As you might suspect, not everyone is equally good at regulating emotions. Individuals who are higher in the personality trait of neuroticism (see Chapter 5) have more trouble doing so and often find their moods are beyond their ability to control. Individuals who have lower levels of self-esteem are also less likely to try to improve their sad moods, perhaps because they are less likely than others to feel they deserve to be in a good mood.64

The workplace environment has an effect on an individual’s tendency to employ emotion regulation. In general, diversity in work groups increases the likelihood that you will regulate your emotions. For example, younger employees are likely to regulate their emotions when their work groups include older members.65 Racial diversity also has an effect: if diversity is low, the minority may engage in emotion regulation, perhaps to “fit in” with the majority race as much as possible; if diversity is high and many different races are represented, the majority race will employ emotion regulation, perhaps to integrate themselves with the whole group.66 These findings suggest a beneficial outcome of diversity—it may cause us to regulate our emotions more consciously and effectively.

While regulating your emotions might seem beneficial, research suggests there is a downside to trying to change the way you feel. Changing your emotions takes effort, and as we noted when discussing emotional labor, this effort can be exhausting. Sometimes attempts to change an emotion actually make the emotion stronger; for example, trying to talk yourself out of being afraid can make you focus more on what scares you, which makes you more afraid.67 From another perspective, research suggests that avoiding negative emotional experiences is less likely to lead to positive moods than does seeking out positive emotional experiences.68 For example, you’re more likely to experience a positive mood if you have a pleasant conversation with a friend than if you avoid an unpleasant conversation with a hostile coworker.

Researchers of emotion regulation often study the strategies people employ to change their emotions. One related technique of emotion regulation is emotional suppression, literally suppressing—blocking or ignoring—initial emotional responses to situations. This response seems to facilitate practical thinking in the short term. However, it appears to be helpful only when a strongly negative event would elicit a distressed emotional reaction in a crisis situation.69 For example, a portfolio manager might suppress an emotional reaction to a sudden drop in the value of a stock and therefore be able to clearly decide how to plan. Suppression used in crisis situations appears to help an individual recover from the event emotionally, while suppression used as an everyday emotion regulation technique can take a toll on mental ability, emotional ability, health, and relationships.70

While emotion regulation techniques can help us cope with difficult workplace situations, research indicates that the effect varies. For example, one study in Taiwan found that all participants who worked for abusive supervisors reported emotional exhaustion and work withdrawal tendencies, but to different degrees based on the emotion regulation strategies they employed. Thus, while there is much promise in emotion regulation techniques, the best route to a positive workplace is to recruit positive-minded individuals and train leaders to manage their moods, job attitudes, and performance.71 The best leaders manage emotions as much as they do tasks and activities. The best employees can use their knowledge of emotion regulation to decide when to speak up and how to express themselves effectively.72

Emotion regulation has important ethical implications. On one end of the continuum, some people might argue that controlling your emotions is unethical because it requires a degree of acting. On the other end, people might argue that all emotions should be controlled so you can take a dispassionate perspective. Both arguments—and all arguments in between—have ethical pros and cons you will have to decide for yourself. Consider the reasons for emotion regulation and the outcomes. Are you regulating your emotions so you don’t react inappropriately, or are you regulating your emotions so no one knows what you are thinking? Finally, consider this: you may be able to “fake it ’til you make it.” Acting like you are in a good mood might put you in a good mood. In one study, a group of participants was asked to hold only a conversation with a barista serving them at Starbucks, while another group was asked to act happy. The happy actors reported later that they were in much better moods.73

Now that we have studied the role of emotions and moods in OB, let’s consider the opportunities for more specific applications that our understanding provides.