Shades of Communitas: A Study of Soft Skills Programs

Abstract

In societies where neoliberal individualism prevails, communal experiences nevertheless remain crucial to human life. Drawing on participant data from a series of soft skills programs (SSPs) for Higher Education (HE) staff, we investigated SSP social worlds, their role in staff navigation in uncertain times and points of resistance within them. We found SSPs to be distinctly performative platforms, engaging actors in various self-care and entrepreneurial activities. A complex network of relationships was established via SSPs, as well as group effects akin to communitas, in “lighter” and “darker” forms. Incongruities of SSPs included gender imbalances and emotional management problems, while a mismatch between managerial attempts to create positive communitas and the reality of mounting workloads and job-cuts facing HE staff were noted in this study. SSPs may help counter organizational siloism, yet reflect the ambiguities within neoliberal culture and can deter staff from pursuing political modes of collective expression in the workplace.

Keywords

soft skills neoliberalism communitas ethnography organizational practices

Introduction

Soft skills programs (SSPs) for staff have an increasing presence in large organizations, yet lived experiences of these programs and the interests they serve have remained largely unexplored. Importantly, the part played by SSPs for staff navigating through rapidly shifting organizational landscapes, and in reshaping their relationship to self and others in the workplace and beyond have been topics neglected to date. For this article, we examine findings from an ethnography of SSPs in a university setting, using dramaturgical theory to investigate their cultural forms and ethos. We begin by looking at the origins of what might be called the “soft-skills culture” within contemporary Western society, its associations with neoliberal discourses, and its relevance to staff in the HE sector. We go on to look at the conflicting forces and pressures on staff within organizations to be both neoliberal self-determining entrepreneurs and members of a corporate community, and the ambiguous role of SSPs therein. We then expound our conceptualization of SSPs as neoliberal performative arenas in which self-care shares a platform not only with entrepreneurism but also with “communitas” (whereby individuals come together integrally) in varying “shades.”

Study Context

Our ethnography focuses on soft skills development programs provided for academic and corporate service staff in a UK university. We use the term “soft skills” to refer to non–discipline-specific personal and professional attributes believed to help individuals navigate the requirements, challenges, and opportunities of society and workplace in pursuit of personal or organizational goals (Heckman and Kautz 2012). Unlike many technical skills, soft skills (as personal and interpersonal skills) cannot be acquired alone; they require interactivity to develop and practice, often under the guidance of a tutor or facilitator. The authors themselves have taken part in a range of personal and professional development courses and have developed and managed undergraduate and postgraduate programs including soft skills development. We noted the growth in SSPs on offer to both academic and corporate service staff and were interested in the affective and cultural implications of this trend, in particular, the impact on workplace relationships. We also considered that with virtual platforms rapidly replacing corporeal learning and development arenas, exploring the cultural and social dimensions of SSPs could be of importance to learning and development professionals and academics and researchers with an interest in organizational practices.

Soft Skills in the Marketplace

The need to train staff in soft skills and emotional competencies can be viewed as part of a necessary response to the demand for new skill sets associated with technological progress, expansion of a global communication infrastructure (Cukier et al. 2009) and less rigid and increasingly interdisciplinary career paths (Arthur, Khapova, and Wilderom 2005). Numerous studies attest to the value of these kinds of skills for enhanced decision-making (Hess and Bacigalupo 2011), effective leadership and management (Ketter 2014), better interpersonal relationships and well-being (Lomas et al. 2014), as well as overall personal and academic success (Romanelli, Cain, and Smith 2006). Soft skills straddle two domains, self-care and entrepreneurship, and in a society preoccupied with both, they are big business. In the United States, the self-improvement industry, including soft skills training provided through motivational speaking and coaching, generates $10 billion per year (Market Data Enterprises 2013). Yet, a drawback of soft skills training for employees is that these skills are less quantifiable than technical or hard skills and, in terms of their transferability to, or within, the workplace, may be relatively time, energy, and money intensive (Laker and Powell 2011).

Soft Skills and Emotions

Soft skills, as opposed to hard skills, emphasize the emotional, rather than the purely cognitive or practical, domain. Workplace emotions are frequently regulated yet opaque in situ (Gibson 2006). However, on soft skills programs (SSPs) they can be examined in an “emotionally intelligent” way (McGurk 2010). In the form of social and emotional skill-sets (Goleman, Boyatzis, and Rhee 2000; Marsh 2012), soft skills training is considered useful for positively influencing attitudes and behaviors, and in so doing, increasing the organizational pool of emotional capital (Gendron 2005), where emotional capital refers to a set of emotion-based resources thought to increase career prospects and personal/institutional success. A further advantage of SSPs is that the positive “therapeutic” field they can create has less perceived reputational risk than seeking out psychotherapeutic support through an organization (Chew-Graham, Rogers, and Yassin 2003; Lomas et al. 2017). Working and learning in groups may also help to develop group emotional competences (GECs) (Koman, Wolff, and Howard 2012), unachievable at the individual level (Fixsen and Ridge 2012).

By stressing particular (“intelligent” and “positive”) emotion-based skill sets (Goleman, Boyatzis, and Rhee 2000; Marsh 2012), more complex sentiments can appear unwelcome or even suggest character deficiencies (Fineman 2006). For this reason alone, we consider SSPs and their rituals and mores, an under-researched area of emotion work (Fixsen and Ridge 2012) and regulation (Buruck et al. 2016). Writing on emotional labor in the 1970s, Hochschild (1979) documented the negative social and effects of commercializing human feeling, and while conditions of employment have changed, not all of these have been for the better (Hochschild 2011). Despite more emphasis placed on the need for courtesy and consideration to staff, stress and burnout are widespread in people- and customer-facing professions, including teaching (Biron, Brun, and Ivers 2008; Watts and Robertson 2011), and have reached crisis point in some sectors (Cheshire et al. 2017).

Neoliberalism and Higher Education

We contend that neoliberalism, which we understand at its core to be a dogma that values market exchanges as an ethic to guide all human action (Harvey 2005), has created a culture in which individual performance, not collective purposes, is prioritized (Radice 2013). The result is not just a deepening of social and economic divides (Harvey 2005), but a more transitional or “liminal” workplace (Tempest and Starkey 2004) in which employees feel less certain about their future within and outside the organization, and employers adopt more short term approaches to staff needs and employment. Reduced employment rights, public services, and welfare support have left employees to fall back on their own resources, whilst they are encouraged to reinvent themselves as “micro-entrepreneurs of the self” (Hall 2016).

Higher education has not been immune to neoliberal policies and ethics. Through necessity or design, senior management teams appear to have largely embraced neoliberalism. Indeed, some argue that global competitiveness has largely overtaken intellectual rigor as the key driving force within HE (Peters 2012; Berg, Huijbens, and Larsen 2016), resulting in fragmentation of the academic sector (Floyd and Morrison 2014). The combination of increased workloads, siloism (Biggs 2015) and employment uncertainties has taken its toll on staff health. Recent studies have indicated rising levels of anxiety, stress and identity confusion within academic communities (Biron, Brun, and Ivers 2008; Floyd 2015; Knights and Clarke 2013; Shin and Jung 2014). At the same time, the increasingly customer- and league-table-driven nature of higher education (HE) has put pressure on staff to be not just teachers, researchers, and administrators, but even more diversely, skilled and competent customer care providers (Tatar and Horenczyk 2003). Human resource departments (HRM) have promoted the profound changes taking place in HE (Knight 2012), resulting in academic, corporate management, and administrative staff entering an area of eternal liminality and self-governance (Tempest and Starkey 2004). Managers in HE have become important performers in the program of change (Berg, Huijebens, and Larsen 2016; Winter 2009), with institutions prioritizing training in state-of-the-art leadership and management skills (Beatty 2010; Clapp-Smith, Vogelgesang, and Avey 2008). In summary, with universities increasingly marketized, and employees under greater pressure and scrutiny, including via social media (Hall 2016), university management has had to consider how best to support a semi-mobile and diverse pool of staff, and SSPs have been heralded as one way of achieving this (Ariratana, Sirisookslip, and Ngang 2015; Junrat et al. 2014).

Methodology

Ethnography was selected as the means of gaining access to data on SSPs and for studying their culture. One of many traditions within the field of qualitative inquiry, the ethnographic method has been used widely in workplace (McQueeney and Lavelle 2017; Tolich 1993) and educational settings (Alexander 1999; Cohen, Manion, and Morrison 2000). In the field of education, ethnographic studies can contribute to a better understanding of recent shifts and changes, including in HE (Iloh and Tierney 2013), as well as associations between emotions and power (McQueeney and Lavelle 2017). Fieldwork was conducted over twenty-two months in a UK university. Forming trusting and mutually respectful relationships with managers in HR and organizational development was an important part of the process of gaining information and access to parts of the organization that might normally be off-limits. Another consideration was choosing from the wide range of soft skills programs (SSPs) and activities available at the time that, in addition to the menu of courses and workshops managed through Human Resources, included regular workshops aimed at preparing staff for a restructuring of the academic program. Table 1 gives a list of key programs observed by the first author and/or included in the study via participant interviews. Multiple half and one-day workshops were also enrolled on and observed by the lead researcher over the fieldwork period. As academics, we needed to bear in mind our closeness to the subject matter, and were aware that this study could present us with our own set of emotional and moral challenges (Goslinga and Frank 2007). Hence, care was taken during the fieldwork to reflect on the influence of our own relationships on interviewing, analysis, and reporting of the findings.

Table 1.

Main Courses and Events Attended and/or Discussed in Interviewees.

Programs Discussed in Interviews	Sector/Role of IntervieweesCorporate service (CS); academic (AC); facilitator/ manager (F)
A. Gender specific personal and professional development (PPD) course	5 female (all CS)
B. Leadership program for women	3 female (all AC)
C. Mixed gender leadership program	1 male (CS), 2 female (CS)
D. Coaching and mentoring course	2 male (2 AC), 4 female (2 CS, 2 AC)
F. Women researcher PPD course (AC)	2 female (all AC)
G. Leadership program researchers (AC)	1 male (AC)
H. Academic residential SSP	2 male (AC), 4 female (AC)
I. Mindfulness program	1 female (AC), 1 male (AC)
G. Resilience program	1 female (AC), I male (AC)
F. Various program	4 male F, 2 female F
Total references to programs	9 female CS, 1 male CS, 13 female AC, 7 male AC, 4 male F, 2 female F.

Field-notes were recorded manually, and divided into observations and other notes. To allow for greater involvement in the program timetable, most of the note taking took place in the periods between activities on the SSPs, or while a facilitator was taking the lead. The lead researcher also made extensive use of memos on an unobtrusive mobile phone, noting changes taking place in feelings and attitudes, and revisiting emerging ideas and concepts as required. Strategies were used to encourage facilitators and participants to feel comfortable with the researcher, such as self-disclosure and the assured confidentiality. To protect subjects, only short descriptions of activities involving other participants are included.

Staff members who had recently attended one or more soft skills programs were contacted via email by an HR manager or lead researcher, and were invited to participate in one-to-one semistructured interviews, either during or subsequent to managing or attending an SSP. Those interviewed consisted of twenty-five staff (eight female and four male academics, seven female and one male corporate service staff, and two female and three male facilitators/managers) from across the university. Some participants had attended several programs, and those who were both attendees and managers of SSPs were interviewed about them separately. The unequal female-to-male ratio reflected the gender balance on most SSPs attended in this study; however, we attempted to interview academic and corporate service staff from all divisions. Questions to participants covered the following areas: participant’s area of work, reason for taking part in SSPs, overall experiences, personal and professional gains from participating, benefits and challenges and plans for utilizing skills and experiential knowledge. Transcription was verbatim with any identifying details removed, and transcripts checked for approval by participants.

In the first stages of analysis, data from observation, interviews, stakeholder discussions and “site documents” (such as course handbooks) were considered as separate elements, and read and re-read to discover themes (including categories and concepts) within them allowing cross checking of data for consistency and accuracy. The full data set was then coded using a modified constant comparison approach (Strauss and Corbin 2015), inspecting and comparing all data and fragments arising in a given case and moving from a larger to more compact data set (Silverman 2014). A detailed code-log was used to develop both “in vivo” (participants’ own words or terms) and constructed (created by researcher) codes, to compare and cross-reference themes and codes from interview, observation, and reflexive data. In addition to manual memos and coding, the full data set was coded using NVivo software.

Conceptual Framework

SSPs are social events in which actors perform in various rituals, characterized by group symbols and meanings. For our conceptual framework, we turned to theory concerning ritual and collective emotion, including those of Goffman (1959, 1967), Collins (1990, 2004), and Turner (1967, 1985). Traditionally rituals were regarded as special ceremonies, usually with religious or spiritual connotations (Paloutzian 2017). The work of Goffman and others has greatly extended this interpretation, so that even mundane daily acts, such as greeting others, can be viewed as interaction rituals with their own rules and symbols (Goffman 1959, 1967; Collins 2004; von Scheve et al. 2014). Everyday interactions are performed in various settings or “regions,” which may be referred to theatrically as the front region (“front of stage”), the back region (“back of stage”), and so on (Jacobsen and Kristiansen 2015). Emotions are central to ritual performances and are constantly monitored (to “save face”), enacted, and portrayed in different social contexts (Goffman 1959, 75).

Like Goffman, we regard ritual and performance as elemental to everyday social interaction. At the same time, some rituals, either by virtue of their perceived status or the strength of feeling that they generate in players, take on a greater significance than others. Collins portrays all individuals as strategic pursuers of “emotional energy,” constantly feeling their way through situations (2004, 3), to find social and moral cohesion within the group. Ultimately, Collins argues, it is this emotional energy that people take away with them from rituals that determines the “success” or “failure” of a ritual. In successful rituals, emotions intensify into the shared excitement that Durkheim (1912) called “collective effervescence,” producing positive emotional outcomes such as confidence and moral solidarity (Collins 2004, 104).

Collins draws on the psychophysiological model of entrainment to explain the success or failure of interaction rituals. The key to successful rituals is where human nervous systems become attuned and bodily patterns become enmeshed in a process he calls “emotional entrainment” (2004, 64). von Scheve et al. (2014) further describe emotional entrainment as an affective attunement, which emotionally “charges” group rituals and influences group-related attitudes beyond the original encounter. Where emotional entrainment is sufficiently strong in social situations, members not only identify with the group, but also wish to repeat the process, thus reinforcing what Collins terms “interaction ritual chains” (Collins 2004). Interaction ritual theory thus offers a transformative explanation of collective emotions across time and space, with emotional responses (e.g., sense of moral rightness, enthusiasm, embarrassment, alienation) incorporated into the individual’s perception of self and relationships and providing a bank of emotional resources/responses for subsequent ritual encounters (Collins 2004, 50; Fixsen et al. 2015).

The concept of embodied engagement has been used to describe the participation of one’s entire self in an activity, including in understanding and meaning making (Merleau-Ponty 1962). In his focus on embodied engagement in social dramas, ethnographer Victor Turner (1920–1983) was influenced by Durkheim (Olaveson 2001), but also resurrected van Gennep’s (Bigger 2009) concept of the “rite of passage” as three distinct but interlinked phases of engagement: separation (i.e., detachment of an individual from an earlier fixed point and social structure), liminality (limen- signifying threshold), and aggregation (when the passage is completed) (V. Turner 1967, 1985). It is during the liminal phase, when the person is “betwixt and between” two cultural states (V. Turner 1967) and when structure and hierarchy break down (V. Turner 1969), that a type of social communion or solidarity known as “communitas” can arise out of ritual. In contrast to the self-conscious position we customarily inhabit, communitas is regarded as a relatively ego-less felt state, which in its purest form can manifest as a “collective joy” (E. Turner 2012). This holistic experience is fleeting and we return quickly to our familiar state of separateness and self-consciousness, albeit with some recollection of the feeling.

In its mode of expression, collective emotion is culturally specific; for example, in the eighteenth century, emotion became closely associated with social rebellion and political agitation (Hewitt 2017), whereas under modern-day neoliberalism, emotion has become a kind of commodity to be profited from by industries (e.g., advertising, media, health therapies). Collective emotion (communitas) must therefore compete with individualistic emotions based around self-determination and competitiveness (Mcginnis and Gentry 2008). A “dark communitas” can exist (Stavely 2016), which, because of its potentially disruptive influence, would pose a threat to the authorities presiding over the established order. This has implications for those attempting to engender enthusiasm and engagement through collective performances, such as on SSPs. We turn now to the results of our fieldwork, focusing our attention on the trajectories of staff members who attended or facilitated the SSPs in this study.

Findings

Entry into SSP Worlds

Over a period of twenty months, the lead researcher took part in a series of staff SSPs, which ranged from half-day workshops to a coaching and mentoring program extending over several months. Away days and residential events that focused on soft skills training were also included in this study. In addition to a menu of HR-managed courses taking place during this time, various faculty-run staff development activities and an extensive program of workshops being offered to academic staff to prepare them for a major change initiative were included. The majority of the SSPs were of a relatively informal nature but a few, such as a leadership and coaching course, led on to professional qualifications. While the subject matter of the SSPs varied, they included distinctive artifacts, rituals, and messages that distinguished them from everyday work or social activities. These included a named event in a location (or setting) that was physically or symbolically removed from the normal workplace environment; the presence of invited participants and facilitators; a timetable, plan and rules; course materials and props; and the use of an assortment of interactive and experiential learning activities.

The general format of programs was to open with a whole group presentation or briefing. The cohort was then divided into smaller groups (often six to eight), re-assembling the larger group at intervals for general discussion or further presentations. During small group work, participants were assigned similar topics to discuss or activities and role-plays to execute. The following extract describes the ritual proceedings on the first day of observation on a four-day woman’s development program:

On entering the room, we are asked to sign a register, put on our sticky name badges, help ourselves to coffee, and “feel welcome” to browse the self-development books displayed on tables at the back. When everyone is seated, we are given an explanation about the program and its history. Next, we are divided into groups. We are reminded that this day is for us, but that there are golden rules, and we should try to stay for the duration of the day. We are asked to explore what we want to get out of the programme. Most of our group (and other groups) have at least some goals in common. We move around in a circle, posting our thoughts on flipcharts and it’s rather like the game of musical chairs. (Lead researcher diary extract)

Personal and Professional Investment

Actors in SPP social worlds entered them for various reasons and expressed different levels of investment in them (managers and facilitators unsurprisingly voicing the strongest ideological commitment). Many of the HR-managed (as opposed to some Faculty run) programs were voluntary; however, attendance on all HR-run SSPs was recorded on the staff member’s personal and professional record and required the approval of a line manager. Participants spoke of a variety of prompts and incentives, which had motivated them to attend particular courses, including taking time out, developing their career, and acting on the recommendation of a mentor or manager. Staff from corporate services in particular saw SSPs as a chance to up-skill in preparation for the next career move; for example, “I wanted to move forward with my career . . . so I went in thinking ‘I’ll make it work for me,’” and “Although you’re embedded in the contract you’re always thinking of what the next step is where you will be going.” The type of course recommended or offered to staff largely mirrored rank within the organization (Kezar and Lester 2009; Mumford, Campion, and Morgeson 2007), so being put forward for a leadership course could feel quite an achievement: “My line manager put me forward. . . . It’s quite a popular program, so it was quite flattering.”

Corporate service staff, most of whom followed “nomadic” career paths (Fixsen, Cranfield, and Ridge 2017), expressed few opinions about changes within the organization under study. Academics’ views concerning working life and job mobility were more critical, while redundancies and restructuring had left many with an attitude of cynical weariness. None spoke of leaving academia completely and those seeking career progression tended to seek it internally rather than in another place of work. As one senior female academic explained, moves between academic institutions generally applied to the young. Nevertheless several academics spoke about the importance of engaging in (and being seen to be engaged in) professional development; for example, “You must market and promote yourself, that’s the world we are in,” and “One does everything to be primed for any opportunities that come up.” In addition, a number of the academics on SSPs were “career hybrids” (Garoupa and Ginsburg 2011), combining faculty posts with other business roles. This suggests that the type of careerism emerging within HE is increasingly complex, with academics engaging in attempts to develop their role as entrepreneurial agents while maintaining their academic identity (Knights and Clarke 2013).

Self-Care and Gender

While some had attended SSPs purely for work or career reasons, most participants regarded their time on SSPs as time out or “me time”; for example, “It was a useful opportunity I think to get out of the office, and to look at the issues in my working life and say, ‘What do you really want?’” Residential events in particular were viewed as chances to focus on self and “to go out of university and out of that brain space.” Maintaining a distinction between course activities and the workplace was emphasized by facilitators, one of whom said, “don’t bring any work, don’t do anything.” Nevertheless some (especially academics) admitted that, with pressing deadlines to meet, they had left in the breaks and breached the SSP rules to look at emails or attend meetings.

Different self-care practices were used on SSPs, such as self-reflection, mindfulness and self-compassion, resilience, and assertiveness training. Several participants interviewed (both academic and corporate service staff) felt that these practices helped with self-awareness and self-confidence; for example, “I think I’m relatively aware of things I’m less strong at, like assertiveness, confidence; “I wouldn’t say that I am pushover but I think that I usually will be more inclined to find a solution that suits the other person better than for myself.”

Self-care issues potentially relate to everyone, yet the marketing of self-care has been aimed primarily at female audiences (Rottenberg 2014). Most of the SSPs offered to staff at this time were not gender specific, yet with the exception of one all-male SSP, which the ethnographer was not permitted to attend, female participants outnumbered their male counterparts at all events. When asked about his views on this gender discrepancy on a coaching course, one male academic talked about what he saw as a culture of “academic testosterone” prevailing within academia. Here, it is interesting that character traits that might traditionally be considered “masculine,” such as assertiveness, self-responsibility, and empowerment, were promoted on the all-women SSPs in this study. To demonstrate to other women how “self-realization” could be achieved, motivational guest speakers were invited to share their stories with participants:

We have a guest speaker. She has a success story to tell us. She advises us about making a plan; “think about who opens doors for you or better still build that door yourself. It’s a continuous progress,” she says. “You have to keep on developing yourself.” (Lead researcher diary extract, women’s development program)

These female “role models” were discussed at some length in class and in later interviews. Several of the younger women found them inspiring, whereas the older female staff members were more disparaging about the aspirational messages being delivered; for example, “The woman regularly works to all hours and she has no work-life balance.” Academics in particular were quick to pick up on the pro-health nudges and the associations made between health and professional success; for example, “There was a sort of subliminal message—‘If you do cycling or something, you will get on in management.’”

Learning through Performing

Much has been written about the benefits of experiential learning and dramaturgical devices (e.g., creative group work, role-play) in both child and adult learning and development (Baruah and Paulus 2009; Hromek and Roffey 2009; Smith 2009), and both featured widely on the SSPs in this study. One such example was a socio-drama workshop, during which participants were asked to explore and reflect on alternative approaches for tackling challenging interactions with students. Each participant chose a role in this scenario and every so often the facilitator said “freeze!” and two people would swap roles. The whole effect produced a lot of laughter at times, and at the end of the session, participants resolved to stay in touch with the facilitator and with one another. Many of these more creative sessions took place away from a university, which some participants felt allowed for more creative license; for example, “adults can play too.” Some of the role-playing exercises ostensibly appeared to serve little purpose but were nevertheless fun at the time:

It [the program] had a very interactive dynamic. But you know, I came out of the course and my wife asked what did you do today, and I said, “I had to be a sheep. I was blindfolded and someone blew a whistle to direct me into a pen.” It’s kind of not your standard sort of management exercises. (Male, academic)

Performing in or out of role in front of one’s peers can be nerve-wracking in terms of the potential for judgment. Some performances on SSPs were informal, even impromptu, whereas others were observed and commented on by invited guests, including students and line managers. Participants, including experienced lecturers, vividly described their particular forms of performance nerves, excitement and so on, when front of stage, and the sense of achievement felt from successfully challenging personal comfort zones, for example, “the fact that I actually did do all those things that I was terrified to do—like stand[ing] up in front of those people.”

Other group activities on SSPs had a more intimate, authentic feel. One senior academic, who formed an action learning group with professionals of similar ranks from other organizations, saw it as an opportunity to “let off steam” about internal work matters: “(I said) I’d like just to have a rant, I just want to get it all out . . . and that rambling and talking it through will help me clarify it in my head.” Not all the group exercises proceeded smoothly, however. Group or team members come with different personalities and values (Glew 2009; Klein et al. 2011), and working out people’s characters within a group can take time (George 1990); for example, “Every time you’re working with new people you are trying to test the water with them.” One male academic recalled “some friction” with a “dictatorial buddy,” on a leadership skills program, who had assumed a controlling posture during an imaginary crisis scenario. Having to work with “negative people” could also be a problem and could color participants’ feelings and opinions about the course, e.g., “we had a couple of people who were just like his big wall of negativity. I hate my job here . . . [it] was so hard [for this participant] to turn them round.”

Social Networking and Communitas

In a neoliberal world in which employees are expected to market themselves, “serious networking,” such as making new contacts or exploring collaborative projects, assumes great importance. One male academic recalled how some years ago he had used his time on an SSP to develop a new enterprise: “I remember the particular moment, which was when me and my colleague pitched an idea . . . and they said, ‘Yes it’s great! Put it forward, we’ll support it.’” Another female academic described the congregating of females from different sectors on a leadership course as something akin to an “‘old boy’ network,” but among women.

Research into embodied engagement suggests that virtual communication and forms of artificial intelligence may not adequately replace the meaningful encounters that employees seek in the workplace (Ray 2006; Merleau-Ponty 1962). Contrasting with the “siloism” (Tett 2015) created by increasingly compartmentalized, digitized work spheres, time on an SSP was an opportunity to physically network and engage with others in workplace related activities. Many of the motivations and benefits of SSPs identified by participants (such as building relationship and performing with others) revolved around the corporeal physicality of attendance, with the establishment of connections, including trust, building of collegiate relationships and practising reflexive performances, largely taking place via face-to-face interaction rituals; for example, “We shared very deeply about ourselves . . . cut through the superfluous quite quickly.”

For new or temporary staff, this physicality was important in terms of establishing agency within the institution. The opportunity to chat with managers (and potentially court their favor) was, for junior staff, a particular “perk” of residential and business events; for example, “My manager’s manager was on the course, and I feel that she’s much more approachable now if I encounter a problem.” Higher-ranking staff (possibly to avoid the constant need to “put on a face”) tended to seek out contacts with similar positions inside or outside of the organization. One senior member described how they saw their meetings with an external action-learning group as an opportunity to have “a good rant” in a way that might not feel safe with colleagues within their organization. Establishing these types of collegial relationships was important to the morale of participants; thus, even those with busy work schedules made time to meet up with staff from other divisions and other institutions they had met on a previous SSP: “We had breakfast together this morning . . . we do intend to continue and we’re trying to make the next date now.”

Incidental learning takes place outside the classroom or workplace, often in groups; for instance, as a result of a conversation with a colleague, occurring in between learning activities at a conference, on porch steps, and in people’s rooms (McFerrin 1999). Residential events favored combining learning with leisure, and most of the participants in this study appreciated the conviviality of these events. For example, on one residential event attended and observed by the researcher, participants sat around in the bar after class, and chatted in a less formal way about topics related to learning and development. At this particular venue, there was a swimming pool, which proved a good location in which to watch participants informally networking while enjoying themselves in the pool.

At its best, the physical coming together of people with similar intentions can be a pivotal moment, alive with possibilities, akin to Durkheim’s portrayal of the collective consciousness (Durkheim 1912). One male academic described feeling “inspired” during his time on a large-scale SSP event; “(there was) a great sense that people were active participants . . . you felt that you were ‘part of building’ something rather than it being a passive meeting.” Other participants used terms such as “energy” or “synergy” to describe the positive “buzz” on some SSPs; for example, “The energy in the room, the potential synergy of working in different teams . . . the whole positivity of the experience stands out.”

Discord and Dissent

Collins argues that at a micro level, positive emotional processes are easier to enact than conflict processes, the latter being easier to conduct at a distance (2004, 74). Nevertheless, certain face-to-face interaction rituals succeed while others fall flat (Collins 2004), or lead to suspicion and conflict (Boyns and Luery 2015). Despite attempts to convince participants of the importance of these skills, some “non-believers” (Elmes and Costello 1992) failed to be convinced of their importance; for example, “it was too touchy feely for my taste.” The academics in particular criticized what they saw as simplistic interpretations of psychological theories on SSPs, with aspects of programs reported to be just plain dull, for example, “It was death by Power Point,” or delivered at a pace that frustrated some academics; “You had to sit for ages listening to a very slow movement of information.”

Another concern for participants were the hidden agendas on some SSPs, with suspicions expressed concerning their internal politics. Role ambiguities and power differentials between people on some courses made some participants reluctant to speak freely; for example, “However good your relationship is (I don’t know how you can), speak freely, knowing your manager (is present). There must be a conflict of interest somewhere.” Certain topics were seen as best discussed outside or “back of stage”; for example, one academic spoke of how “it’s all very well to bring together 30 or 40 people in a room, then say it’s confidential . . . I think you need a certain level of comfort personally.”

While emotional discord between fellow SSP participants in this study seemed to be by and large managed, if only through ignoring the other party, disagreements with facilitators could produce a deeper sense of unease. Two female participants (one directly involved in the incident) expressed a sense of shock over the management of one scenario in which, following the screening of a highly emotive video, a participant was asked to leave because their crying “might upset the others.” As the female facilitator possibly recognized, the fallout from emotion-laden scenarios can spread to others through a group emotional cascade effect (Koman, Wolff, and Howard 2012), but she failed to realize the rapidity of this effect. Via facial and verbal exchanges “back of stage” (Glushko and Tabas 2009; Goffman 1959), this particular emotional cascade effect had its own momentum; “The girl next to me just turned to me and she said, ‘Did she really just say that?’ And you know we were all astounded that someone who is leading the course was so insensitive.” In this case, the emotional fallout was not (for some participants) satisfactorily resolved through facilitator intervention, and the disquiet continued to circulate. This resulted in a counter-solidarity being created within group, as they attempted to disentangle the resulting moral and emotional jumble by themselves (Fixsen et al. 2015).

As agents of change, managers are expected to understand and work with the uncertainty and anxiety of transition, and to manage the “darker side” of emotionally charged situations (Boyns and Luery 2015). During the period in which this study took place a wide-scale strategic undergraduate teaching change initiative was being rolled out, which was not proving wholly popular, especially with the academic staff. To provide information and training on the ethos and requirements of this new strategy, an extensive program of workshops and away days was being delivered to academic and corporate service staff, and formed part of the fieldwork for this ethnography. At the larger scale events, it was noted that organizers used various strategies to manage staff criticism and anxiety and to “win people over” to this less than popular change agenda. Tactics included bringing in “experts” from outside the organization to explain the benefits of changes; using light-hearted humor to create the impression that everybody was “in the same boat”; and boosting morale by portraying the organization as forward thinking and entrepreneurial. The mingling of managers with participants “on the ground” also helped to allay the impression of there being an “us and them” and discouraged “back of stage” gossip (Goffman 1959; Michelson, van Iterson, and Waddington 2010) from derailing the “front of stage” message. Even so, on some SSPs, critical comments and dark humor (Wright, Powell, and Ridge 2006) were expressed in areas out of the earshot of managers, on topics such as unreasonable demands made on teaching staff and the chaotic approach of senior management strategies.

Discussion

For this study, we investigated SSPs, their collective elements, and the part they play in informing what for many has become a less predictable career path in HE. Our findings were presented under the following themes: entry into SSP worlds, personal and professional investment, self-care and gender, learning through performing, social networking and communitas, and discord and dissent. We found SSPs to be decidedly performative social worlds, both in the dramatic and performance management sense of the term and in their use of experiential learning devices, which promoted self-care, entrepreneurism and “communitas.” Various dramaturgical devices were employed on SSPs (typically ice-breakers, role-play, group presentations), designed to engage actors in various self-care and entrepreneurial activities, and to convince participants of the importance of and credibility of these skill sets (Elmes and Costello 1992). By separating the actor from the emotional dramas being played out, for example, in role-play, the ritual aspects of SSPs acted as governance devices, both protecting and distancing participants from their performances. Participants also used theatrical metaphors and analogies to discuss their own performances and to assess the performances of others (e.g., “their stage,” “primadonna”).

Participants congregate as “actors” in social worlds, but arrive from different “sub worlds” (Strauss 1984), which in the case of SSPs included various departments, work sectors, and different institutions. A complex network of social and emotional relationships was established both during and outside of the program schedule (“on set” and “back of stage” (Collins 2004; Goffman 1959), which at times established a group effect akin to communitas, albeit in different forms. Program planners and facilitators employed different strategies to encourage emotional entrainment between participants (von Scheve et al. 2014), and participants referred to scenarios in which this had been successful. Those SPPs that allowed time for group discussion, separated managers from their staff, offered privacy to encourage self-exploration and creativity, and in which the purpose of activities was well explained were more likely to be deemed “successful” as interaction rituals (Collins 2004). Conversely, activities that took place in venues deemed cramped or noisy, with overlong or slow presentations, with arbitrary or unclear rituals or with excessive intervention from facilitators were more likely, in emotional energy terms, to “fail” as interaction rituals (Collins 2004). Trust and mutual support were central tenets on SSPs; however, tensions and divergences due to personality clashes, status differences, and management issues were also widely evidenced in this study.

Self-Care on SSPs

With diminishing health and social-care resources (Schaufeli, Bakker, and van Rhenen 2009), and stress-related health problems on the increase, including among HE staff (Biron, Brun, and Ivers 2008; Winefield and Jarrett 2001), self-care remains an important vehicle for promoting worker well-being. As a concept, self-care has multiple definitions (Ball and Olmedo 2013; Barnett et al. 2007; Denyes, Orem, and Bekel 2001). However, following Foucault (1998), we accept self-care practices to be a set of techniques that “permit individuals to effect by their own means or with the help of others a certain number of operations on their own bodies and souls, thoughts, conduct, and way of being, so as to transform themselves” (18). Self-care practices have until recently been largely separated from the workplace. Recognizing their benefit in terms of creating economic and emotional capital (Gendron 2005), agents of the neoliberal economy have devised multiple ways of promoting self-care practices including through the provision of SSPs.

Self-care practices can, according to many studies, bring many benefits. Mindfulness practices have been associated with decreased anxiety (Dekeyser et al. 2008), better-quality relationships (Branch and Murray 2008; Bush 2011; Goodman and Schorling 2012; Tomac 2012), and a greater sense of well-being (Van Gordon et al. 2016), although these practices also have their psychological hazards (Lomas, Hefferon, and Ivtzan 2016). When employed contemplatively, self-reflection can change the “hearts and minds” of learners (Schon 1983; Moon 2004), while time spent in contemplation may increase mental clarity so that, on reengagement in daily life, one can focus on problems worthy of inquiry (Webster-Wright 2013). In contrast to the materialism and inauthenticity of modern society (Taylor 1991), self-care practices can seem wholesome and commendable. These types of skills are transferable and can potentially benefit people in many walks of life.

Yet, with neoliberal underpinning, self-care has gone beyond the individual choice for self-advocacy and become a “foundation science” (Denyes, Orem, and Bekel 2001), infused or confused with corporately engineered messages. Foucault’s (1998) conception of self-care was as a technology of power associated with biopower (Foucault 2008), the latter referring to the means by which organizations take over people’s lives and heath (Larsen 2007). Self-care as a marketing opportunity can be exploitative (Furedi 2004), a method of endlessly shaping and monitoring employees’ attitudes and behaviors (Ecclestone 2012). While emotional positivity discourses can help employees on a micro level, they can also deter individuals and groups from engaging in anything more than superficial reflection (Argyris 1998; Fineman 2006) or from seeking collective avenues of political power (Ehrenreich 2010). We noted that on the female-only programs in particular, the self-positivity and self-responsibility ethic went hand in hand, with women being encouraged to overcome their confidence and assertiveness issues in order to assume greater responsibility for their own well-being and self-care (Rottenberg 2014). Rather than seeking help, the neoliberal woman (potentially more than her male counterpart) is expected to adopt a tougher attitude to herself and others (Rottenberg 2014), as illustrated in the silencing of “overemotional” responses on one all-female SSP described in this study. The potentially exploitative impact of these gendered messages in terms of emotional regulation is worth considering in further studies.

Career Development and Communitas

Sociological theory suggests that at their best moments, something greater than the sum of the parts occurs during successful rituals (Olaveson 2001), a type of collective feeling, which can be described as high emotional energy or communitas (Turner 1985). These experiences bear resemblance to what Charmaz (1991) calls the “intense present,” during which people experience “a sense of passion, authenticity, and involvement” in the lived activity. Despite the increased number of technological tools, which enable working people to exchange information without meeting in person, face-to-face work networking events have become increasingly popular (Mitchell, Schlegelmilch, and Mone 2016). Mitchell’s study examining the value of these types of event to individuals found it to be a mixture of professional, reputational, and educative, as well as social and emotional, learning (Mitchell, Schlegelmilch, and Mone 2016). Our fieldwork confirmed a complex network of personal and interpersonal relationships established on face-to-face SSPs encouraged through various devices, ranging from confidentiality codes, icebreakers, peer group discussion, group projects, out-of-hours socializing, and end-of-year celebrations. The effects of emotional entrainment extended beyond the individual; being in proximity with others made some participants in this study feel part of “something bigger, or a “wider community,” which could feel inspiring.

Yet, as arenas for communal feeling, the SSPs in this study held an ambiguous position. On the one hand, the impression was of a relatively status-less social space, in which both participants and managers were able to share common goals and aspirations. On the other hand, in an entrepreneurial environment, work colleagues necessarily compete with each other for power and resources, and this inevitably creates hierarchies, anxieties and other emotional barriers. As neoliberal constructs, SSPs promote the ideas of self as a marketable product, which can affect the authenticity of the experience and of relationship building (Vannini and Williams 2009). Another potential limitation of SSPs concerns the transference of soft skills from course to workplace. Proceedings such as away days and staff residential events can create a temporary “buzz”; however, the transfer of insights and conclusions reached on these events back into the organization is by no means guaranteed (Johnson 2008). Faced with a precarious situation with regard to the shape of Higher Education and their future within in it, staff may feel reluctant to invest significant or sustained emotional energy in the social interaction ritual chains (Collins 2004) in which they partake, voluntarily or otherwise.

The utopian view of communitas is only part of the picture; when based on oppositional processes, group emotional energy can have a darker side (Boyns and Luery 2015). As Turner (1969) recognized, the liminal phase is that of anti-structure and the point at which the mainstream may be collectively challenged. We therefore propose a more nuanced conceptualization of communitas, which encompasses its lighter (acquiescent) and darker (oppositional) shades. Where people physically congregate, these lighter and darker types of communitas can coexist, albeit in an uneasy state of alliance. Our findings suggest a mismatch between management attempts to create positive communitas against the reality of mounting workloads and job cuts commented on by participants in the study. We noted many examples in the organization under study, where “corporate-style” communitas promoted by managerial staff (as representatives of the status quo) shared room space with “oppositional communitas” in the form of critical or disengaged staff. In times of “corporate chaos,” dark communitas may contribute to organizational stability by creating alternative communication avenues (e.g., via gossip) and by distracting attention away from macro-level issues of power and powerlessness, while appearing to ratify the freedom of expression that neoliberalism purports to embody (Harvey 2005).

Conclusions

As human beings we are faced with these two wants, the desire to be recognized and respected as an individual and a craving to belong, to be emotionally connected to, to be subsumed, into groups and social worlds. These two human needs have informed political and social governance and its symbols and rituals throughout recorded history. Under the influence of neoliberalism, however, individualism has prevailed at the expense of collective identification. This is the age of the “micro-entrepreneur” (Hall 2016), and with the atomization of work-practices, individuals are increasingly left to face their personal stresses and anxieties alone (Berg, Huijbens, and Larsen 2016; Winefield and Jarrett 2001), including in universities. With working life increasingly an individual, digitized pursuit, people seek out communitas on virtual platforms, like social media, which in some cases may be of a less benevolent nature and design (Gehl 2016). Managers may fear the dark communitas that can surface at such events, but we suggest that expressions of dark communitas “front of stage” as well as “back of stage” additionally serve as a safety valve for expressing unhappiness and anxiety. Silencing these collective voices via workplace siloism seems a shortsighted option.

Faced with budget constraints, universities and other educational establishments are rapidly shifting toward online learning modules and a greater prioritizing of technically oriented staff training courses. Despite the problems with face-to-face staff development identified in this study, with the phasing out of face-to-face learning programs, some avenues for expression of emotional energy and communitas will, we believe, disappear from modern life. What the future of staff development will look like must be the subject of another study, but a year on from this ethnography a further strategic change initiative had been set in motion, with the consequent shedding of many SSPs and staff from all sectors. Learning and development departments are interested in human capital potential, but as this study suggests, their stated ambition to create a more engaged and cooperative workforce are frequently thwarted by managerial edicts, job changes, and budgets (Berg, Huijbens, and Larsen 2016; Watts and Robertson 2011). Ethnography and traditional concepts, such as communitas, offer professionals new ways with which to explore these types of dilemma, hopefully pointing learning and teaching stakeholders in a direction away from the neoliberal and toward more holistic, ethical modes of operation within HE and elsewhere (Lysø, Mjøen, and Levin 2011). However, given the insidious nature of neoliberalism, the authenticity of such “ethical” endeavors may continue to be questioned. The viewpoints expressed in this article reflect our own ontological and political positions but have nevertheless been shaped by our ethnographic investigations.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Author Biographies

Alison Fixsen is a senior lecturer in the School of Social Sciences at the University of Westminster. She has specialist knowledge of personal and professional development, psychoactive drug withdrawal and complementary therapies. She has authored several ethnographies and autoethnographies. Alison is also experienced healthcare practitioner working in the community.

Damien Ridge is professor of Health Studies and Research Director for the College of Liberal Arts & Sciences, at the University of Westminster. His expertise is in qualitative research, mental health, chronic health conditions, gender and sexuality. He is also a psychotherapist in private practice.

References

Alexander

Bryant Keith

. 1999. “Performing Culture in the Classroom: An Instructional (Auto) Ethnography.” Text and Performance Quarterly 19:307–31.

Argyris

Chris

. 1998. “Empowerment: The Emperor’s New Clothes.” Harvard Business Review 76 (3): 98–105.

Ariratana

Wallapha

Sirisookslip

Saowanee

Ngang

Tang Keow

. 2015. “Development of Leadership Soft Skills among Educational Administrators.” Procedia—Social and Behavioral Sciences 186:331–36.

Arthur

Michael B.

Khapova

Svetlana N.

Wilderom

Celeste P. M.

2005. “Career Success in a Boundaryless Career World.” Journal of Organizational Behavior 26 (2): 177–202.

Ball

Stephen J.

Olmedo

Antonio

. 2013. “Care of the Self, Resistance and Subjectivity under Neoliberal Governmentalities.” Critical Studies in Education 54 (1): 85–96.

Barnett

Jeffrey E.

Baker

Ellen K.

Elman

Nancy S.

Schoener

Gary R.

2007. “In Pursuit of Wellness: The Self-Care Imperative.” Professional Psychology: Research and Practice 38 (6): 603–12.

Baruah

Jonali

Paulus

Paul B.

2009. “Enhancing Group Creativity: The Search for Synergy.” In Creativity in Groups (Research on Managing Groups and Teams, vol. 12, edited by Mannix

E. A.

Goncalo

J. A.

Neale

Margaret A.

, 29–56. Bradford: Emerald Group.

Beatty

Brenda R.

2010. “The Emotions of Educational Leadership: Breaking the Silence.” International Journal of Leadership in Education: Theory and Practice 3 (4): 331–57.

Berg

Lawrence D.

Huijbens

Edward H.

Larsen

Henrik Gutzon

. 2016. “Producing Anxiety in the Neoliberal University.” The Canadian Geographer 1–37.

10.

Bigger

Stephen

. 2009. “Victor Turner, Liminality, and Cultural Performance; Studies in Religion & Education.” Journal of Beliefs & Values 30 (2): 209–212.

11.

Biggs

Sharon

. 2015. The Silo Effect: Invisible Barriers That Can Destroy Organizational Teams, 2nd ed. New York: Sharon Biggs.

12.

Biron

Caroline

Brun

Jean-Pierre

Ivers

Hans

. 2008. “Extent and Sources of Occupational Stress in University Staff.” Work 30 (4): 511–22.

13.

Boyns

David

Luery

Sarah

. 2015. “Negative Emotional Energy: A Theory of the ‘Dark-Side’ of Interaction Ritual Chains.” Social Sciences 4 (1): 148–70.

14.

Branch

Sara

Murray

Jane

. 2008. “Building Relationships and Resilience in the Workplace: Construction of a Workplace Bullying Training Program.” ANZAM, 21. http://hdl.handle.net/10072/24324.

15.

Buruck

Gabriele

Dörfel

Denise

Kugler

Joachim

Brom

Sarah Susanne

. 2016. “Enhancing Well-Being at Work: The Role of Emotion Regulation Skills as Personal Resources.” Journal of Occupational Health Psychology 21 (4): 480–93.

16.

Bush

Mirabai

. 2011. “Mindfulness in Higher Education.” Contemporary Buddhism 12 (1): 183–97.

17.

Charmaz

Kathy

. 1991. Good Days, Bad Days: The Self in Chronic Illness and Time. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

18.

Cheshire

Anna, D.

Ridge

J. Hughes

Peters

Panagioti

Simon

Lewith

2017. “GPs’ Perceptions of Resilience Training: A Qualitative Study.” British Journal of General Practice 67 (659): 428–26.

19.

Chew-Graham

Carolyn A.

Rogers

Anne

Nuha

Yassin

. 2003. “‘I Wouldn’t Want It on My CV or Their Records’: Medical Students’ Experiences of Help-Seeking for Mental Health Problems.” Medical Education 37 (10): 873–80.

20.

Clapp-Smith

Vogelgesang

G. R.

Avey

J. B.

2008. “Authentic Leadership and Positive Psychological Capital: The Mediating Role of Trust at the Group Level of Analysis.” Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies 15 (3): 227–40.

21.

Cohen

Manion

Morrison

2000. Research Methods in Education, 5th ed. London: RoutledgeFalmer.

22.

Collins

1990. “Stratification, Emotional Energy, and the Transient Emotions.” In Research Agendas in the Sociology of Emotions, edited by Kemper

Theodore D.

, 27–57. New York: State University of New York Press.

23.

Collins

Randall

. 2004. Interaction Ritual Chains. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

24.

Cukier

Wendy

Yap

Margaret

Holmes

Mark

Rodrigues

Sara

. 2009. “Diversity and the Skills Shortage in the Canadian Information and Communications Technology Sector : A Critical Interrogation of Discourse.” I-PROF 2009 1–11.

25.

Dekeyser

Mathias

Raes

Filip

Leijssen

Mia

Leysen

Sara

Dewulf

David

. 2008. “Mindfulness Skills and Interpersonal Behaviour.” Personality and Individual Differences 44 (5): 1235–45.

26.

Denyes

M. J.

Orem

D. E.

Bekel

2001. “Self-Care: A Foundational Science.” Nursing Science Quarterly 14 (1):48–54.

27.

Durkheim

Emile

. 1912. The Elementary Forms of Religious Life. New York: Free Press.

28.

Ecclestone

Kathryn

. 2012. “From Emotional and Psychological Well-Being to Character Education: Challenging Policy Discourses of Behavioural Science and ‘vulnerability.’” Research Papers in Education 27 (4): 463–80.

29.

Ehrenreich

Barbara

. 2010. Smile or Die: How Positive Thinking Fooled America and the World. London: Granta Books.

30.

Elmes

Costello

1992. “Mystification and Social Drama:The Hidden Side of Communication Skills Training.” Human Relations 45:427–45.

31.

Fineman

Stephen

. 2006. “On Being Positive: Concerns and Counterpoints.” Academy of Management Review 31 (2): 270–91.

32.

Fixsen

Cranfield

Ridge

2017. “Self-Care and Entrepreneurism: An Ethnography of Soft Skills Development for Higher Education Staff.” Studies in Continuing Education 40 (2): 181–97.

33.

Fixsen

Alison

Ridge

Damien T.

2012. “Performance, Emotion Work, and Transition: Challenging Experiences of Complementary Therapy Student Practitioners Commencing Clinical Practice.” Qualitative Health Research 22 (9): 1163–75.

34.

Fixsen

Alison

Ridge

Damien

Kirkpatrick

Susan

Foot

Doug

. 2015. “Interaction Rituals and Jumbled Emotions among ‘Relative Strangers’: Simulated Patient Work on a Trainee Complementary Therapy Practitioner Program.” Sage Open 5 (3): 1–12.

35.

Floyd

Alan

. 2015. “Supporting Academic Middle Managers in Higher Education: Do We Care?” Higher Education Policy 1–17.

36.

Floyd

Alan

Morrison

Marlene

. 2014. “Exploring Identities and Cultures in Inter-professional Education and Collaborative Professional Practice.” Studies in Continuing Education 36 (1): 38–53.

37.

Foucault

1998. “The Ethics of the Concern of the Self as a Practice of Freedom.” In Ethics: Subjectivity and Truth (Essential Work of Michel Foucault 1954-1983), edited by Rabinow

Paul

, 281–301. New York: New Press.

38.

Foucault

Micheal

. 2008. Birth of Biopolitics: Lectures at the College de France 1978 - 79. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

39.

Furedi

Frank

. 2004. Therapy Culture: Cultivating Vulnerablity in an Uncertain Age. London. Routledge.

40.

Garoupa

Ginsburg

Tom

. 2011. “Hybrid Judicial Career Structures: Reputation versus Legal Tradition.” Journal of Legal Analysis 3 (2): 411–48.

41.

Gehl

Robert W.

2016. “Power/freedom on the Dark Web: A Digital Ethnography of the Dark Web Social Network.” New Media and Society 18 (7): 1219–35.

42.

Gendron

2005. “Why Emotional Capital Matters in Education and in Labour ?” Les Cahiers de la Maison des Sciences Economiques 113 (September): 1–37.

43.

George

Jennifer M.

1990. “Personality, Affect, and Behavior in Groups.” Journal of Applied Psychology 75 (2): 107–16.

44.

Gibson

D. E.

2006. “Emotional Episodes at Work: An Experiential Exercise in Feeling and Expressing Emotions.” Journal of Management Education 30 (3): 477–500.

45.

Glew

David J.

2009. “Personal Values and Performance in Teams: An Individual and Team-Level Analysis.” Small Group Research 40 (6): 670–93.

46.

Glushko

Robert J.

Tabas

Lindsay

. 2009. “Designing Service Systems by Bridging the ‘Front Stage’ and ‘Back Stage.’” Information Systems and E-business Management 7 (4 Special Issue): 407–27.

47.

Goffman

Erving

. 1959. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. New York: Anchor Books.

48.

Goffman

Erving

. 1967. Interaction Ritual. Middlesex: Penguin Press.

49.

Goleman

Daniel

Boyatzis

Rhee

2000. “Clustering Competence in Emotional Intelligence: Insights from the Emotional Competence Inventory (ECI).” In Handbook of Emotional Intelligence, edited by Bar-On

Parker

J. D. A.

, 343–62. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.

50.

Goodman

Matthew J.

Schorling

John B.

2012. “A Mindfulness Course Decreases Burnout and Improves Well-Being among Healthcare Providers.” International Journal of Psychiatry in Medicine 43:119–28.

51.

Goslinga

Gillian

Frank

Gelya

. 2007. “In the Shadows: Anthropological Encounters with Modernity.” In The Shadow Side of Fieldwork: Exploring the Blurred Borders between Ethnography and Life, edited by McLean

Athena

Leibing

Annette

. Malden, MA: Blackwell.

52.

Van Gordon

William

Shonin

Edo

Lomas

Tim

Griffiths

Mark D.

2016. “Corporate Use of Mindfulness and Authentic Spiritual Transmission: Competing or Compatible Ideals?” Mindfulness & Compassion 1 (2): 75–83.

53.

Hall

Gary

. 2016. The Uberfication of the University. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

54.

Harvey

David

. 2005. A Brief History of Neoliberalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

55.

Heckman

James J.

Kautz

Tim

. 2012. “Hard Evidence on Soft Skills.” Labour Economics 19:451–64.

56.

Hess

James D.

Bacigalupo

Arnold C.

2011. “Enhancing Decisions and Decision-Making Processes through the Application of Emotional Intelligence Skills.” Management Decision 49:710–21.

57.

Hewitt

Rachel

. 2017. A Revolution of Feeling—The Decade That Forged the Modern Mind. London: Granta Books.

58.

Hochschild

Arlie

. 1979. “Emotion Work, Feeling Rules, and Social Structure.” American Journal of Sociology 85:551.

59.

Hochschild

Arlie

. 2011. “Emotional Life on the Market Frontier.” Annual Review of Sociology 37 (1): 21–33.

60.

Hromek

Roffey

2009. “Promoting Social and Emotional Learning with Games: ‘It’s Fun and We Learn Things.’” Simulation & Gaming 40 (5): 626–44.

61.

Iloh

Constance

Tierney

William G.

2013. “Using Ethnography to Understand Twenty-first Century College Life.” Human Affairs 24 (1): 20–39.

62.

Jacobsen

Kristiansen . 2015. The Social Thought of Ervin Goffman. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

63.

Johnson

Gerry

. 2008. “Ritualizing Strategic Thinking: The Effectiveness of the Strategic Away Day.” Strategic Direction 24 (1): 3–5.

64.

Junrat

Sitthisomjin

Jenphop

Chaiwan

Suravee

Rongraung

Kanokorn

Somprach

. 2014. “Soft Skills for University Library Staff in Thailand.” Procedia—Social and Behavioral Sciences 112:1027–32.

65.

Ketter

Paula

. 2014. “Soft Skills for Leaders.” T+D 68 (3): 6.

66.

Kezar

Adrianna

Lester

Jaime

. 2009. “Supporting Faculty Grassroots Leadership.” Research in Higher Education 50 (7): 715–40.

67.

Klein

Katherine

Andrew

Knight

Ziegert

Jonathan C.

Lim

Beng Chong

Saltz

Jessica L.

2011. “When Team Members’ Values Differ: The Moderating Role of Team Leadership.” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 114 (1): 25–36.

68.

Knight

Matthew

. 2012. Changing Times in UK Universities: What Difference Can HR Make? www.uhr.ac.uk/…Changing times in UK universities (print ver…) (accessed December 12, 2018).

69.

Knights

Clarke

C. A.

2013. “It’s a Bittersweet Symphony, This Life: Fragile Academic Selves and Insecure Identities at Work.” Organization Studies 35 (3): 335–57.

70.

Koman

Elizabeth Stubbs

Wolff

Steven

Howard

Anita

. 2012. “The Cascading Impact of Culture: Group Emotional Competence (GEC) as a Cultural Resource.” In Emotional Intelligence—Theoretical and Cultural Perspectives, edited by Mandal

Manas K.

Emmerling

Robert J.

Shanwal

Vinod K.

, 1–29. Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science.

71.

Laker

Dennis R.

Powell

Jimmy L.

2011. “The Differences between Hard and Soft Skills and Their Relative Impact on Training Transfer.” Human Resource Development Quarterly 22:111–22.

72.

Larsen

Lars Thorup

. 2007. “Speaking Truth to Biopower.” Distinktion: Scandinavian Journal of Social Theory 8 (1): 9–24.

73.

Lomas

Tim

Edginton

Trudi

Cartwright

Tina

Ridge

Damien

. 2014. “Men Developing Emotional Intelligence through Meditation? Integrating Narrative, Cognitive and Electroencephalography (EEG) Evidence.” Psychology of Men & Masculinity 15 (2): 213–24.

74.

Lomas

Tim

Hefferon

Kate

Ivtzan

Itai

. 2016. “Positive Developmental Psychology: A Review of Literature Concerning Well-Being throughout the Lifespan.” Journal of Happiness & Well-Being 4 (2): 143–64.

75.

Lomas

Tim

Medina

Juan Carlos

Ivtzan

Itai

Rupprecht

Silke

Eiroa-Orosa

Francisco José

. 2017. “The Impact of Mindfulness on the Wellbeing and Performance of Educators: A Systematic Review of the Empirical Literature.” Teaching and Teacher Education 61 (November 2016): 132–41.

76.

Lysø

Ingunn Hybertsen

Mjøen

Kristian

Levin

Morten

. 2011. “Using Collaborative Action Learning Projects to Increase the Impact of Management Development.” International Journal of Training and Development 15 (3): 210–24.

77.

Market Data Enterprises. 2013. The U.S. Market for Self-Improvement Products and Services. Tampa, FL: Market Data Enterprises.

78.

Marsh

Gary

. 2012. “Soft Skills and the Future.” Training Journal 39–41.

79.

McFerrin

F. M.

1999. “Incidental Learning in a Higher Education Asynchronous Online Distance Education Course.” In SITE 99: Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference Proceedings, edited by Price

J. D.

Willis

Jerry

Willis

Dee Anna

Jost

Muktha

Boger-Mehal

Stephanie

. Charlottesville, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education.

80.

McGinnis

Lee Phillip

Gentry

James W.

2008. “The Impact of Flow and Communitas on Enduring Involvement in Extended Service Encounters.” Journal of Service Research 11 (1): 74–90.

81.

McGurk

John (Cipd)

. 2010. Using the Head and Heart at Work: A Business Case for Soft Skills. www.cipd.co.uk/NR/rdonlyres/18616949-CF66…/HeadandheartguideFINAL.pdf (accessed December 12, 2018).

82.

McQueeney

Krista

Lavelle

Kristen M.

2017. “Emotional Labor in Critical Ethnographic Work.” Journal of Contemporary Ethnography 46 (1): 81–107.

83.

Merleau-Ponty

Maurice

. 1962. Phenomenology of Perception. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

84.

Michelson

van Iterson

Waddington

2010. “Gossip in Organizations: Contexts, Consequences, and Controversies.” Group & Organization Management 35 (4): 371–90.

85.

Mitchell

Vincent Wayne

Schlegelmilch

Bodo B.

Mone

Sorina Diana

. 2016. “Why Should I Attend? The Value of Business Networking Events.” Industrial Marketing Management 52:100–8.

86.

Moon

Jennifer A.

ed. 2004. A Handbook of Reflective and Experiential Learning: Theory and Practice. London: RoutledgeFarmer.

87.

Mumford

Troy V.

Campion

Michael A.

Morgeson

Frederick P.

2007. “The Leadership Skills Strataplex: Leadership Skill Requirements across Organizational Levels.” Leadership Quarterly 18 (2): 154–66.

88.

Olaveson

Tim

. 2001. “Collective Effervescence and Communitas: Processual Models of Ritual and Society in Emile Durkheim and Victor Turner.” Dialectical Anthropology 26 (2): 89–124.

89.

Paloutzian

Raymond.

2017. Invitation to the psychology of religion, 3rd ed. New York: Guilford press.

90.

Peters

Michael A.

2012. “Neoliberalism, Education and the Crisis of Western Capitalism.” Policy Futures in Education 10 (2): 134–41.

91.

Radice

Hugo

. 2013. “How We Got Here: UK Higher Education under Neoliberalism.” ACME 12 (3): 407–18.

92.

Ray

Susan L.

2006. “Embodiment and Embodied Engagement: Central Concerns for the Nursing Care of Contemporary Peacekeepers Suffering from Psychological Trauma.” Perspectives in Psychiatric Care 42 (2): 106–13.

93.

Romanelli

Frank

Cain

Jeff

Smith

Kelly M.

2006. “Emotional Intelligence as a Predictor of Academic and/or Professional Success.” American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education 70:69.

94.

Rottenberg

Catherine

. 2014. “The Rise of Neoliberal Feminism.” Cultural Studies 28 (3): 418–37.

95.

Schaufeli

Wilmar B.

Bakker

Arnold B.

van Rhenen

Willem

. 2009. “How Changes in Job Demands and Resources Predict Burnout, Work Engagement, and Sickness Absenteeism.” Journal of Organizational Behavior 30 (7): 893–917.

96.

Schon

Donald

. 1983. The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. Boston: Arena.

97.

Shin

Jung Cheol

Jung

Jisun

. 2014. “Academics Job Satisfaction and Job Stress across Countries in the Changing Academic Environments.” Higher Education 67 (5): 603–20.

98.

Silverman

2014. Interpreting Qualitative Data, 5th ed. London: Sage.

99.

von Scheve

Christian

Beyer

Manuela

Ismer

Sven

Kozłowska

Marta

Morawetz

Carmen

. 2014. “Emotional Entrainment, National Symbols, and Identification: A Naturalistic Study around the Men’s Football World Cup.” Current Sociology 62 (1): 3–23.

100.

Smith

Allison L.

2009. “Role Play in Counselor Education and Supervision: Innovative, Ideas, Gaps, and Future Directions.” Journal of Creativity in Mental Health 4:124–38.

101.

Stavely

Helene

. 2016. “‘Excess Is Truly the Key’: Community, Flow and the Play of Control in the Picture Books of Thomas King.” In Philosophical Perspectives in Play, edited by Russell

Wendy

Malcolm

Emily Ryall McLean

, 2005–18. Oxford: Routledge.

102.

Strauss

Anselm

. 1984. “Social Worlds and Their Segmentation Processes.” Studies in Symbolic Interaction 5:123–39.

103.

Strauss

Anselm

Corbin

Juliet

. 2015. Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques, 4th ed. London: Sage.

104.

Tatar

Moshe

Horenczyk

Gabriel

. 2003. “Diversity-Related Burnout among Teachers.” Teaching and Teacher Education 19:397–408.

105.

Taylor

Charles

. 1991. The Ethics of Authenticity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

106.

Tempest

Sue

Starkey

Ken

. 2004. “The Effects of Liminality on Individual and Organizational Learning.” Organization Studies 25 (4): 507–27.

107.

Tett

Gillian

. 2015. The Silo Effect:Why Putting Everything in Its Place Isn’t Such a Good Idea. London: Little, Brown.

108.

Tolich

M. B.

1993. “Alienating and Liberating Emotions at Work: Supermarket Clerks’ Performance of Customer Service.” Journal of Contemporary Ethnography 22 (3): 361–81.

109.

Tomac

Mika M.

2012. “The Influence of Mindfulness on Resilience in Context of Attachment Style, Affect Regulation, and Self-Esteem.” Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering 72:7077.

110.

Turner

Victor

. 1967. The Forest of Symbols: Aspects of Ndembu Ritual. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

111.

Turner

Victor

. 1969. The Ritual Process: Structure and Anti-structure. Chicago: Aldine.

112.

Turner

Victor

. 1985. “Betwixt and Between: The Liminal Period in Rites de Passage.” Magic, Witchcraft, and Religion: An Anthropological Study of the Supernatural 46–55.

113.

Turner

Edith

. 2012. Communitas: The Anthropology of Collective Joy. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

114.

Vannini

Phillip

Williams

J. Patrick

. 2009. “Authenticity in Culture, Self, and Society.” Authenticity in Culture, Self, and Society (1967):1–18.

115.

Watts

Robertson

2011. “Burnout in University Teaching Staff: A Systematic Literature Review.” Educational Research 53 (1): 33–50.

116.

Webster-Wright

Ann

. 2013. “The Eye of the Storm: A Mindful Inquiry into Reflective Practices in Higher Education.” Reflective Practice 14 (February 2015): 556–67.

117.

Winefield

Anthony H.

Jarrett

Richard

. 2001. “Occupational Stress in University Staff.” International Journal of Stress Management 8 (4): 285–98.

118.

Winter

Richard

. 2009. “Academic Manager or Managed Academic? Academic Identity Schisms in Higher Education.” Journal of Higher Education Policy & Management 31 (2): 121–31.

119.

Wright

Rebecca

Powell

Martine B.

Ridge

Damien

. 2006. “Child Abuse Investigation: An In-Depth Analysis of How Police Officers Perceive and Cope with Daily Work Challenges.” Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management 29 (3): 498–512.