An Ethical Analysis

of Emotional Labor

Barry, B., Olekalns, M., & Rees, L. (2019). An ethical analysis of emotional labor. Journal of
Business Ethics, 160, 17-34.
Overview
1. Definition of emotional labor
2. Rights and duties
3. Conflicts
4. Future directions for managerial practice
Emotional Labor

“the management of feeling to create a publicly observable facial and bodily

display”

Emotional efforts that are performed to fulfill perceived or explicit individual

work-related motivations or expectations that serve organizational goals.

Surface acting, in which the individual displays emotions he or she is not

actually experiencing and is not attempting to feel while suppressing the
display of felt emotions.
Deep acting, in which the individual deliberately strives to summon the target
emotion and then allows that felt emotion to guide outward expression.
 A Brief Review of Emotional Labor Research

“...management cannot simply demand ‘service with a smile’ as the effort to put on the smile
may, ironically, have costs to the person and their performance.”
Rights and Obligations in Relation to Emotional
Labor
Rights
Autonomy
“to make reasoned choices about how to live one’s life”

A right to cultivate autonomy comes into play both for the individual who performs
emotional labor and for the employing organization.
Rights and Obligations in Relation to Emotional
Labor
Rights
Well-being
"The presence of happiness or good or success in one’s own life from one’s own point
of view, possibly achieved through the deliberate fulfillment of chosen goals."

“The ability to pursue happiness in accordance with their own desires”

Rights and Obligations in Relation to Emotional
Labor
Duties
Fidelity
“to fulfill promises and implicit promises because we have made them”

psychological contracts. - “beliefs, based upon promises expressed or implied,

regarding an exchange agreement between and individual and, in organizations, the
employing firm, and its agents”

Social Contract Theory

Rights and Obligations in Relation to Emotional
Labor
Duties
Non-maleficence
"a normative principle that constrains action by virtue of the “intrinsic significance of harm-
doing” which invests in that principle “a force sufficient to outweigh good results”. "
 Conflicts Between Rights and Duties

—the question of when either its performance or its regulation crosses ethical lines—

consent is based on the assumption that contracts have a fair and impartial starting point;
mutual self-interest proposes that “morality consists in those forms of cooperative
behavior that it is mutually advantageous for self-interested agents to engage in”
Conflicts Between Two Parties’ Rights

The autonomy rights of one party delimit the well-being rights of the other, and vice versa.

Principle of consent
A decision bias in which individuals overweight short-term benefits (surface acting is less
effortful) and underweight long-term costs (impact on well-being).

Principle of Mutual Self-interest

The principle is met when both parties align on deep acting or when both parties align on
surface acting or deep acting.
Conflicts Between One Party’s Rights and Duties

Principle of consent
Organizations should acknowledge their duties to train, develop and support employees.

The principle of consent suggests that rights may take precedence over duties.

Principle of Mutual Self-interest

Mutual self-interest implies that the duty of non-maleficence should override rights to
autonomy and well-being.

Also, the duty of fidelity should override each party’s rights.

Reconciliation of Rights and Duties and
Discussion

Thank you
for your attention.