Experiences at work and employees reactions to them, can affect employees’ quality of life outside of work – and vice versa.
This insight led employers to establish workplace Employee Assistance Programs, on-site medical centers, concierges, meals, and fitness centers.
When employees suppress their true feelings about work experiences, they engage in “surface acting” — displaying appropriate, but unfelt facial expressions, verbal interactions, and body language.
Surface acting at work was associated with emotional exhaustion, work-to-family conflict, and insomnia outside of work for more than 70 volunteers in a high stress public service occupation, in a study by Singapore Management University’s David T. Wagner, Christopher M. Barnes of University of Washington, and Brent A. Scott of Michigan State University.
“Emotional labor” was Arlie Hochshild’s earlier term for “surface acting” in customer service interactions when employees present prescribed verbalizations and emotions.
She contrasted “surface acting” with “deep acting” in which the person:
- Exhibits the emotion actually felt,
- Uses past emotional experiences to elicit real emotion and empathic connection with others, in a form of “organizational method acting.”
“Surface acting” at work can lead to occupational “burnout,” characterized by emotional exhaustion, detachment from others, and reduced workplace performance, noted University of California Berkeley’s Christina Maslach and Susan Jackson.
In contrast, high emotional labor with deep acting was associated with a greater sense of personal accomplishment in research by University of Regina’s Celeste Brotheridge and Alicia Grandey of Penn State.
Recipients of “surface acting” are usually accurately detect that it’s an inauthentic display, according to University of Tampere Veikko Surakka and Jari K Hietanen of University of Helsinki.
Similarly, “Facades of Conformity,” impression management, and
unwilling compliance are associated with generalized stress and reduced quality of life outside of work, according to Georgetown’s Patricia Hewlin, University of Lethbridge’s Karen H. Hunter, Andrew A. Luchak of University of Alberta, and Athabasca University’s Kay Devine.
These three experiences are defined as:
- Facades of Conformity (FOC), or behaviors enacted to appear that an employee embraces organizational values.
These behaviors usually are associated with non-participative work environments, minority status, and high self-monitoring.
Impression management, characterized by ingratiating behaviors in two-person relationships which can favorably influence career outcomes, according to Georgia Tech’s Robert C. Liden and Terence R. Mitchell of University of Washington.
- Compliance, or publicly stating changed beliefs in response to external pressures, without truly modifying personal convictions, according to Leon Festinger.
Most people at work encounter situations in which they choose to behave in “appropriate” ways that are inconsistent with their true feelings, and may experience similar stress spillover from “surface acting” at work.
-*How do you prevent “burnout” when workplace settings seem to require “surface acting”?
- How Effective are Strategic Threats, Anger, and Unpredictability in Negotiations?
- Emotional Awareness Enables Focus, Risk-taking Even When “Stressed”
- Leadership Roles Reduce – Rather than Increase – Perceived Stress
- Natural Environments Enhance “Vitality” and Reduce Stress
- Consequences of “Facades of Conformity”
- Is Being at Work Less Stressful than Being at Home?