Organisational Behaviour_ EL report

Organisational Behaviour: EL Report
Kayla Brown 10181214 Page 1 of 16
- Organisational Behaviour-
Report: Emotional Labour within the Service Orientated Occupational Groups
Kayla Brown
10181214
Edith Cowan University

Contents
1.0 Introduction P 3
2.0 Discussion P 5
2.1 Overview of theories and concepts P 5
2.1.1 Surface and deep acting P 6
2.1.2 Affective events theory P 6
2.1.3 Emotion regulation theory P 7
2.2 Factors influencing emotional labour P 7
2.2.1 Organisational influences P 7
2.2.2 Individual emotions P 8
2.3 Implications on organisational behaviour P 9
2.3.1 Employee performance P 9
2.3.2 Employee turnover P 10
3.0 Conclusion P 11
4.0 References P 12
5.0 Appendices P 15
Appendix 1A: flow chart- emotional labour P 15
Appendix 1B: Pret-A-Manger media article P 16

1.0 Introduction
The substantial global growth of the service sector has influenced an increase in
interpersonal transactions/service transactions in such occupations, along with the
establishment of new role requirements Influenced by “divergent polarised conceptualisation
of rationality and emotions in the workplace” (Hatznikolakis & Crossman, 2010, p. 426). The
growth and expansion of the service sector has had the impact of increasing competition,
consequently resulting in organisations implementing and promoting emotional labour (EL)
strategies, such as ‘service with a smile’, to maintain competitive advantage (Goodwin,
Groth, & Frenkel, 2011; Grandey, Rupp, & Brice, 2015). In the study of organisational
behaviour, it is important to consider the role of emotions in workplace behaviour as it may
influence and determine employee performance and organisation competitive advantage
(Grandey & Gabriel, 2015).
The concept of emotional labour derived from Hochschild, A, 1983 in the ‘The Managed
Heart’ publication (Goodwin et al., 2011; Grandey & Gabriel, 2015). For much of the
twentieth century the perception of emotional display within the work-place environment was
considered generally to be “discouraged as disruptive, illogical, biased and weak, an
anathema to sensible, intelligent, goal orientated and instrumental workplace cultures”
(Hatznikolakis & Crossman, 2010, p.426). Emotional labour refers to a situation in which
employees’ practice various strategies to regulate their emotions during interpersonal
transactions as a requirement of organisational emotional display rules (Goodwin et al., 2011;
Tang, Seal, Naumann & Miguel, 2013). Therefore the contemporary employee is expected to
regulate emotion displays to align with the organisationally-desired norms, for example a
nurse is expected to express empathy and a sales assistant is expected to express
responsiveness (Pisaniello, Winefield & Delfabbro, 2012). This has the consequence of some
employees experiencing an estrangement between genuinely felt emotions and expected
emotional displays (Goodwin et al., 2011; Maini & Chugh, 2012).
This report aims to conceptualise the link between emotional labour strategies and
core job performance within the service oriented occupation groups.
Limitations of the report include its lack of consideration that emotional variables
vary as a function of the cultural context under consideration. This factor is integral as

cultural differences in work emotions are important in contemporary organisational
behaviour (Allen, Diefendorff & Ma, 2014).
The report begins by reviewing literature on emotional labour theory which builds the
theoretical foundation for the report. The report then explores the relevant influencing
factors of emotional labour such as organisational influences, and individual emotions;
before interpreting the implications they impose. The report concludes with the
recommendation that organisations should consider replacing emotion display policies
and rules with practices which support and value employees.

2.0 Discussion
Emotional labour strategies are particularly important in the context of service
orientated occupational groups, as employee behaviour and success of abiding by behaviour
scripts (smiling, eye-contact, voice tone), during interpersonal transactions is a critical aspect
influencing the customer’s perception of service quality (Goodwin, et al., 2011; Lapointe,
Morin, courey, Boilard, & Payette, 2012; Maini & Chugh, 2012; Tang et al., 2013). This is
exemplified by a statement excerpted from Grandey et al. (2015, p. 770), in regards to a
Starbucks barista employees job being more than just serving coffee, “she also needs to be
polite, even friendly, to the customers. If she does her job correctly. Then maybe the
customer will walk away feeling like the barista was actually happy to serve them, that it was
not only her job, but a genuine pleasure,” this media quote echoes the concern of why
emotional labour is necessary.
2.1 Overview of theories and concepts
The understanding of emotional labour is essential within the service industry as both
theory and empirical evidence suggest that, personal and event characteristics, emotional
labour (emotion requirements, emotion regulation, emotion performance), and relational and
context factors, are integral to an employee’s work-life experience and well-being (Goodwin
et al., 2011). This is further illustrated in appendix A (Grandey & Gabriel, 2015).
Empirical evidence demonstrates that surface and deep acting often yield divergent
outcomes for employees, particularly regarding their well-being (Goodwin et al., 2011).
Emotional regulation strategies, when applied to employee-customer interactions, mirror the
concepts of deep acting, whereby the modification of felt emotions occurs in anticipation of
perceived discrepancy between actual felt emotions and required emotions; and surface
acting, whereby emotions not actually felt are expressed as a consequence to suppressing felt
emotions, amplifying weak emotions, and faking emotions (Blau, Fertig, Tatum,
Connaughton, Park, & Marshal, 2010; Goodwin et al., 2011).
Grandey et al. (2015) argue that emotional labour is an unfair labour practice as
employees are subjected to distributive injustice, interactional injustice, and procedural
injustice as employees within the service industry endure being undervalued within the
organisation, disrespected by customers, as well as being self-undermined by organisational

policies. Literature identifies that it is a common occurrence for employees in the service
context to experience harassment as a consequence to a customer’s misinterpretation of the
emotional labour requirements, and the abuse of power in the service context is often
experienced by service providers (Grandey et al., 2015).
2.1.1 Surface and deep acting.
Surface acting typically has more detrimental outcomes, such as job performance and
cognitive cost, than deep acting (Goodwin et al., 2011). Cho et al. (2013, p. 671) identifies
the differences between emotional labour acting types, stating that “while deep acting
attempts to modify internal feelings to be consistent with display rules, surface acting
modifies outward displays to be consistent with display rules”. This is further supported by
Goodwin et al’s (2011) findings which suggest that although deep acting requires initial
emotion-regulation, from a cumulative perspective the strategy does not necessitate constant
emotional regulation, such as suppression and masking affiliated with maintaining
conflicting internal feelings and emotion displays, that surface acting does (Goodwin et al.,
2011). Surface acting influences negative interpersonal outcomes (emotional exhaustion and
feelings of inauthenticity), in comparison to deep acting which studies suggest have a positive
influence on an individual’s, perception of enhanced job satisfaction, improved service
delivery outcomes, and employee/organisational performance (Goodwin et al., 2011),
In addition it may be argued that deep acting is the preferred emotional labour
strategy for employees to engage in as it is considered more constructive, although it remains
a concern that this strategy is not positively related to well-being (Goodwin et al., 2011;
Humphrey, Ashforth, & Diefendorff, 2015).
2.1.2 Affective events theory
Affective events theory is relevant when analysing emotions in organisations, as
according to the macro-level perspective, “the nature of the job and the requirements for
emotional labour affect behaviour and work attitudes”, (Cho, Rutherford & Park, 2013, p.
671). Therefore employee’s positive and negative emotional reactions are influenced by a
combination of daily events, the work environment and personal dispositions, which
subsequently influence an employee’s experience of job satisfaction, job performance, and
organisational commitment (Cho et al., 2013). The theory highlights the relation between

employee’s internal influences (emotions, mental states) and their influence on an
individual’s reactions to situations which subsequently determine an employee’s attitude, job
satisfaction, and performance (Humphrey et al., 2015).
2.1.3 Emotion regulation theory
The micro-level emotion regulation theory suggests that employee’s emotional labour
strategies have well-being outcomes for individuals as well as the organisations (Cho et al.,
2013; Goodwin et al., 2011). Such outcomes are associated with job satisfaction, job stress,
performance, and turnover (Grandey et al., 2015). Individuals engage in two different
emotion regulation strategies, antecedent-focused emotion regulation which manipulates
input and is commonly affiliated with emotional labour; and response-focused emotion
regulation strategies which manipulate output (Cho et al., 2013; McCance, Nye, Wang, Jones,
& Chiu, 2013). Emotional labour is affiliated with antecedent-focused emotion as it relates to
the strategy of avoiding, altering, or re-evaluating situations and people on the basis of their
probable emotional impact (Cho et al., 2013).
2.2 Factors influencing emotional labour
A combination of influencing factors on emotional labour, such as the expectation of
positive emotion requirements coupled with negative working environments has costs to
employee well-being and subsequently organisational sustainability (Grandey & Diamond,
2010; Grandey et al., 2015). This is the result of a depletion of regulating emotions and the
draining experience of dissonance from the incongruence of internal states and required
emotional displays, creating a state of tension and influencing negative employee citizenship
performance (Cho et al., 2013; Maini & Chugh, 2012; Grandey et al., 2015). The ‘ego-
depletion’ theory further supports the notion that factors influencing emotional labour present
a struggle for an employee in the service context to maintain emotion regulation (Cho et al.,
2013; Ramachandran, Jordan, Troth, & Lawrence, 2011).
2.2.1 Organisational influences
Emotional displays are commonly required and enforced within organisations to
improve organisation competitive advantage through improving the public’s perception of the
organisation, thus improving customer satisfaction and loyalty through the utilisation of

employee’s emotions as an economic commodity (Grandey et al., 2015; Humphrey, 2012;
McCance et al., 2013). Organisations use emotional labour (imbedded in organisation
culture) as a commodity to differentiate their organisation from their competitors through the
use of slogans such as an airline service encouraging customers to “fly the friendly skies”
(Lee, An, & Noh, 2015; Grandey et al., 2015). The organisation ‘Pret-A-Manger’ further
exemplifies this through the practice of ‘enforced happiness’ on its employees and the
statement that ‘'Pret doesn't merely want its employees to lend their minds and bodies; it
wants their souls too’, (appendix B) (McDermott, 2013).
Environmental conditions and events influence an employee’s ability to maintain a
positive demeanour, such as, low pay, job monotony, lack of organisational support, and
workin anti-social long hours which is becoming more prevalent in the service industry, these
factors cause myriad sources of distress (Grandey et al., 2015; Maini & Chugh, 2012).
Emotional displays are considered to be a necessity for contemporary employees as a matter
of survival within the work environment where emotional labour is required, such as service
industry jobs, as it determines an individual employee’s job security and pay (Grandey et al.,
2015). This is evidenced in the ‘Pret-A-Manger’ organisation where the employees ‘should
never be 'moody', or 'just here for the money’, and an employee’s loss of employment for
consulting an independent union for ‘Pret’ workers regarding emotional labour working
conditions (appendix B) (McDermott, 2013).
2.2.2 Individual emotions
Employees are often required to engage in positive affective emotions, regardless of
their honest feelings about the job, the situation, or the customer (Grandey et al., 2015).
Individual differences (personalities) influence the emotional labour strategy adopted within
the service context, such differences influence a person’s job-fit (Humphrey et al., 2015).
From a person-centric perspective, literature proposes that not even the most extraverted and
agreeable person can not be expected to portray positive emotions in response to all people
consistently, although employees are expected to maintain positive expressions in emotional
labour occupations such as the service industry (Grandey et al., 2015). Therefore individuals
employed in the service context must be intrinsically motivated to engage in effective
emotion regulation and maintain the regulatory resources to meet emotional demands,
(Grandey et al., 2015). Individuals in the service context are often undervalued and their

efforts to display emotional labour expectations are under-compensated and yet expected by
the public as emotional labour has been generalised under the umbrella of ‘good customer
service’ (Cho et al., 2013; Grandey et al., 2015; Lapointe et al., 2012).
2.3 Implications on organisational behaviour
Literature highlights that organisations implement emotion display rules with the
underlying assumption that an organisations requirement that employees display positively
appropriate emotions relevant is that sincere emotional displays, also referred to as good
‘affective delivery’, has a positive impact on organisational outcomes such as improved
organisational performance (Goodwin et al., 2011). Contrary to this perspective, literature
stipulates that the authenticity of required positive emotions from employees induces
dissonance and depleted resources, consequently impeding task performance as well as
threatening well-being (Grandey et al., 2015; Humphrey et al., 2015; Lapointe et al., 2012).
Grandey et al. (2015) identifies the inattention to employee needs as a consequence
to emotional labour expectations as, limiting self-determination, threatening autonomy,
competence, and belongingness. Literature further recognizes emotion performance may not
benefit organisational productivity, as focusing on friendliness rather than efficiency does not
benefit organisational profits (Grandey & Gabriel, 2015). Therefore it is evident that the
requirement of emotional labour in the service context comes with trade-offs, effecting
aspects of job performance and having the overall impact of net loss for the organisation
(Grandey et al., 2015).
2.3.1 Employee performance
The actions and behaviours controlled by individual employees contribute to
organisational goals, therefore employee performance is an important construct within
service industry context (Goodwin et al., 2011). Employee performance, in the service
industry, refers to tangible service delivery and intangible aspects such as interpersonal
behaviour and emotional display (e.g., responsiveness, empathy) (Goodwin et al., 2011).
Grandey et al. (2015), identify that, despite proposed benefits of smiling, emotional labour
has human costs, such as the somatic symptoms of job dissatisfaction and job burnout
(Grandey & Diamond, 2010; Lapointe et al., 2012). Contrary to this perspective, deep acting
is considered to be positively correlated with employee performance as it involves the

expression of real emotions and influences a sense of personal accomplishment (Humphrey et
al., 2015; Goodwin et al., 2011).
In the circumstance where emotion display demands exceed the individual’s self-
control resources, resulting in a depletion of the individual employee’s performance (Grandey
et al., 2015). Studies indicate that the emotional labour demand in the service context
“impairs subsequent self-regulatory performance on attentional tasks, decision-making, and
physical exertion (Grandey et al., 2015, p. 772). Literature supports this with the findings that
individuals experiencing a depleted self-regulatory state have a higher tendency to engage in
anti-social behaviours such as ineffective self-presentation and inappropriate self-disclosure
(Grandey & Gabriel, 2015).
2.3.2 Employee turnover
Literature has posited that emotional labour potentially contributes to employee
turnover (Goodwin et al., 2011). Employee turnover is a critical concern for many
organisations, research findings demonstrates that employee satisfaction and commitment
positively effects organisational performance (Cho et al., 2013; Goodwin et al., 2011;
Ramachandran et al., 2011). Employees who regularly engage in the practice of emotional
labour have the tendency to adopt the attitude that they work in an unsuitable environment,
consequently influencing employee withdrawal cognitions and behaviours (Goodwin et al.,
2011). When employees experience a discrepancy between their internal and external
emotional experience (surface acting), it is common for such individuals to express turnover
intentions and emotional exhaustion (Cho et al, 2013). Grandey et al. (2015) suggest that over
a duration of time, chronic depletion influences an increase in turnover intentions as well as
quit rates.

3.0 Conclusion
In conclusion, through the exploration of the relevant emotional labour theories and
concepts, it is apparent that emotions are integral to an individual’s reasoning process which
influences motivation and behaviour within the service context (Humphrey, 2012). Thus
organisations must consider emotional labour implications as emotional behaviour has
become an intrinsic component to understanding expected behaviours in organisations and
the influence it has on organisational effectiveness.
It is suggested that organisations replace emotional requirements and escalating
worker coercion with humanistic practices, this may be achieved by reducing employee costs
(Grandey et al., 2015). thus replacing emotion display policies and rules with practices which
support and value employees, this may have the positive outcome where employees
experience authentic positive emotions, subsequently reducing human costs and increasing
organisation effectiveness (Grandey et al., 2015). Therefore on a theoretical and practical
level, by reducing the depletion of self-regulatory resources and producing authentic
emotions (deep-acting), this may influence service success (Goodwin et al., 2011). This
report evidences that emotional labour is a consequence to the inappropriate use of the
surface-acting emotional labour strategy (Humphrey et al., 2015).

4.0 References
Allen, J. A., Diefendorff, J. M., & Ma, Y. (2014). Differences in emotional labor across
cultures: A comparison of chinese and U.S. service workers. Journal of Business and
Psychology, 29(1), 21-35. doi:10.1007/s10869-013-9288-7
Blau, G., Fertig, J., Tatum, D. S., Connaughton, S., Park, D. S., & Marshall, C. (2010).
Further scale refinement for emotional labor: Exploring distinctions between types of
surface versus deep acting using a difficult client referent. Career Development
International, 15(2), 188-216. doi:10.1108/13620431011040969
Cho, Y., Rutherford, B. N., & Park, J. (2013). The impact of emotional labor in a retail
environment. Journal of Business Research, 66(5), 670-677.
doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2012.04.001
Crossman, J., & Hatzinikolakis, J. (2010). Are business academics in australia experiencing
emotional labour?: A call for empirical research. Journal of Management and
Organization, 16(3), 425-435. doi:10.5172/jmo.16.3.425
Goodwin, R. E., Groth, M., & Frenkel, S. J. (2011). Relationships between emotional labor,
job performance, and turnover. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 79(2), 538-548.
doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2011.03.001
Grandey, A. A., & Diamond, J. A. (2010). Interactions with the public: Bridging job design
and emotional labor perspectives. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31(2-3), 338-
350. doi:10.1002/job.637
Grandey, A., & Gabriel, A. (2015). Emotional labor at a crossroads: Where do we go from
here? (pp. 323-349). Palo Alto: Annual Reviews. doi:10.1146/annurev-
orgpsych-032414-111400
Grandey, A. A., Rupp, D., & Brice, W. N. (2015). Emotional labor threatens decent work: A
proposal to eradicate emotional display rules. Journal of Organizational Behavior,
36(6), 770-785. doi:10.1002/job.2020

Humphrey, R. H. (2012). How do leaders use emotional labor? Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 33(5), 740-744. doi:10.1002/job.1791
Humphrey, R. H., Ashforth, B. E., & Diefendorff, J. M. (2015). The bright side of emotional
labor. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 36(6), 749-769. doi:10.1002/job.2019
Lapointe, É., Alexandre J S Morin, Courcy, F., Boilard, A., & Payette, D. (2012). Workplace
affective commitment, emotional labor and burnout: A multiple mediator model.
International Journal of Business and Management, 7(1), 3.
Lee, C., An, M., & Noh, Y. (2015; 2014). The effects of emotional display rules on flight
attendants’ emotional labor strategy, job burnout and performance. Service Business,
9(3), 409-425. doi:10.1007/s11628-014-0231-4
Maini, V., & Chugh, S. (2012). Emotional labor: A psychological manipulation for
organizational success. Journal of Organisation and Human Behaviour, 1(4), 31.
McCance, A. S., Nye, C. D., Wang, L., Jones, K. S., & Chiu, C. (2013). Alleviating the
burden of emotional labor: The role of social sharing. Journal of Management, 39(2),
392-415. doi:10.1177/0149206310383909
McDermott, K. (2013, February 3). Revealed: Pret a Manger’s bizarre ‘emotional labour’
rules for workers who are told to ‘be happy’, touch each other and NEVER act
moody. Daily Mail Australia. Retrieved from
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2272400/Revealed-Pret-Mangers-bizarre-
emotional-labour-rules-workers-told-happy-touch-NEVER-act-moody.html
Pisaniello, S. L., Winefield, H. R., & Delfabbro, P. H. (2012). The influence of emotional
labour and emotional work on the occupational health and wellbeing of south
australian hospital nurses. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 80(3), 579-591.
doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2012.01.015
Ramachandran, Y., Jordan, P, J., Troth, A, C., & Lawrence, s, A. (2011). Emotional
intelligence, emotional labour and organisational citizenship behaviour in service
environments. International Journal of Work Organisation and Emotion, 4(2), 136-

157.
Tang, C., Seal, C. R., Naumann, S. E., & Miguel, K. (2013). Emotional labor: The role of
employee acting strategies on customer emotional experience and subsequent buying
decisions. International Review of Management and Marketing, 3(2), 50-57.

5.0 Appendices
Appendix A: flow chart- emotional labour
(Grandey & Gabriel, 2015)

Appendix B: Pret-A-Manger media article
(McDermott, 2013).
(McDermott, 2013).

Organisational Behaviour_ EL report

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (20)

Similar to Organisational Behaviour_ EL report

Similar to Organisational Behaviour_ EL report (20)

Organisational Behaviour_ EL report