JOMXXX10.1177/0149206316672530Journal of ManagementChi and Grandey / Emotional Labor Predicts Service Performance 672530research-article2016 Journal of Management Vol. 45 No. 2, February 2019 673 –700 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/014920631667253010.1177/0149206316672530 © The Author(s) 2016 Article reuse guidelines: sagepub.com/journals-permissions Emotional Labor Predicts Service Performance Depending on Activation and Inhibition Regulatory Fit Nai-Wen Chi National Sun Yat-Sen University Alicia A. Grandey Pennsylvania State University When service providers regulate their moods and expressions (i.e., deep acting and surface acting), are they better performers? Drawing on the framework of activation-inhibition regulatory systems and regulatory fit, we propose (a) that deep acting represents an activation-oriented regulation strategy and surface acting, an inhibition-oriented regulation strategy; (b) that these strategies have separate pathways to desirable performance (i.e., affective delivery) and counterproductive perfor- mance (i.e., service sabotage), respectively; and (c) that performance is optimized when momentary regulation strategies are aligned with activation- and inhibition-oriented traits. Empirically, across two studies, we employ a multilevel approach (i.e., within- and between-person), a multisource approach (i.e., self, coworker, customer), and a multicontext approach (i.e., banks and restaurants) to test regulatory fit as applied to emotional labor. In two studies, we support separate activation and inhibition pathways, plus regulatory fit, in that deep acting is beneficial to affective delivery for those higher in two activation traits—namely, extraversion and openness—and that surface acting predicts service sabotage for those lower in an inhibition trait: conscientiousness. We empirically rule out mood as the explanation for these effects, propose future research to apply regulatory fit to other outcomes and contexts, and suggest practical implications for services. Keywords: emotional labor; service performance; affective delivery; service sabotage; Big Five personality traits; moods Acknowledgments: This article was accepted under the editorship of Patrick M. Wright. The authors contributed equally to this paper. The current study was supported by the National Science Council of Taiwan (Grant NSC 100- 2410-H-110-003). We thank Robert Melloy for his review of a draft of this paper and the action editor Daniel Beal and two anonymous reviewers for constructive comments and suggestions. Corresponding author: Nai-Wen Chi, Institution of Human Resource Management, National Sun Yat-Sen University, 70 Lienhai Rd., Kaohsiung 80424, Taiwan. E-mail: [email protected], [email protected] 673 674 Journal of Management / February 2019 Service providers know that they must exude a friendly and welcoming demeanor, though at times they may feel irritated or bored. In such cases, emotional labor is key to achieving performance goals. They may try to improve their moods by reappraising situations or fake their expressions by hiding their true feelings—two emotion regulation strategies known as deep acting and surface acting, respectively (Hochschild, 1983). These strategies require effort that can be costly to the employee; moreover, whether and when these strategies are actually effective for interpersonal performance is unclear. Only a handful of studies test whether these emotion regulation strategies predict service performance, with weak or mixed effects, and almost none consider the possibility that they could predict more counterproduc- tive behaviors (Hüsheger & Schewe, 2011; Mesmer-Magnus, DeChurch, & Wax, 2012; Yam, Fehr, Keng-Highberger, Klotz, & Reynolds, 2016). We propose conceptual and methodologi- cal explanations for these weak effects and clarify when emotional labor strategies are linked to performance. Conceptually, we propose that the effectiveness of surface acting and deep acting are conditional on personality traits—specifically, some people are better at enacting the strate- gies than others. Specifically, service providers may report using surface and deep acting to a similar extent, but they might differ in their capacity to translate that emotion regulation strategy into observable performance behaviors. Such a capacity could be indicated by per- sonality traits, as practiced tendencies that are known to predict emotion regulation strategies at the person level (Diefendorff, Croyle, & Gosserand, 2005; Kammeyer-Mueller et al., 2013); however, few studies have assessed whether traits moderate their performance effec- tiveness in the moment (e.g., Chi, Grandey, Diamond, & Krimmel, 2011). Exploring interac- tive effects of traits may help to untangle the weak relationships of emotional labor with performance. Unfortunately, no existing theoretical frameworks exist to explain how person- ality intersects with emotional labor to predict performance (Dahling & Johnson, 2013); we propose a new framework to understand when emotion regulation strategies harm or benefit performance. There are also methodological explanations for the weak effects between emotional labor and performance that we aim to address. First, much prior research on emotional labor effec- tiveness is not at an appropriate level of analysis for the phenomenon. A person-level approach ignores the momentary and transient nature of emotion regulation (Beal, Trougakos, Weiss, & Green, 2006; Scott & Barnes, 2011), which may be more or less effective in an acute versus chronic event. Second, prior studies do not always take into account the effects of felt moods on emotion regulation (Gabriel & Diefendorff, 2015; Totterdell & Holman, 2003) and service outcomes (Beal et al., 2006; Miner & Glomb, 2010); thus, it is unclear if surface acting and deep acting uniquely predict performance or if relationships are due to shared affective influences. Third, existing research on emotional labor and performance focuses on productive behaviors (e.g., Bono & Vey, 2005), but emotion regulation strategies may also make counterproductive behaviors more likely (e.g., avoiding the customer), result- ing in weak overall effectiveness. Thus, we believe that, to determine the effectiveness of emotional labor, researchers must examine within-person variations of emotional labor strat- egies on productive and counterproductive performance, beyond effects of momentary moods. In the current article, we address these theoretical and methodological issues and uniquely contribute to the literature in several ways. First, we draw on established theories of affect Chi, Grandey / Emotional Labor Predicts Service Performance 675 and self-regulation to argue that both emotional labor strategies and personality traits can be conceptualized as activation- and inhibition-oriented self-regulation (see Elliot & Thrash, 2002, 2010; Lanaj, Chang, & Johnson, 2012). We then apply regulatory fit theory (Higgins, 2000) to suggest that the match of the momentary regulatory strategy and chronic motiva- tional orientation of the employee (e.g., activation or inhibition oriented traits) enhances performance, separate from the effects of felt moods (Aaker & Lee, 2006; Cesario, Higgins, & Scholer, 2008; Johnson, Smith, Wallace, Hill, & Baron, 2015). By doing so, we contribute to theory by proposing an integrated and unique way of thinking about what deep acting and surface acting represent, how and why they are related to service performance, and what traits serve as the boundary conditions to those relationships (Whetten, 1989). Second, we use research methods that address prior limitations and provide a robust empirical contribution. We do this by (a) studying emotional labor–performance relation- ships within person (at the daily level and the transaction level) to be more consistent with the transient nature of emotion regulation, (b) testing relationships with affective delivery and service sabotage to assess differential outcomes by strategy, and (c) controlling for the effect of felt moods on performance to permit inferences about the unique effect of emotion regulation. Finally, we conduct a constructive replication (Lykken, 1968) and overcome limi- tations about the generalizability of our findings by conducting two studies that vary in ser- vice context (banks and restaurants), timing of the assessments (day and encounter levels), and source of data (coworkers, self, and customers). Such an empirical approach permits us to be more confident in forming conclusions about our theoretical model. Emotional Labor and Service Performance The two primary emotion labor strategies used by service employees when interacting with customers are known as deep acting and surface acting (Hochschild, 1983). Deep acting indicates the extent that the employee is trying to improve one’s mood to appear genuine to customers, whereas surface acting indicates the extent that one is hiding felt emotions and pretending when interacting with customers. These emotion regulation strategies are per- formed to meet the display rules and cope with dissonant emotions (Diefendorff et al., 2005), but their relationship with service performance is unclear. Service performance involves many types of skills and behaviors (e.g., efficiency, product knowledge), but the central component is interpersonal behaviors (Parasuraman, Zeithaml, & Berry, 1988). In this article, we focus on two main forms of interpersonal performance that represent productive and counterproductive behaviors: affective delivery and