Wow thanks for the book rec. This is exactly my experience.
Maybe I just don't understand the term though.
It's talking about the internal "PR" role that marketing plays in its interface between management and the employees. Think about the huge product launch events that big tech companies produce. It's as much about creating external publicity or buzz as it is about generating conformity among the staff in terms of what the company line is going to be. As a result, it also boils down to a lot of emotional labor on behalf of PR staff "selling" the vision of the management to the rest of the staff, despite the fact that management's "vision" will be represented with vague, imprecise symbols that allow management to later on morph things around in whatever way suits them.
Incidentally, I think it's also the biggest reason why internal prediction markets are not adopted. Despite evidence that they improve product delivery metrics and tangible financial metrics of project success, it makes the evaluation of project success so quantitative that managers lose their ability to manipulate, tell stories, argue for bonuses, argue that they were stopped by internal politics, etc. etc. Telling those stories is so valuable to middle and upper management that it is worth more than increased raw success of the company overall. Essentially, they want the company overall to be slightly worse off if it gives them manipulable tactics for entrenching their personal job security or bonus or whatever.
One of its primary claims is that HR and marketing function essentially purely as emotional labor (the book would treat legal compliance as a distinct category), and has a whole chapter called, "Dexterity with Symbols" that is a breakdown of how management and executives need to communicate with vague, symbolic language that can never been pinned down to specific claims or specific requirements, so as to allow virtually anything that is said to be reinterpreted as-needed to retrospectively imply whatever is expedient for the executives, particularly from an emotional labor point of view.
I think this is a huge component of why software companies use open-plan offices, and in fact sometimes pay higher prices just to have an open-plan office (not even talking about any of the arguments about lost productivity or reduced communication in open-plan spaces, just purely the real estate costs).
It's a form of emotional labor. The company gets to see who will express outward fealty to the management, like a dog rolling over to expose its tummy. Who will drink the Kool-Aid about "collaboration" and "entrepreneurial spirit" and give emotional labor outwardly praising the open plan office designs, despite inwardly knowing they are miserable, anti-productive and anti-ergonomic spaces.