See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/235916037

Emotion Regulation and Its Implications for Leadership: An Integrative Review

and Future Research Agenda

Article  in  Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies · April 2013

DOI: 10.1177/1548051813485438

CITATIONS READS
23 1,519

3 authors:

Annie Haver Kristin Akerjordet

University of Stavanger (UiS) University of Stavanger (UiS)
11 PUBLICATIONS   57 CITATIONS    28 PUBLICATIONS   572 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Trude Furunes
University of Stavanger (UiS)
53 PUBLICATIONS   427 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Improving quality in nursing home studies, developing an innovative web based supervision and assessment program View project

Mental Well-Being Project View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Annie Haver on 29 October 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

485438
research-article2013
JLOXXX10.1177/1548051813485438Journal of Leadership & Organizational StudiesHaver et al.

Article
Journal of Leadership &

Emotion Regulation and Its Implications

Organizational Studies
20(3) 287–303
© The Authors 2013
for Leadership: An Integrative Review and Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

Future Research Agenda DOI: 10.1177/1548051813485438

jlo.sagepub.com

Annie Haver1, Kristin Akerjordet1 and Trude Furunes1

Abstract
This integrative review synthesizes research on emotion regulation and its implications for leadership, from both leaders’
and followers’ perspectives. Regulating one’s emotions is considered an area of key competence associated with effective
and good leadership. Three themes emerged from the preliminary synthesis: (a) emotion regulation strategies as facilitators
of health, (b) emotion regulation strategies as facilitators of job outcome, and (c) emotion regulation as barriers to health
and job outcomes. Findings revealed that leaders’ emotion competencies, cultural understanding, and coaching ability
and the quality of leader–member relationships seem particularly important for the efficiency of emotion regulation.
Methodological shortcomings and future research are discussed.

Keywords
deep acting, emotion regulation, leaders, leadership, integrative review, surface acting

Introduction Leaders cannot perform ER efficiently if they do not pos-

Today there is a need to explore emotion regulation (ER)
associated with leadership in a changing and dynamic con-
texts characterized by globalization, fierce competition,
new technology, and changing customer demands (Avey,
Wernsing, & Luthans, 2008; Ottenbacher & Harrington,
2010). Given the fact that we live in a world with a high
degree of uncertainty and unpredictability, ER is considered
a key competence associated with effective and good lead-
ership and is essential in relation to how people deal with
negative emotions in order to reduce potentially adverse
outcomes (Boss & Sims, 2008; Côté, 2005; Humphrey,
2002; Tugade & Fredrickson, 2007). This is significant with
regard to enhancing competitive advantages and adaptable
healthy organizations (George, 2000; Lawrence, Troth,
Jordan, & Collins, 2011). Leaders who use ER effectively
may be able to improve their affect, the quality of their rela-
tionships, and organizational outcomes (Brundin, Patzelt, &
Shepherd, 2008; Humphrey, 2012; John & Gross, 2004;
Tugade & Fredrickson, 2007). This requires leaders to
emphasize and enhance followers’ enthusiasm, optimism,
and resilience and to display confidence and pleasant emo-
tions in way that helps followers cope with negative emo-
tions (Gardner, Fischer, & Hunt, 2009; Humphrey, 2002;
Pescosolido, 2002; Van Kleef, Homan, Beersma, &
Knippenberg, 2010). This point reflects the important
aspects of emotional intelligence (EI; Côté & Hideg, 2011;
Elfenbein, Marsh, & Ambady, 2002; Lawrence et al., 2011).
sesses EI, considered the ability to perceive, learn, and
adjust behavior in order to fulfill organizational goals
(Lawrence et al., 2011; Opengart, 2005).
There is a variety of possible mechanisms for ER in the
workplace (Côté & Morgan, 2002; Grandey, 2000; Van
Kleef et al., 2010) that are substantial and meaningful
(Gross & John, 2003). The extent to which people utilize
reappraisal or suppression (or both) or exercise surface act-
ing, deep acting, and naturally felt emotions is therefore of
interest, because these individual differences seem to have
implications for their affect, the quality of their relation-
ships, and their well-being (Brundin et al., 2008; John &
Gross, 2004). However, researchers have only recently
begun to explore ER in the leadership domain, which
requires increased attention. For the purpose of this review,
we therefore decided to investigate the current knowledge
of ER and its implications for leadership. This involved sys-
tematically reviewing and synthesizing previous research
on ER related to leadership, from both leaders’ and follow-
ers’ perspectives. Through this review, we hope to summa-
rize and extend our knowledge in this area of research and
to provide suggestions to guide further research. Specifically,
1
University of Stavanger, Stavanger, Norway
Corresponding Author:
Annie Haver, Norwegian School of Hotel Management, Faculty of Social
Sciences, University of Stavanger, N-4036 Stavanger, Norway.
Email: annie.haver@uis.no
288
we review the research that has been performed during the
past 12 years. Since the extant research is limited, we agreed
that an integrative review would be appropriate (Aarthun &
Akerjordet, 2012; Whittemore & Knafl, 2005). As far as we
know, this is the first systematic review of ER related to
leadership that has been performed internationally.
Emotion Regulation
Conceptualizations of ER vary across and within a range of
research fields (Côté, 2005; Gross & Barrett, 2011;
Lawrence et al., 2011). Most of our understanding of ER
and its related health consequences, for example, is derived
from social psychology research, which has focused on the
relationship between people and groups (Lawrence et al.,
2011). In the present review, ER refers particularly to
Gross’s (1998a) working definition of ER, developed and
extended within industrial organizational psychology
(Lawrence et al., 2011). Gross (1998b) defined ER as “the
processes by which individuals influence which emotions
they have, when they have them, and how they experience
and express these emotions” (p. 275). Because Gross’s
(2002) conceptual understanding in this review is extended
to application within an organizational context, we have
included regulating emotional expression through surface
acting, deep acting, and display of naturally felt emotions
(Diefendorff & Gosserand, 2003; Hochschild, 1983). These
ER strategies operate along a continuum—from conscious,
effortfully controlled regulation of emotions to uncon-
scious, effortless, and automatic regulation (Bargh &
Williams, 2007; Grandey, 2000; Gross & Thompson, 2006).
ER refers to strategies used to control or manage the
experience of emotions, while focusing on their temporal
nature in the process of regulating one’s emotions (Gross,
1998a; Gross & Thompson, 2006). Gross’s (1998a) model
of ER distinguishes between antecedent-focused and
response-focused regulation strategies (Gross, 1998a,
1998b). The antecedent-focused strategy (i.e., cognitive
reappraisal) is a conscious attempt to reduce the aversive
nature of an event prior to its occurrence by changing the
way it is evaluated (e.g., to reduce the threat of an event by
minimizing its importance). Conversely, response-focused
strategy (i.e., suppression) involves a conscious attempt to
inhibit one’s ongoing stream of emotional experiences,
whether they are covert, overt, or both (Gross, 1998a, 2007;
Lazarus & Alfert, 1964).
Evidence from experimental laboratory research explor-
ing the outcomes of using reappraisal and suppression
showed that people using the reappraisal strategy controlled
their emotions by changing the way they thought about a
situation (John & Gross, 2004, 2007). By reinterpreting
what they found stressful, they experienced and expressed
more positive emotions and were considered to have greater
self-esteem and life satisfaction (John & Gross, 2004).
Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies 20(3)
Although reappraisal has been positively associated with
interpersonal functioning and well-being, it is more difficult
to execute, because it requires a high degree of conscious-
ness and personal effort to change emotionally charged situ-
ations (Grandey, 2000). Suppression, on the other hand, is
associated with less desirable consequences, such as
decreased interpersonal functioning and well-being and
increased physiological reactivity (Côté, 2005; John &
Gross, 2004). Suppressors focus more on changing their
emotional displays rather than changing their true feelings
(Grandey, Foo, Groth, & Goodwin, 2012). Suppressors
experience and express fewer positive emotions; indeed,
they experience themselves as inauthentic, misleading oth-
ers about their true selves, and often deal with stressful situ-
ations by masking their inner feelings (Gardner et al., 2009;
John & Gross, 2004).
Reappraisal and suppression strategies are often concep-
tualized as deep acting and surface acting (Diefendorff &
Gosserand, 2003; Grandey, 2000). In an organizational con-
text in which interactional emotions emerge, individuals
often use deep acting or surface acting as ER strategies
(Grandey, 2000; Hochschild, 1983). Both deep and surface
acting involve expressing a publicly observable facial and
bodily display in order to align an individual’s emotional
displays with the rules the organization has established
regarding emotional displays (Elfenbein, 2007; Hochschild,
1983). Surface actors fake or hide desired emotions, and
their felt emotions are thus distinguished from their dis-
played emotions, which involves ER and norms of behav-
ior. Being forced to comply with organizational display
rules can therefore cause harmful psychological effects and
is associated with undesired work outcomes, such as
increased stress, emotional exhaustion, lower job satisfac-
tion, and reduced life dissatisfaction (Grandey, 2000). On
the other hand, the term deep acting refers to the process of
modifying inner feelings to express appropriate emotions,
and naturally felt emotions refers to the process of express-
ing authentic, genuine emotions. Both deep acting and natu-
rally felt emotions are associated with an increased sense of
personal accomplishment and desirable work outcomes
(Gardner et al., 2009; Liu, Prati, Perrewé, & Ferris, 2008).
Emotional Intelligence
When it comes to improving organizational effectiveness,
EI and its impact on leadership have generated increasing
interest (Sosik & Megerian, 1999; Zhou & George, 2003).
Research linking EI and ER strategies is emerging
(Lawrence et al., 2011). In this regard, the fourth branch of
the ability-based EI model by Mayer and Salovey
(1997)—“emotion management”—is especially relevant in
understanding the regulation and expression of emotions
(Côté & Hideg, 2011; Lawrence et al., 2011). Nevertheless,
the concept of EI was originally developed and presented as
Haver et al.
a mental ability, described as intelligence in the more tradi-
tional sense (Mayer, Caruso, & Salovey, 1999; Salovey &
Mayer, 1990). This proposed ability-based model was sub-
sequently refined (Mayer & Salovey, 1997) to include being
aware of emotions, emotional knowledge, use of emotions,
and emotion management (Lawrence et al., 2011). EI has
also been described as a collection of mixed models, traits,
and abilities, which has created extensive controversy
(Cherniss, 2010), particularly regarding measurement
issues (Conte, 2005; Grewal & Salovey, 2005). In our
review, we adopted Salovey and Mayers’s (1990) ability-
based EI model, which is broadly accepted academically
(Ashkanasy & Daus, 2005; Jordan, Ashkanasy, Härtel, &
Hooper, 2002). It is expected that individuals with high EI
are more likely to utilize both reappraisal and deep acting,
as these are effective ER strategies for producing the
required emotions counteracting adverse organizational
outcomes (Akerjordet, 2009; Côté & Hideg, 2011; Lawrence
et al., 2011).
Emotion Regulation and Leadership
Emotions are more or less considered an integral part of our
working lives and require a high degree of mindful ER
(Brotheridge & Lee, 2008; Härtel, Ashkanasy, & Zerbe,
2011). In organizational settings, emotions are seen as a
contagion process in which followers constantly interpret
the leaders’ emotional expression (Brotheridge & Lee,
2008; Newcombe & Ashkanasy, 2002). In this regard, fol-
lowers see their leaders as an ongoing source of either has-
sles or uplift at work (Bach & Fisher, 2000; Newcombe &
Ashkanasy, 2002). Leadership is therefore often described
as a social interaction in which everything a leader says or
does or leaves unsaid or undone has an effect on their fol-
lowers (Yukl, 2010). Leaders who are excited, enthusiastic,
and energetic are more likely to create a positive emotional
environment, thus energizing their followers (Barsade,
2002). Furthermore, leaders who are able to express and
display positive emotions to their followers are considered
better leaders, whether they give positive or negative feed-
back (Conelly & Ruark, 2010; Lewis, 2000; Zapf, 2002).
Experience of positive emotions can, in this regard, build
resources and may predict followers’ well-being from a
long-term perspective (Tugade & Fredrickson, 2004, 2007).
On the contrary, leaders who feel distressed and hostile can
display bad or negative moods and influence their followers
negatively (Newcombe & Ashkanasy, 2002; Sy, Côté, &
Saavedra, 2005). Leaders with negative emotions toward
followers can also unconsciously display negative emo-
tions, even while expressing a positive message, thus creat-
ing dissonance (Côté, 2005). In this regard, leaders who
react negatively and irrationally to organizational chal-
lenges may enhance frustration, disappointment, and
decreased well-being among their followers, rather than
289
creating a positive organizational culture (Dasborough,
2006; Zapf, 2002).
Leaders differ in their abilities to regulate emotion, with
some choosing more effective strategies than others (Lopes,
Salovey, Beers, & Côté, 2005). The effectiveness of leaders
in terms of ER depends also on their context, suggesting
that a particular regulation strategy can be adaptive in one
work situation and maladaptive in another (Côté, 2005;
Gross, 2007). This concept challenges the abilities of both
leaders and followers to facilitate constructive work rela-
tionships and positive teamwork, which indeed requires
conscious ER (Boss & Sims, 2008; Brotheridge & Lee,
2008; Gardner et al., 2009).
Method
An integrative review was performed to determine the
field’s current knowledge and provide a synthesis of current
understanding (Burns & Grove, 2011). This approach
involved identifying, selecting, and synthesizing previous
independent studies with diverse methodologies
(Whittemore & Knafl, 2005). To increase the potential to
identify accurate results emerging from appropriate data-
bases, a systematic and well-defined literature search strat-
egy was developed, as illustrated in Figure 1 (Whittemore
& Knafl, 2005). Moreover, the searches were performed in
close cooperation with a specialized librarian at the univer-
sity, and consensus among researchers was reached for the
final synthesis.
Search Methods
The first author performed an initial search of the electronic
databases Academic Search Elite, ERIC, Business Source
Complete, Medline, Hospitality & Tourism Complete, Soc
Index, ISI Web of Science, PsycInfo, and Science Direct to
identify peer-reviewed articles in English published from
January 2000 to December 2012. The databases were
selected based on the fact that they cover both leadership
and psychology. The following keywords were used in vari-
ous combinations: emotions, emotion regulation, leader-
ship, management, emotional labor, and emotion
management. At this initial stage, neither were terms trun-
cated nor were advanced searches applied. Second, to
strengthen the quality of the initial search, the same searches
were performed using a higher degree of limitations, such
as advanced searches and more specific and controlled
search terms. The keywords used in this second stage were
leadership and emotion* regulation in different combina-
tions. The specialized librarian also added the databases
Scopus and Emerald. After these two searches were com-
plete, the first author discussed and compared the various
hits with the librarian on two occasions. Furthermore, to
ensure that the latest articles published in 2012 were
290
Search 1: First search outcomes:
Initial search outcomes:
Academic Search Elite: 31
ISI Web of Science: 13
PsycInfo: 68
Science Direct: 47
Total hits: 159
Total hits from searches 1 & 2: n = 309
Manual searches of the 17 articles added 4
Outcomes from search 1 & 2: n = 21
Search 1 & 2: n = 21 articles
Search 3: n = 4 articles
Total sample: n = 25 empirical articles for
critical appraisal and synthesis
Figure 1. Flowchart of the search outcomes and selection process on emotion regulation related to leadership.
included, a third search was performed for studies within
the past 6 months in line with the second search. Finally, the
references in the initially included articles in the review
process were scanned manually for additional studies that
might have been missed by the database searches. Based on
our review, the sample was limited to empirical articles that
focused specifically on ER and its impact on leadership. In
this regard, followers’ ER was included, because they are
Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies 20(3)
Search 2: Second search outcomes by the librarian:
Academic Search Elite: 12
ISI Web of Science: 12
PsycInfo: 36
Science Direct: 24
Scopus: 23 (*new)
Emerald: 43 (*new)
Total hits: 150
When titles and abstract were read, 242
articles were excluded, whereas 159 were not
relevant to the research question and criteria,
83 were duplicates
Remaining and fully read: n = 67
50 articles removed. Did not comply with the
research question and inclusion criteria
Remaining and fully read: n = 17
Third search outcomes period: June-Dec 2012
Academic Search Elite:10
ISI Web of Science: 3
PsycInfo: 10
Science Direct: 6
Scopus: 7
Emerald:10
Total hits: 46
From search nr 3, 42 articles where removed,
whereas 34 did not comply with the research
question and inclusion criteria, and 8 were
duplicates.
4 remained articles, whereas one were found
manually
seen as a key audience for leaders and therefore an impor-
tant part of leadership (Gardner et al., 2009; Yukl, 2010).
Since ER is considered as a new method of conceptualizing
emotional labor (Brotheridge & Grandey, 2002), we decided
to focus mainly on ER. According to Côté (2005), ER rep-
resents a broader and more pervasive set of behaviors than
emotional labor. Furthermore, emotional labor—described
through deep acting, surface acting, and naturally felt
Haver et al.
Table 1. Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria.
Inclusion criteria
x Peer-reviewed articles published in the period January
2000 to December 2012
x Leadership context
x Publication in English
x Studies with both quantitative and qualitative design
x Samples having part-time positions or full-time positions
and in contact with managers/leaders or customers
(organizational context)
x Articles including “emotional labor” described through
deep acting, surface acting, naturally felt emotions, and
emotional intelligence, when the authors applied (a)
measures focusing on emotion regulation and/or (b)
connected these to emotion regulation as part of their
theoretical framework
x Articles that included research related to reappraisal and
suppression in combination with words or theoretical
framework such as emotion regulation and leadership
emotions—and EI were included as long as the authors
applied (a) measures focusing on ER and/or (b) connections
to ER as part of their theoretical framework. The searches
were based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria presented
in Table 1. As a result of the limited empirical research on
ER related to leadership, some articles were considered rel-
evant despite their wider scope. Thus, student samples were
included when the research contained employment status in
an organizational context.
Search Outcomes
Initially, a provisional sample of 159 abstracts emerged.
When using a higher degree of truncated terms and advanced
searches in addition to adding two more databases, 150
additional hits emerged. By adding the first group of hits
(159) and the librarians’ hits (150), the total number of arti-
cles gleaned from the database searches included 309
abstracts. The third search provided 46 additional articles.
The final sample consisted of 355 articles. The titles and,
when necessary, the abstracts were reviewed according to
the research question and inclusion criteria. Based on inclu-
sion/exclusion criteria, 199 articles were then excluded, and
83 were identified as duplicates. The remaining 67 articles
were reviewed in their entirety.
A new systematic assessment of the articles in relation to
the inclusion criteria and the review question resulted in 17
relevant articles. In addition, when the references of the ini-
tial 67 relevant articles included in the search process were
scanned manually, 4 articles were added to the sample.
Searches 1 and 2 produced 21 articles. The third search
resulted in 46 articles, whereas 42 were removed because
they did not comply with the inclusion and exclusion criteria.
The final sample consisted of 25 empirical articles. During
291
Exclusion criteria
x Only studies specifically about emotional intelligence and
measuring emotional intelligence
x Studies about emotions or emotional labor limited to a
psychological perspective
x Studies about emotion regulation, managing emotions, and
emotional display, with no research/analyses or theoretical
framework within surface acting, deep acting, naturally felt
emotions or reappraisal, and suppression strategies.
the review process, all authors discussed the inclusion and
exclusion of the articles. To ensure transparency, the retrieval
and selection processes are presented in Figure 1.
Characteristics and Quality Appraisal
Synthesis often begins with an initial narrative evaluation of
a study’s characteristics (Anthony & Jack, 2009). A critical
appraisal of the 25 studies was thus performed according to
the guidelines for evaluating quantitative and qualitative
research by Burns and Grove (2011). This involved careful
examination of all aspects of the studies, including purpose,
research problems, literature reviews, methods, results, and
conclusions in order to evaluate the studies’ strengths, weak-
nesses, limitations, and significance.
Of the 25 studies, 24 employed a quantitative design,
and 1 used a qualitative method. Methodological approaches
such as descriptive research (2 studies), descriptive correla-
tional research (18 studies), experimental research (3 stud-
ies), and longitudinal research were applied (1 study).
Fifteen studies were reported from the followers’ perspec-
tive, 1 from the leaders’ perspective and 6 from both the
followers’ and the leaders’ perspectives. One article
researched from a team perspective, 1 the leader–follower–
customer perspective and 1 the follower–leader–coworker
perspective.
The context of the studies varied, and in many articles,
the authors did not describe the context. Eight of the studies
examined what the authors labeled as “service work” or
“people work.” Our quality appraisal of the studies revealed
that the research problems and purposes were relevant and
significant in relation to previous research. The studies also
included literature that was relevant and appropriate to their
purpose (Burns & Grove, 2011). The studies had varying
292
degrees of focus on methodological procedure, clarity and
bias, limitations, and ethical rigor, and in several of the arti-
cles, limitations and ethical aspects were hardly addressed.
Table 2 presents the main points of this quality scrutiny.
In particular, sampling techniques and response rate
have been found to limit the value of previous research.
Convenience sampling was used widely (in 13 of the 25
studies), with little consideration given to the representative
nature of the population being studied. Quite a few of the
studies presented small samples and student samples or suf-
fered from relatively low response rates. According to
Baruch and Holtom (2008), response rates in organizational
research have been stable in the past several decades, at an
average of 35.7%. Using the low standard from Baruch and
Holtom (2008), seven of the studies reported response rates
below this figure, nine studies failed to report response
rates, and three used sampling techniques that did not report
nonresponses. None of the studies discussed ethical consid-
erations, and only four discussed validity issues. One of the
articles failed to discuss the study’s limitations, and two of
the studies did not discuss implications. Most of the articles
discussed both implications for future research and implica-
tions for practice, however, to a varying degree.
Analytical Process
Data from the 25 included studies were extracted for analy-
sis and synthesis according to procedures presented by
Whittemore & Knafl (2005). After repeatedly reading the
included articles, relevant primary sources from the studies
were organized into a group classification system based on
the following ER strategies applied deductively: (a) reap-
praisal and suppression and (b) surface acting, deep acting,
and display of naturally felt emotions. Data were then
extracted and coded in the group classification system and
then compared to identify patterns, themes, and relation-
ships. Meaningful higher order clusters were then identi-
fied, such as leadership skills, relational factors, personal
factors, and organizational display rules (requirements).
Finally, important elements were synthesized into an inte-
grative summary of the topic, after which three main
themes emerged inductively. In the verification, the links
between the study process, findings, and previous studies
were examined and conflicting evidence addressed. The
present article’s authors reached a consensus on the final
synthesis.
Findings
Three themes emerged from the preliminary synthesis in
terms of ER related to leadership: (a) ER strategies as facili-
tators of health, (b) ER strategies as facilitators of job out-
comes, and (c) ER strategies as barriers to health and job
outcomes (see Table 3). To provide a comprehensive
Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies 20(3)
summary of the research field, each theme is presented at
the descriptive level.
Emotion Regulation Strategies as Facilitators of
Health
The findings emphasized that leadership is a highly emo-
tional, contagious process between leaders and followers
and that these effects have an inherent potential to promote
organizational health (Bal, Chiaburu, & Diaz, 2011; Bono,
Foldes, Vinson, & Muros, 2007; Chuang, Judge, & Liaw,
2012; Diefendorff & Richard, 2003; Fisk & Friesen, 2012;
Glasø & Einarsen, 2008; Glasø, Ekerholt, Barman, &
Einarsen, 2006; Kafetsios, Nezlek, & Vassilakou, 2012;
Richards & Hackett, 2012; Thiel, Connelly, & Griffith,
2012). The degree to which one regulates emotions effi-
ciently and frequently related to health is often associated
with leadership style, organizational roles, and cultural
context (Bal et al., 2011; Bono et al., 2007; Chuang et al.,
2012; Glasø & Einarsen, 2008; Glasø et al., 2006; Kafetsios
et al., 2012). Moreover, leaders’ ER competency and their
emotional engagement are important to followers’ health
as well (Chuang et al., 2012; Glasø & Einarsen, 2008;
Kafetsios et al., 2012; Thiel et al., 2012). Both leaders’ and
followers’ experiences of reappraisal counteracted nega-
tive emotions and thus affected them positively (Bal et al.,
2011; Chi & Liang, 2013; Glasø et al., 2006; Kafetsios et
al., 2012; Liu, Prati, Perrewé, & Brymer, 2010). The use of
reappraisal or deep acting appeared to be positively related
to coping, high positive affect (Bono & Vey, 2007; Cheung
& Tang, 2009; Diefendorff, Richard, & Yang, 2008;
Gosserand & Diefendorff, 2005; Kafetsios et al., 2012;
Thiel et al., 2012; Totterdell & Holman, 2003), and well-
being (Diefendorff et al., 2008; Glasø et al., 2006;
Gosserand & Diefendorff, 2005; Liu et al., 2010; Totterdell
& Holman, 2003). In addition, reappraisal played an impor-
tant role in how followers responded to breach of trust. By
reinterpreting the situation in a positive light, followers
were more likely to take charge and to share information
with colleagues (Bal et al., 2011). Moreover, the benefit
followers gained through reappraisal or deep acting in a
follower–customer interaction was associated with authen-
ticity and well-being (Bal et al., 2011; Grandey, 2003; Liu
et al., 2010; Thiel et al., 2012; Totterdell & Holman, 2003).
Although deep acting required personal effort, the research
showed no relationship between deep acting and stress,
burnout/emotional exhaustion, or dissonance (Blau,
Bentley, & Purcell-Eggerichs, 2012; Bono & Vey, 2007;
Chau, Dahling, Levy, & Diefendorff, 2009; Grandey, 2003;
Totterdell & Holman, 2003). Evidently, leaders and follow-
ers regulated their emotions to various degrees, because
they have different motives related to interpersonal ER
(Glasø & Einarsen, 2008; Glasø et al., 2006; Kafetsios
et al., 2012; Thiel et al., 2012). Followers’ ER strategies,
 Table 2. Profile of the 25 Empirical Studies Included in the Integrative Review.
Study

9. Diefendorff, 11. Bono, Foldes,

1. Chuang, Judge, and Liaw 2. Fisk and Friesen 3. Kafetsios, Nezlek, 4. Thiel, Connelly, 5. Bal, Chiaburu, and 6. Chau, Dahling, Levy, 7. Cheung and Tang 8. Cole, Walter, and Richard, and Yang 10. Glasø and Vinson, and Muros
(2012) (2012) and Vassilakou (2012) and Griffith (2012) Diaz (2011) and Diefendorff (2009) (2009) Bruch (2008) (2008) Einarsen (2008) (2007) 12. Bono and Vey (2007)

Country Taiwan Canada Greece United States United States and United States Hong Kong United States and United States Norway United States United States
Germany Germany
Scope and purpose To examine how To examine how To examine the To examine the To examine how To examine how the To examine how To examine the To examine the use To examine the To examine the role To examine the
transformational leadership leaders’ emotion relationships leaders’ effects emotion regulation emotional labor affectivity and association of specific forms extent to which of organizational association between
leads to favorable customer regulation affect between leaders’ suggesting moderates the (emotion regulation) emotional between of emotion leaders and leaders, personality and
intentions via the mediation employees’ levels emotion regulation different regulation relationship strategies of deep intelligence dysfunctional team regulation at followers express, employees’ effective performance
of service employees’ of job satisfaction and leaders’ and strategies after between acting and surface influence the use behavior and team work suppress, or fake emotions, and the in the context of
emotion regulation (i.e., job and organizational subordinates’ subordinates psychological acting directly of emotional labor performance their emotions effects of emotion work that requires
satisfaction) citizenship work-related experienced anger contract and breach influence emotional (i.e., emotion during their regulation emotional regulation
behaviors outcomes or pessimism in the organization exhaustion regulation) interaction
strategies
Method Quantitative Quantitative Quantitative Experimental Quantitative Quantitative Quantitative Quantitative Quantitative Quantitative Quantitative Experimental
Design Cross-sectional Cross-sectional Cross-sectional Experimental Cross-sectional Cross-sectional Cross-sectional Cross-sectional Cross-sectional Cross-sectional Cross-sectional Experimental
Descriptive
Sampling strategy Convenience Snowballing Convenience Convenience Convenience Convenience, one Random Purposive, informant Random Random Random Convenience
organization sampling approach
Sample 55 managers; 214 employees; 126 employees 51 school directors; 147 undergraduate 124 U.S. employees; 263 bank tellers 486 Chinese 61 teams, 232 students 135 leaders; 207 57 employees 162 students
210 customers (204 281 teachers students 245 Dutch employees multinational followers
matched sets) employees company
Context Service work; stores Not stated schools Not stated All industries; Banking Mixed, people work Not stated Not stated Not stated Public sector health Not stated
Consultancy care and students
Data collection Questionnaire Questionnaire Questionnaire Experiment, online 2 Questionnaires Questionnaire Questionnaire Questionnaire Questionnaire Questionnaire Questionnaire Controlled experiment
method
Response rate (%) 98, 94, 93 64 100 NA 25, 56 26 44 Not stated Not stated Not stated 79 NA
Measures Established scales Established scales Established scales Established scales Established scales Established scales Established scalesEstablished and Scales development Established scales and Established scales Established scales
adjusted scales scale development
Scales MLQ-5X, DES, JS, PANAS, ERS, LMX-7, JGS, ERQ, GIJS, JAS, PLE, PANAS, ERS, PCB, ERS, FV, KS, ERS, EE, TI ERS, PANAS, WLEIS, DTB, NNE, ERS, JAWS, AE LMX-7, FFJSI, MLQ-5X, JS, WSI, SMS, IPIP, DA, SA,
SPSPS OCB MBI, PC BHS, STAXI-2 MOW, TC ELS, WS NTAT,NE, TP SHC, AE AE, ERS PANAS, EP, EE, GOE
Reliability High Cronbach’s alphas High Cronbach’s Some low Cronbach’s High Cronbach’s High cronbach’s High Cronbach’s alphas Some low Some low Not stated High Cronbach’s Not stated Some low Cronbach’s
alphas alphas alphas Alphas (D = .68-.94) Cronbach’s alphas Cronbach’s alphas alphas alphas
Validity Convergent and discriminant Discriminant Not stated Validity tested Not stated Not stated Not stated Not stated Not stated Not stated Not stated Not stated
Ethical considerations No No No No No No No No No No No No
Provides new insights Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Limitations of study Limitations outlined Limitations outlined Limitations outlined Limitations outlined Limitations outlined Limitations outlined Limitations outlined Limitations outlined Limitations outlined Limitations outlined Limitations outlined Limitations outlined
Implications for Implications for practice Implications for Implications for Implications for Implications for Implications for Implications for Implications for Implications for Implications for Implications for Implications for practice
practice/research research leadership and leaders managers and research and practice research and practice research practice research and
research research outlined practice practice

(continued)

293
294
Table 2. (continued)
Study

13. Glasø, Ekerholt, 20. Totterdel 22. Liu, Prati, 24. Blau, Bentley,
Barman, and Einarsen 14. Gosserand and 15. Diefendorff, Croyle, 16. Grandey, Fisk, and 17. Yurtsever 18. Diefendorff and 19. Grandey and Holman 21. Côté and Morgan Perrewé, and Brymer 23. Chi and Liang and Purcell-Eggerichs 25. Richards and
(2006) Diefendorff (2005) and Gosserand (2005) Steiner (2005) (2004) Richard (2003) (2003) (2003) (2002) (2010) (2013) (2012) Hackett (2012)

Country Norway United States United States United States and Turkey United States United States United Kingdom Canada Not stated Taiwan United States Not stated
France
Scope and purpose To examine To examine whether To examine whether To examine the To examine the To examine To examine To examine in To explore the To examine individual To examine the To examine the To examine the how
emotions work in commitment the display of relationship between relationship antecedents and whether which way association differences in linkage between impact of emotion the interaction
leader– to emotional naturally felt job autonomy, between profit consequences of surface employees between emotion emotion regulation, abusive supervision regulation on work between
subordinate display rules emotions is distinct emotion regulation, achievement emotional display and deep use emotion regulation and emotional and work exhaustion attachment and
relationships is a necessary from surface acting and job satisfaction and emotion rules within acting help regulation job satisfaction experiences at withdrawal from emotion regulation
condition for and deep acting as a in different regulation organizations determine processes to and intention work, and job- stress perspective relates to LMX
emotional display method of displaying organizational strategies emotional accomplish to quit in the related outcomes and the moderating quality
rules to affect organizationally cultures exhaustion emotional organization role of emotion
behavior at work desired emotions labor regulation
strategies
Method Qualitative Quantitative Quantitative Quantitative Quantitative Quantitative Quantitative Quantitative Quantitative Quantitative Quantitative Quantitative Quantitative
Design Descriptive Cross-sectional Cross-sectional Cross-sectional Experimental Cross-sectional Cross-sectional Not stated Longitudinal Cross-sectional Cross-sectional Cross-sectional Cross-sectional
Sampling strategy Purposive Random Purposive Snowballing and Convenience Convenience Convenience Time-sampling Convenience Convenience Convenience Purposive Purposive
convenience
Sample 8 middle-level 318 employees and 270 students; 170 116 U.S. employees; 99 104 lower level Employees; 131 employees 18 employees 111 employed Sample 1: 112 254 voluntary military 24,586 emergency 150 dyads: 150
managers; 8 supervisors individuals French employees managers supervisors; college students employees, 28 officers; 55 work medical technicians subordinates
subordinates coworkers managers; Sample groups (EMTs; 10,996 and their direct
(complete sets) 2: 74 employees, EMT: basic, 1,835 supervisor
138 middle EMT: intermediate,
managers 10,613 paramedics)
Context Former OP students People work People work People work Banking Service work University Call center, Not stated Study 1: health care Ministry of National Medical personnel A variety of work
administration banking hospice; Study 2: Defense settings
service work, hotel
and resort
Data collection Interviews Questionnaire Questionnaire Questionnaire Questionnaire Questionnaire Questionnaire Questionnaire Questionnaire- Questionnaire Questionnaire Questionnaire Questionnaire
method laboratory
Response rate (%) Not stated 31.2 Not stated 98 Not stated 49, 41, 41, 33 (sets) 28 Not stated Not stated 23, 95 77 33 Not stated
Measures Semistructured Established and Established and Established scales Established scales Established and Established and Established and Established and Established scales Established scales Established and Established and
interview guide adjusted scales developed scales developed scales developed adjusted adjusted scales adjusted scales developed scales
scales scales
Scales No scales DRII, CDR, ERS, ERS, Big 5, SM, EES ERS, JA, EE, MOAQ, ERS JIR, DR, BiG 5, EMB, ERS, MOAQ, EE, EI, EE, AU, SS, JSS, IQ, DES ER, JAWS, JS, JP, AS, ER, EE, WWD ERS, WEO, JS LMX-MDM, ECR, ERS
PANAS, PA, PAD NA MOAQ DR, AD ERS MOA
Reliability NA High Cronbach’s High Cronbach’s alpha High Cronbach’s alpha High Cronbach’s High Cronbach’s Missing High Cronbach’s Missing High Cronbach’s alpha High Cronbach’s alpha High Cronbach’s alpha High Cronbach’s alpha
alpha alpha alpha alpha
Validity Not stated Not stated Not stated Not stated Not stated Not stated Not stated Not stated Not stated Discussed Convergent and Not stated Not stated
discriminant

(continued)
 Table 2. (continued)

Study

13. Glasø, Ekerholt, 20. Totterdel 22. Liu, Prati, 24. Blau, Bentley,
Barman, and Einarsen 14. Gosserand and 15. Diefendorff, Croyle, 16. Grandey, Fisk, and 17. Yurtsever 18. Diefendorff and 19. Grandey and Holman 21. Côté and Morgan Perrewé, and Brymer 23. Chi and Liang and Purcell-Eggerichs 25. Richards and
(2006) Diefendorff (2005) and Gosserand (2005) Steiner (2005) (2004) Richard (2003) (2003) (2003) (2002) (2010) (2013) (2012) Hackett (2012)

Ethical No No No No No No No No No No No No No
considerations
Provides new Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
insights
Limitations of study Limitations outlined Limitations outlined Limitations outlined Limitations outlined Limitations not Limitations outlined Limitations Limitations Limitations outlined Limitations outlined Limitations outlined Limitations outlined Limitations outlined
outlined outlined outlined
Implications for Implications for Implications for Implications for Not outlined Implications for Not outlined Implications for Implications for Implications for Implications for Implications for Implications for Implications for
practice/research research research research research and research and research and research practice and for theory and practice EMS careers and practice
practice practice practice research research

Note. The original abbreviations for the scales are mainly used. However, some of the abbreviations are authors’ own interpretations.
Study 1: MLQ-5X = transformational leadership; DES = employee amplification of pleasant emotions; JS = job satisfaction; SPSPS = service performance; PANAS = positive and negative affectivity.
Study 2: ERS = ER strategies; LMX-7 = Leader–member exchange; JGS = job satisfaction; OCB = organizational citizenship behaviors.
Study 3: ERQ = ER strategies; GIJS = job satisfaction; JAS = job affect, positive and negative; MBI = emotional exhaustion; PC = perceived cohesion–emotion regulation model.
Study 4: PLE = perception leader effectiveness; PANAS = positive and negative affectivity; ERS = ER scale; BHS = The Beck Hopelessness Scale; STAXI = trait, anger.
Study 5: ERS = ER scale (both S1 and S2); PCB = psychological contract breach; MOW = meaning of work; TC = taking charge; FoV = feelings of violation, KS = knowledge sharing.
Study 6: ERS = ER strategies; EE = emotional exhaustion; TI = turnover intention.
Study 7: ERS = ER strategies; PANAS = positive and negative affectivity; WLEIS = EI scale; WS = work characteristics such as emotional labor.
Study 8: DTB = dysfunctional team behavior; NTAT = negative team effective tone; NE = negative expressivity; NNE = negative expressivity; TP = team performance.
Study 9: ERS = emotion regulation strategies; JAWS = well-being; AE = affective events.
Study 10: LMX-7 = leader–member exchange inventory; FFJSI = job satisfaction; SHC = subjective health complaints; AE = affective experiences.
Study 11: MLQ = supervisors’ leadership behaviors; JS = job satisfaction; WSI = work status and interactions; AE = affective experience; ERS = ER scale.
Study 12: SMS = self-monitoring scale; IPIP = personality traits; ERS = ER scale; PANAS = positive and negative affectivity; EP = emotional performance; EE = emotional expressions; GOE = genuineness and overall effectiveness.
Study 13: No scales used.
Study 14: DRII = display rule and interpersonal interaction; CDR = commitment display rules; ERS = ER scale; PANAS = positive and negative affectivity; PA = positive affect; PAD = positive affect delivery.
Study 15: ERS = ER scale; Big 5 = personalities; SM = self-monitoring; EES = emotional expression.
Study 16: ERS = ER scale; JA = job autonomy; EE = emotional exhaustion; JS = job satisfaction; NA = negative affectivity; MOAQ = job satisfaction.
Study 17: ERS = ER strategies.
Study 18: JIR = job-based interpersonal requirements; DR = display rules; Big 5 = personality; MOAQ = job satisfaction; EMB = emotion management behaviors.
Study 19: ERS = ER scale; DR = display rules; MOAQ = job satisfaction; EE = emotional exhaustion; AD = affective delivery.
Study 20: EI = emotional intelligence; EE = emotional expressivity; AU = autonomy; SS = supervisor support; ERS = ER scale.
Study 21: DES = differential emotions; JSS = job satisfaction; IQ = intention to quit.
Study 22: ER = ER scale; JAWS = job-related affective well-being; JS/MOA = job satisfaction (2 different); JP = job performance.
Study 23: AS = abusive supervision; ERS = ER scale; EE = emotional exhaustion; WWD = work withdrawal.
Study 24: ERS = ER scale; WEO = work exhaustion outcome; JS = job satisfaction.
Study 25: LMX-MDM; ECR = attachment anxiety/attachment avoidance; ERS.

295
296 Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies 20(3)

Table 3. Articles Included in the Data at the Descriptive Level and Preliminary Synthesis.

1 2 3
Themes Emotion regulation strategies as Emotion regulation strategies as Emotion regulation as barriers to
facilitators of health facilitators of job outcomes health and job outcomes
Article No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 2, 3, 6, 7, 10, 11, 12, 13, 16, 17,
14, 16, 18, 19, 20, 22, 23, 25 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 18,19, 20, 21, 23, 24

specifically suppressing and faking, were associated with
their relationship with their leader and their strategic
choices (Glasø et al., 2006; Totterdell & Holman, 2003). In
this regard, followers attempted to hide their inner feelings,
a strategy they considered to be emotionally disadvanta-
geous to themselves. It is also worth mentioning that
although the use of reappraisal as an application of ER is
healthier than suppression, some findings revealed that fol-
lowers’ use of suppression was not necessarily related to
negative health or well-being at work (Liu et al., 2010).
Furthermore, leaders regulated their emotions to a greater
degree than their followers did. Thus, the leaders sup-
pressed/faked emotions in good faith when they considered
the cultural context, followers’ well-being, respect, and
avoidance of discomfort (Glasø & Einarsen, 2008; Glasø et
al., 2006; Kafetsios et al., 2012). Leaders’ expectations of
themselves as good role models were also a contributing
factor to their ER (Glasø et al., 2006). When leaders and
followers referred to experienced and expressed emotions,
the most highly scored emotions were gladness, enthusi-
asm, and interest (Glasø & Einarsen, 2008). To maintain a
good atmosphere and enhance display rules, the leaders
chose to suppress negative emotions such as anger and
uncertainty, which in turn led to beneficial effects on their
followers’ positive emotions (Glasø & Einarsen, 2008;
Glasø et al., 2006; Kafetsios et al., 2012; Thiel et al., 2012).
Although leaders suppressed/faked negative emotions
more intensively than followers did, the negative effects of
suppressing were not long-lasting for themselves or for
their followers (Glasø & Einarsen, 2008; Glasø et al., 2006;
Kafetsios et al., 2012). Finally, evidence showed that fol-
lowers’ outcomes of ER were positively affected by job
autonomy (Grandey, Fisk, & Steiner, 2005), self-monitor-
ing (Bono & Vey, 2007), and commitment (Gosserand &
Diefendorff, 2005), all of which contributed to more effec-
tive and authentic performance of emotion management.
Emotion Regulation Strategies as Facilitators of
Job Outcome
The findings revealed that organizational members differed
in their use of ER strategies and that there was difference in
how successful these strategies were (Fisk & Friesen, 2012;
Glasø & Einarsen, 2008; Kafetsios et al., 2012; Thiel et al.,
2012). As such, selection of ER strategies and their success
related to job outcomes was influenced by cultural context,
organizational role, personal factors, intrapersonal skills,
and competency in ER (Bal et al., 2011; Bono & Vey, 2007;
Cheung & Tang, 2009; Diefendorff, Croyle, & Gosserand,
2005; Diefendorff & Richard, 2003; Glasø & Einarsen,
2008; Glasø et al., 2006; Liu et al., 2010; Richards &
Hackett, 2012; Thiel et al., 2012). In addition, each organi-
zation’s requirements in terms of expressing positive emo-
tions and commitment to display rules were critical to how
the followers reacted (Bono et al., 2007; Côté & Morgan,
2002; Diefendorff et al., 2005; Diefendorff et al., 2008;
Diefendorff & Richard, 2003; Glasø & Einarsen, 2008;
Glasø et al., 2006; Gosserand & Diefendorff, 2005; Grandey
et al., 2005; Liu et al., 2010). Moreover, leadership styles
and personality were important factors in how followers
regulated their emotions and achieved job outcomes (Bono
et al., 2007; Chuang et al., 2012; Diefendorff et al., 2005;
Diefendorff & Richard, 2003; Fisk & Friesen, 2012; Thiel
et al., 2012). Transformational leaders and leaders who had
a high-quality exchange relationship with followers tended
to evoke positive emotions among their followers and
helped them accomplish their jobs more effectively (Chuang
et al., 2012; Glasø & Einarsen, 2008; Glasø et al., 2006).
When followers experienced low-quality relationships with
their leaders, the leaders’ deep acting appeared to be posi-
tively related to job satisfaction and job performance.
Moreover, followers’ personalities played a role in ER as
well. Followers who were extroverts and those high on self-
monitoring were more likely to display deep acting and
effective performance (Bono & Vey, 2007; Diefendorff
et al., 2005; Diefendorff & Richard, 2003).
Leaders’ and followers’ ER due to emotional affect and
job outcomes seemed to differ from the leaders’ and the
followers’ perspectives (Glasø & Einarsen, 2008; Glasø et
al., 2006; Kafetsios et al., 2012). Imbalance of power and
avoidance of personal and social consequences were
emphasized when followers reported ER in relation to
interacting with their leader (Glasø & Einarsen, 2008;
Glasø et al., 2006). Leaders, on the other hand, appeared
to use ER more to reach organizational goals (Glasø &
Einarsen, 2008; Glasø et al., 2006). Followers reported
increased job performance when using reappraisal
(Kafetsios et al., 2012; Totterdell & Holman, 2003;
Yurtsever, 2004), whereas leaders’ reappraisal was valu-
able for their own positive affect and intrapersonal func-
tioning (Kafetsios et al., 2012).
Haver et al.
Interestingly, both reappraisal and suppression in combi-
nation with work experience and emotional experience had
positive effects on job satisfaction and work withdrawal
(Blau et al., 2012; Liu et al., 2010). Leaders’ use of suppres-
sion to follow cultural codes and reduce followers’ uncer-
tainty and unpleasant emotions had beneficial effects on
followers’ emotions and job outcomes and on groups with
low cohesion (Glasø & Einarsen, 2008; Glasø et al., 2006;
Kafetsios et al., 2012). Deep acting among followers was
associated with better interpersonal interactions, greater
effort toward customers, and followers’ efficiency in terms
of producing the required performance (Bono & Vey, 2007;
Diefendorff et al., 2005; Grandey, 2003; Totterdell &
Holman, 2003). Reappraisals and deep actors were also bet-
ter at dealing with negative affect, and both leaders and fol-
lowers who exhibited these qualities had an active approach
to coping with challenging situations (Bal et al., 2011;
Diefendorff et al., 2008; Gosserand & Diefendorff, 2005;
Grandey, 2003; Thiel et al., 2012; Yurtsever, 2004). In addi-
tion, followers using reappraisals were more prone to
strengthen the collegial cohesion through knowledge shar-
ing and by taking charge at work (Bal et al., 2011).
Moreover, dysfunctional teams and teams low in cohesion
that used suppression had favorable effects on both leaders’
and followers’ job satisfaction and job performance (Cole,
Walter, & Bruch, 2008; Kafetsios et al., 2012). Leaders’ use
of the reappraisal strategy on followers seemed to be valu-
able and effective with followers who were angry, pessimis-
tic, and uncertain (Thiel et al., 2012). Furthermore, followers
who experienced pessimism and low-quality exchange rela-
tionships with their leader benefitted when leaders used the
deep-acting strategy (Fisk & Friesen, 2012; Glasø &
Einarsen, 2008).
Organizational requirements regarding display rules
influenced followers’ use of deep or surface acting
(Diefendorff et al., 2005; Diefendorff & Richard, 2003;
Glasø & Einarsen, 2008; Grandey et al., 2005; Kafetsios
et al., 2012). Followers with high commitment to organiza-
tional display rules combined with high levels of display
requirements were associated with the greater use of ER
and positive emotional display (Diefendorff et al., 2005;
Diefendorff & Richard, 2003; Gosserand & Diefendorff,
2005). Nevertheless, when followers perceived that the
organization had requirements about displaying positive
emotions, they tended to experience a positive emotional
state through deep acting or genuinely felt emotions
(Diefendorff et al., 2005; Diefendorff & Richard, 2003).
Conversely, when they perceived direct requirements to
hide negative or positive emotions, they were more likely to
fake emotions through surface acting/suppression
(Diefendorff et al., 2005; Diefendorff & Richard, 2003;
Glasø & Einarsen, 2008; Glasø et al., 2006; Liu et al., 2010).
In this case, competency in ER mattered. Followers and
leaders using a high level of ER preferred deep acting or
297
naturally felt emotions, whereas those who were not good
with ER seemed to use more superficial methods, such as
surface acting (Chau et al., 2009). Followers who engaged
in deep acting were more likely to be perceived by others as
more effective in their emotional display (Bono & Vey,
2007). Finally, evidence showed that followers’ use of reap-
praisal plays an important positive role in the relationship
between abusive supervision and work withdrawal. Also,
when followers engage in less expressive suppression or
more cognitive reappraisal, they do not become emotion-
ally exhausted (Chi & Liang, 2013).
Emotion Regulation as Barriers to Health and
Job Outcomes
Regulating emotions at work is considered important in
meeting display rules and interpersonal goals (Diefendorff
& Richard, 2003; Grandey et al., 2005). Nevertheless, ER
was often triggered by interpersonal challenges among
leaders, followers, and customers and seemed to be a com-
plex interpersonal issue related to potential negative effects
(Diefendorff et al., 2008; Glasø & Einarsen, 2008; Glasø et
al., 2006; Totterdell & Holman, 2003). Specifically, sup-
pression of negative emotions such as anger, annoyance,
disappointment, uncertainty, and frustration was a potential
hazard to good health and positive job outcomes (Glasø &
Einarsen, 2008; Glasø et al., 2006; Kafetsios et al., 2012).
Evidence also showed that suppression and surface acting
influenced followers’ health negatively, particularly related
to stress, burnout, and emotional exhaustion (Blau et al.,
2012; Bono et al., 2007; Bono & Vey, 2007; Chau et al.,
2009; Côté & Morgan, 2002; Grandey, 2003; Grandey et
al., 2005; Gross, John, & Richards, 2000; Kafetsios et al.,
2012; Totterdell & Holman, 2003). Surface acting and sup-
pression among followers were therefore related to
decreased job satisfaction and performance, fewer citizen-
ship behaviors, and increased turnover intentions (Blau et
al., 2012; Bono et al., 2007; Bono & Vey, 2007; Chau et al.,
2009; Côté & Morgan, 2002; Diefendorff & Richard, 2003;
Glasø & Einarsen, 2008; Glasø et al., 2006; Grandey et al.,
2005; Kafetsios et al., 2012; Yurtsever, 2004). Although the
literature shows that a negative relationship between fol-
lowers’ surface acting and job satisfaction appeared to be
short-lived, surface acting related to stress seemed to be
more long-lasting (Bono et al., 2007). Moreover, the find-
ings indicated that followers’ suppression of emotions and
surface acting were associated with low job autonomy and
lower affective delivery to customers (Bal et al., 2011; Côté
& Morgan, 2002; Grandey, 2003). Evidence also showed
that the relationship between suppression, strain, and burn-
out could be influenced by the cultural context (Chi &
Liang, 2013; Grandey et al., 2005; Kafetsios et al., 2012).
Additionally, when suppressing emotions, the imbalance of
power in the leader–follower relationship seemed to
298
influence followers’ health negatively (Bono & Vey, 2007;
Cheung & Tang, 2009; Chi & Liang, 2013; Glasø &
Einarsen, 2008). Findings revealed that followers who
experienced abusive supervision use a high degree of sup-
pression in order to deal with their emotional exhaustion
and work withdrawal. Furthermore, evidence also showed
that the effect of abusive supervision on work withdrawal
through emotional exhaustion seems to be stronger for fol-
lowers with low levels of reappraisal (Chi & Liang, 2013).
In fact, some followers reacted negatively to their leaders’
distinct forms of ER (Diefendorff & Richard, 2003; Fisk &
Friesen, 2012; Kafetsios et al., 2012). On a few occasions,
followers perceived the leaders’ surface acting as inauthen-
tic and manipulative. Followers with a poor relationship
with their leader experienced the leader’s use of deep acting
as contributing to lower job satisfaction (Fisk & Friesen,
2012; Glasø & Einarsen, 2008). In addition, within hierar-
chical cultures in which collectivistic thinking is high, sup-
pression seemed to be the norm. Thus, leaders’ use of
reappraisal led to lower positive affect and job satisfaction
among followers (Kafetsios et al., 2012). Finally, it is note-
worthy that although leaders suppressed more intensively
than followers, there seemed to be a lack of potential nega-
tive effects among leaders. Conversely, followers experi-
enced both negative affect and emotional dissonance when
they suppressed emotions (Chau et al., 2009; Glasø &
Einarsen, 2008; Glasø et al., 2006; Kafetsios et al., 2012).
Synthesis
The evidence from this review highlights important aspects
of ER and its impacts on leadership. However, the extant
research is limited. There appears to be a clear distinction
between ER strategies, leadership styles, personality, and
the relationship between leaders and followers, leading to
different consequences related to health, well-being, and
organizational outcomes. Apparently, leaders and followers
use ER on different occasions based on motives and in
achieving goals. Furthermore, in people-intensive work
environments, surface acting among followers seems to be
a huge risk factor for emotional exhaustion and turnover
intention, particularly with reduced work experience. ER is
especially important for leaders who tend to suppress/fake
their emotions acting in good faith. Leadership is indeed an
emotionally contagious process, and therefore the relation-
ship between leaders and followers highlights their inherent
vulnerability and interdependence, because ER reflects the
leaders’ power to influence their followers, which thus
reflects important ethical issues that surround leaders’ use
of ER. The organization’s requirements for displaying posi-
tive emotions and leaders’ display of positive emotions
influenced followers ER positively. Specifically, followers’
ER (i.e., deep acting and naturally felt emotions) was influ-
enced positively by the leaders’ emotional support and the
Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies 20(3)
quality of their relationships enhancing empowerment.
Moreover, followers and leaders using high levels of ER
preferred reappraisal, deep acting, or naturally felt emo-
tions, reflecting important aspects of EI. In this regard, the
leaders’ coaching skills and ability to manage their own
and their followers’ emotions effectively can contribute to
increased leader effectiveness, a healthier organizational
climate, and positive organizational job outcomes. However,
conflicting evidence indicates that leaders’ and followers’
ER competencies needed to succeed in organizations might
differ across cultures and organizational contexts (Kafetsios
et al., 2012; Liu et al., 2010).
The current review makes a number of contributions to
the literature. First, to the author’s knowledge, it is the first
attempt to explore ER and its impacts on leadership, serving
as a constructive summary of trends and an extended con-
ceptual understanding. Second, this review highlights the
inherent vulnerability and imbalance of power in the leader-
ship process, which reflects important ethical issues that
surround leaders’ use of ER. Third, this study facilitates an
increased awareness of potential cultural and contextual
differences of the necessary ER competencies among lead-
ers and followers to succeed in organizations, thus indicat-
ing that different cultural beliefs and work values play an
important role in ER. Finally, the review provides method-
ological considerations and suggestions for future research
agendas.
From a practical perspective, this review provides sev-
eral implications for leadership. Given the fact that change
is the norm, leading in a changing and dynamic context
requires efficient ER. Leaders with a conscious approach to
ER may be better able to solve problems, handle diversity,
and avoid rigidity in decision making by counteracting old
habits, anxieties, or fears (Kets de Vries, 2006), thus enhanc-
ing creativity and openness to challenges. Leaders’ use of
positive display and reappraisal by labeling stressful events
as opportunities rather than threats is therefore of signifi-
cance to support the followers’ positive emotions and resil-
ience (Cole et al., 2008; Tugade & Fredrickson, 2007). This
requires leaders to demonstrate their ability to manage
social relationships with integrity as they allow freedom in
the team and encourage unconventional ideas and conflict-
ing opinions needed for innovation. Leaders should there-
fore be willing to develop and empower others as leaders,
not just create submissive followers, enhancing the follow-
ers’ use of reappraisal and naturally felt emotions. In this
regard, an increased understanding of the followers’ needs
and coaching ability and the quality of leader–member rela-
tionships seem particularly important for the efficiency of
ER and the leaders’ and followers’ sense of coherence
(Eriksson & Lindström, 2005). Therefore, leaders need to
become more aware of their critical role (power) and moral
responsibilities due to ER to contribute to more effective,
healthy, and adaptable organizations. In addition, an
Haver et al.
increased cultural understanding is required so that ade-
quate ER competencies can be developed contributing to
effective leadership contextually. A high degree of EI and
mindfulness, from both the leaders’ and the followers’ per-
spectives, should therefore be emphasized in relation to ER
in leadership and educational settings.
Future Research Agenda
The research reviewed in this article provides an account of
ER to leadership. Although interest in ER research is grow-
ing, this review demonstrates clear gaps within ER related
to leadership that need to be addressed. Based on this
review, evidence shows that there is a lack of empirical
research on the impact of leaders’ ER on followers (and on
themselves), and how both leaders and followers can use
effective ER constructively. In the following, we will briefly
outline suggestions for future research.
1. Methodological considerations: Although we have
found that ER appears to be of importance related to
leadership, little consideration is given to the repre-
sentative nature of the population being studied. In
future research, we suggest that critical reflections
due to the statistical power of the sample should be
considered to a higher degree to strengthen the sci-
entific rigor (reliability and validity) and the degree
of generalizability (Baruch & Holtom, 2008).
Moreover, in order to capture important nuances
and paradoxical relationships (nonlinear processes),
future research should also include both qualitative
and mixed-method designs to expand our concep-
tual understanding of ER related to leadership.
Furthermore, to strengthen the validity of previous
research, more longitudinal studies are required to
see how ER strategies fluctuate over time and the
extent of their impact in a leadership context.
2. Reappraisal and suppression strategies: Since lim-
ited research has been performed on short- and
long-term outcomes of using reappraisal and sup-
pression and on how leaders’ ER may influence fol-
lowers (and their own) job performance and health,
more studies are required. Thus, reappraisal and
suppression strategies and their outcomes need to be
further explored and described in different organiza-
tional settings and countries in systematic compara-
tive studies regarding the potential convergence and
divergence aspects of ER.
3. Deep acting and naturally felt emotions: Given that
followers display naturally felt emotions to a higher
degree than they do deep acting and surface acting
and given that display of naturally felt emotions is
associated with well-being and authenticity
(Diefendorff et al., 2005; Gardner et al., 2009), the
299
question of which ER strategies leaders and follow-
ers consciously choose in different contexts still
remains elusive. At a general level, limited research
has been conducted on the display of naturally felt
emotions related to leadership. This seems to repre-
sent a large research gap within ER related to lead-
ership that needs to be explored further.
4. Leadership styles and coaching abilities: Previous
literature shows that leadership styles, EI, and good
coaching skills are inextricably interwoven and that
leaders’ support is essential in facilitating how fol-
lowers regulate their thoughts, feelings, and behav-
iors (Grant, 2007). Future research should focus on
the leaders’ coaching abilities and on which ER
strategies leaders use on followers in challenging
situations. A coaching and emotionally supportive
leadership style can have the inherent potential to
facilitate physical and mental space for venting
emotions. More research is therefore required to
strengthen the leaders’ understanding of how fol-
lowers (and they themselves) can use effective ER
strategies constructively. This can be of particular
importance in people-intensive environments such
as the hospitality industry and health care settings to
elucidate factors that can facilitate health, well-
being, and positive organizational outcomes with
regard to followers’ suppression of emotions and
surface acting.
5. The impact of the leaders’ power and followers’ vul-
nerability: The review points out that followers’
relationships with their leader and the power
involved in the relationship between them seem to
require a higher degree of suppression and leakage
of energy among followers. There is perhaps no
more important and vulnerable dyadic relationship
than that between a leader and a follower. The quali-
tative study by Glasø et al. (2006) revealed that
leaders regulate their emotions with regard to orga-
nizational goals, whereas followers regulated their
emotions based on personal motives and needs.
Further research is needed to validate these results
and to explore and describe the divergence and
motives between leaders’ and followers’ use of ER
strategies in different contexts.
Limitations
The review has several limitations that need to be addressed.
First, ER is viewed differently across cultures and contexts.
A review that includes studies from various countries with
diverse samples and a limited degree of evidence may lead
to bias in the synthesis. The results of this integrative review
should therefore be treated with caution until more rigorous,
discriminant, predictive, and incrementally valid evidence
300
is provided. Second, the authors demonstrated transparency
by describing the background of their judgments on which
some decisions were based. Nevertheless, it is important to
acknowledge that this review represents the researchers’
reading of the studies in question; other authors with diver-
gent interests may arrive at a different conclusion (Aarthun
& Akerjordet, 2012). Furthermore, sources generated
through the use of other keywords, databases, and search
strategies might have contributed differently. However, we
believe that a synthesis of ER and its impacts on leadership
will contribute to an extended understanding of important
ER facilitators and barriers to health, well-being, and orga-
nizational outcomes.
Conclusion
In conclusion, there are a number of important avenues for
future research on ER related to leadership. We hope that
this review provides a framework for such future research
and, more broadly, that it indicates the importance of an
extended conceptual understanding of ER related to leader-
ship in different organizational settings.
Acknowledgment
The authors would like to express their gratitude to specialized
librarian Grete Mortensen for her valuable contribution.
Authors’ Note
Annie Haver is a Visiting Fellow at the School of Psychology,
Faculty of Health and Behavioural Sciences University of
Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia. Kristin Akerjordet is a
Visiting Senior Fellow (Honorary) at the School of Nursing,
Midwifery and Indigenous Health, Faculty of Health and
Behavioural Sciences, University of Wollongong, New South
Wales, Australia.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author (s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with
respect to the authorship and/or publications of this article.
Funding
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support
for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article:
The Faculty of Social Sciences at the University of Stavanger
provided support in the form of a grant for the development of this
review.
References
Aarthun, A., & Akerjordet, K. (2012). Parent participation in deci-
sion-making in health-care services for children: An integra-
tive review. Journal of Nursing Management. Advance online
publication. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2834.2012.01457.x
Akerjordet, K. (2009). An inquiry concerning emotional intel-
ligence and its empirical significance (Issue No. 61).
Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies 20(3)
Stavanger, Norway: Department of Health Studies, Faculty of
Social Sciences, University of Stavanger.
Anthony, S., & Jack, S. (2009). Qualitative case study method-
ology in nursing research: An integrative review. Journal
of Advanced Nursing, 65, 1171-1181. doi:10.1111/j.1365-
2648.2009.04998.x
Ashkanasy, N. M., & Daus, S. C. (2005). Rumors of the death of
emotional intelligence in organizational behavior are vastly
exaggerated. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26, 441-
452 doi:10.1002/job.320
Avey, J., Wernsing, S. T., & Luthans, F. (2008). Can positive
employees help positive organizational change? Impact of
psychological capital and emotions on relevant attitudes and
behaviors. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 44, 48-70.
doi:10.1177/0021886307311470
Bach, J., & Fisher, D. C. (2000). Affective events-emotions matrix:
A classification of work events and associated emotions. In N.
M. Ashkanasy, C. E. J. Härtel & J. W. Zerbe (Eds.), Emotions
in the workplace: Research, theory, and practice (pp. 36-48).
Westport, CT: Quorum Books.
Bal, M. P., Chiaburu, D. S., & Diaz, K. L. (2011). Does psy-
chological contract breach decrease proactive behaviors?
The moderating effect of emotion regulation. Group &
Organization Management, 36, 722-758. doi:10.1177/
1059601111423532
Bargh, J. A., & Williams, L. E. (2007). The nonconscious regula-
tion of emotion. In J. J. Gross (Ed.), Handbook of emotion
regulation (pp. 429-445). New York, NY: Guildford Press.
Barsade, S. G. (2002). The ripple effect: Emotional contagion
and its influence on group behavior. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 47, 644-675. doi:10.2307/3094912
Baruch, Y., & Holtom, B. C. (2008). Survey response rate levels
and trends in organizational research. Human Relations, 61,
1139-1160. doi:10.1177/0018726708094863
Blau, G., Bentley, A. M., & Purcell-Eggerichs, J. (2012).
Testing the impact of emotional labor on work exhaus-
tion for three distinct emergency medical service (EMS)
samples. Career Development International, 17, 626-645.
doi:10.1108/13620431211283788
Bono, J. E., Foldes, H. J., Vinson, G., & Muros, J. P. (2007).
Workplace emotions: The role of supervision and lead-
ership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 1357-1367.
doi:10.1037/0021-9010.92.5.57
Bono, J. E., & Vey, M. A. (2007). Personality and emotional per-
formance: Extraversion, neuroticism, and self-monitoring.
Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 12, 177-192.
doi:10.1037/1076-8998.12.2.177
Boss, A. D., & Sims, H. P., Jr. (2008). Everyone fails!
Using emotion regulation and self-leadership for recov-
ery. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 23, 135-150.
doi:10.1108/02683940810850781
Brotheridge, C. M., & Grandey, A. A. (2002). Emotional labor
and burnout: Comparing two perspectives of “people work.”
Journal of Vocational Behavior, 60, 17-39. doi:10.1006/
jvbe.2001.1815
Brotheridge, C. M., & Lee, R. T. (2008). The emotions of
managing: An introduction to the special issue. Journal
of Managerial Psychology, 23, 108-117. doi:10.1108/
02683940810850763
Haver et al.
Brundin, E., Patzelt, H., & Shepherd, D. A. (2008). Managers’ emo-
tional displays and employees’ willingness to act entrepreneur-
ially. Journal of Business Venturing, 23, 221-243. doi:10.1016/j.
jbusvent.2006.10.009
Burns, N., & Grove, S. K. (2011). Understanding nursing
research: Building an evidence-based practice (5th ed.).
Riverport Lane, MD: Elsevier Saunders.
Chau, S. L., Dahling, J. J., Levy, P. E., & Diefendorff, J. M. (2009).
A predictive study of emotional labor and turnover. Journal
of Organizational Behavior, 30, 1151-1163. doi:10.1002/
job.617
Cherniss, C. (2010). Emotional intelligence: Toward clarification
of a concept. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 3,
110-126. doi:10.1111/j.1754-9434.2010.01231.x
Cheung, F. Y.-L., & Tang, C. S.-K. (2009). The influence of emo-
tional intelligence and affectivity on emotional labor strate-
gies at work. Journal of Individual Differences, 30, 75-86.
doi:10.1027/1614-0001.30.2.75
Chi, S.-C., & Liang, S.-G. (2013). When do subordinates’
emotion-regulation strategies matter? Abusive supervi-
sion, subordinates’ emotional exhaustion, and work with-
drawal. Leadership Quarterly, 24, 125-137. doi:10.1016/
j.leaqua.2012.08.006
Chuang, A., Judge, T. A., & Liaw, Y. J. (2012). Transformational
leadership and customer service: A moderated media-
tion model of negative affectivity and emotion regulation.
European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology,
21, 28-56. doi:10.1080/1359432X.2010.532911
Cole, M. S., Walter, F., & Bruch, H. (2008). Affective mecha-
nisms linking dysfunctional behavior to performance in work
teams: A moderated mediation study. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 93, 945-958. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.93.5.945
Conelly, S., & Ruark, G. (2010). Leadership style and activating
potential moderators of the relationships among leader emo-
tional displays and outcomes. Leadership Quarterly, 21, 745-
764. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2010.07.005
Conte, J. M. (2005). A review and qritique of emotional intel-
ligence measures. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26,
433-330. doi:10.1002/job.319
Côté, S. (2005). A social interaction model of the effects of emo-
tion regulation on work strain. Academy of Management
Review, 30, 509-530. doi:10.2307/20159142
Côté, S., & Hideg, I. (2011). The ability to influence others via
emotion displays: A new dimension of emotional intel-
ligence. Organizational Psychology Review, 1, 53-71.
doi:10.1177/2041386610379257
Côté, S., & Morgan, L. M. (2002). A longitudinal analysis of the
association between emotion regulation, job satisfaction, and
intentions to quit. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23,
947-962. doi:10.1002/job.174
Dasborough, T. M. (2006). Cognitive asymmetry in employee
emotional reactions to leadership behaviors. Leadership
Quarterly, 17, 163-178. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2005.12.004
Diefendorff, J. M., Croyle, M. H., & Gosserand, R. H. (2005). The
dimensionality and antecedents of emotional labor strategies.
Journal of Vocational Behavior, 66, 339-357. doi:10.1016/
j.jvb.2004.02.001
Diefendorff, J. M., & Gosserand, R. H. (2003). Understanding
the emotional labor process: A control theory perspective.
301
Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24, 945-959. doi:
10.1002/job.230
Diefendorff, J. M., & Richard, E. M. (2003). Antecedents and
consequences of emotional display rule perceptions. Journal
of Applied Psychology, 88, 284-294. doi:10.1037/0021-
9010.88.2.284
Diefendorff, J. M., Richard, E. M., & Yang, J. (2008). Linking
emotion regulation strategies to affective events and negative
emotions at work. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 73, 498-
508. doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2008.09.006
Elfenbein, A. H. (2007). Emotion in organizations. Annals of the
Academy of Management, 1, 315-386. doi:10.1080/078559812
Elfenbein, A. H., Marsh, A. A., & Ambady, N. (2002). Emotional
intelligence and the recognition of emotion from facial
expressions. In F. L. Barrett & P. Salovey (Eds.), The wisdom
in feelings. Psychological processes in emotional intelligence
(pp. 37-60). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
Eriksson, M., & Lindström, B. (2005). Validity of Antonovsky’s
sense of coherence scale: A systematic review. Journal
of Epidemiology & Community Health, 59, 460-466.
doi:10.1136/jech.2003.018085
Fisk, G. M., & Friesen, J. P. (2012). Perceptions of leader emo-
tion regulation and LMX as predictors of followers’ job satis-
faction and organizational citizenship behaviors. Leadership
Quarterly, 23, 1-12. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.11.001
Gardner, W. L., Fischer, D., & Hunt, J. G. (2009). Emotional
labor and leadership: A threat to authenticity? Leadership
Quarterly, 20, 466-482. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2009.03.011
George, M. J. (2000). Emotions and leadership: The role of
emotional intelligence. Human Relations, 53, 1027-1055.
doi:10.1177/0018726700538001
Glasø, L., & Einarsen, S. (2008). Emotion regulation in
leader-follower relationships. European Journal of
Work and Organizational Psychology, 17, 482-500.
doi:10.1080/13594320801994960
Glasø, L., Ekerholt, K., Barman, S., & Einarsen, S. (2006). The
instrumentality of emotion in leader-subordinate relation-
ships. International Journal of Work Organisation and
Emotion, 1, 255-276. doi:10.1504/06.10791
Gosserand, R. H., & Diefendorff, J. M. (2005). Emotional dis-
play rules and emotional labor: The moderating role of com-
mitment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 1256-1264.
doi:10.1037/0021-9010.90.6.1256
Grandey, A. A. (2000). Emotion regulation in the workplace: A new
way to conceptualize emotional labor. Journal of Occupational
Health Psychology, 5, 95-110. doi:10.1037//1076-8998.5.1.95
Grandey, A. A. (2003). When “the show must go on”: Surface
acting and deep acting as determinants of emotional exhaus-
tion and peer-rated service delivery. Academy of Management
Journal, 46, 86-96. doi:10.2307/30040678
Grandey, A. A., Fisk, G. M., & Steiner, D. D. (2005). Must “ser-
vice with a smile” be stressful? The moderating role of per-
sonal control for American and French employees. Journal
of Applied Psychology, 90, 893-904. doi:10.1037/0021-
9010.90.5.893
Grandey, A. A., Foo, S. C, Groth, M., & Goodwin, R. E. (2012).
Free to be you and me: A climate of authenticity alleviates
burnout from emotional labor. Journal of Occupational
Health Psychology, 17, 1-14. doi:10.1037/a0025102
302
Grant, A. M. (2007). Enhancing coaching skills and emotional
intelligence through training. Industrial and Commercial
Training, 39, 257-266. doi:10.1108/00197850710761945
Grewal, D., & Salovey, P. (2005). Feeling smart: The science of
emotional intelligence. American Scientist, 93, 330-339.
Gross, J. J. (1998a). Antecedent—and response-focused emotion
regulation: Divergent consequences for experience, expres-
sion, and physiology. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 74, 224-237. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.74.1.224
Gross, J. J. (1998b). The emerging field of emotion regulation:
An integrative review. Review of General Psychology, 2, 271-
299. doi:10.1037/1089-2680.2.3.271
Gross, J. J. (2002). Emotion regulation: Affective, cognitive,
and social consequences. Psychophysiology, 39, 281-291.
doi:10.1017.S0048577201393198
Gross, J. J. (2007). Handbook of emotion regulation. New York,
NY: The Guilford Press.
Gross, J. J., & Barrett, L. F. (2011). Emotion generation and emo-
tion regulation: One or two depends on your point of view.
Emotion Review, 3, 8-16. doi:10.1177/1754073910380974
Gross, J. J., & John, P. O. (2003). Individual differences in two
emotion regulation processes: Implications for affect, rela-
tionships, and well-being. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 85, 348-362. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.85.2.348
Gross, J. J., John, P. O., & Richards, J. M. (2000). The dissociation
of emotion expression from emotion experience: A personal-
ity perspective. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,
26, 712-726. doi:10.1177/0146167200268006
Gross, J. J., & Thompson, R. A. (2006). Emotion regulation:
Conceptual foundations. In J. J. Gross (Ed.), Handbook of
emotion regulation (pp. 3-26). New York, NY: Guildford
Press.
Hochschild, R. A. (1983). The managed heart: The commercial-
ization of feeling. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Humphrey, H. R. (2002). The many faces of emotional leader-
ship. Leadership Quarterly, 13, 493-504. doi:10.1016/S1048-
9843(02)00140-6
Humphrey, H. R. (2012). How do leaders use emotional
labor? Journal of Organizational Behavior, 33, 740-744.
doi:10.1002/job.1791
Härtel, C. E. J., Ashkanasy, N. M., & Zerbe, J. W. (2011). Research
on emotion in organizations: Vol. 7. What have we learned?
Ten years on. Bingley, England: Emerald.
John, P. O., & Gross, J. J. (2004). Healthy and unhealthy emo-
tion regulation: Personality processes, individual differences,
and life span development. Journal of Personality, 72, 1301-
1333. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.2004.00298.x
John, P. O., & Gross, J. J. (2007). Individual differences in emo-
tion regulation. In J. J. Gross (Ed.), Handbook of emotion
regulation (pp. 351-372). New York, NY: Guildford Press.
Jordan, P. J., Ashkanasy, N. M., Härtel, C. E. J., & Hooper, G.
S. (2002). Workgroup Emotional Intelligence Scale develop-
ment and relationship to team process effectiveness and goal
focus. Human Resource Management Review, 12, 195-214.
doi:10.1016/S1053-4822(02)00046-3
Kafetsios, K., Nezlek, B. J., & Vassilakou, T. (2012). Relationships
between leaders’ and subordinates’ emotion regulation and
satisfaction and affect at work. Journal of Social Psychology,
152, 436-457. doi:10.1080/00224545.2011.632788
Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies 20(3)
Kets de Vries, M. F. R. (2006). The leader on the couch: A clinical
approach to changing people and organisations. Chichester,
England: John Wiley.
Lawrence, A. S., Troth, C. A., Jordan, J. P., & Collins, L. A.
(2011). A review of emotion regulation and development of a
framework for emotion regulation in the workplace. In P. L.
Perrewé & D. C. Ganster (Series Eds.), Research in occupa-
tional stress and well-being: Vol. 9. The role of individual dif-
ferences in occupational stress and well being (pp. 197-263).
Bingley, England: Emerald.
Lazarus, R. S., & Alfert, E. (1964). Short-circuiting of threat
by experimentally altering cognitive appraisal. Journal of
Abnormal and Social Psychology, 69, 195-205. doi:10.1037/
h0044635
Lewis, M. K. (2000). When leaders display emotions: How fol-
lowers respond to negative emotional expression of male and
female leaders. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21, 221-
236. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1099-1379(200003)
Liu, Y., Prati, L. M., Perrewé, P. L., & Brymer, R. A. (2010).
Individual differences in emotion regulation, emotional expe-
riences at work, and work-related outcomes: A two-study
investigation. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 40,
1515-1538. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2010.00627.x
Liu, Y., Prati, L. M., Perrewé, P. L., & Ferris, G. R. (2008). The
relationship between emotional resources and emotional labor:
An exploratory study. Journal of Applied Social Psychology,
38, 2410-2439. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2008.00398.x
Lopes, P. N., Salovey, P., Beers, M., & Côté, S. (2005). Emotion
regulation abilities and the quality of social interaction.
Emotion, 5, 113-118. doi:10.1037/1528-3542.5.1.113
Mayer, J. D., Caruso, D. R., & Salovey, P. (1999). Emotional
intelligence meets traditional standards for an intelligence.
Intelligence, 27, 267-298. doi:10.1016/S0160-2896(99)00016-1
Mayer, J. D., & Salovey, P. (1997). What is emotional intelli-
gence? In P. Salovey & D. J. Sluyter (Eds.), Emotional devel-
opment and emotional intelligence (pp. 3-31). New York,
NY: Basic Books.
Newcombe, J. M., & Ashkanasy, N. M. (2002). The role of
affect and affective congruence in perceptions of leaders:
An experimental study. Leadership Quarterly, 13, 601-614.
doi:10.1016/S1048-9843(02)00146-7
Opengart, R. (2005). Emotional intelligence and emotion work:
Examining constructs from an interdisciplinary frame-
work. Human Resource Development Review, 4, 49-62.
doi:10.1177/1534484304273817
Ottenbacher, C. M., & Harrington, J. R. (2010). Strategies
for achieving success for innovative versus incremen-
tal new services. Journal of Services Marketing, 24, 3-15.
doi:10.1108/08876041011017853]
Pescosolido, T. A. (2002). Emergent leaders as managers of group
emotion. Leadership Quarterly, 13, 583-599. doi:10.1016/
S1048-9843(02)00145-5
Richards, D. A., & Hackett, R. D. (2012). Attachment and emotion
regulation: Compensatory interactions and leader–member
exchange. Leadership Quarterly, 23, 686-701. doi:10-1016/j.
leaqua.2012.03.005
Salovey, P., & Mayer, J. D. (1990). Emotional intelligence.
Imagination, Cognition and Personality, 9, 185-211.
doi:10.2190/DUGG-P24E-52WK-6CDG
 Haver et al.
Sosik, J. J., & Megerian, E. L. (1999). Understanding leader emo-
tional intelligence and performance. Group & Organization
Management, 24, 367-390. doi:10.1177/1059601199243006
Sy, T., Côté, S., & Saavedra, R. (2005). The contagious leader:
Impact of the leader’s mood on the mood of group members,
group affective tone, and group processes. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 90, 295-305. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.90.2.295
Thiel, C. E., Connelly, S., & Griffith, J. A. (2012). Leadership
and emotion management for complex tasks: Different emo-
tions, different strategies. Leadership Quarterly, 23, 517-533.
doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.12.005
Totterdell, P., & Holman, D. (2003). Emotion regulation in cus-
tomer service roles: Testing a model of emotional labor.
Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 8, 55-73.
doi:10.1037/1076-8998.8.1.55
Tugade, M. M., & Fredrickson, L. B. (2004). Resilient individuals
use positive emotions to bounce back from negative emotional
experiences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
86, 320-333. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.86.2.320
Tugade, M. M., & Fredrickson, L. B. (2007). Regulation of
positive emotions: Emotion regulation strategies that pro-
mote resilience. Journal of Happiness Studies, 8, 311-333.
doi:10.1007/s10902-006-9015-4
Van Kleef, G. A., Homan, C. A., Beersma, B., & Knippenberg, V. D.
(2010). On angry leaders and agreeable followers. Psychological
Science, 21, 1827-1834. doi:10.1177/0956797610387438
Whittemore, R., & Knafl, K. (2005). The integrative review:
Updated methodology. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 52,
546-553. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2648.2005.03621.x
View publication stats
303
Yukl, G. (2010). Leadership in organizations (7th ed.). Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Yurtsever, G. (2004). Emotional regulation strategies and nego-
tiation. Psychological Reports, 95, 780-786. doi:10.2466/
pr0.95.3.780-786
Zapf, D. (2002). Emotion work and psychological well-being:
A review of the literature and some conceptual consider-
ations. Human Resource Management Review, 12, 237-268.
doi:10.1016/S1053-4822(02)00048-7
Zhou, J., & George, M. J. (2003). Awakening employee creativ-
ity: The role of leader emotional intelligence. Leadership
Quarterly, 14, 545-568. doi:10.1016/S1048-9843(03)00051-1
Author Biographies
Annie Haver, has 12yrs leadership experience in change manage-
ment, strategic processes and organizational & conceptual devel-
opment, from various industries incl. oil, information technology,
publishing, and hospitality. She is currently doing a PhD in
Leadership.
Kristin Akerjordet, PhD, is Postdoctoral Research Fellow and
Associate Professor in Leadership and Nursing Science at
Department of Health Studies, Faculty of Social Sciences,
University of Stavanger, Norway.
Trude Furunes, PhD, is Associate Professor in Leadership and
Organization at Norwegian School of Hotel Management, and
Vice Dean for Research, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of
Stavanger, Norway.