Emotions in the Workplace: Detrimental or Instrumental

EMOTIONS IN THE WORKPLACE: DETRIMENTAL OR INSTRUMENTAL

Crystal Holman

July 2015

Southern New Hampshire University

Abstract

Until recently, the idea of a successful workplace was one nearly void of emotion and heavily run on rationality. Therefore little attention was given to the influence of emotions on the workplace and organizational behavior. Because it is almost impossible to separate people from their emotions, organizations are now beginning to consider the negatives and positives of applying emotional intelligence to aid in effectively managing the inevitable presence of emotions within their organizations. I will examine both the negative and positive implications of displaying emotions in the workplace, some elements that may hinder effective management and offer some suggestions that can aid in balancing the emotional climate.

        Keywords:  emotional intelligence, emotion regulation, organizational behavior, displayed emotions

EMOTIONS IN THE WORKPLACE: DETRIMENTAL OR INSTRUMENTAL

I agree with Paul Muchinsky (2000) and his suggestion that because the core of the human experience is so centered on feelings and emotions and because we spend so much of our lives engaged in work, it only makes sense that we rely on practices and theories concerned with the roles of emotions in the workplace. It is puzzling to me that the topic of emotions in OB has just recently started gaining attention because it seems so common-sense to accept that as human beings, we will certainly bring emotions into everything we do. It’s important for managers to find a way to detect and manage emotional cues and information. Robbins and Judge (2015) define the ability to do this as emotional intelligence (EI). Emotions have often been viewed as taboo and uninvited in the work environment. Through the use of emotional intelligence, it may be possible to bring a more favorable outlook to the use of emotions in the workplace.

To suppress?

Some organizations can use emotions to control employees, leaving the employee with a fear of perceived weakness if they show an unfavorable reaction, as was with the case study involving Laura and her boss’s use of fear and anger. Robbins and Judge (2015) suggest that this perception can be contributed to the suggestion that the demonstration or even experience of emotion can make us seem weak, brittle or irrational. Because people want to avoid being viewed in that way, they tend to keep their emotions in check. Research suggests that in the U. S. it is expected that we display positive emotions while suppressing negative ones (Robbins & Judge, 2015, p.102). Maybe this can be seen as a measure of protecting employees. It seems somewhat understandable to me given that emotions can be linked to attitude, which in turn is heavily influenced by its emotional or affect component. The affect component is the emotional or feeling segment and most critical part of an attitude (Robbins & Judge, 2015, p.67). We determine how we feel about something, then act negatively or positively based upon that feeling. We’ve all had run-ins with a workplace Debbie Downer or Negative Nancy. Their attitudes are reflected in everything they do and say and can affect everyone they come in contact with. Before you know it, morale and productivity within their groups have dropped. The possibility of this scenario could initially inspire organizations to discourage the display of certain emotions.

Or not to suppress?

It may seem that by insisting that employees suppress certain emotions organizations protect other employees. However, the emotional labor associated with having to outwardly express “work-appropriate” emotions (generally the happy and positive ones) while feeling something different can be taxing. If given the right tools employees and managers can learn to regulate all emotions so that there isn’t a need to completely suppress them. EI can be that much needed tool.  Studies suggest EI plays an important role in job performance (Robbins & Judge, 2015). More to the point, Muchinsky (2000) proclaims “EI may be the long-sought missing link (or at least a portion thereof) which unites the classic `can do' ability determinants of job performance with the `will do' dispositional determinants.” The opportunity for managers to distinguish the “able” from the “willing” is very valuable.