The six chapters in Section III represent novel areas of empirical investigation and new dimensions of researching emotion in organizational contexts. In the following chapters, the authors cover a range of dynamic topics including organizational-level emotional intelligence (OEI) (Chapter 11), expertise as a firewall for emotion work requirements (Chapter 12), employee experiences of anger (Chapter 13), dynamics of the flow experience among academicians (Chapter 14), academic self-control based in personality systems interaction theory (PSI) (Chapter 15), and the important role of emotions in the neglected context of volunteerism (Chapter 16).

In the first chapter in this section, Chapter 11, authors Nuno Da Camara, Victor Dulewicz, and Malcolm Higgs describe a field study where they examined the effects of a recently developed measure of organizational-level emotional intelligence (OEI), which they pitch as a climate construct involving a set of shared norms and practices. Based on survey data collected from 173 employees of a charitable organization in the United Kingdom, Da Camira and his colleagues find a relationship between OEI and intention to quit and show further that this is mediated by employees’ job satisfaction and affective commitment.

The authors of Chapter 12, Sanjeewa Perera and Carol T. Kulik examine the emotion work requirements of customer service employees in high emotion work environments. The study, undertaken in the context of upmarket hotels, found that novices experienced high emotion workload, whereas experts experienced low workload. The differentiating factor identified was that experts had developed additional strategies to the novices, including following interaction level versus organizational level, rules.

In Chapter 13, authors Kathryn Moura, Ashlea C. Troth and Peter J. Jordan describe a qualitative study where they investigated employee experiences of anger. In the study, which was conducted immediately prior to instigation of an anger management intervention program, the authors interviewed 20 employees with a view to identifying anger triggers and to see what actions employees were taking to deal with their anger. Results showed that the principal trigger for interviewees’ anger was a perception of unfair treatment by management that employees felt powerless to deal with, resulting in angry outbursts. Employees reported that the only strategy they had to deal with the anger source was to try to “walk away,” although they also acknowledged that this provided only temporary respite. Moura and her colleagues conclude with a discussion of possible remedies that might be taken to deal with employees’ anger responses to perceptions of injustice.

In Chapter 14, Avina J. Mendonca, Nidhi Mishra, and Sanket S. Dash examine the dynamics of the flow experience among academicians. Drawing from a review of the literature on flow, and using a structured interview method, the authors asked professors about the extent to which predefined constructs increased their sense of involvement, and the effect of student characteristics on the duration of feelings. They also asked interviewees about feelings in the research process and how collaboration and intrinsic and extrinsic motivators influenced flow, as well as querying perceptions of the change in flow over time and its consequences. Based on their results, the authors conclude that different psychological needs lead to different flow experiences and that characteristics of the situation (such as interactions with students or collaborators) affected the experience of flow.

In Chapter 15, authors Jason J. Dahling, Sophie A. Kay, and Nickolas F. Vargovic outline a weekly diary study of academic self-control based in personality systems interaction theory (PSI), which includes a dichotomy of an individual’s action versus state orientation (ASO). In this theory, action- oriented individuals are more likely than their state-oriented counterparts to adjust to demanding situations and to self-regulate (i.e., control their emotions and behaviors). Dahling and his associates hypothesized that action-oriented individuals’ propensity to self-regulate would be mediated by their affective responses to events. To test this idea, the authors collected weekly reports of negative affect and self-regulation from 39 undergraduate students over the period of one academic semester. Results supported the expected effect of ASO but, unexpectedly, there was no mediating effect of trait affect.

Chapter 16 is the last in the volume. In it, the authors Charmine E. J. Hartel and Jennifer M. O’Connor call attention to the paucity of emotions research in the context of volunteerism. After reviewing the small number of studies examining emotions and volunteering, she concludes that the available evidence indicates that emotions play a particularly central role in the attraction, retention, and engagement of volunteers. The chapter concludes with a call for research into this important societal role.

In conclusion, the chapters in this volume collectively illustrate a range of different perspectives, approaches, and opportunities that inform new ways of studying and understanding emotions in worklife. We hope the present volume encourages further momentum to inspire scholarly contributions for advancing theoretical and empirical developments to the field of research of emotions in organizations. To close this introduction, we take the opportunity to acknowledge contributions of those involved in enabling this volume to be produced, including the Emonet conference organizers, participants, presenters, reviewers, and authors, and the assistants involved in supporting this volume. We would especially like to express our deep appreciation to the editorial and production staff at Emerald.

Charmine E. J. Hartel Wilfred J. Zerbe Neal M. Ashkanasy Editors


Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P., & Caruso, D. R. (2002). Mayer-Salovey-Caruso emotional intelligence test. North Tonawanda, NY: Multi-Health Systems, Inc.

Parker, S. K. (2014). Beyond motivation: Job and work design for development, health, ambidexterity, and more. Annual Review of Psychology, 65, 661—691.

< Prev   CONTENTS   Source   Next >