Tamara Freis- Department of Education, Trier University, Trier, Germany
A fundamental challenge confronting modern organizations is to rationalize the affectivity of their members. In contrast to the 19th century, when communication in private settings was largely devoid of emotional content, the current era is characterized by a notable shift toward the incorporation of emotional elements in public discourse. This transformation is unfolding against the background of the ongoing evolution of modern organizations, with the processes of digitization and structural-automation contributing to this shift. The renewed emphasis on emotional semantics is facilitated by these developments—made possible by the fact that they facilitate the experience of the potential future obsolescence of humans as a source of crises. The concept of emotional semantics is currently being discussed in economic discourse, political debate, and in the context of management and leadership. Modern organizations mandate that their members manage their emotions through an organizational culture that fosters reflective communication through empathy. However, an understanding of this process can only be achieved through an examination of historical evidence. The article posits that organizations serve as pivotal actors in the domain of emotion management. Situated at the nexus of historical educational considerations, this perspective offers a nuanced interpretation of the historical evolution of organizational control ambitions. These ambitions have been catalyzed by contemporary trends, such as digitization and the integration of artificial intelligence and have undergone a progressive transformation over time. By sensitizing to the interplay of personal-psychic, institutional and organizational orders, the conceptual instruments for describing a history of emotions become more nuanced. This is demonstrated in the article through the analysis of specific organizational forms, which exemplify a parallel evolution within modern organizational society. Perspectives and discourses in organizational research provide novel approaches to the history of education by considering the organized nature of emotional phenomena. In this regard, the objective of the article is to provide impetus for the field of emotion-sensitive organization and management research which addresses questions pertaining to the transformation of organizations and their historical lines of continuity.
1 Introduction
Processes of digitization provide an opportunity for a resurgence in emotional semantics: “As a crisis discourse the discussion on digitization is emotionally contaminated” (Manhart, 2023a, 212, o.t.). Ideas of digitalization are shaped by both dystopian and utopian elements (Manhart, 2023a). In addition to the shift in decision-making structures facilitated by digital structure formation, the subject side of the organization is being recognized as a crucial element, as its role appears to be at risk of being superseded (Manhart and Wendt, 2021). This is one of the reasons why subjectivity and individual characteristics are increasingly taking center stage (Freis and Schröer, 2024) and new possibilities for personalization arise (Manhart, 2023a, 225). While in the 19th century, communication in private, but not in public, was decidedly related to feelings (Gay, 1997), the current era is characterized by a notable shift toward the incorporation of emotional elements in public discourse (Freis, 2025). The concept of emotional semantics functions as an attention attractor (Baecker, 2004, 19) and is currently being discussed, e.g., in economic discourses, political debates or related to questions of management and leadership. Emotions are playing an increasingly important role in one particular area of the public sphere, namely organizations (Fineman, 1993; Krell and Weiskopf, 2001; Arnold, 2005; Bergknapp, 2018; Renda, 2023). This development runs parallel to the formation of an organizational society (Presthus, 1962; Drucker, 1942). The modern membership organization can be distinguished from proto-organizations in which the “position in the organization is [still] identical to position or rank in the surrounding society” (Manhart, 2025, o.t.). Modern organizations are pedagogical entities in that they carry out the “logic of regulation and orderly procedures of individual spontaneity and emotionality” (Manhart and Wendt, 2020, 380, o.t.). They normalize a variability in organizational affiliation (Manhart, 2025) and realize a specific form of changing persons, i.e., by demanding their members to manage their emotions through an empathic culture that cultivates reflective communication (Fineman, 1993; Ashkanasy and Humphrey, 2011; Ashkanasy and Dorris, 2017). These developments must be observed in their parallelism and internal entanglements. The rationalization of affectivity in modern organizations poses significant challenges to organizational design (Neuberger, 2011; Ortmann, 2001). Feelings function as physically anchored value references. Consequently, they have repeatedly been shown to demarcate organizational control gaps that are not directly accessible. However, they are indirectly accessible through emotional communication (Freis, 2025). In seminal contributions to the field of organizational theory (f.e. Weber, 1922/1964; Taylor, 1919), feelings have been identified as a significant contributing factor to behavioral problems within organizations. They are theorized as disruptive elements that impede the efficient functioning of organizational processes. The notion that organizational members are to be regarded as emotional subjects does not inherently follow from this. An organizational culture in which this occurs is antithetical to the imposition of impersonal, objective action directed at the organization.
The concept of emotion management and emotion work in organizations refers to the ability to articulate feelings appropriately (Hochschild, 1979; Hochschild, 2006; Cornils and Rastetter, 2012; Gerhards, 1988a). This encompasses to discuss feelings in a constructive and productive manner. Given its evolution as a historical institution, emotion management can be utilized pedagogically (Freis, 2025). As educational contexts modern organizations are dependent on forms of affect control from the outset—even if feelings are merely by-products of control efforts (Ortmann, 2001; Elster, 1987). In concrete organizational attempts to influence the management of emotions from the outside in order to encourage personal change, attempts at organizational education (Hunold, 2019) are evident, the addressees of which are always adults as well. Modern organizations use organizational socialization and education to achieve peda- and andragogical effects (Dräger, 2017; Manhart, 2023b). In and through organizations, efforts at adult education are continuously taking place (cf. the debate on ‘Erwachsenenerziehung’, f.e. Hunold, 2024), which also involve affective content. Emotion-oriented communication can be used to talk about feelings. The organization’s inability to access the feelings of its members is evidenced by the linguistic marking of emotions, which indicates a control gap. The distinction between emotions and feelings lies in their respective points of reference. Emotions are communicative entities, while feelings are psychological constructs: From the perspective of communication theory, this distinction emerges as a secondary encoding of the divergence between sociality and psyche (Luhmann, 1986). A formal linguistic training program can regulate the expression of emotions. Organizations offer a structured, rule-governed environment and therefore provide sufficient reference points for such regulation (Freis, 2025).
Based on historical introductions that take the changing relationship between private and public emotional communication since the end of the 18th century as the starting point for subsequent discursive developments, the article explores the significance of emotion semantics in organizational studies. It argues for an understanding of emotion management as a historically evolved institution (Hochschild, 1979, 2006) that is closely related to, but not identical with, modern organizations. Few studies on the history of emotions (Frevert and Pahl, 2022) explicitly consider the intertwined inherent logics of organization and institution, which is why this article focuses on and differentiates between them. Institutional guidelines enable and regulate emotionalized communication. The intertwining of organization and institution is explored through the analysis of exemplary organizational forms, which, however, represent a parallel development in a modern organizational society (2). In the 19th century, the relationship between private and public communication of emotions changes as part of the formation of modern organizational society. The public verbalization of emotions is becoming increasingly important in the context of organizations. This phenomenon is referred to as the emotionalization of public communication (3). Processes of digitization and digital structural-automation (Wendt, 2021) are currently contributing to this shift in importance. This is due to the fact that they facilitate the anticipation and experience of the potential future irrelevance of humans as a source of crisis (Manhart, 2023a; Freis, 2025). In consideration of this development, concrete organizational forms are examined, as well as the shift from formless to form-bound types of emotion management and their historical influence on the modern subject: Since the particular logic of organizations has been insufficiently investigated in this context to date, the influence of the organization on the communication of emotions is examined using exemplary organizational forms, with the analysis focusing on the interplay of organizational and institutional elements (4). The summary demonstrates the synergistic potential of organizational and educational discourses for the advancement of a conceptual history of emotions by enriching classical emotion-historical considerations with organizational logics (5).
2 Emotion management as an institution for the rationalization of affectivity in organizations
The process described by Wright Mills (1955) of determining the inner life of feeling through organizational guidelines is the prototypical example of the growing importance of modern organizations and their influence on the subject. Since the transition from the 17th to the 18th century, society has been regarded as an organizational society (Presthus, 1962) in that organizational principles increasingly determine its functional contexts. The modern membership organization is characterized by its ability to accommodate and normalize variability in organizational affiliation, a phenomenon that is distinct from proto-organizations (Manhart, 2025). Modern organizations as communicative associations, are characterized by specific objectives, e.g., the principle of membership, formal rules, distribution of authority, or fixed hierarchies (Weber, 1922/1964; Luhmann, 1992). Organizations always set expectations for the conduct of their members and are therefore “genuinely pedagogical phenomena” (Schröer, 2023, 348, o.t.; Wendt, 2020). In their capacity as regulatory networks for human interactions, institutions impose limitations and expand the scope of organizational possibilities. North (1992) introduced the metaphor of players (organizations) following the rules of the game (institutions) on a playing field (society) to establish a conceptual distinction. While institutions enforce constraints on organizational behavior, yet they can also be employed or modified by the very organizations they regulate. The management of emotions, a form of expression management (Goffman, 2004), is a historically evolved institution that is becoming increasingly relevant for modern organizations. Organizations address the subjective claim to cultivate one’s own affectivity. This development can be understood in the context of the Age of Enlightenment’s emphasis on the individual’s capacity for self-education (Manhart, 2003, 27). These subjects, as sources of uncertainty, offer organizations potential for flexibility, which is, however, structured and formed in a specific way within the organization (Wendt and Schröer, 2023). The affects and feelings of organizational members are to be tamed and productively integrated into organizational processes, e.g., as work motivation.
As early as the 18th century, Scottish moral philosophy placed feelings at the center of economic contexts as motives for action (Smith, 1759/2010). Modern organizations also regard feelings as motives for action and seek to access them. Feelings are of interest as physically anchored value references. They can be addressed indirectly through communication, verbalized as emotions, and primarily processed socially in this linguistic form, i.e., negotiated and discussed. As formulations, they are institutionally regulated, perceived in this form, mentally processed in relation to one’s own feelings, and expressed on a case-by-case basis. Emotion is the “collective term for all psychological events described by the terms feeling/to feel, affect, mood/moodiness, vibe etc.” (Simon, 2004, 118, o.t.). While individuals perceive feelings as personal experiences, emotions are inherently linked to specific social configurations (Gerhards, 1988b; Ciompi and Endert, 2011; Reckwitz, 2020, 205; Huber, 2023). Mental and social processes, feelings and emotional communication cannot be causally linked, they do not interfere with each other but merely stimulate one another (Fuchs, 2004; Freis, 2025). Organizational norms are known to impede personal communication. The main reason for this is the notion that feelings represent a control gap. Personal communication that pertains to this phenomenon is initially non-transparent to the organization (Luhmann, 1986). There are many emotional accounts of suffering from impersonal and objective organizational requirements. Weber’s concept of the iron cage (Weber, 1922/1964) offers a compelling formulation for the inclusion of feelings that occurs through their exclusion from organizational communication (Freis, 2025). Consequently, the initial emphasis on the communication of emotions is not the formal organization of work and administration. Instead it is directed toward informal groups, collectives and other social systems within the organization that may influence feelings through the medium of communication (Luhmann, 2016). The influence of membership requirements on individuals is a crucial aspect of organizational pedagogy (Wendt and Manhart, 2022b). As subjects and organizations “educate each other” (Wendt and Manhart, 2022b, 548, o.t.), it is unsurprising that emotional communication plays an increasingly significant role in the course of modern organizational development. Individuals who wish to remain relevant in modern society, must be members of organizations and adhere to their guidelines and rules. Organizations can align the learning of their members with the organization’s own requirements and “monitor the attainment of certain skills through the behavior, speech, and actions of these people, e.g., through pedagogical measurement regimes” (Manhart, 2025, o.t.). However, organizations are also constantly shaped by surrounding institutional guidelines and the internal psychological processes of their members. The management of emotions is predicated on institutional rules that have evolved over time and are utilized by organizations for their own purposes. These rules also impose constraints on organizations (Freis, 2025). Emotion management, as part of individual expression management (Goffman, 2004; Hochschild, 2006), predates the use of the term and the emergence of modern membership organizations, as an element of politeness and status-based expression. Emotion management is characterized by a development that is both institutionally anchored and constrained by established forms. Modern organizations continued to develop on this institutional basis in a form-bound manner (North, 1992; Freis, 2025). Althoff (1996) expounds on the significance of emotional expressions in the middle ages, emphasizing their communicative (and political) function. Through an examination of the ritual weeping of the king, he demonstrates how emotional displays served as a means of representation, a strategic form of power exercise (Althoff, 1996). Contemporary forms of emotion management are determined by such early forms of public expression management that were not yet integrated into organizational structures. However, these forms have evolved in parallel with the development of modern organizations, both in their formally structured and informal elements. The relationship between these elements in the development of different forms of organization has not been sufficiently studied to date. However, it is crucial to understanding the current shift toward emotionalized communication in public spheres.
In the philosophy of the 17th and 18th centuries, passions are understood as external driving forces for action, as indicated by the philosophical positions of the Scottish Age of Enlightenment, which attributed an “evaluative character” to sentiments (Hartmann, 2005, 29, o.t.). By the close of the 17th century, the concept of feeling had evolved to signify a subjective “capacity for feeling that accompanies all sentiments” (Hartmann, 2005, 29, o.t.) and only later for “an independent way of accessing the world in an evaluative way” (Hartmann, 2005, 29, o.t.). In this sense, sentiments became intertwined with the notion of feeling. In the context of conceptual history, “a movement can be traced from ‘affect’ or ‘passions’ via ‘sentiment’ to ‘feeling’” (Hartmann, 2005, 30, o.t.). Between 1750 and 1850, the terms underwent significant differentiation in scientific discourse (Stalfort, 2013). In the early modern period temper fluctuations (‘Gemütsbewegungen’) were perceived as being caused by external factors and mostly associated with religious content. However, during the 18th century, a shift occurred toward the “invention of feelings” (Stalfort, 2013, 419, o.t.), in which “hitherto unconsidered feeling events” (Stalfort, 2013, 419, o.t.) are linguistically framed as elements of the inner psychological life of subjects. It is no longer only the externally induced movements of temper with an action-inducing character, but also the sensations coming from within with a more reflective character that are “made communicable […] to social existence” as emotions (Stalfort, 2013, 419, o.t.). This shift in conceptual capacity and social requirement profile for differentiating its own inwardness, characteristic of the 20th-century subject, has also influenced organizational dynamics. Within the framework of organized practices, the possibilities became new demands and expectations (Freis, 2025). Elias (1997a, 1997b) observed an internalization of affects, historically. He draws parallels between this phenomenon and the process of state formation, conceptualizing it as a “civilizing process” that has persisted since the middle ages. This suggests that external compulsions and pressure became increasingly internalized and self-imposed to moderate and regulate one’s emotional responses and affects. The 19th century marked the advent of a mounting social expectation to render the inner self of the subject, particularly its affects and feelings, socially communicable (Freis, 2025). Organizations are a driving force behind this process in the 20th century. The way in which organizations deal with the affectivity of their members is contingent on the institutional forms related to it. A reflexive level is also evident in relation to the statement of an informalization of rules of emotion communication (Neckel, 2005, 421). However, in organizations, the formal and informal rules of (emotional) communication evolve in a concurrent manner from the initial stages (Luhmann, 1999). The social imperative for heightened reflection on feelings is reflected in the pedagogization (Manhart, 2003; Wendt, 2020, 42) and therapeutization (Fuchs, 2004, 38; Fröse et al., 2016, 3) of social communication within organizations. In the context of organizational modes of control, the initial focus remains on the regulation and control of feelings. However, feelings in the form of communicable emotions have evolved into an economic resource, a ‘production factor’ (Küpers and Weibler, 2005; Bergknapp, 2018; Donauer, 2014, 2015). According to Donauer’s historical analysis of the shift in human attitudes within the context of work (Donauer, 2015, 27), organizations have made significant contributions over the past century to fostering the development of meaning-making in the context of working relationships. However, these developments are rooted in early advancements that laid the foundation for subsequent formations during the 20th century (Donauer, 2015). This temporal epoch is associated with a gradual discovery of work feelings (Donauer, 2015, 27). The growing demand for the processing of such feelings is based on the realization that feelings can be used as a resource for organizations (Donauer, 2015, 19 f.).
In comparison to the understanding of the 19th century, this requires a developing de-tabooing and de-privatization of communicated emotionality as a historical shift and nuancing of the same phenomenon (Donauer, 2015). It is only in this institutional-historical context that the pedagogical strategies of organizations in the sense of extended forms of emotion management in the present can be comprehended. The employment of emotion semantics in the discourses of organizational research indicates that organizations—with very different motives, goals and purposes—have endeavored to regulate the communication of emotions and have expanded their control ambitions. The shift toward a loss of control is particularly pronounced in the context of advanced digital structural-automation (Wendt, 2021) and the emergence of other intelligences, which have the potential to substitute for both people and the social form of organizations (Manhart, 2024a). This substitution leads to a change in human self-image (Manhart, 2024a). This change is believed to be a primary motivation for the increasing control aspirations of management and leadership as it undermines the traditional role of humans in the workplace. To avoid the devaluation of humans and their emotions are not to become superfluous, they need to be strategically positioned in their capacity to navigate new circumstances of a present landscape of the digital age. This required a re-evaluation of educational approaches, with a focus on quipping individuals with the necessary skills to effectively navigate the intricacies of modern work environments (Manhart, 2024a; Freis, 2025). The deliberate modification of emotions by and in the interest of organizations is referred to as emotion management or emotion work (Schreyögg and Sydow, 2001; Rastetter, 2001). The evolution of emotion management in organizations, encompassing both informal (e.g., habits, traditions) and formal (e.g., written form) dimensions, has been transformed into a sophisticated pedagogical possibility of “intentionally-unintentionally” (Manhart, 2003) influencing subjective inwardness (Freis, 2025). While the conception of modern bureaucracy still focuses on independence from individuals, formality, and the elimination of subjective feelings (Weber, 1922/1964), the development of organizational theory increasingly takes into account feelings expressed and the emotions negotiated in (informal) groups (Mayo, 1977/1933; Burns and Stalker, 1968/1961; Ouchi, 1981; Peters and Austin, 1986). Since the beginning of the 20th century, a fundamental change has taken place. The necessity of affective-reflective self-discipline, which remains non-transparent, gave rise to skepticism about external control. Consequently, an awareness of the (direct) uncontrollability of the subject emerged (Luhmann, 2016; Ortmann, 2001). Initially, the focus laid on eliminating emotional disturbances; however, there has been an increasing emphasis on personal-informal relationships. In the course of this process, forms of expression of one’s inner self, which are shaped, controlled, and restricted by the organization, became normalized (Freis, 2025). The challenges and opportunities of such emotion-related communication, especially in the context of changes in organizational structures in the times of digitization (Freis, 2025) must be observed against the background of historical developments, the complexity of which must be explored. This article aims to contribute to this. Therefore, some central lines of this emotionalization of public communication are outlined below that culminate in the digital present, in which man and the social form of organization increasingly threatens to become superfluous.
3 The emotionalization of public communication—some historical antecedents
The advent of the postal system and the development of correspondence made letter writing “a [modern] habit” (Gay, 1997, 398, o.t.) in the 19th century. The fundamental principle of writing, which is central to modern organizations in addition to record keeping, finds a parallel and antecedent in this phenomenon. Written communication transcends spatial and temporal boundaries, fostering the development of a universal need for correspondence. Beyond the realm of personal diaries, letters, particularly those expressing love or friendship, have been regarded as a “pledge of true affection,” and a “means of expressing deep sensations” (Gay, 1997, 402, o.t.). This communication mode facilitates the articulation of one’s internal spectrum of feelings with a high degree of nuance. According to Gay, the paradox of this age lies in a process of cultivation that demands maximum generosity (Gay, 1997, 408). Letters are a form of self-disclosure, in which writers reveal aspects of their personal lives to the audience (Gay, 1997, 410). However, the communication of emotions is characterized by a high degree of personal exclusivity and secrecy. It did not (yet) take place in a public forum but rather remained within the confines of the private sphere. The conceptual distinction between public and private domains was not clearly delineated until the 17th century. While Kant (1783/1983, 486) associated the private with the exercise of official activities, i.e., not with the private, intimate space that is considered worthy of protection from a social form understood as public, subsequent conceptual developments have reversed this association (Manhart, 2024b, 79). A promising direction for further research would be to explore the role of emotional elements in the development of public media, such as newspapers or novels. However, early roots of emotionalized communication in the so-called ‘public’ must be contextualized against the backdrop of an emerging understanding of the distinction between public and private spheres (Manhart, 2024b).
Prior to the 19th century, the prevailing notion was that temper fluctuations represented affective reactions to environmental influences, signifying that their origin lay beyond the individual (Stalfort, 2013, 418). In the context of religious thought, the notion of a connection between one’s temper fluctuations and external influences, such as god, the devil, or other entities believed to project affective impulses into the individual, was widely accepted. These conceptions entailed a passive role for the subject in the process of arousing affects, as they allowed themselves to be ‘inspired’ by these external forces. The tendency toward introspection that characterized the 19th century (Plamper, 2012, 44) was, in part, a product of a fundamental pietistic perspective (Beyreuther, 1978), which, remained predominantly focused on the examination of the self, in the sense of exploring states of the soul (Steinmayr, 2021). This provided insights into the relationship with the divine. The development of a pietistic attitude is not the sole source of an evolving introspective perspective; however, it is a central and pioneering process. Further sources can be observed, for example, in the context of developments in Romanticism. The relationship between this development and the evolution of modern organizations that function as pedagogical units and influence the development of an introspective perspective would be a promising research topic and should be investigated in more detail. The notion that contemplation serves as the sole conduit to God (Steinmayr, 2021, 27) is indicative of such a pietistic disposition, stemming from the conception of God as transcendent, that is, external to his creation. The pietistic tendency toward introspection, evident in the practice of keeping diaries and correspondence, signaled a turning away from the conventional social interactions and the public sphere, which was characterized as “hell of the social” (Steinmayr, 2021, 25, o.t.). The practice of diary writing emerged as a technique of religious inspiration, a notion that was reiterated by Zinzendorf (1992). Introspective prayer should be guided by the “eloquence of the heart” (Steinmayr, 2021, 26, o.t.), and characterized by veracity and freedom “from all presentation” (Steinmayr, 2021, 26, o.t.). In contradistinction to outward presentations, i.e., which were regarded as a form of false piety directed toward the public, an inward, introspective examination of the states of the heart is emphasized (Steinmayr, 2021; Zinzendorf, 1992, 729 f.). The (written) reflection of internal religious impulses and feelings fosters the confession, facilitates the ‘exchange of souls’ with a few individuals who share analogous perspectives, and fostering accountability for one’s “fullness of the heart” (Steinmayr, 2021, 26, o.t.), a concept derived from a transcendent deity (Zinzendorf, 1731/1977).
The 19th century is characterized by the rise of secularization and rationalization with the objective being to safeguard the intimate family sphere and shield it from external influences (Frevert and Haupt, 1999). The idealization of privacy and family gives rise to an inner and outer world of the private vis-à-vis the public (Frevert and Haupt, 1999, 14). In the context of these shifting circumstances, the pronounced culture of letter and diary writing expanded and deepened the practices of the 18th century. As Gay (1997) emphasizes the revelation of a person’s inner self occurs in a completely undisguised manner: “But the nineteenth century was teeming with citizens who presented their unveiled inner selves, their naked hearts, to their contemporaries” (Gay, 1997, 9, o.t.), and “the preoccupation with one’s own state of temper [became] without question a veritable obsession” (Gay, 1997, 11, o.t.). The proliferation of “self-portraits, biographies, historical works, and […] character studies” (Gay, 1997, 15, o.t.) coincides with the emergence of correspondence and diaries as the predominant mediums for communication and introspection. In the context of the “inwardness in the bourgeois age” (Gay, 1997, 20, o.t.), communication became characterized by its openness and sincerity, and is largely liberated from the constraints imposed by religious functionalization and guidelines, a phenomenon that remains evident in pietism. Letters became the “language of the heart,” regarded as a privately understood “impression of the soul” (Gay, 1997, 394). The concept of a linguistically differentiated inner life has evolved to signify less external influences and more introspective exploration. The cultural practice of writing letters and journals serves to account for feelings as part of the education of the whole person. The Enlightenment pedagogy has long espoused the ennoblement of the human being, as well as his education for usefulness (Manhart, 2003). The concept of refinement encompasses an introspective moral education, yet it is also about the utility of the human being for the society, which is increasingly linked to organizations. In the context of the modern organizational society, as conceptualized by Presthus (1962) and Perrow (1989) organizations have emerged as pivotal socialization and educational instances (Luhmann, 2018). The educational concept of the Enlightenment is closely linked to the notion of self-education. With organizations, a new context for educational personal change emerges: individuals are intentionally provided with an environment—f.e. the rules of the organization—in which they may unintentionally undergo change, self-educate (Manhart, 2003), and engage in introspective reflection on their own sensitivities and affects. However it was only in the 19th century that there was a growing realization that people and especially their inner were also a context for the formation of organizations (Wendt and Manhart, 2022a).
Since then, there has been a growing recognition of the importance of feelings in human decision-making. The idea that education could improve the individual, including at the feeling level, emerged as a prominent guiding ideal. In the context of educational concepts that emerged in the aftermath of the Age of Enlightenment, the notion of attaining a more profound understanding of one’s spectrum of feelings and the imperative to transform external influences into internal control persisted. This represented a continuation of a trend that had already emerged in the education of lords (Manhart, 2003, 12). In the contemporary era, public educational establishments—regarded as modern organizations—have assumed a pivotal role in the educational relationship. The public school system, initially developed with the objective of providing mass education, has evolved as under the influence of Enlightenment pedagogy and subsequent reform pedagogy (Nohl, 1970). This development can be understood as a renewal of internal education. The concept of organized education is now also understood in the context of what is referred to as ‘heart education’ (Frevert and Hoffmann, 2012). The teacher’s personality should be characterized by love, and the special role of empathy and trust in promoting the education of the individual is emphasized (Frevert and Hoffmann, 2012). This phenomenon is not exclusive to the educational sector; feelings are also thematized as an educational subject and justification for action in other organizations. The concept of the formation of the heart experienced a period of prominence around 1800 as a pedagogical subject, with a subsequent shift in focus to actors, circumstances, and framework conditions that could facilitate development. This shift is evidenced by the pedagogical relationship between teacher and pupil or the organizational context of the school (Frevert and Hoffmann, 2012). The notion of cultivating and civilizing feelings is of paramount importance, as it is purported to serve the enhancement of the individual. This concept draws upon external mechanisms to regulate an internal process, a notion that has been increasingly discredited as outdated. An alternative perspective is gaining traction, asserting that feelings do not merely attack from the outside; rather, there exists an internal process of feelings that can be utilized to influence external outcomes, particularly in the context of communication within educational processes. Consequently, the predominant perspective in the 19th century held that feelings emanated from an individual’s innermost being (Frevert and Hoffmann, 2012, 48 f.). Adressing external avenues for influencing control issues—such as the management of emotions in organizational contexts—became subsequently imperative (Ortmann, 2001; Franck and Zellner, 2001).
The formation of feelings is not exclusive to the familial context; it also occurs in organizations, such as schools. This phenomenon suggests a social molding and suppression of the human being (Frevert and Hoffmann, 2012, 52). Organizations seek to instigate feelings for the purpose of their taming and control, consequently constraining, the internal affective landscape in its expression in and by organizations. As Weber (1922/1964) articulated, this approach emphasizes the need to adhere to impersonal rules, perceived as fundamental to the smooth functioning of the organization: “Sine ira et studio, without anger and passion, therefore without ‘love’ and ‘enthusiasm,’ under the pressure of simple concepts of duty; ‘without regard to the person’ […] the ideal civil servant rules his office” (Weber (1922/1964), 129, o.t.). An analogous perspective is elaborated in Taylor (1919) principles of scientific management where the emphasis on rationality and systematic procedures supersedes emotional considerations. In the context of school reform and within the 19th-century culture of letters, the cultivation and formation of the subject’s feelings was a prominent aspect. However, in other organizational contexts, this is primarily a topos that pertains to a controlled inclusion. This perspective does not imply a disregard for employee feelings, as frequently asserted. In this regard, Taylor identifies a ‘one best way’ to address subjective sensations, such as laziness, in a manner that aligns with organizational success (Taylor, 1919, 17). He does not refute the existence of inner states of temper or their relevance. Rather, Taylor shares Weber’s concern with understanding and influencing these states organizationally, through both active exclusion and utilization. Consequently, the human relations movement is explicitly concerned with affective categories of employees (Kieser, 2014). The recommendations that management has put forward as a result of this movement are based on an emotional connection with employees, aiming to foster an understanding of moods and feelings (Kieser, 2014, 104), rather than simply excluding them.
In his analysis of human cooperation, Mayo (1977/1933) underscores the significance of emotional categories in a “non-logical social code” (Mayo, 1977/1933, 120), conceptualizing the factory as a potential catalyst for fostering solidarity both within and beyond its immediate context, positioning it as a potential solution to the social problem of anomie. For instance, a modification in lighting, as a tangible manifestation of heightened awareness of emotional influences, could potentially contribute to a diminution of anomic circumstances (Mayo, 1977/1933, 175). Mayo’s position suggests that these possibilities emerge from the avoidance of a narrow focus on economic factors. In terms of labor productivity, it is presumed that the intrinsic capabilities of individuals have not been fully actualized. Contrary to the pervasive notion that the human relations movement has ‘discovered’ the social relations between (Kieser, 2014, 99) and the feelings of the worker, it is more accurate to assert that the focus has shifted from the initial assessment of the problem, as posited by Weber and Taylor, to a more nuanced understanding of the matter. It is generally assumed that employees of an organization are individuals driven by a desire for self-realization, which, when productively channeled through communication, can also benefit the organization. The implementation of routine employee performance reviews, providing a platform for employees to express their feelings, and the adoption of collaborative management styles that require communicative involvement to achieve organizational objectives more effectively, contribute to the realization of this organization-wide objective. In contemporary organizations, employees are increasingly regarded as emotional subjects (Tsai et al., 2009; Pescosolido, 2002; Peters and Austin, 1986). The orientation toward meaning and subjects in the management of modern organizations can be understood as a “consequence of previous unsuccessful attempts at control” (Wendt, 2023, 557, o.t.). This phenomenon coincides with the mounting emphasis on internal, feeling-based, and sensitive entities that are made communicable—that is, externally negotiable—through forms of emotion work or management (Humphrey, 2002; Flam, 1989; Hochschild, 1979, 2006; Gerhards, 1988a).
The notion of an inherent and constant quality to feelings during the 19th century gave rise to a variety of practices aimed at cultivating these states, which manifested in diverse forms. The practice of letter-writing and diary-keeping in the 19th century can be understood as an attempt to externalize one’s own internal states and processes. However, this act simultaneously facilitated the internalization of the causes of feelings. The interplay between externalization and internalization of feelings can be regarded as two complementary facets of a unified process. In contemporary organizations, there are efforts to regulate and contain the externalization of feelings, as this can potentially have adverse effects on the organization. In the nascent stages of organizational development, there is a tendency to cultivate and regulate employee communication with the objective of containing the feelings of the members within the organization. However, as organizations evolve, a shift emerges toward practices aimed at intentionally shaping the unintentional and unavailable inner self through the introduction of novel incentives in the interest of the organization (Manhart, 2003).
In this context, such forms of communication serve as a means of emotional regulation, whereby member’s expression of emotion is subject to organizational control. Organizations develop their own forms of language and incentive systems with the intention of accessing the inner self indirectly (e.g., Ashkanasy and Humphrey, 2011; Eiselen and Sichler, 2001; Ortmann, 2001). This shift signifies a transition in which organizations adopt a role akin to that previously held by God, the devil, or other external sources of inspiration during the 18th century. It occurs precisely because the original objective was to regulate employee’s feelings, by safeguarding them from external inspiration of emotionality. The advent of new information and communication media in the late 19th century has engendered vast possibilities in terms of quantity and quality for the subjective expression of one’s inner self. This phenomenon occurred because the contemporary subject is provided with avenues and prospects within organizations and the organized mass media to respond to expectations concerning their own inwardness within social configurations. In this context, there is a tendency to seek to express one’s inner self linguistically, aiming to make one’s individuality and identity perceptible to others through appropriate expressive behavior. However, the failure to achieve this expression often leads to a sense of alienation within the impersonal and rigid structures characteristic of contemporary organizational society. This divestment is also necessary because (uncommunicated) sensitivities represent a control problem for organizations from the outset.
In the context of the ongoing digitization of organizations, the formation of digital structures is enabled by visualization, which facilitates co-creative collaboration (Wendt et al., 2024). Fixed processes (Kette and Tacke, 2021; Kette, 2021; Manhart and Wendt, 2021) are compensated for on a social level through organizational cultural forms of attributing subjective relevance (Wendt, 2021) in and through the institution of emotional management. This phenomenon is exemplified by the growing demand for emotional communication (Kupiek, 2022, 2021; Mayer, 2020; Smollan and Sayers, 2009), or the management of an “emotional culture” (Barsade and O’Neill, 2016). It is therefore not exclusive to language but extends to the domain of visual communication as well. The visualization of emotional states in the form of emojis is intended to improve the communicability and understanding of emotions in relation to intention (Barsade and O’Neill, 2016). Consequently, the subject and its feelings have become a focal point of management and (digital) leadership initiatives, as a means of compensating for its perceived irrelevance in the context of digital structural-automation (Freis, 2025; Freis and Schröer, 2024).
Despite the prevalence of institutions in historical emotion research (Plamper, 2012; Burke, 2017), the logic of organizations remains a largely unexamined domain. An illustrative overview of historical organizational structures demonstrates their impact on the expression of emotions, emphasizing the distinction between organizational structures and the institution of emotion management. The school as an educational organization established to educate its pupils and training in emotional management for legal professionals are juxtaposed with societal less legitimate attempts to intentionally influence feelings within the context of organized practices employed by military and—as an extreme case—criminal organizations. The objective is to demonstrate that analogous developments in the context of the object of investigation occur within disparate organizational forms. These forms vary historically and contextually, contingent on the prevailing institutional logics. The subsequent chapter is, therefore, structured in a chronological and systematic manner, commencing with the school. It is a particular modality of emotional management in relation to organizational regulations and standards that is already delineated and cultivated in this context. The subsequent discussion will illustrate how the articulation of emotions constitutes a central control challenge in different organizations, and how this challenge is perpetuated. The chapter concludes with a discussion of the mafia as a criminal organization that does not rely on written communication. Instead it confronts analogous control problems and serves as an extreme case in addressing these challenges. The analysis is constrained to the aforementioned organizational forms, leveraging the principle of contrast to substantiate evidence that, despite their historical distinctions, these organizational forms of handling the expression of internal sensitivities can be situated within the previously delineated contexts and historical trajectories. A more extensive analysis of additional organizational forms could yield a broader array of potential interrelationships among institutional framework conditions and organizational structural types.
4 Historical forms of organizational handling of the expression of inner sensitivities
In the structured setting of the 19th-century school, the term ‘overburdening’ was used to describe excessive demands placed on the child (Seidler and Kindt, 1973). The ramifications of pronounced organizational socialization are regarded as pathological, classified as a ‘disease of civilization’ and linked to an organizational practice, namely teaching (Güntz, 1859). The consequences of an overburdening organizational experience are characterized by emotional distress, including anxiety, fear, worry, sadness, and anger (Seidler and Kindt, 1973, 165). This emotional state has been referred to as the “madness of schoolchildren” (Güntz, 1859, 13, o.t.), indicating a disruption in the child’s emotional equilibrium. The evolving portrayal of this demand and practice structure within an organizational context, as evidenced by the numerous critiques of the lack of individualization in the school system (Key, 1911; Hesse, 1906), exemplifies the initial informal response to the presumed influence of organizations on both communicated and non-communicable emotionality. The accusation of overburdening emerged concurrently with the systematic organization of the modern school system, which underwent significant restructuring (Seidler and Kindt, 1973, 162) since the Age of Enlightenment. Subsequently, methodologies for designing the school space are employed (e.g., Dudek, 2012), which facilitate the establishment of an organizational context that can influence feelings of the subject. This is a growing concern for the staff of an organization (Montessori, 1923; Key, 1911; Neill, 1948). Despite the ongoing discourse surrounding school absenteeism, the emphasis remains on the emotionally overwhelming experience of the child (Bollweg, 2020). School absenteeism is an example of an organizational control problem in educational organizations, discursively related in particular to primary and secondary schools, which stimulates and implies a way of dealing with the internal states of pupils on the part of the organization. Absenteeism in schools is analogous to the phenomenon of absenteeism in other organizations. In both cases, the primary challenge lies in fostering organizational commitment, which entails encouraging individuals to contribute to the organization’s processes and attend to them, thereby mitigating the issue of absenteeism. Schools thus serve as an original example of a fundamental problem of modern organizations (Kühl, 2011; Luhmann, 2000).
From the perspective of educational science, which examines emotions as an implicit pedagogical dimension (Kellermann, 2012), learning processes (Engelen, 2012), or the concept of heart formation (Frevert and Wulf, 2012), the explicit examination of organizational control logics and challenges would be a pivotal research area. The management of this control problem is subject to change over time, as it is contingent on context and temporal factors and is associated with the development of institutional frameworks. In Germany, where compulsory school attendance is the norm, absenteeism is not only an individual failing, as Fahrenholz (2015) notes, but also a reflection of shortcomings in the school’s organizational structure. Since the 1970s, there has been an increasing recognition of the school as a co-determining environment for a child’s development (Fahrenholz, 2015, 15). Absenteeism poses a significant challenge for the organization, as it represents a deviation from the individualized approach to pupil treatment that characterizes the school as an educational organization. Given the considerable size of the class and the universalistic orientation of modern organizations, the opportunities addressing individual emotional content, whether positive or negative, are limited. The internalization of universalistic value orientations at school is a fundamental prerequisite for role-playing, enabling adolescents to assume socially relevant roles voluntarily and proficiently (Parsons, 1987). Consequently, schools are increasingly providing guidance on how individual feelings can be appropriately articulated as universally recognized emotions. However, this does not negate the distinction between an individual’s feelings and those feelings associated with the role of the pupil. Instead, it presents them in a manner that facilitates a connection. The objective of this guidance is to prevent instances of truancy. Truancy is regarded as a failure in the structured education of feelings. Teachers and leaders of the organization are legally, in a form-bound manner, obligated to promote regular school attendance pedagogical (Fahrenholz, 2015, 266). Consequently, individual concerns are initially addressed within a regulatory framework. This is where the family-mediated institutional constraints of everyday emotion management become evident, functioning either as a means of enabling or impeding the expression of free affectivity. Absent such constraints, the expression of affectivity would prove overwhelming for any formal organization. The relationship between public and private spheres is undergoing a transformation due to the growing predominance of schools as educational and socialization instances, particularly in relation to the family. The school’s approach to cultivating a communicative describability of inner lifes has the effect of disempowering the family to a certain extent and contributing to a shift in the expression and handling of emotions in public as opposed to private contexts. Consequently, the revelation of the inner self is centralized within the school environment, where it is cultivated in a specific, controlled, and limited form. A more in-depth examination of the specific organizational nuances of this phenomenon over time would be a fruitful avenue for future research. Organizations implement specific requirements through the establishment of rules (Ortmann, 2012) thereby regulating “what counts and what it counts as” (Ortmann, 2012, o.t.). This regulation extends to the realm of personal introspection, shaping how individuals navigate their own internal worlds. Within the educational context, the prevailing evaluation paradigm plays a pivotal role in shaping this process.
The retraining of emotion management provides the organization with the capacity to address the issue of inadequate institutional feeling regulation. Formal acts and enforceable regulatory consequences facilitate the continuation of organizational practices of teaching in the presence of affective sources of disturbance. From the outset, the objective of fostering conformity in role behavior within the organization is inherently at odds with a time-consuming response to individual feeling and mood states, both within and beyond the academic curriculum. The persistent critical discourse on overburdening refers to a modern form of socialization that is increasingly influencing its members. The evolution of this issue can be observed in the transition from a passive, dismissive, and informal approach to emotion management to an active and structured method within organizational contexts that address internal sensitivities. Berdelmann (2024) explores historical interconnections between pedagogical practices and confessional domains (also in the context of pietism) with regard to observation and assessment practices in schools. She delineates the subsequent evolution of such methodologies in 17th and 18th-century teaching and underscores the significance of the development of functional elements in concrete teaching methodologies as opposed to a retreat of religious elements (Berdelmann, 2024, 205). This is seen against the background of, for example, a pietism attitude of observation that turned from the external to the internal (Berdelmann, 2024, 193) as a specific historical line of development. It represents a marker for subsequent formations of an organization which has to deal with the problem of controlling its environment of the inner of the subject. Specific school organizations have undergone changes in their approach to this issue over time and within the context of historical periods. The initial debate about overburdening has led to a more profound and psychologically sophisticated understanding of the emotional burden borne by pupils within a formalized organizational context. In response to this, organizations have expanded their job profiles, integrating school social workers and psychologists into the fabric of everyday school life.
In the domain of law, the “narrative of legal emotionality” (Schnädelbach, 2020, 9, o.t.), which gained prominence during the transition to the 20th century, plays a pivotal role in shaping the institutional development of form-based emotion management. In the theological-philosophical understanding of law, the feeling of justice (‘Rechtsgefühl’) functions as the predominant internal human criterion for distinguishing between right and wrong (Schnädelbach, 2020). However, this feeling is also regarded as being externally inspired, specifically as a manifestation of natural law. These notions of natural law underwent a period of intense scrutiny during the late Age of Enlightenment, yet they retained their relevance to a certain extend (Luhmann, 1993). In contrast, the differentiated and regulated handling of the feeling of justice became the central factor in the organizational formation of a profession (Schnädelbach, 2020). The elimination of the safeguarding of the given nature of the matter necessitates the implementation of rational regulation within and by organizations. An enhanced scientific examination of this correlation shaped the jurisprudential discourse of the late 19th century. In this context, the feeling of justice emerged as a “means of legal self-assurance” (Schnädelbach, 2020, 368, o.t.), thereby conferring legitimacy upon the field of jurisprudence. In the context of pronounced justice-critical movements at the beginning of the 20th century, for instance, the question of subjectivity in judicial decisions emerged as a key area of concern (Schnädelbach, 2020).
The organized professionalization and legal regulation of the judiciary is contingent upon the efficacy of emotion regulation training in the training of lawyers. The ability to regulate one’s voice and other physical factors has become increasingly crucial for lawyers seeking to influence emotions in the formation of legal cases and judgments within a courtroom setting (Schnädelbach, 2020, 371). In an ideal scenario, the 19th-century judge would have already developed the capacity to cultivate and balance his feelings in accordance with the ‘golden mean’ within the context of his bourgeois upbringing (Schnädelbach, 2020, 172). The archetypal lawyer and judge are characterized by their ability to regulate their feelings. The character in question does not engage in the act of denying his feelings. The objective is to cultivate a sense of duty and self-control in the face of impulses that evoke negative feelings, which can influence decision-making. This can be conceptualized as emotion management (Schnädelbach, 2020). In his theory of legal integrity, Dworkin (1986) delineates the moral dimensions inherent in the judicial application of law. He posits that judges base their decisions on internalized (feelings of) fairness and justice. Sensitivity to moral and emotional elements is central to the theorization of how applicable law is handled and how it influences the performance of certain roles. Dworkin’s conception of subjective internalization of the law exerts a significant influence on internal values, which in turn shape emotional expressions. The dimension of moral sensibility in judicial decision-making is regarded as an integral component of their humanity, which can function as a “precommitment device” (Richards, 2012, 1). These expressions are not only exhibited by judges but also in relation to different organizationally and institutionally defined roles (Dworkin, 1986, vii).
In the subsequent period, there was an increase in social expectations of individuals trained in the law. This phenomenon can be attributed to the processes of urbanization and the perceived social loss of personal ties, which gave rise to critiques of the “judiciary’s expansion into an anonymizing large-scale operation” (Schnädelbach, 2020, 371, o.t.). The success of the impersonal organization of the judicial system invites renewed reflection on the relationship between feeling and regulated emotionality. This entails an examination of the inner lives of judicial employees, defendants, and members of modern society, which are now also addressed in discussions about the feeling of justice and thus subjected to renewed organization. The development of the press and mass media during the early 20th century led to heightened public scrutiny of the judicial system, particularly regarding the judicious handling of emotions in communication (Schnädelbach, 2020). The expression of inner self within organizational processes has become a subject of public discourse. Contrary to the prevailing expectation of restraint in the 19th century, judges are now expected to “openly and emotionally engage with public criticism” (Schnädelbach, 2020, 371, o.t.) and the effective management of emotions is increasingly recognized as a competitive advantage within organizational contexts.
The professional judge, who underwent an organizationally structured training and further development of his virtues and feelings, was required to be able to subdue the unruly, impulsive legal affect by transforming it into a refined, “purified feeling of justice” (Schnädelbach, 2020, 192, o.t.; Riezler, 1921, 11). The figure of the judge, whose life as a civil servant is inextricably linked to the office, becomes the subject of public scrutiny and is subsequently also the focus of criticism regarding state influence (Schnädelbach, 2020, 204). The intertwined evolution of the state system, bureaucratic organization, and the professionalization of the legal profession gave rise to concerns and critical reflections on the organizational influence of state conformism on the feelings of judges (Schnädelbach, 2020, 205). In contrast with the hierarchical structure of personnel in other organizations, judges are not directly bound by instructions. As a distinct category of personnel, they are bound by expectations and decisions pertaining to the organization as a whole, but above all, to those of an institutional nature. This includes the legally enshrined principle of judicial independence, which was already established in the Frankfurt Imperial Constitution (1849), the Prussian Constitution (1850), and the Weimar Constitution (Kreth, 2009, 198). This independence is designed to prevent dependence on other state representatives. Mentioned concerns and critical reflections are favored by the institutional development of an emotion management. The modern subject is understood as active and self-reflective, and is expected to be able to independently and reflectively disencumber and balance inner sensitivities within the framework of organizational roles. This skill is also explicitly being integrated into relevant curricula in legal education (Townsley, 2014). It is evident that the evolution of this phenomenon has been facilitated by the deliberate regulation of feelings and sentiments—a practice that is not only demanded but also cultivated within the context of organizational emotion management, which is conducted in a highly specific manner.
Frevert (2018) conceptualizes honor as a pervasive guiding feeling during the 19th and early 20th centuries. For military organizations, feelings of honor are initially gaps in control, such as joy, sadness, anger or annoyance of their members. They can only be addressed indirectly through external framework conditions. When individuals in uniform are compelled to “pay attention to their honor” (Frevert, 2018, 9, o.t.), it signifies that the organizational ambition is to inculcate a particular disposition among members as an order of inner states, affects, and feelings that are aligned with the organization. Feelings of honor are remarkably distinctive. However, the act of donning a uniform and establishing a set of directives for conduct can only serve to enhance the likelihood of being imbued with such feelings through the corresponding actions. This feeling is exemplified by actions, behaviors, and communication that align with the organization’s established guidelines, thereby demonstrating the efficacy of organized influence. To this end, organizations establish explicit rules and norms of conduct, which their members are required to adhere to. For instance, officers are prohibited from engaging in conduct that would bring disrepute to their comrades (Frevert, 2018). The term ‘honor’ is defined as a suitable characteristic for members of the organization. If their conduct is adjudged to be in violation of their sense of honor, there is an organizational imperative for action that is designed to eliminate the presumed honor deficit. It is therefore incumbent upon officers to be prepared to utilize force and, potentially, to sustain harm themselves, that is, to allow themselves to be harmed, for the organizationally targeted feeling of honor. The targeting of feelings of honor in statesmen and officers by the state and military can be regarded as a paradigmatic example of emotional management by organizations, which subsequently affects social institutions. This influence extends beyond the military context to impact the quality of everyday communication, as evidenced by the common evasive movement on the sidewalk (Frevert, 2018) when a civilian encounters a member of the military in uniform. For the military organization, however, this situation signifies a transfer and influence on the rules of the game of society as a whole, which is inherently uncontrollable. Furthermore, the enforcement of organizational expectations regarding behavior also occurs within the organization through mutual observation and reciprocal sanctions. In this manner, members of the organization socialize and educate one another.
The organization depends on this process of member socialization to function, yet it is unable to exert direct control over it. The organization’s capacity to inculcate a sense of honor or to address the anguish stemming from tarnished honor is inherently limited. Within the military context, the significance of honor is underscored by the emphasis on organizational socialization, characterized by rigorous rituals and sanctions for members, along with a pronounced segregation within barracks. In a similar vein, the targeted shaping and disciplining of the feeling-world of soldiers can only be controlled and tracked by outward appearances, which explains the strictness of the military in these domains (Apelt, 2012). Frevert (2018, 10) characterizes the socialization of military personnel as a feeling-based process of masculinity training that aligns with the objects of the military organization. Concurrently, however, it serves as an exemplar of organizational emotional education, the potential shortcomings of which are manifested in the fetishization of purely formal yet readily verifiable criteria, such as the correct uniform, salutations, drill and parlor orders, cleaning and drinking habits, and so forth. As an organizational culture, secondary mechanisms are therefore formed that not only increase the probability of pedagogical success but also make the appropriation of guidelines verifiable in the first place. Consequently, the sense of camaraderie that is essential to the military (Apelt, 2012) is cultivated as a distinct feeling through the adherence to a set of rules that regulate the behavior of its members. This sense of camaraderie is continuously evaluated through a performative process of mutual perception.
Also, within the domain of organized crime, the feelings of honor are providing a basis for the value system that guides the actions of criminal organizations (Paul and Schwalb, 2012). The generalized willingness of members to engage in criminal activities is predicated on feelings that are targeted in an organization-specific socialization process and subjected to continuous evaluation through communication and conduct. The Mafia utilizes compulsory membership as a strategy to achieve its operational objectives, thereby ensuring that individuals remain within the organization (Kühl, 2012). The transfer of favors and gifts, along with the emotional stylization associated with them, functions as entry and stabilization practices (Bar-Lev and Morag, 2023) to achieve other objectives at a different time and place. These emotional scripts are implemented via feeling-based transactions (Bar-Lev and Morag, 2023). The criminal organization is based on the absence of writing and is therefore essentially realized through bodily practices that are directly connected to feelings. The provision of service to the family business as a favor and friendship service promises feeling-gains for all those involved on the basis of the reciprocity of the actions. The distribution of gifts and presents from the leadership level serves to reinforce this conviction. As Mauss (1990) has already noted, the symbolic significance of these unequal reciprocities blurs the boundaries between benevolence and coercive measures in criminal organizations, precisely because they are always motivated by the promise of future compensation for feelings (Bar-Lev and Morag, 2023).
5 Summary: implications for the organization-sensitive further development of a conceptual history of emotions—the organizational pedagogy of emotions
The processes of digitization have engendered an opportunity for a resurgence in emotional semantics (Manhart, 2025). Concomitant with the transition in decision-making structures, the subject side of the organization is being acknowledged as a pivotal element as its role appears to be at risk of being superseded by structural-automation (Wendt, 2021; Freis, 2025; Freis and Schröer, 2024). Not only, but also against the background of the significantly increased number of crises diagnoses in the age of digitalization, emotions have come to play a pivotal role (Zuboff, 2023; Jörissen, 2012). The invocation of emotional semantics and the ascription of significance to emotional communication can thus be regarded as an indicator of a period in which individuals increasingly perceive themselves as being adrift in the face of digital structural-automation (Rustemeyer, 2020; Manhart and Wendt, 2021; Freis, 2025). The historical trajectory reveals exemplary transitions between informal and formal practices of emotion management within organizations. These practices are in constant interaction with the historically developed institutional networks of rules in society and, in principle, are a universal phenomenon within every organization. A communication-theoretical understanding of the relationship between affect, feeling, emotionality and organization remains sensitive to the autonomy of these phenomena. This is because it focuses less on the historically evolving differentiation of the inner states of the psyche and its concepts and more on the aspect of communication as a system-forming mechanism of social systems (Luhmann, 1986; Simon, 2004). Paradoxes of emotion control (Neckel, 2005, 427) arise not only for individuals, but also for organizations. This article places organizations as pivotal actors of modern emotion management at the center of educational history and organizational pedagogical considerations. Organizations have developed systematic approaches to addressing the technology deficit in education (Luhmann and Schorr, 1982). These approaches encompass not only the influence on cognitive content but also the regulation of emotional responses. Feelings are not addressed directly; rather by systematizing and regulating their communicative emotionalization. In the context of a theory of organization, theoretical and historical considerations on the history of emotions have led to a refined perspective on the historicity of these control ambitions. These ambitions are driven by various factors, including digitization trends. The study of the history of emotions has generated a vast array of descriptive possibilities that have yet to be thoroughly examined and analyzed in relation to the organized practices of their control and the degree of organization of these phenomena. Conversely, the theoretical frameworks and discourses inherent in the field of organization studies have the potential to offer novel approaches to the historical analysis of education, particularly in the context of the organization of emotional phenomena. Awareness of the connection and interplay between personal-psychological, institutional, and organized orders can further differentiate the conceptual tools for describing an organizational pedagogical history of emotions.
Data availability statement
The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/supplementary material, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author/s.
Author contributions
TF: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Software, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing.
Funding
The author declares that financial support was received for the research and/or publication of this article. The publication was funded by the Open Access Fund of Universität Trier and by the German Research Foundation (DFG).
Conflict of interest
The author declares that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Generative AI statement
The author(s) declare that no Gen AI was used in the creation of this manuscript.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
References
Althoff, G. (1996). “Der König weint. Rituelle Tränen in öffentlicher Kommunikation”, Aufführung‹ und ›Schrift‹ in Mittelalter und Früher Neuzeit. Germanistische Symposien Berichtsbände, eds. JD Müller. Stuttgart: J.B. Metzler, 239–252.
Arnold, R. (2005). ““Führen und Geführtwerden im Schulalltag – emotionstheoretische Betrach-tungen”, in Die emotionale Konstruktion der Wirklichkeit” in Beiträge zu einer emotionspädagogischen Erwachsenenbildung. ed. R. Arnold (Baltmannsweiler: Schneider Verlag Hohengehren), 209–217.
Ashkanasy, N. M., and Dorris, A. D. (2017). Emotions in the workplace. Annu. Rev. Organ. Psych. Organ. Behav. 4, 67–90. doi: 10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032516-113231
Ashkanasy, N. M., and Humphrey, R. H. (2011). Current emotion research in organizational behavior. Emot. Rev. 3, 214–224. doi: 10.1177/1754073910391684
Baecker, D. (2004). Einleitung: Wozu Gefühle? Soziale Systeme 10, 5–20. doi: 10.1515/sosys-2004-0102
Bar-Lev, S., and Morag, M. (2023). Can't buy me love: gift-giving among members of criminal organizations. Symb. Interact. 46, 393–416. doi: 10.1002/symb.661
Berdelmann, K. (2024). “Die Entstehung moderner Schülerbeobachtungs- und Beurteilungspraktiken: Wie die professionelle Pädagogik sich von jesuitisch, pietistisch und aufklärerisch geprägten Traditionen erst nährte und dann emanzipierte” in Jahrbuch für Historische Bildungsforschung. Schwerpunkt Empathie, Emotionen, Erziehung und Bildung. eds. S. Kesper-Biermann, E. Möller, and K. Stornig (Bad Heilbronn: Verlag Julius Klinkhardt), 187–212.
Bergknapp, A. (2018). Emotionen in Organisationen. Zum emotionalen Prozess des Organisierens. Psychotherapie im Dialog 19, 104–109. doi: 10.1055/s-0043-123303
Bollweg, P. (2020). “Schulabsentismus” in Handbuch Ganztagsbildung. eds. P. Bollweg, J. Buchna, T. Coelen, and H. U. Otto (Wiesbaden: Springer VS), 403–419. doi: 10.1007/978-3-658-23230-6_31
Burke, R. (2017). Emotional diplomacy and human rights at the United Nations. Hum. Rts. Q. 39, 273–295. doi: 10.1353/hrq.2017.0018
Burns, T., and Stalker, G. (1968/1961). The Management of Innovation. London: Tavistock Publications.
Ciompi, L., and Endert, E. (2011). Gefühle machen Geschichte: Die Wirkung kollektiver Emotionen–von Hitler bis Obama : Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
Cornils, D., and Rastetter, D. (2012). ““…und schon gar nicht Tränen einsetzen”. Gender, Emotionsarbeit und Mikropolitik im Management” in Geschlecht Macht Karriere in Organisationen–Analysen zur Chancengleichheit in Fach-und Führungspositionen. Journal Netzwerk Frauen-und Geschlechterforschung NRW Nr. eds. G. Krell, D. Rastetter, and K. Reichel, vol. 81 (Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG), 158–179.
Donauer, S. (2015). Faktor Freude. Wie die Wirtschaft Arbeitsgefühle erzeugt. Hamburg: Edition Körber-Stiftung.
Donauer, S. (2014). “Emotions at work. Working on emotions. Ein Rückblick in die Geschichte der industriellen Erwerbsarbeit” in Organisation und Intimität. Der Umgang mit Nähe im organisationalen Alltag – Zwischen Ver-trauensbildung und Manipulation. eds. O. Geramanis and K. Hermann (Heidelberg: Carl-Auer Verlag), 151–167.
Dräger, H. (2017). Aufklärung über Andragogik. Kulturhistorische Betrachtungen zum Primat der Andragogik in der Anthropagogik. ZfW 40, 127–152. doi: 10.1007/s40955-017-0089-x
Dudek, M. (2012). Architecture of schools: The new learning environments : London, New York: Routledge.
Dworkin, R. (1986). Law’s empire. Cambridge, Massachusetts London England : The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Eiselen, T., and Sichler, R. (2001). Reflexive Emotionalität–Konzepte zum professionellen Umgang mit Emotionen im Management. Emotionen und Management, 1, 47–73.
Elias, N. (1997a). “Über den Prozess der Zivilisation: soziogenetische und psychogenetische Untersuchungen” in Bd. I: Wandlungen des Verhaltens in den weltlichen Oberschichten des Abendlandes (Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp).
Elias, N. (1997b). “Über den Prozess der Zivilisation. Soziogenetische und psychogenetische Untersuchungen” in Bd. II: Wandlungen der Gesellschaft, Entwurf zu einer Theorie der Zivilisation. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp (Orig. 1949).
Engelen, E. M. (2012). Emotionen als Lernprozesse. Eine Theorie zur Semantisierung von Emotionen als Voraussetzungen für das Verstehen seiner selbst und anderer. Z. Erzieh. 15, 41–52. doi: 10.1007/s11618-012-0291-y
Fahrenholz, C. (2015). Schulabsentismus als lineare Verlaufsgeschichte - Ursachen, Entstehungsbedingungen und die Beweggründe der Schüler: eine Längsschnittstudie über aktive Schulverweigerer. Bielefeld: Universität Bielefeld.
Fineman, S. (1993). “Organizations as emotional arenas” in Emotion in organizations. ed. S. Fineman (London: SAGE Publications), 9–35.
Flam, H. (1989). “Emotional man: a third perspective on collective and corporate action” in MPIfG Discussion Paper 89 (7) (Köln: Max-Planck-Institut für Gesellschaftsforschung).
Franck, E., and Zellner, J. (2001). “Emotionale Grenzen der Vernunft und ihre Konsequenzen für die Neue Institutionenökonomie” in Emotion und Management. Managementforschung 11. eds. G. Schreyögg and J. Sydow (Wiesbaden: Betriebswirtschaftlicher Verlag Dr. Th. Gabler GmbH), 249–276.
Freis, T. (2025). Emotionalisierte Kommunikation in Organisationen – Zur Genese eines pädagogischen Steuerungsproblems und seiner Folgen. Der pädagogische Blick, 4–24. (In press).
Freis, T., and Schröer, A. (2024). Digital leadership in meta-organizations? Emergence of a renewed relevance of leadership in the context of digitization. Front. Educ. 9:1465088. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2024.1465088
Frevert, U., and Haupt, H.-G. (1999). “Der Mensch des 19. Jahrhunderts” in Der Mensch des 19. Jahrhunderts. eds. U. Frevert and H.-G. Haupt (Frankfurt/New York: Campus Verlag), 9–18.
Frevert, U., and Hoffmann, T. (2012). “Gefühle im pädagogischen Verhältnis: Das lange 19. Jahrhundert und ein Postscript” in Jahrbuch für Historische Bildungsforschung Bd. 18., Emotionen in der Bildungsgeschichte, eds. Sektion Historische Bildungsforschung (Bad Heilbronn: Julius Klinkhardt), 47–69.
Frevert, U., and Pahl, K. (2022). “Introducing political feelings: participatory politics, institutions, and emotional templates” in Feeling political: Emotions and institutions since 1789. eds. U. Frevert and K. Pahl F. Buscemi, P. Nielsen, A. Arndt, M. Amico, and C. Moine, (Switzerland AG: Springer Nature), 1–26.
Frevert, U., and Wulf, C. (2012). Die Bildung der Gefühle. Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft Sonderheft 15, 1–10. doi: 10.1007/s11618-012-0288-6
Fröse, M., Kaudela-Baum, S., and Dievernich, F. (2016). “Die Leidenschaften haben die Menschen die Vernunft gelehrt” in Emotion und Intuition in Führung und Organisation. eds. M. Fröse, S. Kaudela-Baum, and F. Dievernich (Wiesbaden: Betriebswirtschaftlicher Verlag Dr. Th. Gabler GmbH), 1–18.
Fuchs, P. (2004). Wer hat wozu und wieso überhaupt Gefühle? Soziale Systeme 10, 89–110. doi: 10.1515/sosys-2004-0106
Gay, P. (1997). “Die Macht des Herzens” in Das 19. Jahrhundert und die Erforschung des Ich (München: Verlag C.H. Beck).
Gerhards, J. (1988b). Soziologie der Emotionen. Fragestellungen, Systematik und Perspektiven. Weinheim und München: Juventa.
Güntz, E. (1859). Wahnsinn der Schulkinder, eine neue Art der Seelenstörungen. Allg. Z. Psychiatrie 16, 187–221.
Hartmann, M. (2005). Gefühle. Wie die Wissenschaften sie erklären. Frankfurt/New York: Campus Verlag.
Hochschild, A. R. (1979). Emotion work, feeling rules, and social structure. Am. J. Sociol. 85, 551–575. doi: 10.1086/227049
Hochschild, A. R. (2006). Das gekaufte Herz. Die Kommerzialisierung der Gefühle. Frankfurt/New York: Campus Verlag.
Huber, M. (2023). “Emotionen zwischen Körper, Geist und Sozialität. Versuch einer begrifflichen und konzeptuellen Annäherung” in Affekt–Gefühl–Emotion: Zentrale Begriffe Psychoanalytischer Pädagogik? Annäherungen aus konzeptueller, forschungsmethodischer und professionalisierungstheoretischer Perspektive, vol. 85.
Hunold, M. (2019). Organisationserziehung und Macht: Eine rekonstruktive Studie zu Erwachsenen in quasi-totalen Wohnorganisationen. Wiesbaden: Springer VS.
Hunold, M. (2024). Erwachsenenerziehung im Kontext gesellschaftlicher Macht erforschen! Debatte. Beiträge zur Erwachsenenbildung 5, 173–179.
Jörissen, B. (2012). The expression of the emotions in man and avatars. Zur Bildung der Gefühle in virtuellen Umgebungen. Z. Erzieh. 15, 165–178.
Kant, I. (1783/1983). “Kritik der reinen Vernunft” in Schriften zur Anthropologie, Geschichtsphilosophie, Politik und Pädagogik. Werke in sechs Bänden, Bd. 2. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft. ed. I. Kant.
Kellermann, I. (2012). Emotionen – Formen – Gesten. Ein ethnografischer Blick auf verborgene Dimensionen von Unterricht. Z. Erzieh. 15, 97–114.
Kette, S. (2021). “Computer says no?” Konsequenzen der Algorithmisierung von Entscheidungsprozessen. Soziale Systeme 26, 160–188.
Kette, S., and Tacke, V. (2021). Editorial: Die Organisation im Zoo der Digitalisierungsforschung. Soziale Systeme. Zeitschrift für soziologische Theorie 26, 1–18.
Kieser, A. (2014). “Managementlehren – von Regeln guter Praxis über den Taylorismus zur Human-Relations-Bewegung,” in Organisationstheorien, eds. A. Kieser and M Ebers. (Stuttgart: Verlag W. Kohlhammer), 73–117.
Krell, G., and Weiskopf, R. (2001). “Leidenschaften als Organisationsproblem” in Emotionen und Management. Managementforschung. eds. G. Schreyögg and J. Sydow, vol. 11 (Wiesbaden: Betriebswirtschaftlicher Verlag Dr. Th. Gabler GmbH), 1–46.
Kreth, E. (2009). Die richterliche Unabhängigkeit: Wahrung einer sich selbst erfüllenden Aufgabe. DRiZ, Juli 2009, 198–201.
Kühl, S. (2012). “Zwangsorganisationen” in Handbuch Organisationstypen. eds. M. Apelt and V. Tacke (Wiesbaden: Springer VS), 345–358. doi: 10.1007/978-3-531-93312-2_17
Kupiek, M. (2021). Digital leadership, agile change und die emotion economy. Wiesbaden: Springer Gabler, E1.
Kupiek, M. (2022). “Die Emotionale Organisationskultur als Voraussetzung für erfolgreiches E-Learning” in E-Learning im digitalen Zeitalter: Lösungen, Systeme, Anwendungen (Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden), 517–536.
Luhmann, N. (2018). Schriften zur Organisation 1: Die Wirklichkeit der Organisation. Wiesbaden: Springer-VS.
Luhmann, N. (1993). “Am Anfang war kein Unrecht” in Gesellschaftsstruktur und Semantik. Studien zur Wissenssoziologie der modernen Gesellschaft. Bd. ed. N. Luhmann, vol. 3 (Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp), 11–64.
Luhmann, N. (1986). “Systeme verstehen Systeme” in Zwischen Intransparenz und Verstehen. Fragen an die Pädagogik. eds. N. Luhmann and K.-E. Schorr (Frankfurt a.M: Suhrkamp), 72–117.
Luhmann, N., and Schorr, K. E. (1982). “Das Technologiedefizit der Erziehung und die Padagogik”. in dies. Zwischen Technologie und Selbstreferenz: Fragen an die Pädagogik. Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp, 11–41.
Luhmann, N. (1992). “Organisation” in Mikropolitik. Rationalität, Macht und Spiele in Organisationen. eds. W. Küpper and G. Ortmann (Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag), 165–186.
Manhart, S. (2003). “Absichtlich unabsichtlich. Zum Verhältnis von Politik, Bildung und Pädagogik um 1800” in Erziehung in der Moderne (Festschrift für F. Baumgart), 95–142.
Manhart, S. (2023a). “Das gekränkte Subjekt in den Mythen digitaler Technik. Das Digital Mindset zwischen analoger Individualisierung und digitaler Personalisierung” in Digitale Mindsets: Chancen und Herausforderungen für Individuum und Organisation. eds. S. Kaiser and B. Ertl (Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden), 211–235.
Manhart, S. (2023b). “Pädagogisch in die Krise. Zwei Typen der andragogischen Funktionalisierung von Krisenkommunikation” in Pädagogik des gesellschaftlichen Ausnahmezustandes: Erziehung Erwachsener in der Corona-Pandemie. eds. D. Klinge, A.-M. Nohl, and B. Schäffer (Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden), 27–66.
Manhart, S. (2024a). “Das Glück der Automatia. Arbeit, Technik und Automatisierung in der sozialen Evolution” in Individuen in digitalen Arbeitswelten: Interdisziplinäre Perspektiven auf Individuum und Organisation. ed. D. Busch (Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden), 37–67.
Manhart, S. (2024b). “Partizipation durch Kritik. Zur Funktion organisierter Kritik in der Moderne” in Organisation und Kritik. Jahrbuch der Sektion Organisationspädagogik. eds. S. Rundel, C. Damm, O. Dörner, N. Engel, C. Schröder, and I. Truschkat (Wiesbaden: Springer VS).
Manhart, S. (2025). Information, Kommunikation, Organisation. Zur Semiotik pädagogischer Organisationsgestaltung in Organisationspädagogisches Denken und Forschen verstehen Ein Studienbuch. eds. Heidelmann, M.A., and Weber, S.M. (Münster: Waxmann). (In press).
Manhart, S., and Wendt, T. (2020). Komplexe Organisation und organisierte Komplexität. Die Pädagogik partizipativer Organisationsgestaltung im Zeitalter des Populismus. Zeitschrift für Weiterbildungsforschung 43, 377–393.
Manhart, S., and Wendt, T. (2021). Soziale Systeme? Systemtheorie digitaler Organisation. Soziale Systeme. Zeitschrift für soziologische Theorie 26, 21–53.
Mauss, M. (1990). Die Gabe: Form und Funktion des Austauschs in archaischen Gesellschaften : Suhrkamp.
Mayer, R. E. (2020). Searching for the role of emotions in e-learning. Learn. Instr. 70:101213:101213. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2019.05.010
Neckel, S. (2005). Emotion by design: Das Selbstmanagement der Gefühle als kulturelles Programm. Berl. J. Soziol. 15, 419–430.
Neuberger, O. (2011). “Gefragte Emotionen. Die Transformation des Untersuchungsgegenstands im Prozess seiner Erfassung” in Jenseits des Individuums – Emotion und organisation. eds. T. Hoyer, U. Beumer, and M. Leuzinger-Bohleber (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht), 89–110.
Nohl, H. (1970). Die pädagogische Bewegung in Deutschland und ihre Theorie. Frankfurt a.M.: Verlag G. Schulte-Bulmke.
Ortmann, G. (2001). “Emotion und Entscheidung” in Emotion und Management. Managementforschung. eds. G. Schreyögg and J. Sydow, vol. 11 (Wiesbaden: Betriebswirtschaftlicher Verlag Dr. Th. Gabler GmbH), 277–323.
Ortmann, G. (2012). “Enabling limits Organisationen regeln, was zählt und als was es zählt” in (2012). Organisationen regeln: die Wirkmacht korporativer Akteure. eds. S. Duschek, M. Gaitanides, W. Matiaske, and G. Ortmann (Springer-Verlag), 59–93. doi: 10.1007/978-3-531-94050-2_4
Ouchi, W. (1981). Theory Z. How American business can meet the Japanese challenge, vol. 24. London: Addiso-Wesely Publishing Company, 82–83.
Parsons, T. (1987). Die Schulklasse als soziales System. Einige Funktionen in der amerikanischen Gesellschaft. Klassiker der Erziehungssoziologie. Düsseldorf, 102–124.
Paul, A. T., and Schwalb, B. (2012). “Kriminelle Organisationen” in Handbuch Organisationstypen. eds. M. Apelt and V. Tacke (Wiesbaden: Springer VS), 611–629.
Perrow, C. (1989). Eine Gesellschaft von Organisationen. Journal für Gesellschaftsforschung. 28, 3–19.
Pescosolido, A. T. (2002). Emergent leaders as managers of group emotion. Leadersh. Q. 13, 583–599. doi: 10.1016/S1048-9843(02)00145-5
Peters, T. J., and Austin, N. (1986). “Leistung aus Leidenschaft” in Über Management und Führung. Aus dem Amerikanischen von Ursel Reineke (Hamburg: Hoffmann und Campe).
Rastetter, D. (2001). “Emotionsarbeit–Betriebliche Steuerung und individuelles Erleben” in Emotionen und Management. Managementforschung. eds. G. Schreyögg and J. Sydow, vol. 11 (Wiesbaden: Gabler), 111–134.
Reckwitz, A. (2020). Das Ende der Illusionen. Politik, Ökonomie und Kultur in der Spätmoderne. Berlin: Suhrkamp.
Renda, C. (2023). “Individuum und Organisation, Organisationen und Gefühl – Einleitende Worte zur Affinität zweier Themenfelder” in Emotionale Mitgliedschaft – Studien zum Verhältnis von Organisation, Emotion und Individuum. Organisationssoziologie. ed. C. Renda (Wiesbaden: Springer VS), 1–5.
Richards, D. (2012). The role of emotion in judicial decision-making: SSRN. Available online at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2000857 (Accessed February 07, 2025).
Rustemeyer, D. (2020). “Leonardos Spiegel. Der sich abhanden kommende Mensch” in Das Ende der politischen Ordnungsvorstellungen des 20. Jahrhunderts. Erziehungswissenschaftliche Beobachtungen. eds. U. Binder and J. Oelkers (Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien), 283–299.
Schnädelbach, S. (2020). Entscheidende Gefühle: Rechtsgefühl und juristische Emotionalität vom Kaiserreich bis in die Weimarer Republik. Göttingen: Wallstein Verlag.
Schreyögg, G., and Sydow, J. (2001). Emotionen und Management. Managementforschung, vol. 11. Gabler: Wiesbaden.
Schröer, A. (2023). “Organisation und Transformation als Grenzobjekte zwischen Organisationstheorie und Erziehungswissenschaft” in Forschungsdiskurs und Etablierungsprozess der Organisationspädagogik. Theorien, Methodologien und Methodiken im pluralen Diskurs einer erziehungswissenschaftlichen Subdisziplin. eds. M. A. Heidelmann, V. Storozenko, and S. Wieners (Wiesbaden: Springer VS), 335–351.
Seidler, E., and Kindt, H. (1973). Die «Überbürdung» der Kinder als Problem der frühen Kinderpsychiatrie. Gesnerus 30, 160–176. doi: 10.1163/22977953-0300304007
Simon, F. B. (2004). Zur Systemtheorie der Emotionen. Soziale Systeme 10, 111–139. doi: 10.1515/sosys-2004-0107
Smollan, R. K., and Sayers, J. G. (2009). Organizational culture, change and emotions: a qualitative study. J. Chang. Manag. 9, 435–457. doi: 10.1080/14697010903360632
Stalfort, J. (2013). Die Erfindung der Gefühle. Eine Studie über den historischen Wandel menschlicher Emotionalität (1750–1850). Bielefeld: transcript.
Steinmayr, M. (2021). Pietistische Kommunikation. Konzepte der Sozialität bei Spener. Francke und Zinzendorf. Studia Germanica Gedanensia 44, 24–35. doi: 10.26881/sgg.2021.44.02
Townsley, L. (2014). Thinking like a lawyer ethically: narrative intelligence and emotion. Legal Educ. Rev. 24:69.
Tsai, W. C., Chen, H.-W., and Cheng, J.-W. (2009). Employee positive moods as a mediator linking transformational leadership and employee work outcomes. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 20, 206–219. doi: 10.1080/09585190802528714
Weber, M. (1922/1964). Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft. Grundriss der verstehenden Soziologie. Köln/Berlin: West.
Wendt, T. (2020). Die nächste Organisation. Management auf dem Weg in die digitale Moderne. Transcript.
Wendt, T. (2021). Die Kultivierung des Zufalls. Zum Verhältnis von organisationaler Strukturautomation und Unberechenbarkeit in der digitalen Moderne, in Organisation über Grenzen: Jahrbuch der Sektion Organisationspädagogik. Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden, 295–308.
Wendt, T. (2023). Sinn als Grundbegriff der Managementlehre. Die Neuerfindung organisationaler Beweglichkeit durch New Work, Purpose und Humanocracy. Gruppe. Interaktion. Organisation. Zeitschrift für Angewandte Organisationspsychologie (GIO), 1–11.
Wendt, T., Freis, T., Schröer, A., and Schütz, F. (2024). Zukunft auf Leinwand. Methoden der Visualisierung und ihre Funktionen für Organisationen. Gruppe. Interaktion. Organisation. Zeitschrift für Angewandte Organisationspsychologie 24, 47–57.
Wendt, T., and Manhart, S. (2022a). Gemeinsam verschieden. Organisation und Bildung im semantischen Feld erziehungswissenschaftlicher Prozessbegriffe. Zeitschrift für Weiterbildungsforschung 45, 471–489. doi: 10.1007/s40955-022-00224-8
Wendt, T., and Manhart, S. (2022b). Die Bildung der Organisation. Zur Komplexitätsfähigkeit von Management und Führung. Gruppe. Interaktion. Organisation. Zeitschrift für Angewandte Organisationspsychologie 53, 547–556. doi: 10.1007/s11612-022-00649-2
Wendt, T., and Schröer, A. (2023). “(Wieder-)Herstellung von Unsicherheit: Blickwechsel zwischen Erziehungswissenschaft und Organisationstheorie” in Irritation in der Erziehungswissenschaft. Erscheinungsformen, Funktionen und Leistungen. ed. U. Binder (Weinheim: Beltz Juventa), 153–167.
Wright Mills, C. (1955). Menschen im Büro: ein Beitrag zur Soziologie der Angestellten. Köln: Bund-Verlag.
Zinzendorf, N. G. V. (1992, 1972). “Des Graffen von Zinzendorf Gedancken vom Reden und Gebrauch der Worte” in Ergänzungsbände zu den Hauptschriften, eds. Zinzendorf, N. Graf v., in Bd. XI: Freywillige Nachlesen Bey den bißherigen Gelehrten und erbaulichen Monaths=Schrifften, VI Sammlung. eds. E. Beyreuther and G. Meyer (Franckfurth and Leipzig, Nachdruck Hildesheim).
Zinzendorf, N. G. V. (1731/1977). “Jüngerhaus-Diarium” in Zinzendorf und die Herrnhutter Brüder. Quellen zur Geschichte der Brüder-Unität von 1722–1760. eds. H. C. Hahn and H. Reichel (Hamburg: Friedrich Wittig), 90–92.
Keywords: emotion managament, organizations, emotion-emphasized communication, expression of the inner self, control ambitions
Citation: Freis T (2025) Emotion management in organizations: the transformation of unreachable feelings to modifiable communication in organizations. Front. Educ. 10:1505275. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2025.1505275
Edited by:
Inga Truschkat, Free University of Berlin, GermanyReviewed by:
Ali Mansoor Al-Ameri, University of Karbala, IraqHenning Pätzold, University of Koblenz, Germany
Copyright © 2025 Freis. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Tamara Freis, ZnJlaXNAdW5pLXRyaWVyLmRl