan secara internal konsisten
di semua lima tingkat organisasi. Dari perspektif strategis, ini berarti bahwa seorang manajer yang menimbulkan iklim emosional yang positif dapat berharap bahwa ini akan menyebabkan emosi positif pada semua tingkatan lainnya. Anggota dalam sebuah organisasi yang ditandai dengan iklim yang positif karena itu dapat mengharapkan untuk bekerja dalam kelompok kohesif di mana emosi positif ditransfer dari para pemimpin untuk anggota, dan antara anggota, dan di mana mempengaruhi positif dihasilkan kemungkinan untuk menciptakan kondisi yang memfasilitasi perilaku organisasi positif, dan di mana kreativitas asli dapat berkembang. Akhirnya, kami mencatat bahwa penelitian di bidang ini masih pada tahap awal pengembangan. Meskipun penelitian tentang peran yang dimainkan oleh emosi dalam pengaturan organisasi telah berkembang pesat selama 15 tahun sejak Isen dan Baron (1991) menerbitkan artikel mani mereka pada positif mempengaruhi, masih ada ruang yang cukup untuk penelitian untuk memahami secara lebih rinci peran mempengaruhi dan emosi dalam kehidupan organisasi pada umumnya, dan emosi positif pada khususnya. Kami berharap perspektif multi-level yang diuraikan dalam bab ini akan memberikan kerangka kerja untuk memajukan penelitian ini lebih lanjut ke masa depan.
Pengakuan
Penelitian ini didanai oleh hibah dari Australian Research Council. Kami mengakui dengan ucapan terima kasih atas bantuan dari Kaylene W. Ascough dan Marie T. Dasborough dalam mempersiapkan naskah ini. Versi awal dari bab ini disajikan dalam Simposium All-Academy pada Pertemuan Tahunan ke-64 Academy of Management, New Orleans, Louisiana, Amerika Serikat (Agustus 2004), yang diketuai oleh A. Caza dan LE Sekerka.