The purpose of this study was to understand more about how romantic couples negotiate forgiveness and reconciliation. To do so, this study used purposive sampling and recruited 21 couples (42 individuals) to independently complete diaries two times a week for four weeks. In addition to collecting information about the transgression and background related to the transgression, participants were asked to report their most recent conversations with their partner since their last diary. Analysis revealed that couples’ conversations were triggered in the following seven ways: Intentional repair, during other conversation, during other arguments, airing feelings, everyday interactions, potential for temptation or risk, and chronic behavior associated with violation. This interpretive analysis was also guided by negotiating morality theory. One of the central assumptions of negotiated morality theory is that forgiveness communication is an important site for relational partners to negotiate a shared sense of morality. Moreover, the details of couple’s diaries and conversations provide information that can be used to advance negotiated morality theory. Specifically, this analysis extends theory by 1) demonstrating that conceptualizing the moral functions of forgiving communication hierarchically, renaming constructs, and the addition of a new construct (honoring emotion) will improve its parsimony and explanatory power, 2) illustrating how couples engage in discussion-based forgiveness and reconciliation, and 3) empirically illustrating how defining moral standards and restoring relational justice are the two main moral functions of forgiving communication. Restoring relational justice consisted of the following subthemes: establishing accountability, atonement, honoring the self and other, honoring emotion, and increasing safety and certainty. Among the contributions this analysis makes is identifying and describing honoring emotion. In doing so, the subcategories of honoring emotion provide both heuristic and practical implications. Participants’ diaries provided insights about the range of emotions, the discomfort and difficulty of emotional conversations, and communicating emotions.

This dissertation examines compassion in healthcare organizations through a lens of structuration theory. The purpose of this study is to identify structures that healthcare workers describe as enabling and/or constraining compassion, and the ways that healthcare workers (re)produce and transform these structures. Through qualitative, semi-structured interviews with healthcare workers, this study reveals that multiple structures in healthcare constrain compassion at different stages of the compassion process (i.e., recognizing, relating, and (re)acting). Findings also illuminate how healthcare workers engage in individual and collective compassion to support coworkers, which can (re)produce or challenge the status quo of compassion in organizations. This study extends compassion scholarship by: (a) delineating the differences between individual compassion, group compassion, and organizational compassion, (b) highlighting how structurational divergence in healthcare stunts compassion, (c) examining the limits and consequences of emphasizing compassion in healthcare, and (d) offering insight on the varied success of compassion programs.

The purpose of this study is to explore the role of leadership communication incultivating compassion at work. To do so, this study utilizes positive deviance case selection and qualitative, semi-structured interviews to explore employees’ experiences with highly compassionate leaders. These interviews allow insight into employees’ perspectives on expressing suffering at work and experiences of compassionate communication from leaders. The findings of this study extend current understandings of compassion at work by highlighting the role of uncertainty to express suffering in limiting compassion, uncovering leadership communication behaviors that cultivate compassion, and illustrating dynamics that leaders navigate when reacting compassionately. Specifically, this study extends compassion theory by (1) demonstrating that uncertainty related to emotional disclosure limits employees’ sharing of personal suffering, which shapes and limits compassion processes, (2) illustrating that individuals holding traditionally marginalized or minoritized identities face additional uncertainty related to expressing pain and suffering, (3) highlighting a relational orientation that emphasizes personal well-being as enabling the compassion processes, (4) outlining anticipatory compassion as a specific discursive move that conveys care and opens space to express specific pains and suffering, and (5) empirically illustrating three dialectical tensions that punctuate the dynamic interactions between leaders and employees when relating and (re)acting compassionately.