Revision as of 21:57, 22 March 2022

Metonymy and Management: Owning One's Work

by Stella Boswell

Abstract

An organization is nothing without its workforce. Despite the ideals held by its leaders, a company’s goals are ultimately carried out and portrayed to the public by its volunteers or employees who hold the least amount of responsibility. While leadership sets the tone for the work being done, if a vision is not shared among employees it will never be achieved. For this reason, it is crucial for employees to feel connected to the company and motivated to work in accordance with its mission. Ensuring that this feeling of connection is established within workers is where use of the rhetorical device metonymy becomes relevant. Metonymy is the replacement of an object with something that represents it as a way of referral. For example, we may refer to “a business professional” as “a suit.” . A suit is the traditional uniform for a business professional, a part of his/her identity as a business professional, but is not a term that encompasses all that it means to be one. The same device is used when, in response to a customer asking for tea, a waiter replies “I’m sorry, I do not have any.” In this situation the waiter, by phrasing his response as if he himself is the sole provider of the food and drinks in the restaurant, is using metonymy. He, as an employee, is representative of the entire dining establishment, including what they have in stock, in this example. This use of a personal pronoun can help to make the employee feel more connected to the enterprise and by extension, its success or failure. By establishing this connection, the employee feels a deeper sense of responsibility to the concerted effort of the company and will work and participate accordingly.

Big Idea

What is Metonymy?

Metonymy is a rhetorical device that is characterized by referring to something using an aspect of it instead of using its traditional name. The origin of this device can be attributed to Rhetorica ad Herennium, an ancient Greek text of which the author is unknown, where it is defined as "a trope that takes its expression from near and close things by which we can comprehend a word that is not denominated by its proper word"^[1]. This definition highlights the way that meaning can be discerned by a listener even when a word is replaced by another that is related to it. For example, ‘redcoats’ is a metonym for British occupational forces in colonial America. While the soldiers do wear red coats, that is but an element of their identity. This way of referencing could be used to emphasize the striking nature of seeing a red coat as a colonist under British attack, thereby bringing more attention to the imagery of the war. Metonymy can be considered a form of personification when the term used to refer to something is a person^[2]. This type of metonymy can be seen when a barista replies, “Sorry, I am out of decaf,” to an inquiring customer. In this situation, the barista is using the personal pronoun “I” in order to refer to the establishment at which they work. The concept and use of this personifying form of metonymy, which will be referred to as personal metonymy, will be discussed further here. In her article The Use of Metonymy in Business Linguistic Culture, Mihaela Vasiloaia writes that the word used as a referent and the thing being referred to are “linked by conceptual contiguity” ^[3]. With the use of personal metonymy, the employee can begin to see themselves as contiguous with their place of work and the tasks at hand. Utilizing the effect of this rhetorical device in speech and ultimately thought can have profound effects on one’s mindset and how they view themselves in relation to a group.

Alienation

In order to lay the grounds for the utility of Personal Metonymy, I will first discuss the concept of alienation in the workplace: a phenomenon which can be assuaged by the use of metonymic language. Alienation, a term first coined by Karl Marx in his 1844 Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts, describes the process by which a person becomes estranged to the products of their labor. Marx states that complex division of labor often prevents a worker from seeing their effort come to fruition. Due to this, the worker begins to primarily view the task as a means of survival (earning a living wage) instead of laboring in order to create. Without the result of their labor being readily apparent, the worker can begin to feel a loss of individuality and connection to their employment^[4]. The use of personal metonymy in a work setting could help to thwart these feelings of disconnection by serving as a linguistic reminder for a worker of their role and contribution to their organization.

Relation to Projects, Programs, and Portfolios

Implementing personal metonymy in language regarding a project can increase awareness of responsibility on an individual level which can combat feelings of disconnection and alienation. These feelings are especially common in the employees serving in positions given the least amount of responsibility and decision-making power within the company. When an employee is not in a position to direct or manage elements of the organization, it is easier for them to slip into a more passive state of mind when working. The employee does not feel as though they are united with the enterprise. Rather, they feel isolated while completing their tasks and disconnected from the company mission. By first implementing personal metonymy into their language while interacting with customers or clients, a sense of responsibility for the success of the company can be restored. After creating the habit of using personally metonymic language, the sentiment of ownership and responsibility will be more easily implanted into an employee's thoughts. The employee can begin to reshape their image of the position they hold within their company as one that is important for the organization's success. When the secretary of a law firm says to a client, “I have time for you to meet with your lawyer on this day,” there comes with that statement a reminder of the purpose and importance of the secretary’s job. It reinforces to the secretary that they are responsible for scheduling the meetings for clients in order to provide them with the legal advice that they are in need of. With a less personal statement such as “Your defender cannot meet with you on that day”, the secretary is taken out of the process completely. This statement could lead the secretary to feel that the scheduling process could happen in spite of them and could decrease the responsibility that they feel to the firm. With the emphasis on their role highlighted by personal metonymy, a team member will become more aware of the significance of their position as an essential gear in the machine of the organization. When working, people benefit immensely from feeling that they are needed and consequently will typically step up to meet the task in front of them. Specifics regarding implementation will be discussed further in the following sections. Asking that employees use language that directly ties them and their role to the success of the company or organization will significantly increase not only morale, but work ethic.

Application

Program Management

Though alienation typically occurs in those who have less authority in the decision making process, alienation is nonetheless a phenomenon worthy of consideration on the program level. When embarking on a program of grand scale with many moving parts and projects involved, managers of the individual projects become those that carry out the wishes of the program managers. In meetings with program managers, project managers are no longer the highest authority as they are in the sphere of their projects. The project managers must hear what is told to them about the program and adapt their projects accordingly. It is entirely possible that a project manager can feel plugged in and passionate about their individual project whilst feeling completely alienated from the main goal of the program. For this reason, it is important to incorporate personal metonymy in each level of an enterprise to encourage feelings of inclusion coming from both above and below an employee. Programs have an intrinsically wide scope, and there are bound to be changes and sacrifices that must be made in individual projects in order to benefit the greater cause and mission. Without a connection to that mission, it is possible that project managers may feel that their work is regarded as unimportant because it is subject to so much change that is often out of their control. With the implementation of personal metonymic language when discussing the inner workings of a project, project managers may feel more in tune with the larger purpose that their project is serving. By encouraging this connection to the mission of the program, the project managers will feel more aligned with the program and ultimately the stakeholders.

Project Management

Participating in a project while not being in a position to make important decisions can lead to alienation in a similar way. This alienation can be even more intense due to the fact that an employee working within a project may feel alienated from both the project they are participating in as well as the overarching program. Those responsible for carrying out the tasks requiring the least thought and reflection on the project are at the highest risk of feeling alienated from the enterprise. According to Kai Erikson in On Work and Well-Being, alienation becomes possible when “the work of the hand is separated from the work of the brain^[5].” He also goes on to say there is a high risk of alienation when the tasks are “choreographed by a planner in some distant office” ^[5]. The distance from the baseline of employees carrying out specific parts of an ongoing project and the managers of the program that the project is included in leaves ample room for alienation from the program to occur. This phenomenon can be seen in the example of the relationship between global health officials tasked with coordinating a response to the Covid-19 pandemic and a sanitation worker in Texas who is responsible for disinfecting chairs and tables between vaccinations. The sanitation worker repeats this crucial sanitation task day in and day out, and as the pandemic continues, the worker may lose the sense and perspective they once had of being an integral part of the global Covid response. If when asked about the processes of the vaccination center the sanitation worker replies, “The tables and chairs are disinfected between vaccinations,” the worker is not reflecting any notion of personal responsibility in their language. They will not feel the sense of responsibility that they would if they said “I disinfect the area between uses.” While it is true that the sanitation worker is not the sole employee responsible for the sanitation task, by using personal metonymy, “I” is referent of the entire sanitation staff. The worker is immediately reminded of their role and can feel pride and connection to their work, thus avoiding feelings of alienation towards their job. This sentiment also allows them to more accurately place themselves among the global health officials whose primary concern is managing the overall effort with whom they share a goal. With the objective put more clearly in view for the sanitation worker through their language choice, the program managers and the sanitation worker can more easily relate to each other as they both recognize their shared mission.

Portfolio Management

Portfolio management is the first area in beginning a program where implementing personal metonymy can be considered. While it is true that the management of the portfolio of an organization does not typically involve working directly with clients or with all employees of a company, the choice of taking on one project versus another should include deliberation regarding the congruence of the project and the goal of Personal Metonymy to emphasize feelings of connection in employees to their work. When conducting a risk analysis for a project, it is in typical fashion to construct a matrix diagram weighing the likelihood of certain risks and their severity if they were to occur. Likelihood of alienation in employees is a risk that must be considered. According to David Coburn in his piece titled Job Alienation and Well-Being, after the Industrial Revolution and rise of more division of labor, “monotonous and repetitive work has been claimed to have undesirable consequences for the worker, ranging from lowered job satisfaction and unhappiness to higher felt powerlessness and lower mental and physical health” (42). These criteria, such as repetitiveness and monotony can be helpful in calculating the likelihood of alienation to occur. Projects that would involve high specification of labor and little interaction with fellow employees or clients are more likely to induce sentiments of alienation in the participants. It is somewhat difficult to gauge the severity of a situation in which employees feel alienated, however there is possible risk regarding both monetary and humanitarian aspects of a program. There is the severity of the loss of interest and consequent lack of effort invested into the project. This will more than likely result in a poor product being delivered which will affect the stakeholders and incur all of the monetary and corporate consequences that follow. The second area of risk is the severity of the effect of the project on the well-being of the employees. This can be seen in deterioration of the spirit of employees and will incur consequences of a more humanitarian nature. Shortcomings in either category can result in severe damage to a company or organization and should be highly valued when considering a potential project or program. In terms of avoiding these risks, it is necessary to consider how conducive to Personal Metonymy the project is. We must ask if it is possible to envision situations in the duration of the project where employees can personally implement metonymic language. Are there opportunities for employees to feel as though they are representative of the project as a whole or its mission? Is there room for employees to complete tasks of a different nature throughout the project and see their contributions come to fruition? All of these questions are more easily answered when a business or organization has set in place a standard of encouraging employees to use personally metonymic language. With employees reminding themselves of their role through the use of personal metonymy, it will become easier for them to identify when they begin to feel less pride or the onset of alienation. Emphasizing the importance of feeling in this way can act as a preventative element for sentiments of disconnection and encourage employees to reflect if they do feel disconnected. The specifics of applying this will be discussed further in the next section.

Project, Program, and Portfolio Application Model

Achieving fluidity throughout an entire program when implementing Personal Metonymy begins with the program managers’ choice of projects that are conducive to it. As shown in the fluidity diagram, the first step is for program managers to consider the potential threat that alienation poses in a given project or program when choosing the next endeavor for their company. The next step in the model of implementation must be carried out by project managers. The project managers should be encouraged to use personal metonymy when providing updates regarding their project in the context of the program or speaking with clients. As shown in the diagram, the project coordinators’ objective is to avoid alienation from the program that encompasses their project. For example, a construction manager of a hospital being built as part of a city’s public health program could tell a reporter, “I have the resources available to change the status of our city’s health.” In this situation, the project manager is using Personal Metonymy to make themselves representative of the resources and initiative of the city’s undertaking. With the project managers feeling acutely connected to the program, the next step of the model can come into play. The final element of the Personal Metonymic Model is the use of metonymic language by employees working underneath the project managers. An example of this would be a construction worker on the hospital site saying to an inquiring citizen, “I plan to have the job finished in March.” While of course it is primarily the task of the project and program managers to ensure the time frame, the construction worker is representative of these goals, especially because he is an integral part of whether the project remains within the time frame. With each level of management dedicated to implementing personal metonymy, a trickle down effect is able to occur. The project managers feel connected to the entire program, and the project employees ultimately feel connected to their project and the program. This is all made possible by the intention held by the portfolio managers to take on initiatives that make this harmony possible.

Limitations

When implemented and maintained, the use of personal metonymy can work to assuage feelings of disconnection in employees and managers alike. However, there are some qualifications that must be made regarding successful use. The first qualification is that the success of personal metonymy may vary depending on the cultural environment in which it is used. According to Hofstede’s Scale of Culture, which is pictured below. ***This scale was created in order to facilitate interaction and work across different cultures, giving people a way to better explain their own processes and understand those of the people around them. Culture can be measured on a scale of many factors: one being collectivism vs individualism. Where a certain culture falls on the scale is indicative of their tendency to see themselves as a group or an individual working in a group when completing tasks together. This difference may affect how Personal Metonymy is used across cultures. A society that leans toward the collectivist end of the scale may feel uncomfortable using personal pronouns when speaking about their work within a project. The goal of Personal Metonymy is not to discourage collaboration. Its goal is merely to connect an individual to their work. This being said, in some cultures a certain degree of loss of individualism in the workplace may be more accepted by employees that view themselves primarily as a member of a team. Another challenge in the implementation of personal metonymy arises in seeking out projects that are conducive to it. In the current post-industrial market, diversification of labor is an extremely common practice and is typically preferred by larger corporations in order to maximize efficiency. Implementing personal metonymy is especially important in situations where labor is diversified in efforts to thwart feelings of alienation in employees. However, it is worth noting that in situations where labor is highly specified, the use of personal metonymy can only go so far. With recent strides made towards the development of more highly functioning robots, this phenomenon could become something of the past. But, in our current situation, feelings of alienation become difficult to avoid when one’s job is extremely specific and allows for very little deviation from one process.

Conclusion

Work is so integral to human nature and incurs such pride when its product is recognized. In order to preserve this nature of work that is so essential, personal metonymy encourages team members to remind themselves of their role in helping the company provide a service for society. Through a simple linguistic reminder of what it is that they represent during work hours, employees at all management levels are able to access the feeling of pride in their labor that is so intrinsic to us as humans. When implemented across a program encompassing various projects and growing a portfolio, harmony between members becomes more easily achieved. While using personal metonymy, employees are not only reminded of the pride they should feel but of their responsibility to the greater goal and mission in what they are participating in.

Annotated Bibliography

Erikson, Kai. “On Work and Alienation.” American Sociological Review, vol. 51, no. 1, [American Sociological Association, Sage Publications, Inc.], 1986, pp. 1–8, https://doi.org/10.2307/2095474.

This article by Kai Erikson written in the American Sociological Review describes the relationship between alienation and the modern workplace. He pulls from Karl Marx’s manuscripts and emphasizes how alienation is becoming increasingly more common with the specialization of labor. This source is both relevant and credible based on where it is published and its analysis of the factors that can contribute to alienation. The article was written by Kai Erikson, a Yale graduate, and then was approved for publication in the highly regarded American Sociological review. Including information from this source was helpful in that it described what can cause sentiments of alienation. This source helps to clarify what Personal Metonymy has to achieve in order to prevent alienation in workers.:

Coburn, David. “JOB ALIENATION AND WELL-BEING.” International Journal of Health Services, vol. 9, no. 1, Sage Publications, Inc., 1979, pp. 41–59, http://www.jstor.org/stable/45138316.

This article titled Job Alienation and Well-Being written by David Coburn discusses the effects of sentiments of alienation on workers who experience it. This article is published in the International Journal of Health Services, a highly regarded journal in the medical world, and is concerned with the psychology of alienation. This source is relevant to the topic of Personal Metonymy in that it helps to highlight the causes of alienation. These being identified is greatly helpful in providing instruction for which projects or tasks are more likely to create feelings of alienation in workers. This article helped to emphasize the threat to workers and companies alike that feelings of alienation pose.:

Mihaela Vasiloaia. “The Use of Metonymy in Business Linguistic Culture.” Economy Transdisciplinarity Cognition Journal 21.1 (2018): 183–191. Print.

This article written by Mihaela Vasiloaia helped to bring attention to the social uses of metonymy. The article describes differing effects that metonymic language can have on communication within the business world. This article spurred more thought into what other uses of metonymy, especially Personal Metonymy, can do for changing a workers mindset. This article is relevant in that it discusses metonymy in a business context as opposed to just a literary one where metonymy is typically discussed. The article is credible due to its publication in the Economy Transdisciplinarity Cognition Journal and makes use of many equally credible sources.:

Hoftstede's Cultural Dimensions Theory, https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/knowledge/other/hofstedes-cultural-dimensions-theory/. Accessed 20 Mar. 2022.

This diagram illustrating Hoftstede’s Theory of Cultural Dimensions is relevant in that it shows the various ways that different cultures can be measured in order to become more easily comparable to each other. Due to the fact that the use of Personal Metonymy and its effectiveness can vary depending on the culture it is used in, this image is necessary. Differences in culture must be considered when formulating a management strategy in order to ensure that it can be implemented by as many groups as possible. This image helps the reader to see that these cultural measures exist on a spectrum. The source is credible due to the fact that it is from the Corporate Finance Institute and it is identical to the diagram that Hoftstede himself developed.:

“Risk Matrices.” Risk Matrices, CGE Risk, 24 July 2017, https://www.cgerisk.com/knowledgebase/Risk_matrices. Accessed 11 Mar. 2022.

This diagram is necessary in order to demonstrate the type of risk analysis that is discussed in the section regarding portfolio selection. It is included in order for the reader to be able to better visualize the scale that should be considered when choosing to undertake a project. This image is from CGE Risk, an organization that researches risk analysis strategies which makes it an appropriate source for discussing that topic. Though there are many versions of risk diagrams similar to this one, this particular diagram showing likelihood vs severity is most appropriate for the discussion of the effects on a company that alienation may have.:

Zeeman, Nicolette. “Personification and Allegory: Selves and Signs.” Arcade Literature, Humanities, & the World, Stanford , https://arcade.stanford.edu/content/personification-and-alienation. Accessed 13 Mar. 2022.

This article written by Nicolette Zeeman provides more insight about the history and extensive uses of metonymy. The article details the variety of ways that metonymy can be used as a rhetorical device. This article is necessary to cite due to the discussion it has about metonymy as a form of personification. This particular use is specific to what is discussed in formulating the Personal Metonymy management strategy and it is necessary that it is made clear when metonymy is a form of personification and when it is not. This article was published in the Stanford University’s journal titled Arcade Literature, Humanities, & the World which makes it a credible source seeing as it is from a reputable university and is included in a journal dedicated to exploring literary phenomena.:

Cicero, Marcus Tullius. Rhetorica Ad Herennium, Harvard University Press, Cambridge (Mass.), 1999, p. 140.

Rhetorica Ad Herennium is a Greek guide to language that is used widely throughout history. It is appropriate in this instance because it is widely regarded as one of the first guides to rhetorical devices in languages. It has been reprinted and translated into many different languages. It is relevant because it provides a definition of metonymy that is accepted by linguists across the world. The definition it provides is helpful in getting a sense of what a general definition of metonymy is.:

Marx, Karl. Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844. [8th edition]. Dover Publications, 2012. Web. 22 Mar. 2022.

The Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844 written by Karl Marx details his thoughts regarding political structures and how they relate to the working class. This is a necessary reference due to the fact that Marx was the first to coin the term alienation. The goal of implementing personal metonymy is to combat this feeling of alienation that Marx describes as being so prevalent in workers under certain conditions. This is a credible and relevant source because it is the primary source on the concept of alienation.:

References

1. ↑ " Rhetorica Ad Herennium p. 140"
2. ↑ "Zeeman, Nicolette. “Personification and Allegory: Selves and Signs.” Arcade Literature, Humanities, & the World, Stanford"
3. ↑ " Use of Metonymy in Business Linguistic Culture p. 185"
4. ↑ " 1844 Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts by Karl Marx"
5. ↑ ^{5.0 5.1} "Erikson, Kai. “On Work and Alienation.” American Sociological Review, vol. 51 p. 2"