description of the project and its...

EMOTIONAL LABOUR: CAN WORKER PHYSICAL LOCATION AND TYPE

OF CLIENT CONTACT MAKE A DIFFERENCE?

By

KRIS ELLIS

Integrated Studies Project

submitted to Dr. Cathy Bray

in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

Master of Arts – Integrated Studies

Athabasca, Alberta

August, 2007

Table of Contents Name of Research Project ....................................................................................1

Description of the project and its scope.................................................................1

Theme...................................................................................................................1

Environmental Analysis .........................................................................................2

Significance/ importance of topic...........................................................................3

Literature Review ..................................................................................................3

Initial Research Questions ..................................................................................13

Impacts on Initial Research Questions................................................................13

Methodology........................................................................................................15

Survey design and results ...................................................................................17

Emotional Labour strategies................................................................................27

Implications for research .....................................................................................29

Conclusion ..........................................................................................................30

References..........................................................................................................31

Appendix A - Survey on Emotional Labour..........................................................38

Appendix B - E-mail soliciting research participants............................................40

Appendix C – Statistical Information....................................................................43

Appendix D – Environmental Analysis.................................................................45

Appendix E – Emotional Labour Learning Module ..............................................50

MAIS 701 Research Project – Kris Ellis – 2410609 Page: 1

Name of Research Project Emotional Labour: Can worker physical location and type of client contact make a difference? Description of the project and its scope Hochschild’s groundbreaking work in 1983, “The Managed Heart: Commercialization of

Human Feeling”, was significant in that it identified a previously invisible dimension of

work. She argued that dealing with emotions is an important and demanding component

of work, particularly in service work, entailing management of feelings and the

expression of emotion. This is now described as ‘emotional labour’ where workers strive

to ‘create and maintain a relationship, a mood, or a feeling (1983:440).

In analyzing how emotional labour is performed and structured, Hochschild argued that

expenditure of human energy in showing sympathy, trust, good feelings in positive

situations (sales in stores), or distrust and suspicion in negative situations (stopped by

police) becomes emotional work. According to Wallace and Wolf (1995), “jobs

requiring emotional labour have three aspects to them. First, the occupation requires

face-to-face or voice contact with customers. Second, the employee is required to

produce a particular, predefined emotional state in others. Third, the employer exercises

some control over the emotional activities of employees hired to produce those feelings.

Initially, emotional labour studies were confined to occupations that interact with the

public (customers). Subsequent studies have expanded the concept to define

customers as either external or internal to the organization. This implies that employees

who are required to produce a particular, predefined emotional state in other

employees, can experience emotional labour.

Theme Essentially, the theme of this research project was to study a specific group of people

where the main differences are the degree of external client contact the employee is

exposed to and the physical location where they work, to determine if emotional labour


is experienced and controlled differently based on these differences. The study group

was identified as the Analysts and Underwriting Consultants employed within the Group

Benefits Corporate Account division of Manulife Financial. Manulife Financial is a

leading Canadian-based financial services company, operating worldwide, offering a

diverse range of financial protection products and wealth management services. The

job descriptions and hiring practices for the occupations identified for this study are

identical within three different locations: Waterloo Ontario, Toronto Ontario & Montreal

Quebec. The Analyst occupation experiences significant internal customer contact,

while the Underwriting Consultant occupation experiences significant internal and

external customer contact. The Analysts and Underwriting Consultants work together to

service both internal and external customers.

Environmental Analysis While a Undergraduate degree is the predominant level of education within the

Corporate Accounts Underwriting organization, the Underwriting role has, for the past

six years, experienced high staff turnover relative to other Group Benefit roles. This

turnover has been due to a variety of reasons, such as: changes in technology and job

expectations/accountabilities, changes in management, and opportunities for promotion

within the organization.

The Corporate Accounts Underwriting organization is segregated into “Job grades”, with

corresponding salary grades. In 2003, a Job Family career progression was developed

and implemented with the Underwriting organization. Within this career progression is a

requirement, for the analysts, to gain risk assessment and external client support skill

sets prior to being promoted to an Underwriting Consultant role. At the present time,

gaining these skill sets requires the Underwriting Analysts to apply for and be

successful at Underwriting job postings outside of the Corporate Account environment.

The primary measurement of employee satisfaction is the annual Employee Satisfaction

Survey, which is completed at approximately the same time as the annual performance

and salary reviews. The 2006 Employee Satisfaction Survey resulted in negative


trending within the Underwriting organization, with significantly lower scores compared

to the overall average.

A full environmental analysis can be found in Appendix D.

Significance/ importance of topic Employee turnover remains one of the most persistent and frustrating problems that

organizations face. Key reasons for employee turnover include the organizational

culture, job characteristics, job fit and job expectations (Lee & Ashforth, 1996). If the

organizational culture and/or job characteristics require the employee to act in a

predefined way in order for accountabilities to be met, and if there is a negative

implication to the employee for not acting in that way, emotional labour is one of the job

expectations. If the organization and/or the employee fail to account for the emotional

strain/cognitive dissonance that emotional labour may produce, or provide tools for

reducing that dissonance, ultimately, the employee will take steps, which may result in

decreased performance, cynicism regarding the disconnection between how the

employee actually feels and what the organization expects the employee to

demonstrate, or the employee removing themselves from that organization. Karen

Pugliesi, in her study on emotional labour, found that “the more your job requires you to

fake emotions, the more likely you are to become emotionally detached from those

around you at work. You are also more likely to be detached from your own emotional

state (you may not realize how depressed and upset you really are) and so are more

likely to be dissatisfied with your job in the future”. (Pugliesi, 1999, pg 126)

A literature review was completed to determine if any existing literature or research has

approached the study of emotional labour from an internal/external contrast or physical

location perspective.

Literature Review The most recent decades have placed the study of emotion firmly in the organizational

agenda. Organizations are now believed to have “feelings”, (Albrow, 1994, 1997),

reflecting “love, hatred and passion” (Fineman, 1993). The “commercialization of


feeling” (Hochschild, 1979, 1983) is now a common term within organizational

behaviour theory (Bolton and Boyd, 2003), with employers openly engaging employees’

hearts and minds (Warhurst and Thompson, 1998). Perhaps the greatest contribution

to advance an understanding of emotion within the workplace is Hochschild’s (1983)

work concerning the “managed heart”. Her study of air-stewardesses provided insight

to how managing emotions has become a saleable commodity, a commodity now

known as “emotional labour” (Hochschild, 1983). Hochschild’s work has proven to be

enduring, and there is little in emotional labour research within the past 2 decades that

does not, to some degree, refer to her original study (Meier, Mastracci & Wilson, 2006;

Miller, Considine & Garner, 2007; Montgomery, Panagopolou, de Wildt & Meenks,

2006).

Hochschild (1983) argued that emotions are social and can act as signals concerning

the relation between the environment and the self. Our ability to manage emotions is

based on our expectations of others and the expectations of others toward us, and

these can be mutually understandable because these are based on earlier experiences.

Our emotions, acting as part of the interpretive process, become part of the social self,

and are one means that we use to interpret stimuli and develop an appropriate

response.

Using standard socialization and interaction concepts, Hochschild (1983) extended the

study of how we alter and modify our emotions and feelings socially to the workplace,

studying the labour involved in emotional management. Hochschild (1983) extended

the emotional analysis further when she introduced the idea of control or management

of emotions by others, including institutions and, more specifically, commercial

enterprises. This happens when "within institutions various elements of acting are taken

away from the individual and replaced by institutional mechanisms" (Hochschild, 1983,

p. 49), in effect, commoditizing emotion work.

The argument is that the expenditure of human energy in showing appropriate emotions

within a given situation becomes emotional work. In the commercial sector, emotions


can sometimes be sold and have an exchange value, with organizations being

increasingly willing to direct and control how employees present themselves to others.

As a consequence, a key component of the work performed by employees has become

the labour involved in presenting the emotions specified and desired by employers.

It was within her seminal study that the concepts of surface acting and deep acting were

introduced. Hochschild (1983) described surface acting as the "body language, the put-

on sneer, the posed shrug, the controlled sigh", whereas deep acting occurred when the

emotional display “is a natural result of working on feeling….a real feeling that has been

self-induced”. Further research has indicated that surface acting has more negative

effects on employees than does deep acting (Brotheridge & Grandey, 2002; Grandey,

2003; Gross, 1998; Morris & Feldman, 1997; Pugliesi, 1999). Surface acting is more

likely to be used by inexperienced employees than by those with more on-the-job

experience (Grandey, 2003). Hochschild’s “new social theory of emotion”, laid out in

Appendix A of The Managed Heart (1983), has been critically examined by Catherine

Theodosius from Essex University in her article “Recovering Emotion from Emotion

Management” (2006). Theodosius approaches emotion and emotional labour in this

article from a sociological perspective, attempting to understand the unconscious

emotional processes that critics of Hochschild (1983) argue is missing from her

research. Using her observations of nurses on an acute surgical ward, Theodosius

(2006) illustrates how, using “a more interactive, relational approach to emotion”, it is

possible to uncover hidden emotions generally subsumed through the process of

emotion management. Leveraging Freud’s work with repression, Theodosius (2003)

argues that there is “a whole plethora of feelings and emotions unconsciously involved

in any given interaction”. Ultimately, Theodosius (2006) argues, emotion and emotional

labour is more than the interaction of emotions and feelings, as Hochschild (1983)

believed, but also relational, conscious and unconscious.

As research on emotional labour has evolved, various elaborations and/or

interpretations of Hochschild’s concepts have been developed (Smith, 1992; Wharton,

1993; Sutton, 1991; Adeimann, 1995; Rafaeli, 1989; Rafaeli & Sutton, 1990; Tolich,


1993; Van Maanen &. Kunda, 1989), Brotheridge and Lee (2003) argue that it is

“important to distinguish between surface and deep acting because each suggests a

fundamentally different internal state, and may have differential effects on workers' well-

being. Sheldon, Ryan, Rawsthorne and Ilardi (1997) believe that the “end state of

surface acting is one of misalignment and inauthenticity”, reducing the person’s state of

well-being. Key to the concept of surface acting is the extent to which a person

identifies with their work role. The level of identification may determine the motive or

reason for why someone engages in surface acting (Ashforth and Tomiuk, 2000).

Initial studies on emotional labour confined the research to interactions at the customer-

organizational level. However, subsequent studies seem to indicate that emotional

labour is present within all organizational communications (Mann, 1997; Grandey, A.

2000; Ashkanasy, N., 2003).

Most researchers agree that jobs requiring emotional labour have three aspects to them

(Wallace and Wolf, 1995). The employee has an occupation that requires face-to-face

or voice contact with internal or external customers, the employee needs to produce a

particular, predefined emotional state in these customers and the employer, to some

level, has control over the employee’s presentation of desired emotions. “The

employee is attempting to manage emotions of customers, and employers in turn are

managing the emotional activities of employees.” (Wallace and Wolf, 1995). Several

typologies have also been derived to categorize the various aspects of emotional

labour. One typology consistently included in research analysis is that of Morris and

Feldman (1996). Morris and Feldman’s (1996) construct involves four dimensions to

emotional labour: frequency of emotional display, attentiveness to display rules, variety

of emotions required to be displayed, and emotional dissonance.

Frequency of emotional display addresses the fact that the more often the provider’s

employees display emotional behaviours approved by the client, the more likely a client

is to continue engaging in business with the provider.. Morris and Feldman (1996)

indicate that this dimension is the most studied of all four emotional labour dimensions.


Frequency of emotional display is impacted by how explicit the display rules are, how

closely the employee is watched to ensure the appropriateness of the emotional display,

and how routine the tasks the employee performs are.

Attentiveness to display rules addresses the work effort involved by the employee to

ensure that the approved emotions are displayed within the workplace. The longer the

employee is required to display approved emotions, and the more intense this display

must be, the greater the emotional labour involved. The length and degree of effort in

attending to display rules is impacted by how routine the task is, as well as whether the

person the employee is displaying the desired emotion for has power over that

employee.

The variety of emotions required to be displayed addresses the emotional work effort of

the employee in managing the appropriate emotional display for any given situation. An

increase in the variety of emotional displays engenders a corresponding increase in

emotional labour. The variety of emotions required to be displayed is impacted by

power perceptions and how much variety in tasks the employee is exposed to.

Morris and Feldman’s fourth dimension, emotional dissonance, is generally considered

a consequence of emotional labour (Adelmann, 1989; Zerbe, 2000). However, Morris

and Feldman disagree that emotional dissonance is simply a consequence of emotional

labour, arguing, instead, that emotional dissonance is a dimension of the emotional

labour construct. Emotional dissonance addresses the conflict felt by an employee due

to the manipulation of people and emotions. If the emotion that the employee actually

feels differs from what the employee is required to display, a state of disconnection

occurs. Most researchers, though, agree that failure to resolve emotional dissonance,

whether it is a consequence or a dimension of emotional labour, is a key contributor to

emotional exhaustion, which, if not addressed, may lead to termination of employment

for the employee (Morris and Feldman, 1996). Resolution of emotional dissonance

occurs when the employee truly believes that their internal and external emotional

display match. Emotional dissonance is impacted by what type of interaction occurs


between the employee and the receiver of the emotional display, the degree of job

autonomy enjoyed by the employer, and whether the employee usually experiences a

positive or negative affectivity toward their job accountabilities.

Emotional exhaustion, as a consequence or dimension of emotional labour, has been

examined to determine the relationships that emotional exhaustion has with regard to

organizational commitment, turnover intentions, and job performance ratings (Cordes &

Doherty, 1993; Baba, Jamal & Tourigny, 1998; Fruedenberger, 1983; Lee & Ashforth,

1996). These studies have demonstrated that emotional exhaustion can cause workers

to have poorer work attitudes, lower levels of job performance, and increased likelihood

of seeking employment elsewhere. Cropanzano & Byrne (2000) extend this research,

examining and determining that emotional exhaustion has an effect not only on the

employee, but on supervisory commitment to the organization and the organizations

commitment to its employees.

The existing body of literature concerning emotional labour has been subject to various

criticisms. Bolton & Boyd (2003) argue that emotional labour is a more multi-

dimensional concept than initially posited. Instead, they offer a typology in four parts

regarding different types of emotional labour (pecuniary; presentational; prescriptive and

philanthropic) that may be carried out, and suggest that such a multi dimensional view

encompasses a less simplistic and rigid view than that offered by Hochschild (1983).

Bolton and Boyd (2003) argue that the recognition of different types of emotional self-

management provides a clear indication that emotions within organizations cannot be

simplified into any given category. In their study of airline cabin crews, Bolton and Boyd

illustrate that employees can draw on different sets of emotional rules according to

context and their individual motivations to do so.

Fineman (2003) argues that existing research on emotional labour has not recognized

the degree of control that the employee may contribute, “even in a tightly prescriptive

environment.” Bolton & Boyd (2003), agreeing with this observation, suggest “it is the

worker who calibrates how much feeling is invested in the performance”. Furthermore,


Fineman (2003) suggests that emotional labour may not always be difficult for the

employee. Some employees may be able to successfully “ride the role” (Fineman,

2003), relying on “cracks to exploit, places to be or feel different or defiant”, or as

Thompson and Ackroyd (1995) suggest, “an ability to carve out spaces for resistance

and misbehaviour”. Opportunities for misbehaviour has been catalogued in Van

Maanen’s (1991) study which illustrates the strategies used by Disney employees

despite the significant surveillance strategies employed by Disney.

Hochschild’s original concept of surface acting and the emotional dissonance that

occurs when the employee is unable to reconcile the desired emotional displays relative

to what the employee truly feels has also come under criticism. Fineman (2003)

describes the value we place on authenticity is “paradigmatically naïve”, and argues that

humans have many selves and many truths, which change with situations and

audiences, an argument supported by Bolton and Boyd’s 2003 study. Guerrier and

Adib (2003) suggest that we use the term authentic behaviour to replace the idea of an

authentic self in order to circumvent this debate. Additional research by Dijk & Brown

(2006) indicate that there is evidence “to support the view that emotional labour and

dissonance are two separate constructs, and that the cognitive dissonance theory

based concept of psychological discomfort is conceptually relevant to the examination

of negative work outcomes associated with the performance of emotional labour.”

A final argument concerning existing research on emotional labour concerns the

narrowly defined study groups, which primarily focus on public service encounters

(Tyler & Taylor, 2001; Bolton & Boyd, 2003; Smith, 1992; Dent, Burke & Green, 1991;

Korczynski, 2001; Taylor & Tyler, 2000; Guerrier & Adib, 2004). Moore, Kelliher and

Hailey (2004) argue that there are many other parts of an organization that would

benefit from the exploration of emotional labour, indicating that relative inattention has

been paid to sections of the working population as well as the work done by employees

in terms of everyday work relationships. Waldron (1999) articulates the

point, “the consuming emotional labour that is intrinsic to ‘doing’ work relationships has

received too little attention, despite the fact that managing relationships with other ‘team


members’ has become a substantial, if not the central, feature of the work of many

employees”. A notable exception is the research completed by Harris (2002), who

studied the emotional labour of barristers. This work has been perceived as unusual as

it focused on a group where the emotional labouring was unscripted and self-regulated.

Harris (2002) concluded that concentrating on the employee-customer interface or the

manipulation of behaviour at point-of-sale “may overlook broader, more pervasive

emotional labour”. Fineman (2003) agreed that the research concerning emotional

labour needs to be broadened, stating a “need for a better understanding of the shape

of emotion work and emotional labour in people who are less scripted that traditional

service workers.”

Taking up the challenge, Moore, Kelliher and Hailey (2004) focused their research

on the unique impacts of managerial behaviour, which, similar to Harris’ (2002) study of

barristers, may be required to be unstructured and self-regulated while still supporting

appropriate emotional displays. Moore, Kelliher and Hailey’s (2004) findings indicate

that middle managers, because of their position in organizations, are likely to

experience significant emotional labour due to the conflict between being both

managers and themselves managed. Significant to this study is the finding that

emotional labour is increased when the employee is not formally prepared for the

emotional labour display expectation imposed by organizational management.

Rupp and Spencer (2006) continue to expand the shape of emotional labour in their

study of the impacts of interactional injustice as a motivator for emotional labour.

Drawing on previous research, they argue that “interactional injustice stems from

undeserved derogatory judgments made about another. Judgments are derogatory

when statements made about an individual are false (i.e., wrongful) or a grossly

distorted version of the truth (unfair)”. Supporting Bolton and Boyd’s (2003) contention

that employees draw on different sets of emotional rules, Rupp and Spencer (2006)

apply an affective events theory model to emotional labour, arguing that specific

emotions are generated from specific work events, which in turn translate to

spontaneous, affectively driven behaviors. Drawing on this model, Rupp and Spencer


(2006) found that participants who had been exposed to customers “trained to be

undeservingly impolite, disrespectful, inarticulate, and informationally unclear” perceived

higher levels of interactional injustice. This led them to experience higher levels of

emotional labour than participants who were exposed to customers trained to be more

fair. Additionally, Rupp and Spencer (2006) found that “participants who were exposed

to interactional injustice from customers found it more difficult to obey the emotional

requirements of their job.”

Referring to Wharton (1993, Best, Downey, and Jones (1998) and Kruml and Geddes

(1998), Brotheridge & Lee (2003) argue that there has been limited research concerning

a psychometrically rigorous multidimensional measures of Emotional Labour. Their

research, which ultimately developed an Emotional Labour Scale, incorporates research

findings concerning emotional labour models along with various existing emotional

scales such as the Emotional Work Requirements Scale (Best, Downey & Jones, 1998),

the Vulnerability Scale (Glover, Ohlde, Silver, Packard, Goodnick, & Hamlin, 1994) and

the Maslach burnout inventory (Maslach & Jackson, 1986). Using Exploratory factor

analysis, an initial survey was completed, and then restructured into the final survey,

using confirmatory factor analysis. The Emotional Labour scale uses a 5-point Likert

scale, and can be considered the first comprehensive emotional labour scale that

measures the consequences of surface and deep acting, illustrates a positive

relationship between surface acting and emotional exhaustion and clearly measures the

impact of Morris & Feldman’s four dimensions of emotional labour.

Taking a different direction regarding emotional labour research, Soares (2003)

expanded the gender, race, ethnicity, social class and status impacts on emotional

labour, specifically the impact of crying at the workplace. Soares (2003) contends that

tears possess “a cathartic effect that frees stress and emotion in the individual, thus

producing an effect of relief”, and argues that tears indicate the employee’s inability to

manage the emotional labour experienced. Soares’ (2003) research, although prior to

Rupp and Spencer (2006), includes disturbing examples of interactional injustice, from

customers as well as coworkers. Most disturbing are the examples of bullying in the


workplace, with the corresponding feelings of helplessness, shame and fear that are

experienced by those who are bullied. Workplace violence is on the rise, and, as

Soares (2003) wonders, what, ultimately, “are the consequences of working in an

environment increasingly filled with attacks on the self?” Montgomery, Panagopolou, de

Wildt & Meenks (2006) argue that increases in emotional labour, specifically surface

acting, and burnout lead to work-family interference, which occurs when the “pressures

from the work and family roles are mutually incompatible”. Montgomery et al (2006)

identify a causal relationship between increased emotional labour at work and an

increase in marital discord. Additionally, Bono & Vey (2004) indicate in their analysis

that emotional labour can be associated with poor physical and psychological health.

Bryant & Cox (2006) agree with these findings and highlight, as well, that organizational

change exacerbates the existing personal cost of emotional labour. Bryant & Cox’s

(2006) study has been seminal in moving the study of emotional labour into the realm of

organizational change management. Expanding this study of organizational

management is Miller, Considine & Garner (2007), who categorize emotions in the

workplace into five categories, which overlap and challenge existing rational

approaches to organizational life.

This literature review is by no means exhaustive; however, as determined, research has

yet to be completed to determine what impacts, if any, differences in physical location

has on the emotional labour experienced by employees. Any differences found may

suggest a need for further research into the impacts of, for example, culture,

management style, and organizational consistency. Additionally, although existing

research has concluded that employees experience some degree of emotional labour,

even if little or no external customer contact is involved, deeper analysis comparing and

contrasting the dimensions of emotional labour between employee groups may provide

insight into which dimensions produce the highest risk for employees.


Based on the identified research gaps, the following research questions were

determined:

Initial Research Questions While emotional labour has been studied throughout a variety of organizations, the

following may be construed as research gaps worth pursuing regarding the

level/intensity of emotional labour experienced:

1. Is there a difference between employees engaging in internal and external customer

contact relative to those engaging in primarily internal customer contact?

2. Given the exact same occupation(s) within an organization, are there regional

differences in the emotional labour experience?

3. Why are strategies identified to mitigate the costs of emotional labour successful?

4. Can any one strategy be applied to the same occupation within an organization?

Impacts on Initial Research Questions As indicated in the Methodology portion of this analysis (below), a survey was designed

and implemented with the intent of determining the presence and extent of emotional

labour within the study group as well as determining what strategies the study

participants employed to mitigate the personal cost of emotional labour. However,

survey results concerning mitigation strategies indicated that all three regions employed

exactly the same mitigation strategies, strategies that, as per the Commentary section

of this analysis indicates (below), generate, for the most part, increased emotional

labour. Therefore, the third and fourth research questions were modified to:

3. What strategies have been identified within the research community that aid in the

mitigation of emotional labour costs?

4. What type of strategies, given no limitations, would the study participants perceive

as aiding in mitigation of emotional labour costs?

The change in research questions enables this research analysis to examine the

presence/efficacy of existing strategies and provide illumination into the perceptions of

the study participants as they relate to desired employee benefits. Both of these

opportunities are anticipated to provide a wealth of information concerning gaps in

existing strategies, which ultimately may aid employers in mitigating employee turnover.


The research questions were determined leveraging the following social psychological

theories:

Cognitive Dissonance

Cognitive dissonance, a concept developed by social psychologist Leon Festinger

(1957) in the 1950s, refers to the mental discomfort that people experience when trying

to hold two or more contradictory beliefs at the same time. They may deal with this

discomfort by changing at least one of their inconsistent beliefs or by forming a new

belief to explain away the contradiction. Cognitive dissonance resolution concepts can

be found in Hochschild’s (1983) deep acting strategy. Ongoing cognitive dissonance

can be argued to result in the same type of emotional exhaustion that emotional

dissonance generates.

Self-Perception Theory

Self-perception theory is an account of attitude change developed by psychologist Daryl

Bem (1972). It asserts that we develop our attitudes by observing our own behavior and

concluding what attitudes must have caused them. Self-perception theory differs from

cognitive dissonance theory in that it does not hold that people experience a "negative

drive state" called "dissonance" which they seek to relieve. Instead, people simply infer

their attitudes from their own behavior in the same way that an outside observer might.

Morris & Feldman’s (1996) Frequency dimension of emotional labour is impacted by this

theory. Frequency of emotional display is impacted by the explicitness of display rules,

and how closely employees are observed to determine the appropriateness of their

emotional display. Display rules enable the employees to develop the appropriate

behaviour by observing others and concluding which attitudes generated the

appropriate behaviour. When feedback is provided concerning behaviour, this provides

another opportunity to observe behaviour and determine the appropriate attitude.


Methodology The following outlines the steps that were completed:

1) An email outlining the research proposal and asking for participants was distributed

to the Corporate Accounts Underwriting organization (Appendix B).

2) The study group was identified based on the return emails from the Corporate

Accounts Underwriting organization indicating permission to be included in the

research study.

3) A substantial body of documents relating to emotional labour was accessed and

read during this project. The reading material served as a knowledge base of

comparative research. The final research paper has synthesized the readings and

situated emotional labour concepts within the research results.

An e-learning module was developed and implemented addressing concepts related

to emotional labour. The module provided an overall explanation of what emotional

labour is, when it occurs and how it is experienced. Examples were provided to

situate the emotional labour experience. This module was developed using Adult

Education principles and design methodology. The module was considered

necessary to aid the study group in identifying aspects of their occupation that

generate emotional labour. Although completion of the learning module was not

mandatory, based on feedback from the participants, 90% of the total participant

group did complete the module. The e-learning methodology that was used was

Captivate, a Manulife-approved e-learning software. An invitation to participate in

this study (and what participation entailed) was emailed to all Analysts and

Underwriting Consultants, with an endorsement from the Underwriting Organization

Management.

4) Learning transfer from the module was measured through a series of questions

administered after the learning module to ensure that the study group understood

the concepts prior to completing the survey. Incorrect answers were provided a link

to the applicable area/concept so that the participant had an opportunity to review

why their selection was incorrect. Given this type of accelerated learning

methodology, it was anticipated that all participants who completed the module

would gain sufficient knowledge to then further participate in this research. Learning


transfer results were stored within the learning module, without recording who the

participant was. The average score was 95%.

5) A link was provided within the learning module to a survey, which was used to

measure if employees within the study group believed emotional labour was present

within their job accountabilities. The survey was also distributed through the

Research Group email address list, indicating a hyperlink to the survey. Only the

Underwriting Consultants and Analysts participating in the research were included in

the email address. Underwriting management was copied in the email, with a

notation that the email was for information purposes only. The survey was designed

using the online survey software: www.SurveyConsole.com. An introduction to the

purpose of the survey was included in the email, as well as an endorsement from the

Group Benefits Management team. The survey, provided in Appendix A, leveraged

existing surveys on emotional labour such as the Maslach Burnout Inventory

(Maslach & Jackson, 1986), Best et al (1998) Emotional Work Requirements Scale

and Brotheridge’s (2003) Emotional Labour scale. The survey employed a 5-point

Likert scale with the following anchors: never (1), rarely (2), sometimes (3), often (4),

and always (5), and the response stem: 'On an average day at work, how frequently

do you . . .’, as well as a series of questions employing a 5-point Likert scale using

strongly agree (1), agree (2), neutral (3), disagree (4), strongly disagree (5)

categories, anchoring perceptions regarding employment and hiring practices.

The survey tracked responses by region, age, gender and occupation. Participation,

at 60%, or 41 employees of the potential study group, was significant enough that

regional results did not violate confidentiality.

The survey did not ask any questions that enabled the researcher to determine who

responded. All survey results were stored using a computer independent from

Manulife Financial LAN access and results were protected with a password known

only to the researcher.

http://www.surveyconsole.com/


The survey identified/validated whether employees:

believed emotional labour is present within their accountabilities

were able to apply specific emotional labour characteristics to their occupation

identified existing strategies that were perceived to mitigate emotional labour

costs

Survey design and results On an average day at work, how frequently do you…

Deep make an effort to actually feel the emotions you are required to display to others

Deep try to actually feel the emotions you have to show as part of your job

Surface deceive people by being friendly when you are experiencing negative emotions

Surface appear to others to be experiencing deeper emotions than you feel

Surface pretend to enjoy the tasks you do

Frequency feel that management is evaluating you based on how you act

Frequency engage in a variety of tasks

Attentiveness display intense emotions in order to achieve your goals

Attentiveness pay attention to the emotions you're displaying to others

Attentiveness show negative emotions to coworkers

Attentiveness show negative emotions to management/staff outside your team

Attentiveness show a specific emotion in order to get something done

Attentiveness act in a way that hides how you really feel

Variety display different kinds of emotions

Variety express different emotions when interacting with others

Category

The first section of the Survey was designed to determine if the participant group engaged in surface and/or deep acting as well as any of the emotional labour dimensions identified by Morris & Feldman (1996): Ranking:

Never 1Rarely 2Sometimes 3Often 4Always 5

Participants were asked to rank their behaviour on a Likert scale with the following anchors:


I believe, that, at work:My behavior is usually an expression of my true inner feelings, attitudes, and beliefs.

I don't have to change my opinions (or the way I do things) in order to please someone else or win their favor.

I don’t have to act different than what I really feel to suit different people and different situations.

I don't have to imitate the behaviour of other people that I work with.

My behaviour doesn't change because I am meeting with my direct manager.

My behaviour doesn't change because I am meeting with people that have a higher job grade than me (and are not my direct manager).

I believe that when I was interviewed/when I started my position:that I understood exactly what types of behaviour/emotional displays were expected within my job accountabilities

my Manager/ Supervisor made it clear to me what the outcomes were if I did not display the expected behaviours/ emotions

The second and third section of the survey was designed to determine if the participant group felt emotional dissonance. Participants were asked to rank their beliefs on a Likert scale with the following anchors:

Strongly Agree 1Agree 2Neutral 3Disagree 4Strongly Disagree 5

A positive correlation in the first section of the survey would indicate that the participant

group believed that emotional labour was experienced within their occupation. A

positive correlation in the second and third section of the survey would indicate that the

participant group believed that they engaged in deep acting and had resolved any

emotional/cognitive dissonance regarding emotional display requirements.

Respondent statistics

The following frequency charts indicate the statistics for the participant group:

# % # %<1 year 5 24% 2 10%between 1 - 5 years 8 38% 5 25%between 5 - 10 years 3 14% 6 30%>10 years 5 24% 7 35%

21 100% 20 100%% of total group 51% 49%

ParticipationAnalyst Consultant


Female# % # % # % # %

<30 years old 2 5% 4 10% 0 0% 0 0%between 30 - 44 years old 2 5% 2 5% 4 10% 3 7%between 45 - 54 years old 0 0% 2 5% 2 5% 4 10%>55 years old 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 2 5%Total Female participant per category 4 10% 8 20% 6 15% 9 22%

Total Female participants 27 66%

Male<30 years old 3 7% 2 5% 1 2% 0 0%between 30 - 44 years old 0 0% 2 5% 2 5% 2 5%between 45 - 54 years old 0 0% 1 2% 0 0% 1 2%Total Male participant per category 3 7% 5 12% 3 7% 3 7%

Total Male participants 14 34%Total Group 41 100%

<1 year between 1 - 5 years between 5 - 10 years >10 years

The survey analysis was completed using descriptive statistics, reporting on the mean

results and indicating the interval data. Although these results are presented as

measures of central tendencies, they are also equivalent to the frequency results. All

41 participants provided a response for each question in the survey.

Figure 1: Average response, by Emotional Labour category, of first section of Survey

1 2 3 4

Participant scores

As indicated by the chart, all participants believe they engage, to a significant degree, in emotional labour. It is interesting to note that the highest score is generated in the “frequency” category, which measures the extent to which the employees believe that management evaluates them on how they act.

5

Deep Acting

Surface Acting

Frequency

Attentiveness

Variety

Average response

Ranking:Never 1Rarely 2Sometimes 3Often 4Always 5

The responses seem to indicate differences between the emotional labour dimensions.

Further analysis could provide clarity as to the reason, which might enable employers to


address specific dimensions as a way of mitigating the personal cost of emotional

labour.

Figure 2 Average response, by Emotional Labour

category and occupation, of first section of Survey

1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5

Participant scores

5

Deep Acting

Surface Acting

Frequency

Attentiveness

Variety

Consultants

Analysts

The overall average is compared to the averages produced by occupation. As shown, the Consultants exceed the average (green line) in two of the five dimensions, indicating that there are differences in the emotional labour experience. It is interesting to note that the Consultants significantly exceed the average under the Frequency dimension, which may indicate the perception of additional management monitoring due to external client contact.


The Analyst role exceeds the average under the Surface acting dimension, which may

be indicative of the power relationships experienced by this occupation.


Figure 3 Average response, by Emotional Labour

category and region of first section of Survey

1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5Participant scores

Deep Acting

Surface Acting

Frequency

Attentiveness

Variety

MontrealToronto

Waterloo

An examination of the results by region indicates regional differences in comparison to the overall average. It is interesting to note that the Waterloo region exceeds the overall average in four of the five dimensions. Further research would be required to determine why this trend exists, given that staff turnover and experience are consistent amongst regions. Ranking:


Figure 4: Analyst average response, by Emotional Labour category and region, of first section of Survey

1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5

An examination by occupation indicates differences by region.

Participant scores

Deep Acting

Surface Acting

Frequency

Attentiveness

Variety

Analysts

MontrealToronto

WaterlooRanking:


Consistent with other results where the Waterloo region exceeds the overall average, the Analyst role in Waterloo exceeds the overall average in four of five dimensions.


Figure 5

Consultant average response, by Emotional Labour category and region, of first section of Survey

1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5Participant scores

Deep Acting

Surface Acting

Frequency

Attentiveness

Variety

Consultants

MontrealToronto

Waterloo


The Consultant role in Montreal exceeds the ain all five dimensions. What is interesting is the relativelyhigher score in the Attentiveness category, which may indicate a perception within the Montreal Consultants that they are closely monitored regarding the appropriate emotional display.

verage

This analysis indicates that there are occupational and regional differences in the level

of emotional labour experienced by the Analysts and Consultants of the Manulife

Financial Group Benefits Corporate Accounts Underwriting department.


The second and third section of the Survey was intended to measure the presence of

emotional dissonance.

Figure 6 Frequency of responses of second and third section of Survey

I believe, that, at work:Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree

Strongly Disagree Total

My behavior is usually an expression of my true inner feelings, attitudes, and beliefs. 8 21 5 6 1 41

I don't have to change my opinions (or the way I do things) in order to please someone else or win their favor. 8 10 7 15 1 41

I don’t have to act different than what I really feel to suit different people and different situations. 3 9 10 18 1 41

I don't have to imitate the behaviour of other people that I work with. 10 17 8 6 0 41

My behaviour doesn't change because I am meeting with my direct manager. 7 14 9 7 4 41

My behaviour doesn't change because I am meeting with people that have a higher job grade than me (and are not my direct manager). 8 18 9 5 1 41

I believe that when I was interviewed/when I started my position:that I understood exactly what types of behaviour/emotional displays were expected within my job accountabilities 6 18 10 6 1 41

my Manager/ Supervisor made it clear to me what the outcomes were if I did not display the expected behaviours/ emotions 0 4 13 17 7 41

It is interesting to note the number of participants who responded neutrally. It is

possible that the research participants did not truly perceive that the individual results

would remain confidential, and therefore, while wishing to participate in the study,

responded in a “protectionist” frame of mind. While fewer participants disagreed (29%)

than agreed with the belief statements, the fact that a percentage disagreed with the

belief statements indicates the presence of emotional dissonance within the Corporate

Accounts Underwriting organization.


Analysis by occupation indicates differences between the Analyst and the Consultant

role.

Figure 7 Frequency of responses of second and third section of Survey by Occupation

ies to select the “neutral” option, which

I believe, that, at work: Analyst Consultant Analyst Consultant Analyst Consultant Analyst Consultant Analyst Consultant

My behavior is usually an expression of my truebeliefs. 5 0 3 3 0 1

I don't have to change my opinions (or the waysomeone else or win their favor. 5 2 6 9 0 1

I don’t have to act different than what I really fedifferent situations. 7 3 6 12 1 0

I don't have to imitate the behaviour of other p 2 4 2 0 0

My behaviour doesn't change because I am me 1 2 5 2 2

My behaviour doesn't change because I am mehigher job grade than me (and are not my direc 8 1 1 4 0 1

I believe that when I was interviewed/when I

that I understood exactly what types of behavioexpected within my job accountabilities 6 4 3 3 0 1

my Manager/ Supervisor made it clear to me wnot display the expected behaviours/ emotions 5 12 2 5 0 0

Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Strongly DisagreeDisagree

inner feelings, attitudes, and 4 4 9 12

I do things) in order to please 4 4 6 4

el to suit different people and 0 3 7 2

eople that I work with. 4 6 7 10 6

eting with my direct manager. 2 5 7 7 8

eting with people that have a t manager). 2 6 10 8

started my position:

ur/emotional displays were 2 4 10 8

hat the outcomes were if I did 3 1 11 2

may indicate less ambivalence from the Underwriting Consultants regarding survey

confidentiality.

The Consultant responses show fewer tendenc


Figure 8 Frequency of Analyst responses of second and third section of Survey by Region

I believe, that, at work: Waterloo Toronto Montreal Waterloo Toronto Montreal Waterloo Toronto Montreal Waterloo Toronto Montreal Waterloo Toronto Montreal

My behavior is usually an expression of my true inner feelings, attitudes, and beliefs. 3 1 0 4 2 3 3 0 2 3 0 0 0 0 0

I don't have to change my opinions (or the way I do things) in order to please someone else or win their favor. 2 1 1 3 1 2 4 0 1 4 1 1 0 0 0

I don’t have to act different than what I really feel to suit different people and different situations. 0 0 0 3 1 3 5 1 1 5 0 1 0 1 0

I don't have to imitate the behaviour of other people that I work with. 1 1 2 5 1 1 4 1 1 3 0 1 0 0 0

My behaviour doesn't change because I am meeting with my direct manager. 0 2 0 4 0 3 7 0 1 0 1 1 2 0 0

My behaviour doesn't change because I am meeting with people that have a higher job grade than me (and are not my direct manager). 0 2 0 6 1 3 6 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0

I believe that when I was interviewed/when I started my position:

that I understood exactly what types of behaviour/emotional displays were expected within my job accountabilities 1 1 0 5 2 3 5 0 1 2 0 1 0 0 0

my Manager/ Supervisor made it clear to me what the outcomes were if I did not display the expected behaviours/ emotions 0 0 0 1 1 1 7 2 2 3 0 2 2 0 0

Neutral Disagree Strongly DisagreeStrongly Agree Agree

An examination by occupation and region indicates regional differences. The Waterloo Analysts show the highest

frequency of selecting either a neutral or disagreement option, indicating a higher degree emotional dissonance relative to

the other two regions. However, the Waterloo Analysts also selected the neutral option more often relative to the other

two regions, which may indicate a higher level of ambivalence concerning confidentiality within this region.

Consistent with the overall responses, the Consultants in all 3 regions are less predisposed to select a “neutral” option.

I believe, that, Montreal

My behavior isbeliefs. 0

I don't have to csomeone else o 0

I don’t have to different situations 0

I don't have to im 0

My behaviour d 1

My behaviour dhigher job grade tha 1

I believe that

that I understoodexpected within m 1

my Manager/ Supernot display the 1

gree

search Project – Kris Ellis – 2410609 Page: 26

Figure 9 Frequency of Consultant responses of second and third section of Survey by Region

at work: Waterloo Toronto Montreal Waterloo Toronto Montreal Waterloo Toronto Montreal Waterloo Toronto Montreal Waterloo Toronto

usually an expression of my true inner feelings, attitudes, and 2 2 0 7 3 2 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 1

hange my opinions (or the way I do things) in order to please r win their favor. 1 3 0 2 2 0 1 0 1 4 3 2 1 0

act different than what I really feel to suit different people and . 0 3 0 1 1 0 2 1 0 6 3 3 0 0

itate the behaviour of other people that I work with. 1 5 0 6 2 2 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0

oesn't change because I am meeting with my direct manager. 1 4 0 5 0 2 0 1 0 2 3 0 1 0

oesn't change because I am meeting with people that have a n me (and are not my direct manager). 1 5 0 5 1 2 1 0 0 2 2 0 0 0

when I was interviewed/when I started my position:

exactly what types of behaviour/emotional displays were y job accountabilities 2 2 0 5 1 2 0 4 0 2 1 0 0 0

visor made it clear to me what the outcomes were if I did expected behaviours/ emotions 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 6 4 2 2 2

Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disa

Consistent with the analyst responses, the Waterloo Underwriting Consultants selected a “disagree” option more often

than the other two regions.

MAIS 701 Re


Based on the overall responses to these sections of the survey, the results indicate the

presence of emotional dissonance within the Corporate Accounts Underwriting

organization.

Emotional Labour strategies

Figure 10 Emotional Labour strategies by category

The final analysis concerns the

strategies available to mitigate

the cost of emotional labour.

As previously noted, the

strategies identified by the

participant group did not vary

enough to enable the group to

rank the efficacy of the

strategies:

The strategies that were included under the category “emotional detachment” include:

Don't think about it Withdraw Don't interact with coworkers Zone out Hide it Stay quiet Hold it in

There was no significant deviance between occupation and region regarding identified

strategies.

A review of suggested strategies based on existing research (Bono & Vey (2005);

Bryant & Cox (2006); Montgomery et al (2006); Meier, Mastracci, & Wilson (2006);


Brotheridge & Lee (2003), Morris & Feldman (1996)) indicates that the primary

strategies concern reducing the level of emotional dissonance:

Clear expression of display rules

Leadership that expresses clear vision and positive expectations for performance

Managerial and supervisor training concerning awareness of their influence on

employees’ emotional experiences

Clear job autonomy

Hire employees with the emotional “fit” required for the job

Additional strategies include:

The ability to “decompress” before leaving work

Education concerning work-life balance

Shift to transformational leadership styles

Placing an organizational price to the skill of managing emotional labour

Upon completion of the survey, the participant group was asked the following question:

If you were given the opportunity to suggest to management some coping

strategies for emotional exhaustion/burnout, and money and time were no

object, what would you suggest? Your answers will be summarized, and

confidentiality will be maintained.

Overwhelmingly, the responses indicate a strong desire for job autonomy, which has

been identified in current research as a key mitigation of emotional exhaustion, and the

ability to personally manage work/family pressures:

Limit overtime hours

Additional “mental health” days

Ability to purchase additional days (vacation, mental health)

Work from home

Leave of Absences (for 1 month maximum, for example)

Work/Share arrangement


Additional suggestions, which are supported by current research, indicated a need to be

provided a more transformational leadership that recognizes work/family pressures and

employee involvement in their occupations, environment and physical and mental

health:

Gym subsidy

Knowledgeable backup support

More detailed and supportive communication from management

Meal coupons (to provide meal for a family when the employee is working late)

Personal development courses

Implications for research Overall, the results point to the following:

The survey participants perceive that emotional labour is present in their

occupations

The degree of emotional labour varies by occupation and region

These results, however, should be viewed in light of the following:

1. 60% of the total possible employee grouping participated in the survey and

therefore, the results could change should a greater participation rate be

accomplished

2. The employee grouping has never participated in a survey other than the

standard employee survey and therefore, may be suspicious concerning how

confidential the results remain

Further research should examine the implications of the various emotional labour

dimensions, why the results differ by occupation and region and if interactional injustice

is present within the internal/external client contact. Additional research should

examine the importance of other impacts to the presence/degree of emotional labour for

these employees, such as age, gender and organizational culture. It is also important

not to ignore the emotional labour impacts on management, and further research


concerning these impacts on Underwriting management may serve to illuminate

additional explanations for the outcome differences illustrated in this study.

Conclusion This work contributes to the existing research on emotional labour in several ways.

Primarily, it has established the presence of emotional labour within the Group Benefits

Corporate Account Underwriting area, and has confirmed that, for this research group,

the presence of external client contact has impact on the degree of emotional labour

experienced. Additionally, this research has highlighted a need for further study to

determine why a difference in physical location can impact the degree of emotional

labour experienced.

As indicated in various research outcomes, performing emotional labour may have

potentially significant personal and organizational costs. It is important to understand

how emotional labour impacts various occupational functions, in the hopes that human

resource practices can be better aligned with personal and organizational needs.


References Allison, M. & Willmott, H., (2002), Identity regulation as organisational control: producing

the appropriate individual. Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 39, No. 5, pp 619 – 644

Adelmann P.K., (1995), Emotional labor as a potential source of job stress. In SL

Sauter & LR Murphy (Eds) Organizational risk factors for job stress, Washington: American Psychological Association, (pp. 371-381)

Anderson B.A, Provis C. & Chappel S.J., (2002), Coping strategies in the performance

of emotional labour, Paper presented at the Council for Australian University Tourism and Hospitality Education (CAUTHE) Promaco.

Ashforth, B. E. & Humphrey, R. H., (1993), Emotional Labor in Service Roles: The

Influence of identity, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 18, No. 1, pp. 88-115.

Baba, W., Jamal, M., & Tourigny, L., (1998), Work and mental health: A decade of

Canadian research, Canadian Psychology, 39, 94-107. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A., (1986), The moderator-mediator variable distinction in

social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.

Bem, D. J., (1972), Self-perception theory, In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in

Experimental Social psychology, Vol. 6: 1-62. Bem, D. J., & Funder, D. C., (1978), Predicting more of the people more of the time:

Assessing the personality of situations, Psychological Review, 85: 485-500. Bem, D. J. & McConnell, H. K., (1970), Testing the self-perception explanation of

dissonance phenomena: On the salience of premanipulation attitudes, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 14: 23-31.

Best, R.G., Downey, R. G., & Jones, R., (1998), Job burnout: A dysfunctional

consequence of contextual performance, A working paper. Bolton, S.C. & Boyd, C., (2003), Trolley dolly or skilled emotion manager? Moving On

from Hochschild’s Managed Heart, Work, Employment & Society, Volume 17(2): 289–308


Bono J.E. & Vey M.A., (2005), Toward understanding emotional management at work: A quantitative review of emotional labor research, In CE Hartel & WJ Zerbe (Eds) Emotions in organizational behavior, Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, (pp. 213-233)

Bos, R. T. & Willmott, H., (2001), Towards a post dualistic business ethics: interweaving

reason and emotion in working life, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 38, No. 6, pp769 –793.

Brehm, J. W. & Cohen, A. R., (1962), Explorations in cognitive dissonance. New York:

Wiley Brennan, K., 2006, The Managed Teacher: Emotional Labour, Education and

Technology, Educational Insights, Retrieved January 1, 2007 from: http://www.cust.educ.ubc.ca/wstudents/tsed2/EI102/pdfs/Brennan.pdf

Brotheridge C.M. & Grandey A.A., (2002), Emotional labour and burnout: comparing two

perspectives of people at work, Journal of Vocational Behavior, 60(1): 17-39. Brotheridge C.M. & Lee R.T., (2003), Development and validation of the Emotional

Labour Scale, Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology , 76, :365-379

Bryant, M. and Cox, J..W., (2006), The Expression of Suppression: Loss and Emotional

Labour in Narratives of Organizational Change, Journal of Management and Organization, 12; 2: 116-130

Cordes, C. L., & Dougherty, T. W., (1993), A review and integration of research on job

burnout, Academy of Management Review, 18, 621-656. Copranzano R, Weiss H.M. & Elias S.M., (2004), The impact of display rules and

emotional labor on psychological well-being at work, In PL Perrewe and DC Ganster (Eds) Emotional and Physiological Processes and Positive Intervention Strategies, (3: 45-89).

Cropanzano, R., & Byrne, Z.S., (2000), The Relationship of Emotional Exhaustion to

Work Attitudes, Job Performance Ratings, and Organizational Citizenship Behaviors, Presented as a poster session for the fifteenth annual conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology in New Orleans, LA, April 13 -16, 2000.

Dent, M., Burke, W. & Greene, R., (1991), Emotional Labour and Renal Dialysis:

nursing and the labour process, Paper presented to the 9th Labour Process Conference, Manchester, April.

http://www.cust.educ.ubc.ca/wstudents/tsed2/EI102/pdfs/Brennan.pdf


Dijk, P., Brown, A.K., (2006), Emotional labour and negative job outcomes: An evaluation of the mediating role of emotional dissonance, Journal of Management and Organization, Lyndfield, Sep 2006, Vol. 12, Iss. 2; p. 101:116

Ehrenreich, B., Fear of falling: the inner life of the middle class, New York: Pantheon

Books. Eisenhardt, K.M., (1989), Building theories from case study research, Academy of

Management Review, Vol. 14, No. 4, pp. 532-550. Festinger, L., (1957), A theory of cognitive dissonance, Stanford: Stanford University

Press. Fiebig G.V. & Kramer M.W., (1998), A framework for the study of emotions in

organizational contexts, Management Communication Quarterly, 11(4): 536-572. Fineman, S., (2003), Emotional Labour – A done concept? Paper presented at ESRC Seminar, Loughborough. Foy, N., (1985), Ambivalence, Hypocrisy, and Cynicism: aids to Organizational change,

New Management Vol. 2, No. 4, pp. 49-53. Freedman, J. L., (1969), Role playing: Psychology by consensus, Journal of Personality

and Social Psychology, 13: 107-1 14. Freudenberger, H. J., (1983). Burnout: Contemporary issues, trends, and concerns, In

B. Farber (Ed.), Stress and burnout (pp. 23-28), New York: Pergamon.B Frost, P., (2003). Toxic emotions at work: how compassionate managers handle pain

and conflict, Harvard Business School Press Grandey A.A., (2000). Emotion regulation in the workplace: A new way to

conceptualize emotional labor, Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 5(1): 95-110.

Grandey A.A., (2003), When 'the show must go on': Surface and deep acting as

determinants of emotional exhaustion and peer-rated service delivery, Academy of Management Journal, 46(1): 86-96.

Green, D., (1974), Dissonance and self-perception analyses of "forced compliance":

When two theories make competing predictions, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 29: 81-28.

Guerrier, Y. & Adib, A., (2003), Work at leisure and leisure at work: A study of the

emotional labour of tour reps, Human Relations, Vol. 56, No. 11.


Harmon-Jones E. & Mills J., (1999), An introduction to cognitive dissonance theory and an overview of current perspectives on the theory, In E Harmon-Jones & J Mills (Eds.) Cognitive dissonance: progress on a pivotal theory in social psychology , Washington D.C: American Psychological Association, (pp. 3-21)

Harris, L.C., (2002), The Emotional Labour of Barristers: An exploration of emotional

labour by status professionals, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 39, No. 4, pp. 553-584.

Hochschild, A., (1983), The Managed Heart: Commercialization of Human Feeling,

University of California Press International Journal of Work Organisation and Emotion, (IJWOE) research papers,

Retrieved January 1, 2007 from: http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=106&year=2006&vol=1&issue=3

James N., (1989), Emotional labour: Skill and work in the social regulation of feelings.

Sociological Review, 37: 15-42. Jansz J. & Timmers, M., (2002), Emotional Dissonance: When the experience of an

emotion jeopardizes an individual's identity, Theory and Psychology, 12(1): 79-95.

Kruml S.M. & Geddes D., (2000), Exploring the dimensions of emotional labor: The

heart of Hochschild's work, Management Communication Quarterly, 14(1): 8-49. Kruml S.M. & Geddes D., (2000), Catching fire without burning out: Is there an ideal

way to perform emotional labor, Westport: Quorum Books. Korczynski, M., (2003), Communities of Coping: Collective Emotional Labour in Service

Work, Organization, Vol. 10, No. 1, pp. 55-79. Lee, R. T. & Ashforth, B. E., (1996), A meta-analytic examination of the correlates of the

three dimensions of burnout, Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 123-133. Leidner, R., (1999), Emotional labour in Service Work, Annals of the American

Academy of Political and Social Science Journal, 561: 81-95 Mann S., (1999), Emotion at work: To what extent are we expressing, suppressing, or

faking it? European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 8: 347-369. Maslach, C, & Jackson, S. E., (1986), Maslach burnout inventory: Manual (2nd ed.), Palo

Alto,CA, Consulting Psychologists Press.

http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=106&year=2006&vol=1&issue=3

http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=106&year=2006&vol=1&issue=3


McGovern, P., Stiles, P. & Hope Hailey, V., (1997), The managerial career after downsizing, Work, Employment and Society.

Meier, K., Mastracci, S., & Wilson, K., (2006), Gender and Emotional Labour in Public

Organizations: An Empirical Examination of the Link to Performance, Public Administration Review, 66; 6: 899-909

Meyerson, D.E., (2000), If Emotions were Honoured: A Cultural Analysis in Fineman, S.

(Ed) Emotion in Organizations (2nd Edition), Sage, London Miller, K., Considine, J., & Garner, J., (2007), Let Me Tell You about My Job: Exploring

the Terrain of Emotion in the Workplace, Management Communication Quarterly, Vol. 20, No.3: 231-260

Montgomery, A.J., Panagopolou, E., de Wildt, M. & Meenks, E., (2006), Work-family

Interference, Emotional Labour and Burnout, Journal of Managerial Psychology, 21: 36-51

Morris J.A. & Feldman D.C., (1997), Managing emotions in the workplace, Journal of

Managerial Issues, 9(3): 257-274. O’Neill, H. & Lenn, D., (1995), Voices of survivors: words that downsizing CEOs should

hear, The Academy of Management Executive, Vol. 9, No. 4. Pierce, J.L., (1999). Emotional labour among paralegals, Annals of the American

Academy of Political and Social Science Journal, 561: 127-141 Pugliesi K., (1999), The consequences of emotional labor: Effects on work stress, job

satisfaction, and well-being, Motivation Emotion, 23: 125-54. Rafaeli, A. & Sutton, R., (1987), Expression of Emotion as part of the Work Role,

Academy of Management Review, Vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 23-37. Rafaeli, A. & Sutton, R.I., (1990), Busy stores and demanding customers: How do they

affect the display of positive emotion? Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 33, pp. 623-637.

Ross, M. & Shulman, R. F., (1973), Increasing the salience of initial attitudes:

Dissonance versus self-perception theory, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 28, 138-144.

Sachs, J., Blackmore, J., (1998), You never show you can’t cope: women in school

leadership roles managing their emotions, Gender and Education Journal, 10, 3: 265-279


Sims, D. (2003), Between the millstones: A narrative account of the vulnerability of middle managers’ storytelling, Human Relations, Vol. 56, No.10

Soares, A., (2003), Tears at Work: Gender, Interaction and Emotional Labour, Just

Labour (Vol. 2, Spring 2003), Retrieved January 1, 2007 from: http://www.yorku.ca/julabour/volume2/soares_justlabour.PDF

Snydcr, M., (1974), Self-monitoring of expressive behavior. Journal of Personality and

Social Psychology, 30(4): 526-537. Snyder, M. & Ebbesen, E., (1972), Dissonance awareness: A test of dissonance theory

versus self-perception theory, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 8:502-517.

Sturdy, A., (2001), Servicing societies – Colonisation, Control, Contradiction and

Contestation, In Sturdy, A., Grugalis, I. & Willmot, H Customer service, empowerment and entrapment, London: Palgrave.

Taylor, S. & Tyler, M., (2000), Emotional labour and sexual difference in the airline

industry, Work, Employment and Society, Vol. 14, No. 1, Pp. 77-95. Theodosius, C., (2006), Recovering Emotion from Emotion Management, Sociology; 40;

893-909 Thompson, P. & Ackroyd, S., (1995), All quiet on the Workplace Front? A Critique of

Recent Trends in British Industrial Sociology, Sociology, Vol. 29, No. 4, pp. 615-33.

Van Maanen, J., (1991), The Smile Factory: Work at Disneyland. In P. J. Frost et al

(eds.) Reframing Organisational Culture. London: Sage. Van Maanen, J. & Kunda, G., (1989), Real Feelings: Emotional Expression and

Organisational Culture, Research in Organisational Behavior, Vol. 11, pp. 43-103.

Waldron, V.R., (1999), Communication practices of followers, members and protégés:

the case of upward influence tactics, In M. Roloff (ed.), Communication Yearbook 22. Newbury Park, C.A: Sage p. 251-299

Wallace, Ruth A. & Alison Wolf, (1995), Contemporary Sociological Theory: Continuing

the Classical Tradition, fourth edition, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, Prentice Hall

Watson, T., (1994), In Search of Management, London: Routledge.

http://www.yorku.ca/julabour/volume2/soares_justlabour.PDF


Wharton, A.S., (1999), The Psychosocial consequences of emotional labour, Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science Journal: 561: 158-176

Whittington, R., (2002), Putting Giddens into Action: social systems and managerial

agency, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 29, No. 6, pp 693 – 712. Willmott, H., (1997), Rethinking Management and Managerial Work: Capitalism, Control

and Subjectivity, Human Relations, Vol. 50, No. 11, pp 1329 – 1359. Zerbe, W., (2000), Emotional Dissonance and Employee Well-Being, In Ashkansasy, N.

M. Hartel, C.E.J, & Zerbe, W.J. (Eds.) Emotions in the Workplace, Quorum Books.


Appendix A - Survey on Emotional Labour


Illustrated below is the survey used during this research project:


Appendix B - E-mail soliciting research participants


As part of my Masters degree from Athabasca University, one of the requirements is to complete a research project. The research project that I’m doing is on emotional labour, which is the management of feelings and the expression of emotion at work. The research project, titled: Emotional Labour: Can worker physical location and type of client contact make a difference? entails:

• Design and implementation of a learning module on emotional labour • Design and implementation of a survey concerning the presence of emotional labour

within a specific occupation • Identification and ranking of strategies to mitigate the cost of emotional labour

I’m hoping that you will agree to participate in this research project. Your tasks, if you choose to participate, will involve completing the:

• learning module (it will be online and last no more than 20 minutes) • survey on the presence of emotional labour in your job (no more than 10 minutes) • survey on ranking the strategies to mitigate emotional labour (no more than 10 minutes)

Why am I doing this research project? Since learning about emotional labour, I have been very interested in how it affects us physically and emotionally. Part of the reason I chose this project was to determine if emotional labour is present in the Corporate Account underwriting community, and if so, does anything impact it. Identifying why emotional labour impacts are different can help us manage the physical and emotional costs of emotional labour, helping us lead a more balanced worklife. The survey will ask you questions concerning how you act, from an emotional perspective, at work. If any part of this research project causes you to experience detrimental emotions, please remember that Manulife Financial provides EAP counselling through the Reslience program. You can contact an EAP counsellor through the usual contact process. You can review this contact process by clicking on the EAP link: http://mfcentral/mfcentral/hrinfo/index/0,,divId=26&langId=1&locId=1&navId=421004,00.html. All contact with the counsellor will remain confidential and all costs will be borne by Manulife Financial. The organization providing the counsellor further guarantees that all information and participation in counselling is confidential and individual results are not disclosed to Manulife Financial. In order to neutralize any harm to any participant, I guarantee not to track survey responses in such a way that individual respondents are identified, and all data will be aggregated to a level that ensures specific employees remain anonymous. All survey results and analysis will be kept completely confidential, and all survey results and analysis will be destroyed upon completion of this project. You will also receive a copy of the final project submission. Underwriting Management has approved this research project, provided permission to approach you regarding participation in this project, and will also receive a copy of the final project submission. However, Underwriting Management or Manulife Financial, as a corporate entity, will not receive any individual survey information, nor does the granted permission require you to participate in this project. To participate in this project, please email me with your acceptance no later than May 17, 2007: Please copy the following paragraph into the email: I have read and understood the information contained in this letter, and I agree to participate in the study. My agreement to participate is predicated on the understanding that I may refuse to answer certain questions, and I may withdraw during the data collection period from this study by simply not completing the learning module and/or surveys.

http://mfcentral/mfcentral/hrinfo/index/0,,divId=26&langId=1&locId=1&navId=421004,00.html_


Please note: Underwriting management, through this email, is being informed that the previously discussed research project is underway. However, Underwriting management will not participate in this project. Please remember, all participation is voluntary! If you do not wish to participate, simply delete the emails pertaining to this research project, and do not complete the learning module or surveys. All information will be held confidential, except when legislation or a professional code of conduct requires that it be reported. If you have any questions or concerns regarding this project, please don’t hesitate to contact either my academic advisor at Athabasca University, Dr. Cathy Bray: [email protected] or me. Thanks for you help and participation in my project!

mailto:[email protected]_


Appendix C – Statistical Information


Survey Question Mean Standard Deviation Standard Error

make an effort to actually feel the emotions you are required to display to others 3.024 [2.788 - 3.260] 0.78 0.12

feel that management is evaluating you based on how you act 3.69 [3.428 - 3.953] 0.869 0.134

show negative emotions to coworkers 2.452 [2.219 - 2.686] 0.772 0.119

pay attention to the emotions you're displaying to others 3.786 [3.579 - 3.992] 0.682 0.105

show a specific emotion in order to get something done 3.19 [2.897 - 3.483] 0.969 0.149

appear to others to be experiencing deeper emotions than you feel 2.381 [2.090 - 2.672] 0.962 0.148

try to actually feel the emotions you have to show as part of your job 2.881 [2.621 - 3.141] 0.861 0.133

engage in a variety of tasks 4.22 [3.941 - 4.498] n = 41 0.909 0.142

show negative emotions to management/staff outside your team 1.833 [1.603 - 2.064] 0.762 0.118

display intense emotions in order to achieve your goals 2.405 [2.106 - 2.704] 0.989 0.153

Confidence Interval @ 95%

n = 42

n=42

Illustrated below is the Survey statistical information:

deceive people by being friendly when you are experiencing negative emotions 2.619 [2.361 - 2.877] 0.854 0.132

display different kinds of emotions 3.024 [2.755 - 3.294] n = 41 0.88 0.137

really try to feel the emotions you have to show as part of your job 2.942 [2.694 - 3.211] 0.854 0.132

act in a way that hides how you really feel 2.786 [2.549 - 3.022] 0.782 0.121

pretend to enjoy the tasks you do 2.707 [2.458 - 2.956] 0.814 0.127

express different emotions when interacting with others 3.244 [2.964 - 3.524] 0.916 0.143

My behavior is usually an expression of my true inner feelings, attitudes, and beliefs. 2.286 [1.978 - 2.594] 1.019 0.157

I don't have to change my opinions (or the way I do things) in order to please someone else or win their favor.

2.81 [2.442 - 3.177] 1.215 0.187

I don’t have to act different than what I really feel to suit different people and different situations. 3.143 [2.833 - 3.453] 1.026 0.158

I don't have to imitate the behaviour of other people that I work with. 2.286 [1.978 - 2.594] 1.019 0.157

My behaviour doesn't change because I am meeting with my direct manager. 2.69 [2.322 - 3.059] 1.22 0.188

My behaviour doesn't change because I am meeting with people that have a higher job grade than me (and are not my direct manager).

2.375 [2.048 - 2.702] n = 40 1.055 0.167

that I understood exactly what types of behaviour/emotional displays were expected within my job accountabilities

2.524 [2.202 - 2.846] 1.065 0.164

my Manager/Supervisor made it clear to me what the outcomes were if I did not display the expected behaviours/emotions

3.643 [3.377 - 3.909] 0.879 0.136

n = 42

n = 42

n = 41

n = 42


Appendix D – Environmental Analysis


The Group Benefits division of Manulife Financial is ranked 2nd in Canada based

on volume of premium. This division, employing approximately 4,000

employees, has a business presence in the majority of provinces in Canada.

Employee job functions include Underwriting, Client Management, Premium

Administration, Member Administration, Technology support and Learning

Development. In 2001, Manulife Financial and John Hancock merged into one

organization, with John Hancock’s Canadian division, Maritime Life, incorporating

into the Manulife Financial branding. Prior to the integration with Maritime Life,

the Corporate Accounts Underwriting department consisted of two regions:

Ontario and Montreal. With the integration, a third region, Toronto, was added.

The typical job description for the Group Benefits Corporate Accounts

Underwriting organization, based on the Roles & Structure information provided

on the Group Benefits website, consists of the following requirements:

Prepares recommendations for risk assessment and establishing pricing

for group plans

Responds to plan sponsor inquiries relating to pricing, experience analysis

Ensures appropriate non-standard risk assessment and pricing of group

plans

Ensures plan sold and plan design can be administered

Provides day to day technical product support and training to the field

Provides accurate and appropriate risk and pricing assessments

Establishes and maintains internal and external relationships to impact

and influence complex business decisions

Coaches staff in day to day operations

The Waterloo and Toronto Underwriting organizations report to a different Vice

President than does the Montreal Underwriting organization, which generates

concerns regarding communication flows and consistency.


The Underwriting analyst role has, for the past six years, experienced high staff

turnover relative to other underwriting roles. This turnover has been due to a

variety of reasons, such as: changes in technology and job

expectations/accountabilities, changes in management, and opportunities for

promotion within the organization. Additionally, post merger, the Toronto region

comprised only Maritime Life employees. In the subsequent years, staff turnover

has resulted in a number of Underwriting Consultants not affiliated with the

Maritime Life culture.

The Corporate Accounts Underwriting Departments are physically located within

open plan offices, with standard privacy walls separating the cubicles. While this

design facilitates communication between the employees, it also distracts the

employees during high concentration periods. Manulife Financial floor/office

space guidelines have been implemented inconsistently within the three offices,

with the Waterloo office experiencing smaller floor space allocations.

The chairs that the employees use are ergonomically designed in accordance

with Manulife standards. Any ergonomic tools required by the employees are

identified by the employees, and approved by management, subject to

ergonomic assessment. The overhead lighting is fluorescent, which, while

adequate, generates shadows in the work areas towards the evening hours.

Most of the employees have lamps on their desks to brighten their work

environment. Manulife Financial guidelines concerning reduction of energy in the

summer months have not been consistently implemented. The Waterloo office is

required to close the window blinds in the summer, generating a darker

environment.

The Corporate Accounts Underwriting Department has a full learning centre

available to them for training needs, with notebooks available that have

expanded memory and fast math processors. Using notebooks for training


enables the Learning Department to provide more concurrent training for a

variety of different learning needs within the organization.

All employees are assigned either desktop or notebook computers based on their

desired choice in conjunction with work guidelines. New employees within the

department are provided with computers meeting current technological standards

as defined by Manulife. Existing employees must retain the computers originally

assigned to them until their ‘refresh’ date, which is usually five years after

computer assignment. This requirement is enforced regardless of changing

technological needs. Computer skill-sets vary between employees, and range

from beginner to expert categories in Word and Excel. Most of the applications

used by the Corporate Accounts Underwriting organization are designed outside

of the Underwriting organization, but using the Underwriting organization as

subject matter experts.

An Undergraduate degree is the predominant level of education within the

Corporate Accounts Underwriting organization.

These charts illustrate the average length of time the

participant group has been employed at Manulife

Financial, and the gender/age bands relative to

employment length:

<1 year 17%between 1 - 5 years 32%between 5 - 10 years 22%>10 years 29%

<1 year between 1 - 5 years between 5 - 10 years >10 years<30 years old 12% 15% 2% 0%between 30 - 44 years old 5% 10% 15% 12%between 45 - 54 years old 0% 7% 5% 12%>55 years old 0% 0% 0% 5%

Female <1 year between 1 - 5 years between 5 - 10 years >10 years<30 years old 5% 10% 0% 0%between 30 - 44 years old 5% 5% 10% 7%between 45 - 54 years old 0% 5% 5% 10%>55 years old 0% 0% 0% 5%Male<30 years old 7% 5% 2% 0%between 30 - 44 years old 0% 5% 5% 5%between 45 - 54 years old 0% 2% 0% 2%


The Corporate Accounts Underwriting organization is segregated into “Job

grades”, with corresponding salary grades. In 2003, a Job Family career

progression was developed and implemented with the Underwriting organization.

Within this career progression is a requirement, for the analysts, to gain risk

assessment and external client support skill sets prior to being promoted to an

Underwriting Consultant role. At the present time, gaining these skill sets

requires the Underwriting Analysts to apply for and be successful at Underwriting

job postings outside of the Corporate Account environment.

The primary measurement of employee satisfaction is the annual Employee

Satisfaction Survey, which is completed at approximately the same time as the

annual performance and salary reviews. The 2006 Employee Satisfaction

Survey resulted in negative trending within the Underwriting organization, with

significantly lower scores compared to the overall average in questions such as:

My manager treats employees with respect My manager inspires trust and confidence.

My manager takes appropriate action on employee input and feedback.

My manager keeps me informed about decisions that affect me.

My manager encourages me to come up with new ideas to improve the way I do my job.

My manager lets me know that my work contributions are valued and appreciated.

My manager provides an appropriate amount of feedback on my performance (both formally and informally).

My manager provides meaningful feedback (positive and negative) on my performance.

My manager supports on-the-job opportunities for learning and development.

My manager supports the personal development plans we've established.

On an on-going basis, my manager demonstrates good people management skills.

My manager differentiates performance in my department

My manager works with me to set clear and measurable objectives.


Appendix E – Emotional Labour Learning Module

MAIS 701 Research Project – Kris Ellis – 2410609 51 Page:

MAIS 701 Re 54

search Project – Kris Ellis – 2410609 Page:

description of the project and its...

Documents