Organizational Rituals: Features, Functions and Mechanisms

Abstract

This review identifies the defining features of rituals and their functions in organizations, culminating in two key claims. First, organizational rituals can be described on a spectrum based on the fullness and degree of their expression. Complete or 'full' organizational rituals possess a greater number and intensity of ritual features than 'ritual-like' activities. The efficacy of an activity corresponds to its alignment with the features of full rituals. Ritual-like activities are therefore less powerful and more frequent organizational events than full rituals. Second, it is theorized that rituals work through three mutually reinforcing mechanisms: cognitive capture, emotional anchoring and behavioural prescription. It is proposed that rituals work by channelling (1) cognitive content, (2) affective responses and (3) behavioural activity toward the cultural expectations of organizations and their members. Organizational rituals may be characterized as standardized, rule-bound, predictable and repetitive behaviours undertaken in conditions demanding explicit performance expectations. Rituals are physically enacted to conform to a specified and invariable sequence, and are invested with added significance through a combination of formality and symbolism. Nine inter-dependent functions of rituals are specified, which are to: (1) provide meaning; (2) manage anxiety; (3) exemplify and reinforce the social order; (4) communicate important values; (5) enhance group solidarity; (6) include and exclude others; (7) signal commitment; (8) manage work structure; and (9) prescribe and reinforce significant events. These functions underline the role that rituals play as communication and learning systems, drawing attention to what is important and helping to funnel the thoughts, feelings and behaviours of organizational members. Organizational rituals are particularly important because they not only illuminate organizational behaviour, but also entrench or challenge existing cultural values.

The expressive role of performance measurement systems: A field study of a mental health development project

“…Smith and Stewart (2011) argue that the process of transferring unexpressed beliefs and values into comprehensible symbols and material artefacts is important for the expression of 8 values. Boedker and Chua (2013) argue that emotions like hope, desire, fear and passion can come alive and circulate through material artefacts such as accounting templates, reflecting their role in not only engaging intellectual and reasoning skills, but also playing on people's passions and feelings.…”

The Psychology of Rituals: An Integrative Review and Process-Based Framework

“…Our framework complements past theoretical approaches, which also seek to unify the phenomenon of ritual by examining its fundamental cognitive processes (e.g., Boyer, 2001; Psychology of Rituals 47 Boyer & Liénard, 2006;Dulaney & Fiske, 1994;Marshall, 2002;McCauley & Lawson, 2002;Whitehouse, 2004) and shared psychosocial functions (e.g., Islam & Zyphur, 2009;Smith & Stewart, 2011;. We extend these previous accounts by placing psychological processing front and center.…”

The psychology of rituals: An integrative review and process-based framework

“…Our framework complements past theoretical approaches, which also seek to unify the phenomenon of ritual by examining its fundamental cognitive processes (e.g., Boyer & Liénard, 2006;Boyer, 2001;Dulaney & Fiske, 1994;Marshall, 2002;McCauley & Lawson, 2002;Whitehouse, 2004) and shared psychosocial functions (e.g., Islam & Zyphur, 2009;Smith & Stewart, 2011;. We extend these previous accounts by placing psychological processing front and center.…”

“…That is, rituals either lack overt instrumental purpose, or their constitutive actions themselves are not immediately causally linked to the stated goal of the ritual (Herrmann, Legare, Harris, & Whitehouse, 2013;Legare & Souza, 2012;Rappaport, 1999). This "causal opaqueness" , 2016Legare & Souza, 2012 results in features that are impervious to rational hypothesis testing, often displaying features that appear arbitrary, characterized by unnecessary repetition and stereotypy (Rutherford, 2006;Smith & Stewart, 2011;Sosis & Ruffle, 2004). For example, setting a table to prepare for a meal is typically not considered to be a ritual.…”

“…Unlike other behaviors, rituals are typically chunked into units of segmented action, which then become sequenced, patterned, and repeated in fixed or bounded ways (Boyer & Liénard, 2006;Nielbo & Sørensen, 2011. In contrast to habits or routines, which may change each time they are performed, rituals tend to be invariable in their performance (Rappaport, 1999;Smith & Stewart, 2011). Because of this invariability, rituals typically require a "scrupulous adherence" to rules, whereby sticking exactly to the script is imperative (Dulaney & Fiske, 1994, p. 245).…”