Mattering

I recently wandered into a research literature formerly unknown to me. “Mattering” is defined by some as feeling valued and adding value to your environment. Others note that it is a key feature of one’s self-image in a given environment. It is a component of the notion of self-esteem or self-worth. But “mattering” seems to be a most useful concept in work organizations.

As work organizations (i.e., companies, universities, nonprofit units) adapt to what appears to be a post-pandemic environment, there seems to be consistent commentary about whether current phenomena will persist for the foreseeable future. For example, the preference for remote work by some staff requires adaptation by supervision and work group cultures. There appear to be widespread changes over time in how management reacts to remote and hybrid work. Past posts have noted that the many organizations are struggling to identify the right mix of remote, hybrid, and onsite work.

Mattering, as defined above, is an attribute desirable for all humans. We note that the concept is socially centered. It has little meaning without information about how we as individuals relate to others. In a work organization our perceptions of our own performance is heavily shaped by others.

Some researchers believe mattering requires both feeling valued by others and adding value to one’s environment. The first implies interactions with other in the environment. The second requires the cognition of linking one’s work with a larger part of the mission of one’s environment. In some sense, both of these requires interaction with others. Feeling valued is often the result of direct communication between co-workers. The second, judging whether each of us is adding value to our environment, requires knowledge about how our individual activities are linked to the overall goals of the organization. But such communication seems to be weak in many organizations. The custodian, the administrative clerk, and others may feel quite removed from the output of the unit. Mattering requires the environment identifies and reinforces how each job is necessary to the overall mission. This allows each staff member to define how they add value to the environment.

All of this implies a link between perceptions of mattering and the social cohesion of the group. For example, a common complaint of support level employees in professional organizations is that the professionals don’t say hello to them passing in the hallways. They don’t recognize them. The support staff feel invisible. They seem irrelevant to the higher-ups. Some of the professionals respond that they rarely say “hello” to anyone at work. They are focused on their jobs. Whatever the cause of the missed opportunity, there can be real damage to a sense of mattering for the support staff.

This example shows how much of the communication of mattering may occur in very brief, face to face, unplanned encounters. The encounters may not even have much content related to the work of the organization. They may merely be an acknowledgement of the relevance of one person to another, embedded in the same work environment.

When employee groups don’t work in the same location the ability to communicate mattering is threatened. The chance encounter is more difficult. The use of email robs the author of communicating emotion. The gathering of a group on zoom produces a more formal interaction.

As we evaluate different mixes of remote, hybrid, and onsite work, we might want to consider how the mix affects each of our sense of mattering to the organization.