CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 714Management and Organizational StudiesJob Satisfaction and Organizational BehaviorAppreciative Inquiry and Organizational Change

Explaining Compassion Organizing

Dutton, Jane E., Worline, Monica C., Frost, Peter J., Lilius, Jacoba·2006·Administrative Science Quarterly
DOI 10.2189/asqu.51.1.59
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

We develop a theory to explain how individual compassion in response to human pain in organizations becomes socially coordinated through a process we call compassion organizing. The theory specifies five mechanisms, including contextual enabling of attention, emotion, and trust, agents improvising structures, and symbolic enrichment, that show how the social architecture of an organization interacts with agency and emergent features to affect the extraction, generation, coordination, and calibration of resources. In doing so, our theory of compassion organizing suggests that the same structures designed for the normal work of organizations can be redirected to a new purpose to respond to members' pain. We discuss the implications of the theory for compassion organizing and for collective organizing more generally.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2189/asqu.51.1.59

Cites

130 of 130 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Compassionate behavior with employees during turbulent times leads to increased employee commitment and reduced absenteeism.

    “Compassionate behavior with employees during turbulent times leads to increased employee commitment and reduced absenteeism (Dutton et al. 2006).”

    From Whither compassionate leadership? A systematic review (2024) · cites this paper as Dutton et al. 2006

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

4 of the 134 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Dutton, J. E., Worline, M. C., Frost, P. J., & Lilius, J.
Affiliations
  • University of Michigan (US)
  • Emory University (US)
  • University of British Columbia (CA)
  • Queen's University (CA)
ORCID
Venue
Administrative Science Quarterly
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2006-03
Volume
51
Issue
1
Pages
59-96
ISSN
  • 0001-8392 (ISSN-L)
  • 1930-3815
DOI
10.2189/asqu.51.1.59
OpenAlex
W2132999934
Cited by
714
References
134
Citations by year
2026: 53 · 2025: 37 · 2024: 55 · 2023: 42 · 2022: 46 · 2021: 57 · 2020: 49 · 2019: 41 · 2018: 38 · 2017: 39 · 2016: 46 · 2015: 33 · 2014: 37 · 2013: 33 · 2012: 26
FWCI
22.89
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
Administrative Science Quarterly (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Management and Organizational Studies
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Job Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Appreciative Inquiry and Organizational Change
Keywords
compassion, social coordination, collective organizing, organizational structure, agency, emergent properties, trust, attention, emotions, social architecture

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review