Initial colleague’s post 1:
Emotional labor refers to showing an accepted emotion. The work behind this display of emotion is that it may not be true to the actual feelings of the individual. In the job market, there are certain job performances that are reliant upon the employees portraying or hiding certain emotions. Some of these emotions include happiness, concern, or even aggressiveness. Several jobs come to mind when I think of managing emotions which range from the friendliness of Disney characters interacting with children to attorneys who must keep certain emotions hidden but are expected to act aggressively when representing others. Judges too must manage their emotions and remain neutral. When you think of these jobs and emotional gender expectations it is no wonder that there are gender disparities. Women are expected to be more emotional and understanding, while men are expected to be more aggressive and dominating. As of October 2019, men represent 73% of the total federal judges (Center for American Progress 2019).
Reference:
Center for American Progress. 2019 Building a More Inclusive Federal Judiciary. October 3. https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/courts/reports/2019/10/03/475359/building-inclusive-federal-judiciary/#:~:text=Today%2C%20more%20than%2073%20percent,1%20percent%20of%20sitting%20judges. (Links to an external site.)
Initial Colleague’s Post 2:
NASA was under a lot of external pressure to provide results regarding launches and commercial use, which was internalized within the organization. Insofar, NASA was fighting for its proverbial life in relation to funding and viability. When the design flaw with the O-rings was discovered by engineers – NASA deemed the design flaw that eventually doomed the Challenger an acceptable risk. Essentially, any concern was hushed by management and no further action was taken. In turn, there was a dearth of communication between managerial levels. Instead of having an open dialogue with the decision-makers about the O-rings and the launch of the Challenger, the management hoarded information and attempted to resolve things internally. Ultimately, the Challenger tragedy may have been avoided if there was an environment or culture where grievances could have been aired to the highest level(s) of management without fear of reprisal, or upsetting the chain of command. The engineers knew that there was a design flaw and tried to stop the launch accordingly. Additionally, if the management were not hoarding information, but if it instead flowed freely between all levels of management the tragedy might have been avoided as well. One level of management was making decisions for all levels of management, and that one level of management was rife with groupthink. Surely, upper-management doesnt need to know about this concern. They are going to launch regardless, right?
