Management Decision

Innovative work behaviors, employee engagement, and surface acting: A

delineation of supervisor-employee emotional contagion effects
Tung-Ju Wu, Yenchun Jim Wu,
Article information:
To cite this document:
Tung-Ju Wu, Yenchun Jim Wu, (2019) "Innovative work behaviors, employee engagement, and
surface acting: A delineation of supervisor-employee emotional contagion effects", Management
Decision, https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-02-2018-0196
Permanent link to this document:
https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-02-2018-0196
Downloaded by Tulane University At 13:30 24 March 2019 (PT)

Downloaded on: 24 March 2019, At: 13:30 (PT)

References: this document contains references to 40 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 10 times since 2019*
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-
srm:402646 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald
for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission
guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as
well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and
services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for
digital archive preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

 The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/0025-1747.htm

Innovative
Innovative work behaviors, work
employee engagement, behaviors

and surface acting

A delineation of supervisor-employee
emotional contagion effects Received 20 February 2018
Revised 22 September 2018
Tung-Ju Wu 2 December 2018
28 December 2018
East Business Management Research Center and College of Business Administration, Accepted 2 January 2019
Huaqiao University, Quanzhou, China, and
Yenchun Jim Wu
Downloaded by Tulane University At 13:30 24 March 2019 (PT)

Graduate Institute of Global Business and Strategy,

National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei, Taiwan

Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to explore the relationship between positive and negative emotional
contagion by supervisors and innovative behavior by employees in the marketing department at China
Mobile, as well as investigating the mediating roles of work engagement and surface acting in this path.
Design/methodology/approach – The authors analyzed emotional contagion on innovative behavior and
investigated the mediation effect of work engagement and surface acting, and used structural equation
modeling to test the hypotheses. Subjects in this study comprised 263 dyads of supervisors and employees
(131 supervisors and 263 employees) in the marketing department at China Mobile.
Findings – The results indicated that positive emotions by employees mediated the positive effect of supervisors’
expression of positive emotions about employees’ work engagement; work engagement mediated the positive
effect of employees’ positive emotions on their innovative behavior; and employees’ negative emotions mediated
and did not significantly mediate the effect of supervisors’ negative emotions on employees’ surface acting and
innovative behavior, respectively.
Research limitations/implications – This study recommends that future studies examine emotional
labor by team members and investigate the types of mechanisms (such as psychological safety and team
learning) adopted by such teams to increase their members’ levels of emotional contagion.
Practical implications – The authors recommend that enterprises implement courses that are relevant to
emotional management for supervisors to enhance their ability to regulate and manage their own emotions.
The authors also suggest that organizations offer adequate job resources to employees to inspire work
engagement among employees.
Originality/value – This study explored the role of work engagement among employees, which serves as a
motivational mechanism between positive emotional labor by supervisors and innovative behavior by
employees. In addition, it investigated the role of surface acting by employees, which serves as an energetic
mechanism between negative emotional labor by supervisors and innovative behavior by employees.
Keywords Work engagement, Surface acting, Innovative behaviour, Emotional contagion
Paper type Case study

1. Introduction
Innovative behavior among employees is critical for the long-term survival and success of an
organization (Anderson et al., 2014). For organizations, this innovative behavior is beneficial for
generating new ideas, which subsequently elevates their work performance (Wu et al., 2014;
Odoardi et al., 2015; Grosser et al., 2017). The impact of employee-oriented behavior on

The authors are grateful for the valuable comments made by the reviewers. This research was Management Decision
supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 71702059) and Social Science and © Emerald Publishing Limited
0025-1747
Humanity on Young Fund of the Ministry of Education (No. 16YJC630136). DOI 10.1108/MD-02-2018-0196
 MD individual innovative behavior has been discussed in the field of marketing. It emphasizes that
when employees are closer to customers, they are better able to understand customer needs.
This not only enhances the professionalism of their own work, revealing the gaps in providing
products/services, but also satisfies customers in a differentiated and innovative way.
Therefore, we adopt an employee-oriented view of marketing to examine how employees’
innovative behavior is motivated by internal demand (Buruck et al., 2016; Dahling, 2017).
Demonstrating innovative behavior is crucial especially for marketing planners. Moreover,
studies have revealed that employees’ feelings, cognitive processes and behavior at work are
influenced by the emotions of their supervisors (Sy et al., 2005; Tamir, 2016). Specifically, the
emotional labor of supervisors affects employees’ behavior, including their innovative behavior
(Zhang and Bartol, 2010; Wang et al., 2017).
The marketing department at a telecom company is generally small to medium in scale and
has relatively few employees; thus, supervisors and employees have relatively high-frequency
interaction. As a result, it is easy for employees to be aware of whether their supervisors are in
a good or bad mood, which easily affects their own moods. Emotional labor is defined as when
Downloaded by Tulane University At 13:30 24 March 2019 (PT)

an individual’s physical and psychological state becomes consistent with that of another
person through observing their publicly expressed moods (Barrick et al., 2015). Emotions are a
psychological state generated from mood changes, during which people collect information
from their surrounding environment and effectively adapt and adjust their own thinking
patterns and behavior (Tamir, 2016; Friedman et al., 2018). Studies have determined that
positive and negative moods may coexist (Amabile and Pratt, 2016), and numerous scholars
have reported that emotions influence a person’s innovative behavior (Anderson et al., 2014).
However, whether a mediating mechanism exists between emotions and innovative behavior
warrants exploration. Because positive and negative moods may coexist, this study
simultaneously investigated whether supervisors’ positive and negative emotions influence
employees’ innovative behavior through various mediating mechanisms.
In addition, the process of how supervisors’ positive and negative emotional labor
influences employees’ innovative behavior and the vital roles associated with employees’
psychological state (e.g. work engagement and emotional regulation) have been neglected.
Individual motivations are the key factor influencing their innovative behavior (Grosser et al.,
2017). Furthermore, work engagement is a motivational construct that is associated with an
individual’s positivity at work, fulfillment of personal aspirations, and affective-motivational
state derived from work (Schaufeli and Bakker, 2004). Surface acting in emotional labor
indicates that employees do not express the emotions that they actually feel; instead, they
disguise their emotions verbally or non-verbally. Such methods of expressing emotions usually
follow the organization’s policies and, in general, are inconsistent with the feelings actually felt
by the employees who are required to engage in emotional labor. This inconsistency between
the intrinsic and extrinsic expression of emotions can easily result in employees’ emotional
dissonance, which in turn affects their work performance (Mesmer-Magnus et al., 2012;
Bhave and Glomb, 2016). Therefore, this study explored employees’ work engagement by
focusing on the motivational mechanism formed between supervisors’ positive emotional labor
and employees’ innovative behavior; furthermore, it investigated employees’ surface acting by
focusing on the energetic mechanism formed between supervisors’ negative emotional labor
and employees’ innovative behavior. The results may be used as a reference for determining
the effects of employees’ psychological states on their innovative behavior.
Therefore, clarifying the roles of work engagement and surface acting as mediating
mechanisms is beneficial for determining how and why emotional contagion by supervisors
influences employees’ innovative behavior. Finally, from the perspective of positive
organizational behavior, our research on work engagement enhanced our understanding of
the influences of a positive psychological state on employee behavior. At the same time, an
exploration of surface acting enables researchers to pay additional attention to the effect of
 negative psychological states on employee behavior. Therefore, this study simultaneously Innovative
investigated the roles of work engagement and surface acting as mediating mechanisms, work
contributing to the construction of a theory on positive and negative organizational behaviors
behavior. In this study, we surveyed the staff (supervisor and employees) who work in the
marketing department of China Mobile as our research participants.

2. Literature review and hypotheses

2.1 Emotional contagion
Emotions are believed to converge through social networking. A person can acquire
emotions, such as happiness (positive) and anger (negative), from people around them
(Deng and Hu, 2018). This process is called emotional contagion, in which the emotional
expression of one person leads another person to experience a congruent emotional state
(Peters and Kashima, 2015; Weilenmann et al., 2018). Emotional labor means that
one person’s emotional state becomes consistent with that of another person by observing
Downloaded by Tulane University At 13:30 24 March 2019 (PT)

the latter’s publicly expressed emotions (Barrick et al., 2015). According to the emotional
labor mechanism, emotional labor is divided into two stages (Hatfield et al., 1994; Sy et al.,
2005). In the first stage, an individual unconsciously mimics the emotions expressed by
other people; and in the second stage, the individual consciously mimics the facial
expressions, voice and actions of other people, creating a state of emotional contagion.
Hatfield et al. (1994) indicated that people have a tendency to mimic others automatically
and synchronize their own expressions, voice and actions during social interaction;
eventually, an individual’s emotional state becomes consistent with that of others.
Numerous scholars have reported that emotional labor is a type of social influence;
specifically, when a person expresses positive or negative emotions through body
language, tone of voice and facial expressions, other people will be affected, and thus,
positive or negative emotional labor spreads (Barrick et al., 2015; Haynie et al., 2017).
Generally, studies on emotional labor in the workplace have focused on the influence of
marketing personnel’s emotions on customers’ emotions and have rarely examined the
influence of supervisors’ emotional labor on employees’ emotions (Tamir, 2016; Friedman
et al., 2018). In addition, past research has indicated that in an organization, employees’
emotions are easily affected by supervisors’ emotions because supervisors have higher
power and status (Yam et al., 2017). Moreover, studies on charismatic leadership have
indicated that supervisors’ positive emotions generated incentive effects on their
subordinates (Friedman et al., 2018); by contrast, supervisors with negative emotions
negatively affected their subordinates’ emotional state, causing the subordinates to
develop negative perceptions of their supervisors. In addition, supervisors’ expressions of
positive or negative emotions have been found to critically influence both their employees
and organizations (Perry-Smith and Mannucci, 2017). On the basis of these statements,
according to the job demands-resources theory, employees develop positive (negative)
feelings when their supervisors expressed positive (negative) emotions, leading to positive
(negative) emotional contagion.

2.2 Work engagement as a mediating variable

Schaufeli and Bakker (2004) reported that work engagement is a positive psychological state
related to self-realization and work. Regarding the mediating role of work engagement in the
relationship between supervisors’ emotional labor and employees’ innovative behavior, this
study referred to the affective events theory proposed by Weiss and Cropanzano (1996). This
theory indicated that the positive or negative events (e.g. positive or negative emotional
expressed by supervisors) encountered by employees in the workplace arouse relevant
affective reactions (e.g. positive or negative feelings of employees), in turn, facilitating and
 MD forming employees’ work attitude and behavior. Therefore, on the basis of the affective events
theory, this study hypothesized that supervisors’ expression of positive emotions will evoke
employees’ positive feelings, and such a positive affective reaction will prompt employees to
increase their willingness to engage in their work and demonstrate innovative behavior.
In addition, studies on the influence of supervisors’ positive emotional expressions on
employees’ work engagement have indicated that supervisors frequently influence employees
through various methods of emotional expression. When supervisors express positive
emotions and reduce their criticism of employees, employees will feel less threatened and be
willing to propose more innovative ideas without the fear of being scolded or criticized (Barrick
et al., 2015; Amabile and Pratt, 2016). Hence, a favorable exchange relationship develops
between supervisors and employees when supervisors express positive emotions, increasing
employees’ willingness to devote themselves to work and develop higher work motivation. In
addition, studies on the emotional intelligence of supervisors have revealed that supervisors
who maintain more positive emotions can effectively facilitate the supervisor–subordinate
relationship and stimulate employees’ work motivation (van der Linden et al., 2017).
Downloaded by Tulane University At 13:30 24 March 2019 (PT)

Research on the relationship between employees’ positive emotions and their work
engagement has shown that employees with stable and joyful emotions have higher work
engagement (Schaufeli and Bakker, 2004) and have higher task persistence. In other words,
employees in a positive mood have the courage to overcome obstacles at work and are
enthusiastic, energetic and happy. Such employees believe that they have the ability to form
positive interpersonal relationships and fulfill their work objectives; therefore, they are
willing to devote extra effort to their work. On the basis of these statements, when
supervisors express positive emotions, employees will perceive the positive emotional state
of their supervisors; subsequently, stimulating and encouraging effects will be aroused in
the employees, thereby prompting employees to develop higher willingness for work
engagement. Hence, this study proposed the following hypothesis:
H1a. Employees’ positive feelings mediate the positive effect of supervisors’ expression
of positive emotions on employees’ work engagement.
Moreover, studies have verified that positive emotions are beneficial for triggering an
individual’s innovative behavior (Amabile et al., 2005; Anderson et al., 2014). Regarding the
influence of employees’ work engagement on their innovative behavior, the research results of
Grosser et al. (2017) revealed that employees demonstrate innovative behavior through three
types of work behavior: idea generation, idea promotion and idea realization. In addition to
knowledge and skills, demonstrating innovative behavior requires intrinsic motivation and a
certain degree of drive, ensuring that employees’ innovative behavior can be aroused in the
face of challenges. Therefore, positive emotions alter employees’ way of thinking and help
them to enjoy their work, in turn, inspiring their innovative behavior (Tamir, 2016). According
to Schaufeli et al. (2002), employees with high work engagement have strong perseverance and
tend to prefer challenging work that can stimulate their intrinsic motivation. Zhang and Bartol
(2010) indicated that high work engagement prompts an individual to become flexible and
persevere, seek problem-solving methods and seek, promote and realize new ideas
enthusiastically. Thus, employees with high work engagement have a high tendency to
demonstrate highly innovative behavior. On the basis of these statements, this study
proposed the following hypothesis:
H1b. Employees’ positive feelings are associated with their work engagement and
positively influence their innovative behavior.
To combine H1a and H1b, this study posited that employees’ positive feelings and work
engagement mediated the positive effect of supervisors’ positive emotional expression on
employees’ innovative behavior.
 2.3 Surface acting as a mediating variable Innovative
The basic assumption behind emotional labor is that positive emotions are the main work
factor driving an employee to demonstrate ideal work behavior (Grandey et al., 2013). behaviors
However, employees may not frequently express positive emotions at work; instead, they
follow the scope allowed by the organizational system and wear metaphorical masks that
portray various emotions when interacting with others during work-related activities. To give
or maintain a positive impression before others, a person, like an actor, is required to put on a
mask that represents various roles to demonstrate behavior that accords with the specific
roles. To ensure that a performance is successful, actors sometimes become fully engaged in
their roles to make themselves feel as if they play these roles in real life. This is called genuine
or sincere acting (Mesmer-Magnus et al., 2012; Bhave and Glomb, 2016). By contrast, actors
may fake their performance; specifically, actors make their audiences feel as if they are sincere
only on the surface, but in fact feel that the roles they are playing are irrelevant to them.
“Pretending” is an adequate term for describing this hypocritical or pretense-laden behavior
(Bhave and Glomb, 2016; Wu, 2017). Studies on the forms related to personal emotional labor
Downloaded by Tulane University At 13:30 24 March 2019 (PT)

include deep acting and surface acting (Wu, 2017). Deep acting means that employees change
their intrinsic emotional state at work, such as considering events from the position of the
supervisor. By contrast, surface acting means that employees merely accept the emotional
expressions requested by their organizations, such as facial expressions, tone of voice and
posture; however, these employees may in fact feel annoyed by the content of their work
(Grandey et al., 2013), and thus, they may express emotions insincerely.
People’s work attitude and behavior are associated with how they adjust and express their
emotions. People adjust their emotional expression and behavior in various work
environments factors (Mesmer-Magnus et al., 2012). According to the perspective of
regulatory focus, the influence of emotional labor on innovative behavior is affected by
people’s self-regulatory mechanisms. The hedonic principle asserts that pursuing pleasure
and avoiding pain are part of human nature and proposes two self-regulatory strategies:
promotion and prevention. These influence people’s emotional reactions toward the essence of
success or failure. Those who select a promotion strategy adjust their own behavior until their
behavior accords with the proposed goals or standards, whereas those who select a prevention
strategy prevent themselves from demonstrating behavior that does not accord with specific
goals or standards. The affective events theory reveals that supervisors’ expression of
negative emotions (affective events) elicits employees’ negative feelings (affective reactions), in
which these negative emotional reactions cause employees to become annoyed with their work
and develop a perfunctory attitude toward it, thereby hindering their innovative behavior
(changes in work attitude and behavior) (Weiss and Cropanzano, 1996).
Regarding the influence and effect of supervisors’ negative emotional expression on
employee burnout, the affective events theory indicates that people’s work attitude and behavior
are influenced by their emotions and previous experiences. Relevant studies have verified the
relationship between emotional labor and work dissatisfaction (Mesmer-Magnus et al., 2012;
Grandey et al., 2013; Bhave and Glomb, 2016). Research results have suggested a tendency
toward emotional exhaustion when individuals experience negative emotional contagion;
moreover, over time, the individuals feel dissatisfied and unable to devote themselves to their
work. Regarding the influence of employees’ negative feelings on their work, Kammeyer-Mueller
et al. (2016) reported that employees experienced psychological and emotional burden when they
perceived their supervisors’ negative emotions. Employees in such a negative emotional state
eventually become dissatisfied with their work. In addition, most studies on work-related
theories have revealed that negative emotional feelings easily lead to depression (Bhave and
Glomb, 2016). Surface acting in emotional labor means that employees interact with others
through indifferent and negative methods and have an indifferent attitude toward their work.
Simultaneously, an indifferent attitude makes employees suspicious of their colleagues or
 MD organizations. Therefore, employees develop a negative emotional state after they perceive their
supervisors’ negative emotions; during such a condition, employees usually act indifferently,
which serves as a coping mechanism, and eventually experience emotional exhaustion and
alienation. On the basis of these statements, this study proposed the following hypothesis:
H2a. Employees’ feelings mediate the positive effect of supervisors’ negative emotional
expression on employees’ surface acting.
In a study on the influence of employees’ surface acting on their innovative behavior,
Kammeyer-Mueller et al. (2016) reported that, compared to employees in low negative
emotional states, those in high negative emotional states are more likely to develop two-faced
behavior. In this state, employees become depressed, and their innovative behavior declines;
simultaneously, dissatisfaction toward their work prevents them from coming up with new
ideas and eventually has a negative effect on their innovative behavior (Amabile and Pratt,
2016). Furthermore, employees who engage in surface acting are indifferent to their work and
must devote extra effort to completing their tasks because they have lost energy and vitality;
Downloaded by Tulane University At 13:30 24 March 2019 (PT)

eventually, they become unwilling to innovate and even lack the ability to do so (Bakker et al.,
2004). Amabile (1988) proposed that employees’ work commitments and level of innovative
behavior decline when they are in a high negative emotional state. Some scholars have also
reported that burnout causes employees to be emotionally and cognitively alienated from their
jobs, eventually making them want to neglect their jobs and goals, affecting their work
performance. Other relevant empirical studies have determined that surface acting negatively
influences the behavior that is intrinsic and extrinsic to roles (Bakker et al., 2004; Amabile and
Pratt, 2016). On the basis of these statements, this study determined that surface acting has a
negative influence on people’s behavior. Thus, this study proposed the following hypothesis:
H2b. Surface acting mediates the negative effect of employees’ negative feelings on
innovative behavior.
To combine H2a and H2b, this study posited that employees’ negative feelings and surface
acting mediated the negative effect of supervisors’ negative emotional expression on
employees’ innovative behavior.

3. Methodology
3.1 Research framework
This study explored the relationships between the various variables in the research framework,
including emotional contagion, work engagement, surface acting and innovative behavior.
Figure 1 displays the research framework.

Supervisor’s Employee’s
Work
Positive Positive
Engagement
Emotions Feelings

Innovative
Behavior
Supervisor’s Employee’s
Surface
Negative Negative
Figure 1. Acting
Research framework Emotions Feelings
 3.2 Research participants Innovative
First, supervisors and staff in the marketing department of China Mobile were recruited as work
research participants. After the list of subsidiaries was confirmed, the marketing behaviors
department in each company was contacted by telephone to invite department supervisors
to participate in a survey. Subsequently, questionnaires were sent to these supervisors by
mail, and they were asked to distribute them to their marketing departments’ staff. The
data collected came from two sources: marketing personnel and their direct supervisors.
A paired sample method was adopted in which questionnaires were distributed such that
one supervisor was paired with one to three employees. A total of 233 and
628 questionnaires were distributed to the supervisors and employees, respectively, and
263 paired questionnaires (from 131 supervisors and 263 employees) were returned,
yielding a pairing success rate of 41.9 percent.
Among the supervisors, most were male (59.3 percent), had received a bachelor’s degree
or above (81.5 percent), were age 35 years on average (standard deviation of 3.59), and had
more than five years of service (62.7 percent). Among the marketing personnel, most were
Downloaded by Tulane University At 13:30 24 March 2019 (PT)

female (76.8 percent), had received a bachelor’s degree or above (85.3 percent), were age
26 years on average, were younger than their supervisors (standard deviation of 5.85), and
had less than three years of service (69.7 percent). In addition, 81.3 percent of the marketing
personnel worked in the same office as their supervisors.

3.3 Research instruments

3.3.1 Supervisors’ positive and negative emotional emotions. The scale of positive and
negative emotions developed by Watson et al. (1988) was employed to measure supervisors’
positive and negative feelings. To ensure that the positive and negative emotional states
measured by the questionnaire were not personal traits, the supervisors were specifically
asked to respond to the question items according to their actual emotional expression at
work during the past week. The scale of positive emotions comprised ten items, which
included “excited” and “energetic,” and the scale of negative emotions comprised ten items,
which included items such as “upset” and “nervous.” A five-point Likert scale was adopted,
and the reliability formed by the potential factors of supervisors’ positive and negative
emotional expressions were 0.88 and 0.91, respectively.
3.3.2 Employees’ positive and negative emotional feelings. In addition, the scale of positive
and negative emotions developed by Watson et al. (1988) was adopted to measure employees’
positive and negative feelings. To ensure that the positive and negative emotional states
measured during the questionnaire were not personal traits, the employees were specifically
asked to respond to the question items according to their actual emotional expression after
they had interacted with their direct supervisors during the past week. The scales of positive
and negative emotions each comprised ten items, and a five-point Likert scale was adopted.
The reliability formed by employees’ positive and negative emotional feelings were 0.85 and
0.88, respectively.
3.3.3 Work engagement. A scale developed by Schaufeli and Bakker (2004) was employed
to measure work engagement, which contained items such as “I am always vigorous at work”
and “I love my job,” and work engagement was measured using 11 items. A seven-point Likert
scale was adopted and the reliability of the scale was 0.92.
3.3.4 Surface acting. A scale developed by Grandey (2003) was adopted to measure
employees’ surface acting. The scale comprised five items, such as “I will conceal my true
feelings to maintain certain expressions and attitude in front of my supervisors.” The items were
measured using a six-point Likert scale, and the reliability of the scale was 0.92.
3.3.5 Innovative behavior. A scale developed by Scott and Bruce (1994) was employed to
measure employees’ innovative behavior. This scale comprised six items that were
 MD answered by employees’ direct supervisors; for example, “This employee often comes up
with some innovative thinking and ideas.” The scores were measured using a five-point
Likert scale, and the reliability of this scale was 0.86.

4. Results
Table I displays the average, standard deviation and correlation coefficients of the variables
in this study. The results indicated that: supervisors’ positive emotional expressions were
positively correlated with employees’ work engagement (r ¼ 0.16, p o0.05); employees’
positive emotional feelings were positively correlated with their innovative behavior
(r ¼ 0.19, po 0.05); supervisors’ negative emotional expressions were significantly and
positively correlated with employees’ surface acting (r ¼ 0.29, p o0.01); and employees’
negative emotional feelings were negatively and non-significantly correlated with their
innovative behavior (r ¼ −0.11, p W0.05).
Downloaded by Tulane University At 13:30 24 March 2019 (PT)

4.1 Verification of the overall model

We adopted LISREL software to develop and analyze the two-stage structural equation
model to verify the hypotheses proposed in this study. In the first stage, confirmatory factor
analysis (CFA) was conducted on all research variables to confirm which of the question
items was measured by the measurement model for the overall scale, as well as which could
effectively represent the independent constructs that were intended to be divided. This
study developed a model with seven factors (supervisor’s positive emotions, supervisor’s
negative emotions, employee’s positive emotions, employee’s negative emotions, work
engagement, surface acting and innovative behavior), a model with four factors
(combination of supervisor’s positive and negative emotions, combination of employee’s
positive and negative emotions, combination of work engagement and surface acting, and
innovative behavior) and a model with one factor (combination of all seven factors), and
analyzed them using the χ2 difference test to determine which exhibited a favorable
goodness of fit. After the CFA was conducted, the goodness of fit of the seven-factor model
( χ2 ¼ 297.88, df ¼ 202, χ2/df ¼ 1.47, NNFI ¼ 0.93, CFI ¼ 0.94, IFI ¼ 0.95, RMSEA ¼ 0.06) was
found to be superior to that of the four-factor model ( χ2 ¼ 891.82, df ¼ 242, χ2/df ¼ 3.69,
NNFI ¼ 0.65, CFI ¼ 0.77, IFI ¼ 0.71, RMSEA ¼ 0.18) and of the one-factor model
( χ2 ¼ 1,756.19, df ¼ 258, χ2/df ¼ 6.81, NNFI ¼ 0.41, CFI ¼ 0.49, IFI ¼ 0.51, RMSEA ¼ 0.25).
Furthermore, the results of the χ2 difference test revealed that the seven-factor model was
significantly superior to both the four-factor model (Δχ2 ¼ 549.81, Δdf ¼ 16, p o0.001) and
the one-factor model (Δχ2 ¼ 1,216.45, Δdf ¼ 28, p o0.001). On the basis of these statements,
the seven-factor measurement model proposed in this study was acceptable; simultaneously,
favorable discriminant validity was exhibited among all variables.

M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

1. Supervisor’s positive emotions 3.87 0.51 (0.88)

2. Supervisor’s negative emotions 2.31 0.62 −0.21* (0.91)
3. Employee’s positive emotions 3.44 0.54 0.22* −0.27** (0.85)
4. Employee’s negative emotions 2.49 0.69 −0.13 0.32** −0.18* (0.88)
5. Work engagement 4.97 0.85 0.16* −0.22* 0.47** −0.26** (0.92)
Table I.
The average, standard 6. Surface acting 3.88 0.93 −0.21* 0.29** −0.33** 0.35** −0.48** (0.92)
deviation and 7. Innovative behavior 3.42 0.64 0.32** −0.12 0.19* −0.11 0.25* −0.18* (0.86)
reliability of the Notes: n ¼ 263. The value in parentheses is the reliability value of each scale. *p o0.05; **p o0.01
research variables (two-tailed test)
 In the second stage, this study developed the structural model and estimated the relevant Innovative
parameters on the basis of the proposed hypothesis. Subsequently, this study followed the work
verification research results of Schaufeli and Bakker (2004) and used work engagement and behaviors
surface acting as the two variables with a covariance relationship and considered the
residual measurement of work engagement and surface acting between groups as
correlated. Table II shows the analytical results, and Figure 2 illustrates the final path of the
model and the standardized path coefficient. The results indicated that the overall model
was favorable. The goodness of fit of the overall structural model was as follows:
χ2 ¼ 353.49 (df ¼ 238), χ2/df ¼ 1.49, NNFI ¼ 0.94, CFI ¼ 0.95, IFI ¼ 0.94 and RMSEA ¼ 0.06.

4.2 Mediating effects of work engagement

The direct effect of supervisors’ positive emotional expressions on employees’ positive
emotional feelings was 0.24 (t ¼ 2.54, po0.01) and that of employees’ positive emotional
feelings on their work engagement was 0.38 (t ¼ 3.39, p o0.001). Moreover, the indirect
effect derived from the aforementioned relationships was 0.19 ( p o0.05). In addition, this
Downloaded by Tulane University At 13:30 24 March 2019 (PT)

study implemented a test developed by Sobel (1982), obtaining a Z-value of 2.36 ( p o0.05).
These results verify that employee’s positive emotional feelings mediated the positive effect
of supervisors’ positive emotional expressions on employees’ work engagement. Therefore,
H1a was supported. The direct effect of work engagement on innovative behavior was 0.35
(t ¼ 3.22, po 0.01) and the indirect effect formed by work engagement in the relationship
between employees’ positive emotional feelings and innovative behavior was 0.21 (t ¼ 2.28,
p o0.05). The Z-value of 2.21 ( p o0.05) was obtained using Sobel’s test. Therefore,
employees’ work engagement mediated the positive effect of employees’ positive emotional
feelings on their innovative behavior. Hence, H1b was supported.

Models χ2 df χ2/df NNFI CFI IFI RMSEA Δχ2

MR 342.24 224 1.53 0.93 0.93 0.92 0.06 – Table II.

MM 319.84 212 1.51 0.94 0.95 0.93 0.06 9.77** Comparison between
Notes: n ¼ 263. MR, model in this study; MM: incorporation of supervisors’ positive emotional expressions the research
→ direct effects of innovative behavior and supervisors’ negative emotional expressions → direct effects of model and the direct
innovative behavior. **p o 0.01 effect model

0.36**

Supervisor’s Employee’s
0.24** 0.38*** Work
Positive Positive
Engagement 0.35**
Emotions Feelings

–0.39*** Innovative
Behavior
Supervisor’s 0.29** Employee’s
0.23** Surface 0.16
Negative Negative
Acting
Emotions Feelings

Figure 2.
0.09 Structural
mode results
Notes: **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001
 MD 4.3 Mediating effects of surface acting
The direct effect of supervisors’ negative emotional expression on employees’ negative
emotional feelings was 0.29 (t ¼ 2.85, po0.01); the direct effect of employees’ negative
emotional feelings on surface acting was 0.23 (t ¼ 2.49, po0.01); and the indirect effect
between the aforementioned relationships was 0.17 ( po0.05). A Z-value of 2.44 ( po0.05) was
obtained using Sobel’s test. Consequently, employees’ negative emotional feelings mediated
the positive effect of supervisors’ negative emotional expression on employees’ surface acting;
hence, H2a was supported. The direct effect of surface acting on innovative behavior was 0.16
(t ¼ 1.72, pW0.05), and the indirect effect of surface acting in the relationship between
employees’ negative emotional feelings and innovative behavior was 0.09 (t ¼ 1.24, pW0.05).
Therefore, surface acting did not mediate the negative effect of employees’ negative emotional
feelings on their innovative behavior; hence, H2b was not supported.

5. Discussions and conclusions

5.1 Research discussions
Downloaded by Tulane University At 13:30 24 March 2019 (PT)

This study explored the role of employees’ work engagement, which serves as a
motivational mechanism between supervisors’ positive emotional labor and employees’
innovative behavior; in addition, it investigated the role of employees’ surface acting, which
serves as an energetic mechanism between supervisors’ negative emotional labor and
employees’ innovative behavior. Our research on motivational mechanisms has determined
that employees’ positive emotional feelings mediate the positive effect of supervisors’
positive emotional expression on employees’ work engagement, and work engagement
mediates the effect of employees’ positive feelings on their innovative behavior. Therefore,
supervisors who express positive emotions aroused positive feelings in employees through
the emotional labor mechanism (Sy et al., 2005; Barrick et al., 2015), thereby possibly
inspiring employees to devote themselves to their work and heightening their work
enthusiasm. Our research on the energetic mechanism has determined that employees’
negative feelings mediate the positive effect of supervisors’ negative emotional expressions
on employees’ surface acting; however, surface acting does not mediate the effect of
employees’ negative emotional feelings on their innovative behavior. Specifically,
supervisors who express negative emotions aroused negative feelings in employees
through the emotional labor mechanism. This state increases employees’ emotional
exhaustion and causes them to interact with others using indifferent or negative methods.
People who feel indifferent toward work became dissatisfied with it, eventually leading
them to engage in surface acting (Kammeyer-Mueller et al., 2016).
On the basis of these research results, we draw the following conclusions. First, the
results indicate that positive and negative emotions can coexist, corresponding with results
indicated by other scholars (Odoardi et al., 2015; Amabile and Pratt, 2016). According to the
emotional labor mechanism (Sy et al., 2005), people spontaneously mimic other people
during social interactions and have a tendency to synchronize their facial expressions,
tone of voice and posture with those of others to attain a state in which their emotions
are consistent with those of others. Based on this theory, employees may develop positive
(negative) feelings when their supervisors express positive (negative) emotions.
Consequently, the emotional labor mechanism can exist in an organization.
Second, regarding the motivational mechanism derived from work engagement, this study
determined that positive emotional labor elevates employees’ work engagement and, in turn,
enhances their innovative behavior. When supervisors control their emotions to a high
degree and reduce their criticism of employees, the employees are willing to propose more
innovative ideas without the fear of being scolded or criticized. Under this condition,
employees perceive a favorable work environment and are happy to engage in their work
(Sy et al., 2005), which helps them to increase their intrinsic motivation and heighten their
 work engagement. In addition, supervisors who are better able to adjust their own emotions Innovative
tended to maintain positive emotions and can effectively display positive emotional labor to work
employees, facilitating positive supervisor–subordinate relationships and allowing employees behaviors
to freely exhibit their creativity and highly innovative behavior (Odoardi et al., 2015).
Finally, regarding the energetic mechanism derived from surface acting, this study
determined that emotional labor significantly affects surface acting. As in the affective events
theory (Weiss and Cropanzano, 1996), negative emotional events influence an individual’s
attitude and behavior. Therefore, supervisors who express negative emotions may arouse an
emotional burden in employees because of the employees’ negative feelings, causing them to
become lazy (Kammeyer-Mueller et al., 2016). When negative emotional labor is fostered, people
tend to experience emotional exhaustion; subsequently, they become dissatisfied or indifferent
toward their work over time and lose their devotion to it. Moreover, Kammeyer-Mueller et al.
(2016) reported that employees with a high level of negative emotions are likely to feel a high
level of work pressure and thus will easily become emotionally exhausted or indifferent toward
work. However, we did not find a relationship between employees’ surface acting and
Downloaded by Tulane University At 13:30 24 March 2019 (PT)

innovative behavior; in particular, surface acting does not mediate the effect of employees’
negative feelings on their innovative behavior, perhaps because marketing are associated with
an service and innovation-oriented work style. Therefore, even if employees are dissatisfied
with their jobs, they must still continually engage in innovative behavior to fulfill marketing
projects and complete their assigned tasks.

5.2 Theoretical implications

On the basis of our conclusions, we raise the following three theoretical implications. First,
unlike studies that focus on exploring positive emotional labor (Sy et al., 2005; Zhang and
Bartol, 2010), this study simultaneously explored supervisors’ positive and negative
emotional labor to expand the theory of emotional contagion. We found that when
supervisors often present positive emotions in the organization, they also pay more
attention to their employees’ work. If they encourage employees and transform their
emotions, their employees are affected by this positive emotional contagion, which
encourages individual work intentions and enhances individual performance (Edelman and
van Knippenberg, 2017; Hinojosa et al., 2017). However, when supervisors often present
negative emotions, such as raising their voice or taunting, in interactions with employees,
employees will tend to respond negatively (Lu et al., 2018), feel insecure and decrease their
interest in work. Therefore, it may lead to poor job performance. Moreover, our research
results are consistent with those of other scholars in revealing the importance of the
influence of supervisors’ emotions on their leadership. Thus our results fill a theoretical gap
between emotions and leadership.
Second, this study determined that employees’ positive or negative feelings (affective
reactions) are aroused when supervisors express positive or negative emotions (in reaction
to incidents in the workplace) and that positive affective reactions prompt people to
demonstrate a high level of work engagement and in turn influence their innovative
behavior. Therefore, from the perspective of the affective events theory, our results support
the application of this theory in relevant studies on emotions and are related to the affective
events and emotional labor theories. Past studies on emotional contagion in the workplace
have focused on the influence of service employees’ emotions on customers’ emotions and
have rarely examined the influence of supervisors’ emotional contagion on employees’
emotions (Tamir, 2016; Friedman et al., 2018). However, Sy et al. (2005) reported that
understanding supervisors’ emotions is critical because they affect employees’ feelings,
thoughts and actions. In our study, we verified this hypothesis and found that the
relationship between employees’ positive emotions and their work engagement indicates
that employees with stable and joyful emotions have relatively higher work engagement
 MD (Schaufeli and Bakker, 2004) and higher task persistence. In addition, innovative behavior
requires the sparking of employees’ intrinsic motivation and identification, ensuring that
their innovative behavior can be maintained when they confront challenges. This study
confirms that engagement can increase employees’ innovative behavior.
Finally, regarding the role of the motivational mechanism in the relationship between
supervisors’ emotional labor and employees’ innovative behavior, the results reveal that work
engagement (motivational mechanism) does not mediate the effect of supervisors’ positive
emotional labor on employees’ innovative behavior. However, surface acting (energetic
mechanism) did not mediate the effect of negative emotional labor on innovative behavior.
These results were consistent with the innovative theory proposed by Amabile (1988), who
reported that motivation is one of the main factors influencing people’s innovative behavior.
The results of the present study support the assumption that the motivation mechanism has
more influence than the energetic mechanism.

5.3 Practical implications

Downloaded by Tulane University At 13:30 24 March 2019 (PT)

First, the results reveal that supervisors who can adjust their emotions can rapidly adjust
their negative emotions and express a positive emotional state and that employees develop
positive feelings after they perceive their supervisors’ expression of positive emotions
(Sy et al., 2005; Barrick et al., 2015). Moreover, supervisors’ ability to adjust their own
emotions is a critical factor determining the success or failure of an organization; therefore,
supervisors must adjust their own emotions to prevent employees from experiencing
burnout, which is caused by the burden of negative emotions. In addition, supervisors must
be able to effectively regulate and manage the emotional environment of their teams,
because a favorable environment helps a team to successfully complete its tasks (Sy et al.,
2005). Consequently, this study recommends that enterprises implement training for
supervisors that is relevant to emotional management so as to enhance their ability to
regulate and manage their own emotions.
Second, the following driving factors can effectively elevate employees’ work engagement:
familiarity with work/values: this provides employees with sufficient work resources to
complete their tasks and fully discuss the corporate strategies and objectives with other
employees, enabling them to understand their value in the organization and enhance their
intrinsic motivation; provide professional development opportunities: this refers to
comprehensive opportunities for development, training and promotion; more interaction with
colleagues: this helps employees to maintain a positive relationship with their supervisors and
colleagues; and clear work processes and procedures: this regards work procedures and human
resource policies, such as the performance management system. Hence, we suggest that
enterprises consult these methods to gradually enhance their employees’ work engagement.
Finally, our results reveal that negative emotional labor arouses surface acting but
does not significantly affect innovative behavior. Nevertheless, surface acting can
gradually consume employees’ mood-related resources (Grandey et al., 2013; Amabile and
Pratt, 2016) and will negatively influence their work performance. It may even lead
employees to engage in nonproductive behavior (e.g. burnout and dissatisfaction).
Therefore, as other researchers have proposed, organizations can reduce their employees’
level of surface acting using methods such as stress management courses, effective
communication and team management (Sy et al., 2005). Furthermore, on the basis of the
job demands-resources model, employees’ level of surface acting can be reduced by
increasing job resources. Hence, we suggest that organizations offer employees adequate
job resources to avoid burnout, such as enhanced autonomy through workflow design,
greater social support between supervisors and employees, feedback and training for
employees after supervisors have assessed their work performance, and allowing
employees to participate in decision-making processes.
 5.4 Direction for future research Innovative
This study explored the roles of motivational and energetic mechanisms in the relationship work
between supervisors’ emotional labor and employees’ innovative behavior. The results behaviors
support the importance of the motivational mechanism as demonstrated by these processes,
however, they still contain other possible influence mechanisms. For example, Wu et al.
(2014) reported that an interpersonal mechanism, derived from persuasion or negotiation,
plays a crucial role between an individual’s emotional state and behavior. In terms of
innovative behavior, marketing personnel must persuade, interact and negotiate with others
at work to promote or realize their innovative ideas. Therefore, we recommend that future
studies explore the role of this interpersonal mechanism further, such as persuasion and
negotiation in the relationship between supervisors’ emotional labor and employees’
innovative behavior. Finally, an increased number of organizations complete tasks through
teamwork, and innovative behavior in teams is a trend in current research on organizations.
Consequently, we recommend that future studies examine the emotional labor experienced
by team members and investigate the types of mechanisms (e.g. psychological health and
Downloaded by Tulane University At 13:30 24 March 2019 (PT)

team member learning) adopted by such teams to increase their members’ level of positive
emotional contagion and innovation behavior. In addition, a multilevel analysis can be
conducted to investigate whether the emotional labor of a team influences the emotional
state and innovative behavior of its members.

References
Amabile, T.M. (1988), “A model of creativity and innovation in organizations”, Research in
Organizational Behavior, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 123-167.
Amabile, T.M. and Pratt, M.G. (2016), “The dynamic componential model of creativity and innovation
in organizations: making progress, making meaning”, Research in Organizational Behavior,
Vol. 36, pp. 157-183.
Amabile, T.M., Barsade, S.G., Mueller, J.S. and Staw, B.M. (2005), “Affect and creativity at work”,
Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 50 No. 3, pp. 367-403.
Anderson, N., Potočnik, K. and Zhou, J. (2014), “Innovation and creativity in organizations: a state-of-
the-science review, prospective commentary, and guiding framework”, Journal of Management,
Vol. 40 No. 5, pp. 1297-1333.
Bakker, A.B., Demerouti, E. and Verbeke, W. (2004), “Using the job demands‐resources model to predict
burnout and performance”, Human resource management, Vol. 43 No. 1, pp. 83-104.
Barrick, M.R., Thurgood, G.R., Smith, T.A. and Courtright, S.H. (2015), “Collective organizational
engagement: linking motivational antecedents, strategic implementation, and firm
performance”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 58 No. 1, pp. 111-135.
Bhave, D.P. and Glomb, T.M. (2016), “The role of occupational emotional labor requirements on the
surface acting-job satisfaction relationship”, Journal of Management, Vol. 42 No. 3, pp. 722-741.
Buruck, G., Dorfel, D., Kugler, J. and Brom, S.S. (2016), “Enhancing well-being at work: the role of
emotion regulation skills as personal resources”, Journal of Occupational Health Psychology,
Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 480-493.
Dahling, J.J. (2017), “Exhausted, mistreated, or indifferent? Explaining deviance from emotional display
rules at work”, European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 26 No. 2,
pp. 171-182.
Deng, H. and Hu, P. (2018), “Matching your face or appraising the situation: two paths to emotional
contagion”, Frontiers in Psychology, Vol. 8, p. 2278, doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02278.
Edelman, P.J. and van Knippenberg, D. (2017), “Training leader emotion regulation and leadership
effectiveness”, Journal of Business and Psychology, Vol. 32 No. 6, pp. 747-757.
 MD Friedman, A., Carmeli, A. and Dutton, J.E. (2018), “When does respectful engagement with one’s
supervisor foster help-seeking behaviors and performance?”, Journal of Vocational Behavior,
Vol. 104, pp. 184-198.
Grandey, A.A. (2003), “When ‘the show must go on’: surface acting and deep acting as determinants of
emotional exhaustion and peer-rated service delivery”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 46
No. 1, pp. 86-96.
Grandey, A.A., Chi, N.W. and Diamond, J.A. (2013), “Show me the money! Do financial rewards for
performance enhance or undermine the satisfaction from emotional labor?”, Personnel
Psychology, Vol. 66 No. 3, pp. 569-612.
Grosser, T.J., Venkataramani, V. and Labianca, G.J. (2017), “An alter-centric perspective on employee
innovation: the importance of alters’ creative self-efficacy and network structure”, Journal of
Applied Psychology, Vol. 102 No. 9, pp. 1360-1374.
Hatfield, E., Cacioppo, J.T. and Rapson, R.L. (1994), Emotional Contagion, Cambridge University,
New York, NY.
Haynie, J.J., Flynn, C.B. and Mauldin, S. (2017), “Proactive personality, core self-evaluations, and
Downloaded by Tulane University At 13:30 24 March 2019 (PT)

engagement: the role of negative emotions”, Management Decision, Vol. 55 No. 2, pp. 450-463.
Hinojosa, A.S., Gardner, W.L., Walker, H.J., Cogliser, C. and Gullifor, D. (2017), “A review of cognitive
dissonance theory in management research: opportunities for further development”, Journal of
Management, Vol. 43 No. 1, pp. 170-199.
Kammeyer-Mueller, J.D., Simon, L.S. and Judge, T.A. (2016), “A head start or a step behind?
Understanding how dispositional and motivational resources influence emotional exhaustion”,
Journal of Management, Vol. 42 No. 3, pp. 561-581.
Lu, J., Zhang, Z. and Jia, M. (2018), “Does servant leadership affect employees’ emotional labor? A social
information-processing perspective”, Journal of Business Ethics, pp. 1-12, doi: 10.1007/s1055
1-018-3816-3.
Mesmer-Magnus, J.R., DeChurch, L.A. and Wax, A. (2012), “Moving emotional labor beyond surface
and deep acting: a discordance-congruence perspective”, Organizational Psychology Review,
Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 6-53.
Odoardi, C., Montani, F., Boudrias, J.S. and Battistelli, A. (2015), “Linking managerial practices and
leadership style to innovative work behavior: the role of group and psychological processes”,
Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 36 No. 5, pp. 545-569.
Perry-Smith, J.E. and Mannucci, P.V. (2017), “From creativity to innovation: the social network drivers
of the four phases of the idea journey”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 42 No. 1, pp. 53-79.
Peters, K. and Kashima, Y. (2015), “A multimodal theory of affect diffusion”, Psychological Bulletin,
Vol. 141 No. 5, pp. 966-992.
Schaufeli, W.B. and Bakker, A.B. (2004), “Job demands, job resources, and their relationship with
burnout and engagement: a multi‐sample study”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 25
No. 3, pp. 293-315.
Schaufeli, W.B., Martinez, I.M., Pinto, A.M., Salanova, M. and Bakker, A.B. (2002), “Burnout and
engagement in university students: a cross-national study”, Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology,
Vol. 33 No. 5, pp. 464-481.
Scott, S.G. and Bruce, R.A. (1994), “Determinants of innovative behavior: a path model of individual
innovation in the workplace”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 37 No. 3, pp. 580-607.
Sobel, M.E. (1982), “Asymptotic confidence intervals for indirect effects in structural equation models”,
Sociological Methodology, Vol. 13, pp. 290-312.
Sy, T., Côté, S. and Saavedra, R. (2005), “The contagious leader: impact of the leader’s mood on the
mood of group members, group affective tone, and group processes”, Journal of Applied
Psychology, Vol. 90 No. 2, pp. 295-305.
Tamir, M. (2016), “Why do people regulate their emotions? A taxonomy of motives in emotion
regulation”, Personality and Social Psychology Review, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 199-222.
 van der Linden, D., Pekaar, K.A., Bakker, A.B., Schermer, J.A., Vernon, P.A., Dunkel, C.S. and Innovative
Petrides, K.V. (2017), “Overlap between the general factor of personality and emotional work
intelligence: a meta-analysis”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 143 No. 1, pp. 36-52.
behaviors
Wang, J.R., Yang, J. and Xue, Y.J. (2017), “Subjective well-being, knowledge sharing and individual
innovation behavior: the moderating role of absorptive capacity”, Leadership & Organization
Development Journal, Vol. 38 No. 8, pp. 1110-1127.
Watson, D., Clark, L.A. and Tellegen, A. (1988), “Development and validation of brief measures of
positive and negative affect: the PANAS scales”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
Vol. 54 No. 6, pp. 1063-1070.
Weilenmann, S., Schnyder, U., Parkinson, B., Corda, C., von Känel, R. and Pfaltz, M.C. (2018), “Emotion
transfer, emotion regulation, and empathy-related processes in physician-patient interactions
and their association with physician well-being: a theoretical model”, Frontiers in Psychiatry,
Vol. 9, p. 389, doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2018.00389.
Weiss, H.M. and Cropanzano, R. (1996), “Affective events theory: a theoretical discussion of the
structure, causes and consequences of affective experiences at work”, in Staw, B.M. and
Downloaded by Tulane University At 13:30 24 March 2019 (PT)

Cummings, L.L. (Eds), Research in Organizational Behavior, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, pp. 1-74.
Wu, L.W. (2017), “The bright side and dark side of co-production: a dyadic analysis”, Management
Decision, Vol. 55 No. 3, pp. 614-631.
Wu, T.J., Tsai, H.T. and Yeh, S.P. (2014), “The role of manager’s locus of control between perceived
guanxi and leadership behavior in family business”, Revista Internacional de Sociologia, Vol. 72
No. 2, pp. 87-104.
Yam, K.C., Klotz, A.C., He, W. and Reynolds, S.J. (2017), “From good soldiers to psychologically entitled:
examining when and why citizenship behavior leads to deviance”, Academy of Management
Journal, Vol. 60 No. 1, pp. 373-396.
Zhang, X. and Bartol, K.M. (2010), “Linking empowering leadership and employee creativity: the
influence of psychological empowerment, intrinsic motivation, and creative process
engagement”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 53 No. 1, pp. 107-128.

Further reading
O’Neill, O.A. and Rothbard, N.P. (2017), “Is love all you need? The effects of emotional culture,
suppression, and work-family conflict on firefighter risk-taking and health”, Academy of
Management Journal, Vol. 60 No. 1, pp. 78-108.
 MD Appendix

Measures Factor loadings

Supervisors’ positive emotions (Source: Watson et al., 1988)

Interested 0.881
Excited 0.877
Strong 0.792
Enthusiastic 0.835
Proud 0.824
Inspired 0.839
Attentive 0.805
Active 0.857
Alert 0.784
Downloaded by Tulane University At 13:30 24 March 2019 (PT)

Determined 0.798
Supervisors’ negative emotions (Source: Watson et al., 1988)
Distressed 0.841
Upset 0.852
Guilty 0.863
Scared 0.805
Hostile 0.811
Jittery 0.847
Irritable 0.829
Ashamed 0.795
Nervous 0.784
Afraid 0.808
Employees’ positive feelings (Source: Watson et al., 1988)
Interested 0.892
Excited 0.851
Strong 0.867
Enthusiastic 0.859
Proud 0.814
Inspired 0.833
Attentive 0.828
Active 0.819
Alert 0.806
Determined 0.794
Employees’ negative feelings (Source: Watson et al., 1988)
Distressed 0.852
Upset 0.867
Guilty 0.807
Scared 0.795
Hostile 0.822
Jittery 0.829
Irritable 0.813
Ashamed 0.802
Nervous 0.849
Afraid 0.838
Work engagement (Source: Schaufeli and Bakker, 2004)
Table AI. At work, I feel full of energy 0.878
The measurement
scales and factor
loadings (continued )
 Measures Factor loadings
Innovative
work
In my job, I feel strong and vigorous 0.843 behaviors
When I get up in the morning, I feel like going to work 0.829
I can continue working for very long periods at a time 0.814
In my job, I am mentally very resilient 0.857
At work, I always persevere, even when things do not go well 0.872
I find the work that I do full of meaning and purpose 0.806
I am enthusiastic about my job 0.819
My job inspires me 0.785
I am proud of the work I do 0.771
I find my job challenging 0.864
Surface acting (Source: Grandey, 2003)
I put on a “mask” in order to display the emotions I need to display for my job 0.885
I faked a good mood in my job 0.871
I will conceal my true feelings to maintain certain expressions and attitudes before
Downloaded by Tulane University At 13:30 24 March 2019 (PT)

my supervisors 0.829
Pretend to have emotions that I don’t really have 0.811
Hide my true feelings about a situation 0.847
Innovative behavior (Source: Scott and Bruce, 1994)
Searches for new technologies, processes, techniques and/or product ideas 0.849
Generates creative ideas 0.825
Promotes and champions ideas to others 0.802
Investigates and secures funds needed to implement new ideas 0.858
Develops adequate plans and schedules for the implementation of new ideas 0.864
Is innovative 0.831 Table AI.

Corresponding author
Yenchun Jim Wu can be contacted at: yenchun@umich.edu

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com