A Daily Diary Study of the Relationships Between Job Insecurity, Emotional Regulation, and Inauthenticity

Abstract

Given the prevalence of job insecurity due to intensifying global labour market trends and, more recently, the coronavirus pandemic, researchers have devoted considerable attention to the myriad individual and organisational consequences of job insecurity. In the present daily diary study, we drew upon affective events theory and the emotional labour as emotional regulation model to argue that job insecurity, as an emotionally-charged event, will positively predict surface and deep acting through eliciting the affective response of worry. Surface and deep acting will, in turn, lead to differing amounts of felt inauthenticity. In addition, we propose that perceived organisational power will moderate the extent to which worry influences surface and deep acting behaviours. Hypotheses were tested using a daily diary design, in which 156 participants answered thrice daily questionnaires over five consecutive workdays. Multilevel analyses revealed that the previous evening’s job insecurity positively predicted the next morning’s worry, which correspondingly predicted afternoon surface acting (but not deep acting). Further, surface acting (but not deep acting) positively predicted felt inauthenticity on the same day and mediated the relationship between worry and felt inauthenticity. Additionally, perceived organisational power did not moderate the relationship between worry and surface/deep acting. Overall, our findings highlight that job insecurity is an emotionally charged event capable of generating an affective response, which shapes how employees regulate their emotions towards other organisational members. Further, we add to the emotional regulation literature by suggesting that surface acting between organisational members, triggered by job insecurity-elicited worry, has significant repercussions regarding felt inauthenticity.