Metonymy and Management: Owning One's Work
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" (140). 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. 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” (185). 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. 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
Programs
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.
