Can hotel managers with social intelligence affect the emotions of employees?

Abstract

Using the Multilevel Model of Emotional in Organizations, this study investigates whether managers’ levels of social intelligence affect employees’ emotional labor and the emotional climate of the workplace. In addition, the mediating effect of emotional labor on social intelligence and emotional climate is defined. A total of 276 surveys were distributed among the employees of a chain hotel in Istanbul. A structural equality modeling was used to explain the relationships between social intelligence, emotional labor, and emotional climate. The results reveal that social intelligence positively and significantly affects deep acting. It is also shown that social intelligence does not affect the emotional climate, and that emotional labor has no intermediary role. Practical results and recommendations are thus suggested for future research.

Keywords:

• social intelligence
• emotional labor
• emotional climate
• hotels

Public Interest Statement

Emotions are an important issue for employees in service businesses. This research examines the role of social intelligence on emotions. It examines the influence of social intelligence on emotional climate and emotional labor and whether it is mediated by emotional labor. The study was conducted on the front office and restaurant staff in Istanbul. It turns out that social intelligence affects emotional labor (in-depth behavior). In emotional labor, no mediating role was found. Within these results, some suggestions have been made for the managers and employees in hotel enterprises.

1. Introduction

Despite the fact that emotions represent an important component of employees’ behavior in hotel businesses, this dimension has been somewhat under-examined (Byron, 2008). It is managers who are the most responsible for the emotions of their employees; their social intelligence can therefore be vital in terms of the performance of employees. An emotional climate within an organization can affect, and become reflected in, employees’ emotional labor, thus leading to customer dissatisfaction (Kaplan, Cortina, Ruark, LaPort, & Nicolaides, 2014).

Research in the field of hospitality accepts the influence of the emotional climate of the workplace on employee performance (Ashkanasy & Nicholson, 2003; Ozcelik, Langton, & Aldrich, 2008). Emotional climate is a concept that points to the individual’s perceptions of situational events; it can therefore be said that the emotional climate is subjective. However, employees that work together tend to share the same climate (Spiess, 2011). Payne and Pugh (1976) stated that emotional climate is affected by both managerial behaviors and human behaviors. Service employees are both creators of and actors in events at work. The communication style of the manager, as well as the broader management style, organizational culture, and norms that become concrete in the behavior of employees form a shared atmosphere. This atmosphere, which we may call emotional climate, affects employees’ emotions, behaviors, and performance (Spiess, 2011). Although the conceptualization of emotional climate in this context has recently been proposed, studies with a theoretical focus have drawn more attention than those that offer empirical demonstrations (Ashkanasy & Jordan, 2008; Schneider, Macey, & Young, 2006).

The display of positive attitudes and feelings towards customers by service employees during service delivery can create a positive impression. This may then make it more likely that the customer will purchase a product from that business or will speak well of the company to others (Parasuraman, Zeithaml, & Berry, 1985). For that reason, most companies are now beginning to focus on managing employees’ emotional behaviors, and are providing implicit and explicit emotional labor rules relating to the appropriate emotional expressions that employees should use when communicating with customers (Diefendorff & Richard, 2003). However, while emotional labor is very important for hospitality businesses, it draws attention to the fact that there is a shortage in the field as to how emotional labor can be managed. Employees working in a negative atmosphere suppress their feelings and thus constantly exhibit behaviors that are inconsistent with the expressions that are expected of them, through the process of abreaction. This emotional inconsistency leads to emotional distress and work stress, which are the main causes of dissatisfaction (Grandey, 2000). Emotions can only be managed in a favorable climate; such climates can be created by managers who are fully aware of it. It is critical for a person to get to know the feelings of others and to motivate and manage their own feelings when building relationships with others (e.g. social intelligence) in order to realize emotional labor (Ashkanasy & Daus, 2002). Although many studies have been carried out empirically investigating emotional labor (Chu, Baker, & Murrmann, 2012; Chu & Murrmann, 2006; Lee, Ok, & Hwang, 2016; Li, Wong, & Kim, 2017), they have not taken into consideration the components of social intelligence and emotional climate.

According to the Multilevel Model of Emotional in Organizations (MMEO) developed by Ashkanasy and Jordan (2008), people feel emotions at a variety of levels, from the individual to the organizational level. Previous studies have divided employees into two groups, software and hardware, but have not taken the soft skills of employees into account (Baum, 2006, 2008). Therefore, emotions and social relations, which form part of these soft skills, are very significant have become increasingly important in recent years.

Unlike earlier studies carried out on personality traits (Bakker & Heuven, 2006; Brotheridge & Lee, 2002; Diefendorff, Croyle, & Gosserand, 2005), age (Bhave & Glomb, 2009), the behavioral consequences of emotional labor (e.g. job satisfaction, stress, etc.) (Allen, Pugh, Grandey, & Groth, 2010), and its relationship with emotional intelligence (Kim, Yoo, Lee, & Kim, 2012), this research will empirically investigate the emotions within the organization and their relationship with social intelligence. This study therefore aims to investigate the influence of managers’ social intelligence on the emotional climate of the workplace and the emotional labor of its employees. It will also consider whether the emotional climate plays an intermediary role. The goal is to understand the emotional reflection of the environment in which the employees work; this is crucial for customer satisfaction. Thus, social intelligence will enable the development of strategies to better understand emotional labor and the emotional climate and to control their consequences, particularly for employees. This information will enable hotel business practitioners to develop effective tools to manage emotions within their organization.

2. Literature review and hypotheses

2.1. Social intelligence

The concept of social intelligence was originally proposed by Edward L. Thorndike in the 1920s, but failed to attract significant attention. The concept gained significance in 1983 when Harvard psychologist Howard Gardner proposed the theory of multiple intelligences in his work “Frames of Mind”. Gardner (1983) found that humans possessed not only cognitive intelligence but also other forms of intelligence, such as language, logic, musical, kinesthetic, visual, internal, and social intelligences. This opened the door to further studies on emotional and social intelligence.

In the 1990s, the concept of emotional intelligence gained significant popularity, with social intelligence included within this concept (Salovey & Mayer, 1990). However, it was understood that the concept of emotional intelligence was insufficient in explaining how individuals made contact with others, and it was suggested that emotional intelligence and social intelligence should be considered separate concepts (Goleman, 2006). Goleman (2006) attracted much attention with his book “The New Science of Human Relationships”, while Albrecht (2006) defines social intelligence as the ability to negotiate and collaborate with others. It was understood that emotional intelligence alone is not enough for the establishment of relationships with others, and it was further argued that the concept of social intelligence is required for examining relationships with others (Boyatzis, 2009).

2.2. Emotional climate

One of the most important factors affecting employee behavior is the emotional climate within the organization (Kaplan et al., 2014). The concept of emotional climate was developed by De Rivera in 1977 and is defined as the “emotional experiences felt by employees or customers in a business rather than physical experiences” (Schein, 1999, p. 3). De Rivera and Grinkis (1986) argue that the emotional climate is based on social relationships rather than on internal processes. Hatfield, Cacioppo, and Rapson (1992, p. 151) asserted that emotions are transmitted from person-to-person and that these transmissions can affect the entire organization. Emotional Contagion “a process in which a person or group influences the emotions or behavior of another person or group through the conscious or unconscious induction of emotion states and behavioral attitudes” (Schoenewolf, 1990, p. 50). Goleman (2006) agreed, highlighting that there are mirror nerve cells in the human brain, and as soon as an emotion is displayed on an individual’s face, others around them may experience similar emotions. The emotional climate concept is therefore closely related to the concept of social intelligence and emotional labor.

2.3. Emotional labor

With the growth of the service industry since the 1970s, there has been an increase in the number of studies examining emotions within organizations. Realizing that emotions are an indispensable element of organizational life as people spend most of their waking hours in the workplace, Hochschild proposed the Emotional Labor Theory in 1983 in order to explain the concept of emotional labor, inspired by the work of Goffman (1959). Hochschild likened employees to theater actors that interact with customers on an individual basis. He defined emotional labor as the gestures that can be observed by all, and the management of the emotions by facial or bodily movements (1983, p. 7). Employees’ control over their emotions is therefore at the core of emotional labor, whilst also including the management of one’s emotional expressions so that they conform to the requirements of the business. Ekman (1973) stated that rules of emotional display form standards, adding that not all kinds of emotional expressions are appropriate for the business or workplace environment. These emotional display rules in hotel businesses require employees to show only appropriate feelings towards customers, in a warm, courteous and sincere way (Lee et al., 2016). It is expected that employees will suppress their negative emotions during service delivery (Morris & Feldman, 1996).

Earlier research identified two dimensions of emotional labor; deep acting and surface acting (Hochschild, 1983). Deep acting is the attempt by the individual to genuinely live and feel the emotions that they are expected to show (Brotheridge & Lee, 2002). Surface acting refers to when an individual is pretending to feel certain emotions (Ashforth & Humphrey, 1993). It was found that employees that are surface-acting are more likely to experience psychological problems (Grandey, Dickter, & Sin, 2004). It was also found that employees that employed deep acting had higher levels of empathy (Genc, 2013). In this context, it is important that employees experience more positive emotions in the workplace and that they express their true emotions in order to display their willing and lively, active, cheerful, and energetic behavior. In short, it is important that employees engage in deep acting.

2.4. Theoretical framework and hypothesis development related to research variables

The relationship between social intelligence, emotional labor, and emotional climate is based on MMEO (Ashkanasy & Jordan, 2008). Ashkanasy and Jordan (2008) developed a five-stage model of emotions in businesses, including hotels. The five stages of this model are associated with (1) the person himself, (2) interpersonal (individual) differences, (3) interpersonal interactions, (4) group dynamics, and (5) the organizational dimension. It is also claimed that this model has a common biological basis at each of its five stages. Hence, at the experiential level, the individual feels the emotion (level 1) in the same instant as it is felt with consideration of the emotional climate at the organizational level (level 5). The first level deals with the immediate emotions experienced by the employees. Researchers indicate that managers should pay particular attention to emotional situations and employee moods that are experienced individually at this level (Ashkanasy & Jordan, 2008; Kaplan et al., 2014). It is argued that at the second level of the model, differences in social intelligence, emotional intelligence, personality traits, and leadership style affect the attitudes of employees. In addition, it is said that this can affect the job and organizational satisfaction of employees. It is suggested that, in interpersonal relationships, managers and leaders should pay attention to differences such as personality traits and emotional intelligence. It is expected that at the third level of the model, in interpersonal interactions, employees display appropriate emotions when dealing with both customers and their fellow employees. At this level, it is necessary for managers to train their employees in emotional labor and to instill confidence in them. The fourth level of the model moves beyond the emotions that are experienced in interpersonal relationships to those that affect the moods experienced by entire teams. Such moods can affect employees’ team-working behavior and performance; it is therefore very important that managers and leaders manage this emotional involvement. The final level of the model relates to emotional climates that exist within businesses, which can affect organizational performance. For this reason, all employees within a business will experience different emotional situations at the individual and organizational levels; managers need to manage these emotional situations in order for the business to succeed (Ashkanasy & Jordan, 2008, pp. 366–367). The MMEO plays an important part in influencing employee behavior (Barsade & Gibson, 2007; Dasborough, 2006; Dasborough, Ashkanasy, Tee, & Tse, 2009; Hartel, Gough, & Hartel, 2008; Offermann, Bailey, Vasilopoulos, Seal, & Sass, 2004).

Earlier studies have argued that hotel equipment (decor, architecture, furniture fittings) alone are not enough, and that employees and their emotions are also a vital factor affecting interactions with customers (Jung & Yoon, 2014; Kim, 2008; Lee et al., 2016).

People spend more time in the workplace than in their social and home environment. Employees may feel very strong emotions (hope, excitement, joy, fear, anger, revenge, etc.), which they may then associate with their workplace (Boyatzis, 2008). Employees are particularly vulnerable to the requests of customers in the hospitality industry, where face-to-face and audible interactions between service providers and customers constantly take place (Pizam, 2004). As hotel employees are part of the customer experience, emotional labor is increasingly being recognized as an important factor. In environments where employees’ feelings are not understood, adverse psychological conditions may be experienced (Cho, Choi, & Lee, 2014; Chu et al., 2012). The social intelligence of managers is therefore important, as managers that can understand and empathize with others will be more aware of how their employees feel. Shani, Uriely, Reichel, and Ginsburg (2014) argued that the social behaviors of managers positively influence employees’ emotional labor (in-depth behavior). Kaplan et al. (2014) stated that the emotional and social behaviors of managers affect employees’ emotions and business performance. Also, Ashkanasy and Daus (2002) articulated that managers who can communicate properly with employees have a positive influence on the emotional impressions of their employees. In summary, managers who are aware of others’ feelings (high social intelligence) can provide their employees with positive emotions (emotional labor). Hypotheses can therefore be formed as follows:

H₁: A relationship exists between the managers’ social intelligence and employees’ emotional labor.

H_1a: A positive relationship exists between the managers’ social intelligence and employees’ deep acting.

H_1b: A negative relationship exists between the managers’ social intelligence and employees’ surface acting.

Earlier studies have indicated that feelings within an organization are an integral part of the business (Boyatzis, 2008; Kaplan et al., 2014). The literature shows that the social intelligence of managers improves service performance (Barsade & Gibson, 2007; Boyatzis, 2007; Offermann et al., 2004; Tsai, 2009). Managerial behaviors have an impact on the emotional climate within a business (Gulertekin, 2013; Spiess, 2011). Momeni (2009) also states that the emotional behaviors of the manager play a role in the emotional climate. Kaplan et al. (2014) detected similar results. In the model proposed by Brotheridge and Lee (2008), it was suggested that the behavior of the manager influenced the emotional climate. Therefore, managers may be able to use their social intelligence to transform the emotional climate into a positive value for the business. Therefore, the second main hypothesis of the research is as follows:

H₂: A positive relationship exists between the managers’ social intelligence and an emotional climate.

Emotional display rules are followed in order to ensure customer satisfaction. At the same time, this emotional labor can directly affect the climate within the business (Byron, 2008). In the model developed by Grandey (2000), it was declared that emotional labor had an effect on organizational performance. At the same time, emotional labor reduces the tendency of employees to leave their employment. It expresses the role of managerial support as an organizational factor, especially on emotional labor. Therefore, emotional labor has an intermediary role in terms of managerial behavior and organizational performance. In order for managers to direct emotional labor in a positive way, they must sustain the positive feelings of employees. Thus, the third main hypothesis of the research is as follows:

H₃: Emotional labor has a mediating effect of managers’ social intelligence and emotional climate.

H_3a: Deep acting has a mediating effect of managers’ social intelligence and emotional climate.

H_3b: Surface acting has a mediating effect of managers’ social intelligence and emotional climate.

3. Method

3.1. Participants and procedure

Hotel customers not only assess the quality of the facility, but also every aspect of the service experience (Ladhari, Brun, & Morales, 2008). Emotions in businesses are effectively perceived through service interactions. Front office and restaurant employees interact more often, and for longer periods of time, with customers than other hotel employees. The emotional reactions of employees are therefore a crucial part of the success of hotel businesses. For this reason, this study will focus on the front office and restaurant employees of a chain hotel business.

In order to distribute the questionnaires for this study, permission was obtained from the administration team of a hotel in Istanbul, Turkey’s largest city, to spend four weeks collecting data from their employees. 325 questionnaires were distributed to those employees who were willing to take part in the research examining the effect of the social intelligence of managers on the emotional labor of employees and the emotional climate in which they work. The questionnaires were collected immediately after they were completed.

3.2. Measurement

For the purpose of this study, the concept of social intelligence has been developed following consideration of the capacities and qualities of social intelligence embodied by managers within an organization (Cooper & Sawaf, 2010). A comprehensive literature review was undertaken, and, with the input of three hospitality management experts, the social intelligence of managers was defined as, “The manager’s awareness of the feelings of others in a business and their ability to demonstrate appropriate skills towards them” (Boyatzis, 2008). This study consists of five items of social awareness and six items of social skills, which are designed to measure social intelligence in hotel businesses from the employees’ perspective. The social intelligence studies in Goleman (2006), the social intelligence studies of Albrecht (2006), and the Tromso Social Intelligence Scale by Silvera, Martinussen, and Dahl (2001) were used in the preparation of the scale items.

To measure the emotional climate, the emotional climate scale developed by Ruiz (2007, pp. 292–293) was used in this study. The scale consists of a total of eight questions (relating to fear, anger, sadness, guilt, insecurity, instability, contempt, and loneliness) to measure the emotional climate of the organization.

The emotional labor scale, Hospitality Emotional Labor Scale (HELS), developed by Chu and Murrmann (2006) was used, which consisted of 10 items to measure surface acting and five items to measure deep acting. All the items in the questionnaire were translated by experts fluent in both Turkish and English, using the back-translation technique, in order to ensure the correctness of the items. All items in the social intelligence and emotional labor scales were rated on a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from (1) “strongly disagree” to (5) “strongly agree”. The emotional climate scale was ranked using the 5-point Likert-type scale with the values poor (1), fair (2), normal (3), good (4), and very good (5). The questionnaire also included questions about the participants’ demographic characteristics, such as gender, age, and educational level.

4. Data analysis and results

4.1. Characteristics of the respondents

In this study, 325 questionnaires were distributed and 276 valid responses were collected. Table 1 shows the demographic characteristics of the participants. The majority of the participants were male (61.2%) and between the ages of 18–22 and 23–27 years old (59.5%), while almost half of them were high school graduates. In terms of the marital status of the participants, the numbers of married and single employees were similar. The majority of the participants were restaurant employees (73.9%). These figures confirm the fact that the hospitality sector is predominantly made up of young employees.

Table 1. Demographic characteristics of participants

Characteristic	N	Percentage (%)
Gender
Male	169	61.2
Female	107	38.8
Age
18–22	49	17.8
23–27	115	41.7
28–32	80	29.0
33–37	26	9.3
38 and over	6	2.2
Education
Elementary school and below	30	10.9
Junior high school	54	19.6
Senior high school	135	48.9
Vocational college or university	45	16.3
Graduate school	12	4.3
Department
Front office	72	26.1
Restaurant	204	73.9
Marital status
Married	130	47.1
Single	146	52.9

4.2. Explanatory factor analysis

An explanatory factor analysis (EFA) was conducted to confirm the validity and reliability of social intelligence. A Cronbach Alpha criterion was used for the reliability analysis. The .70 consistency value recommended by Nunnally (1978) was used. For the factor extraction, the principle component factor analysis and the Varimax Orthogonal Rotation method were used. The evaluation result reveals that the value of the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin is .946 and that Bartlett’s sphericity test is meaningful. These values show that the data are suitable for a factor analysis. In cases where the eigenvalue was greater than 1.0, the factors were removed and then the factors with a factor loading of <.4 were eliminated. Two factors (social awareness and social skills) were applied to the EFA of social intelligence. The total cumulative variance that is explained by these two factors is 82.86%, and the Cronbach Alpha values are .917 and .967, respectively. In addition, the Cronbach Alpha value was >.7 for surface acting, deep acting, and emotional climate (Table 2).

Table 2. Results of confirmatory factor analysis

Construct and items	Standardized factor loadings	Cronbach’s Alpha	Composite reliability	Average variance extracted
Emotional labor			.940
Surface acting		.930		.59
I fake a good mood when interacting with customers	.71
I put on a mask in order to express the right emotions for my job	.88
I have to cover up my true feelings when dealing with customers	.70
I behave in a way that differs from how I really feel	.77
I display emotions that I am not actually feeling	.95
I fake the emotions I show when dealing with customers	.84
I try to change my actual feelings to match those that I must express to customers	.52
My interactions with customers are very robotic	.78
Deep acting		.870		.59
When working with customers, I attempt to create certain emotions in myself that present the image my company desires	.64
I actually feel the emotions that I need to show to do my job well	.54
When getting ready for work, I tell myself that I am going to have a good day	.88
I think of pleasant things when I am getting ready for work	.94
I show the same feelings to customers that I feel inside	.83
Social intelligence			.971
Social awareness		.917		.69
The manager also sees the events from others’ perspective	.85
The manager shows awareness to the events and problems experienced by others	.88
The manager can effectively evaluate the feelings and needs of others	.89
The manager is aware of the unwritten rules of the organization and knows how to solve problems through informal (unusual) ways when he cannot achieve success via formal (usual) ways	.74
The manager is aware of what is expected from him, and does what it takes to meet the expectations	.80
Social skills		.967		.83
The manager praises and makes constructive criticism to the people around him and provides support about their development	.91
The manager can mobilize the people around him in reaching the common purposes	.92
The manager demonstrates the positive aspects of change to the people around him and becomes an example to them	.95
The manager can reconcile the conflicting parties by finding a common solution when there are disagreements	.94
The manager attaches importance to acting together, cooperating, and sharing	.93
The manager thinks that he is successful in communicating with people around him	.82
Emotional climate
Emotional climate		.936		.64
Fear	.66
Anger	.84
Sadness	.79
Guilt	.90
Insecurity	.76
Unstability	.88
Humiliation	.73
Loneliness	.85

4.3. Confirmatory factor analysis

We evaluated convergent and discriminant validity by performing a confirmatory factor analysis to ensure the validity of the measurement model (Churchill, 1979). The AMOS program was used to estimate the measurement model. The convergent validity of a measurement was assessed by calculating the standardized factor loading, composite reliability and average variance extracted (AVE) from the structures listed in Table 2. The standardized factor loadings ranged from .54 to .95, and its meeting criteria proposed by Bagozzi and Yi (.50 to .95) (1991) was significant at .05. The composite reliability of constructs varied between .94 and .97, and these values are significantly higher than .70. The average variance extracted (AVE) varied between .59 and .83 and is higher than the acceptable level of .50 (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). Thus, the convergent validity criteria are met.

To assess the discriminant validity, Fornell and Larcker (1981) suggested that the AVE for each structure should be higher than the unequal correlation between the structure and the others. The correlation between constructs ranges from −.017 to .838, as shown in Table 3, and all of the correlations whose squares were calculated do not exceed AVE. The measurement of the construct supports discriminant validity. For this reason, both convergent and discriminant validity show acceptable structure validity.

Table 3. Correlations between constructs

Construct	EI1	EI2	EL1	EL2	EC
EI1: Social awareness	.69
EI2: Social skills	.838*	.83
EL1: Surface acting	−.565*	−.579*	.59
EL2: Deep acting	.743*	.708**	−.736*	.59
EC: Emotional climate	−.034	−.017	.084	−.051	.64

Notes: The diagonal elements (in bold) are the average variance extracted for each construct. The values of the diagonal elements should be greater than the squared correlation between constructs.

* p < .01.

4.4. Structural equation modeling

A structural equation model was carried out to examine the relationships between the proposed model constructions. The compliance statistics show a good fit between social intelligence, emotional labor, and emotional climate (x²/df = 241.66/86 = 2.810, p < .001, RMSEA = .081, GFI = .894, AGFI = .852, CFI = .951, NFI = .926). Social intelligence affects deep acting positively (β = .81, p < .05) but has no effect on an emotional climate (β = .096, p > .05). At the same time, the mediating effect of deep acting between social intelligence and an emotional climate could not be determined (Figure 1). In this study, two models were created in accordance with the purpose of the research. In the first model, the influence of social intelligence on deep acting and an emotional climate was investigated. The compliance statistics in Model 1 demonstrate that social intelligence affects deep acting positively (β = .81, p < .05); accordingly, the H_1a hypothesis has been accepted. However, it was found that social intelligence has no effect on an emotional climate β = .096, p > .05); there is therefore insufficient evidence to support the H₂ hypothesis. At the same time, the mediating effect of deep acting between social intelligence and an emotional climate could not be determined. As shown in Model 1, there was not enough evidence to support H₃ hypothesis (Figure 1).

Figure 1. Analysis results of structural model.

In the second model, the influence of social intelligence on surface acting and an emotional climate was examined. A satisfactory fit emerged between the variables in the structure of Model 2 (x²/df = 365.667/130 = 2.813, p < .001, RMSEA = .081, GFI = .866, AGFI = .824, CFI = .941, NFI = .911). Social intelligence affects surface acting negatively (β = −.63, p < .05); accordingly, the H_1b hypothesis was accepted. However, social intelligence has no effect on an emotional climate (β = .13, p > .05). There is therefore insufficient evidence to support the H₂ hypothesis. At the same time, it was determined that there is no mediating effect of surface acting on social intelligence and an emotional climate. Additionally, in Model 2, there was not enough evidence to support the H_3a and H_3b hypothesis (Figure 2) and Table 4.

Figure 2. Analysis results of structural model.

Table 4. Direct, indirect, and total effects between social intelligence, deep acting, surface acting, and emotional climate

Effect	Direct		Indirect		Total
	Model 1	Model 2	Model 1	Model 2	Model 1	Model 2
Social intelligence → Deep acting	.81* (13.952)	–	–	–	.81*
Social intelligence → Surface acting	–	−.63*(−9.970)	–	–		−.63*
Social intelligence → Emotional climate	0.10(0.78)	.13(1.449)	–	–	.10	.13
Deep acting → Emotional climate	−.138(−1.122)	–	–	–	−.138	–
Surface acting → Emotional climate	–	.200(1.780)	–	–	–	.200

Note: t-values in parentheses.

* p < .05.

5. Discussion and conclusion

Frontline (service and front office) employees in the hospitality industry use their soft skills to provide high quality services to customers. These soft skills are known as aesthetics, social relations, and emotions (Baum, 2006). It can be said that the number of studies investigating the relationship between the emotional labor of service and front office’s employees (deep acting, surface acting) and managers’ social intelligence, and the emotional climate of the workplace, has been insufficient. This study attempted to reveal the relationship between the social intelligence of managers, the emotional labor of employees, and the emotional climate in which they work. The results are consistent with the findings of Liu, Prati, Perrewé, and Ferris (2008) and Kim, Hur, Moon, and Jun (2017). Liu et al. (2008) found that employees with high emotional intelligence (who can also understand their own feelings) exhibit in-depth behavior. In a study carried out on airline employees in South Korea by Kim et al. (2017), it was asserted that support from managers and friends affect in-depth behavior. This study highlights how important it is for managers to manage employee emotions by communicating openly with employees in order to understand their feelings.

In the hospitality industry, managers’ social awareness and social skills are important factors allowing employees to display their true emotions (deep acting). It is also significant in terms of how managers use these competencies to minimize employees’ display of false emotions. This is consistent with the findings of Tsai (2009), which found that those who are aware of others’ feelings have a higher service attitude (communication with their friends). Also, Ashkanasy and Daus (2002) expressed that if managers create emotionally healthy communication and set visions, this may then be reflected in the emotional labor of employees in terms of in-depth behavior. Kaplan et al. (2014) stated that the emotional and social behaviors of managers influence employees’ emotions and business performance. Additionally, Shani et al. (2014) indicated that the attitudes and behaviors of managers and their support affect the emotional labor of employees. On the other hand, if no empathy is shown to employees or if an indifferent management approach is adopted, this will reduce in-depth behavior. In sum, social intelligence plays a role in the demonstration of in-depth behavior among employees.

Emotional climate variables were included in this study as both customers and employees are affected by the climate in which they consume or work. However, this study found insufficient evidence demonstrating that managers’ social intelligence influence the emotional climate. This is consistent with the findings of Spiess (2011), which found that transformational leadership does not affect the emotional climate. It can be said that besides social intelligence, managerial support is also important (Kim et al., 2017). In addition, according to Ozcelik et al. (2008), the emotional personalities of employees in particular emotional climates also play a role in organizations. Watson, Clark, and Tellegen (1988) indicated that employees with negative emotional attitudes may weaken the emotional climate. It was also put forward by Momeni (2009) that the emotional behavior of managers also plays a role in the emotional climate. In conclusion, the emotional climate is not only affected by social intelligence but also by other factors.

There was no significant relationship between emotional labor and emotional climate in this study. In other words, it was found that the emotions that employees are expected to feel and exhibit do not significantly affect the emotional climate of the workplace. Emotional labor is a behavior that affects the individual performance of the employee (Cossette & Hess, 2015). On the other hand, emotional climate refers to the similar feelings felt by all of the employees within a particular environment (Ashkanasy & Hartel, 2005). It is clear from emotional labor studies that emotional labor has more of an effect on individual behavior. There are studies that show that superficial behavior reduces job satisfaction, while in-depth behavior has a positive influence on job satisfaction (Grandey, 1999; Hur, Moon, & Jun, 2013; Richmord, 1997; Wharton, 2009). This study therefore argues that employees that demonstrate emotional labor do not experience the same emotions as those of the emotional climate.

This study confirms that managers’ social intelligence influences employees’ emotional labor, but found that it does not affect the emotional climate of the workplace, partially confirming the model of Ashkanasy and Jordan (2008). According to Kaplan et al. (2014), the emotional behavior of managers can directly affect job performance, job satisfaction, ill feelings between employees, and burnout. These organizational behavior outcomes are closely related to the emotional climate. Thus, by improving the emotional labor of employees and establishing close relationships with employees, with the use of managers’ social intelligence, both employee satisfaction and customer satisfaction can be secured.

6. Theoretical contribution

Emotional climate has emerged as a new area of study within the field of organizational behavior. Earlier studies of emotions, particularly the emotional climate, have mostly focused on conceptualization (Sekerka & Fredrickson, 2008; Tran, 1998). For this reason, the real contribution of this study is that the existing theoretical model has been empirically tested and a holistic measure has been developed. Therefore, this study provides new information in terms of social intelligence, emotional labor, emotional climate, and the emotional performances of employees in hotel businesses, further strengthening the application of the theoretical model.

7. Practical implications

It is difficult to expect frontline hotel employees in Turkey to manage their emotions, following developments in the Turkish hospitality sector in recent years. This is because of developments seen in the Turkish hospitality sector in recent years (the downed Russian fighter jet crisis, terrorist attacks in both Syria and Turkey, the crisis in the European Union etc.), which have affected Turkey’s hospitality sector as well as the feelings of its employees (Akoglan Kozak & Genc, 2017). Hence, it is essential that managers be aware of the emotional climate of their organization and that they take measures accordingly. In 2016, the number of tourists coming to Turkey fell by roughly 30% compared to the previous year (UNWTO, 2017). Many hotel establishments have closed down or have been sold. Employees are either directly or indirectly affected by this economic climate. These developments have also affected the emotional expressions of employees. Hence, the concepts of emotional climate, social intelligence, and emotional labor are of significant importance in terms of increasing awareness of the psychological conditions of hotel employees, so that they may be directed more positively.

In this study, it was revealed that managers with high social intelligence manage the emotional labor of their employees. It is important that managers use their social intelligence both for recruitment, as well as the ongoing orientation of employees. In this context, managers need to be able to empathize with their employees, be aware of social events both in and outside the organization, and commit themselves to self-improvement so that conflicts within the enterprise can be reduced and positive developments can be reflected back to their employees. At their core, hospitality providers aim to provide enjoyable experiences for tourists. It is therefore one of the basic responsibilities of the hospitality employee to engage in behaviors that encourage happiness amongst their customers. Displaying such positive emotions is a skill that employees must learn. When hiring new employees, it is important that managers make clear the emotions that employees should display towards tourists.

Hotel managers must not only provide some training in emotional display rules; they should also provide training of the emotions that should be displayed in particular situations, as well as the length of time and frequency that such emotions should be displayed. Such training should be reinforced with case studies. Social and emotional interactions should then follow, positively affecting the business and ensuring customer satisfaction. Hotel management executives need to understand that employee satisfaction does not rest only on the provision of physical amenities and salaries. They must recognize that the social dynamics within the business are also important and that these dynamics can trigger social situations. It should also be remembered that unhappy employees may display behaviors that hinder or sabotage their work, and neglect the needs of the customer.

8. Limitations and recommendations for future studies

This study involved front office staff and frontline restaurant employees in hotels in Istanbul. This study cannot be generalized to every location and every type of hotel business; in order to do so, it would be advantageous to study hotel businesses in different locations. It would therefore be beneficial to repeat this study in hotel enterprises that have a different status, particularly as informal relations are stronger in such businesses with 3 stars or fewer, due to their construction, and such social relations can deeply affect employees. It is not only frontline workers that are affected by the emotional climate of a hotel business; therefore, future studies should involve all of the personnel within the organization. Recent developments in the Turkish hospitality sector may have directly or indirectly influenced the results of this study. It would therefore be beneficial for future research to be carried out in different hotel segments, taking cultural differences into account.

Funding

The authors received no direct funding for this research.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Volkan Genc

Volkan Genc, is a research assistant at the School of Tourism and Hotel Management at Batman University. He is currently doing a PhD in Tourism Management at Eskisehir Anadolu University in Turkey. He continues to work on emotional and social competence, emotional labor, aesthetic labor, and the role of employee’s emotions in resistance to change.

Seray Gulertekin Genc

Seray Gulertekin Genc, is a research assistant at the School of Tourism and Hotel Management at Batman University. She is currently doing a PhD in Tourism Management at Eskisehir Eskisehir Osmangazi University in Turkey. She is studying the aesthetic of the destination.