Emotional regulation in the workplace: A new way to conceptualize emotional labor.

Abstract

The topic of emotions in the workplace is beginning to garner closer attention by researchers and theorists. The study of emotional labor addresses the stress of managing emotions when the work role demands that certain expressions be shown to customers. However, there has been no overarching framework to guide this work, and the previous studies have often disagreed on the definition and operationalization of emotional labor. The purposes of this article are as follows: to review and compare previous perspectives of emotional labor, to provide a definition of emotional labor that integrates these perspectives, to discuss emotion regulation as a guiding theory for understanding the mechanisms of emotional labor, and to present a model of emotional labor that includes individual differences (such as emotional intelligence) and organizational factors (such as supervisor support).

When regulating emotions at work pays off: A diary and an intervention study on emotion regulation and customer tips in service jobs.

“…Employees' conscious effort to align their actual feelings with organizational and occupational display rules has mostly been referred to simply as deep acting (Grandey, 2000;Grandey et al, 2005;Hennig-Thurau, Groth, Paul, & Gremler, 2006). More specifically, however, it has been labeled active deep acting by previous researchers (Cropanzano et al, 2004;Kruml & Geddes, 2000).…”

“…The idea that employee deep acting involves cognitive change and attentional deployment is deeply anchored in the emotional labor literature (Grandey, 2000;Groth et al, 2009;Mikolajczak et al, 2009). Cognitive change aims at changing the appraisal of a situation (see Lazarus & Follkman, 1984), thereby reducing the emotional significance of an event and leading to a different emotional response (Gross, 2008).…”

Teachers’ Emotional Labour and Burnout: Does Perceived Organizational Support Matter?

“…Whereas the first category entails simulating or faking emotions not in fact felt, the second category involves attempting to actually feel the opposite emotions. More to the point, surface acting entails faking or pretending to have the required emotional display without changing one's internal feelings which is sometimes referred to as acting in bad faith because it involves simply putting on an inauthentic act (Grandey, 2000). This implies that the employees will only adjust their emotional expressions while their inner feelings remain unadjusted in order to conform to organizationally required emotion display rules (Lee, Hung, & Huang 2012).…”

“…In contrast, the second strategy, deep acting, entails bringing forth the required emotional display by working to change one's internal feelings. Deep acting takes place when the individual consciously strives to adjust his or her feelings so that they are in accordance with the desired emotional expression (Grandey, 2000). The result is a natural emotional display that is consistent with one's feelings and the obligations of the job.…”

“…The result is a natural emotional display that is consistent with one's feelings and the obligations of the job. This type of emotional labour is referred to as acting in good faith since the created display is authentic and genuine (Grandey, 2000). According to Hochschild (1983), whether surface acting or deep acting, both processes require effort and this effortful activity of managing emotions has detrimental consequences for employees and leads to experience of repeated stress, alienation and burnout.…”