WHITE-COLLAR MANNERS
A University Thesis Presented to the Faculty
of
California State University, East Bay
In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree
Master of Arts in Sociology
By
Sheila R. Warbasse
]une,2008
Copyright © 2008 by Sheila R. Warbasse
1l
Abstract
This qualitative study examines the use of manners among white-collar workers and
their significance in building good working relationships. It uses a Grounded Theory
approach drawing on observations and in-depth qualitative interviews from 14
employees, ranging from administrative to executive personnel, to explore the relevance
of manners in the workplace in managing the pressures and strains in America's fast
paced society. Findings indicate that there are three key processes in initiating and
maintaining positive work relationships. These are: expressing gratitude, showing
respect, and conforming to workplace norms. To the extent an employee consistently
engages in these practices, he or she can function well in the workplace. The absence of
one or more of these practices may result in workplace conflict and even bullying. Each
of the three key processes discussed are conditions under which good manners are likely
to break down. The conditions include the employee's prior culture and socialization, the
presence or absence of time pressures and rapidly changing technologies. These findings
are discussed in relations to the work of Hochschild, Goffman, Elias, and other
sociologists who have focused on workplace interactions and manners.
111
WHITE-COLLAR MANNERS
By
Sheila R. Warbasse
Approved:
~
Date:
lein Jennings
~
Professor Carl Stempel
IV
Acknowledgments
I would like to express my deepest gratitude to Professor Diane Beeson for all of her
dedication, direction and time she spent in helping me with my thesis. Others I'd like to
thank, who contributed to the success of this thesis, are Professor Patricia Jennings,
Professor Carl Stempel, Professor Karl Schonborn, Professor Benjamin Bowser,
Professor Laura Nelson, and Mrs. Sylvia Musson. Yet, without the loving support of my
family and friends, my efforts could have never been achieved. They are the reason for
my drive and achievements.
I would like to especially thank my husband, Rai Warbasse and my children,
Raimund and Jaison, for their love, patience and inspiration. Without the help of Nancy
Warbasse and DeAndrea Green, I would have never been able to complete this thesis.
Their hours of loving and committed childcare helped me tremendously throughout this
process. I want to continue to thank those who believed in my research and gave me the
encouragement to remain focused. Those people are Laurie Pruett, Rachelle Pruett,
Chloe and Norm Hodgson, Herb and Sherri Pruett, Helen Hitchcock, Virginia and Stan
Pruett, Dr. Rachel Hurdley, Parul Baxi, Mona Abdoun, Kathleen Cook, Richard Brandley
and those who participated and entrusted me with their experiences that made this thesis
possible. Most certainly, this goal could never have been accomplished without placing
my faith in God, who inspires and gives me guidance daily.
v
Table of Contents
Abstract...
.
. . ..
..
.. . .. . . . .
.. . . ..
.
.. .
111
Acknowledgments...
Chapter One. Literature Review... . . . . ..
Section
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
v
.. . . ..
. ..
.
Introduction
"The Golden Rule"
Popular Literature Review
Scholarly Literature Review
..
.. .
1
.
.
1
2
3
10
.
.
Chapter Two. Methods......
31
.
.
.
.
31
35
38
40
Chapter Three. Findings......................................................................
44
Section
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
Introduction
Data Collection
Grounded Theory
Sample Population
76
79
Chapter Four. Conclusion.....................................................................
95
3.1
3.2
3.3
Introduction...... .. .
..
. ..
..
. . ..
Findings: Three Major Components of Using Good Manners in
the Workplace
.
4.2.1
Showing Gratitude...........................................
4.2.2
Showing Respect.............................................
4.2.3
Conforming to the Workplace Culture..................
95
102
References. . . .. . .. . . . . .. . .. . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . .. .. . . .. .. . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . .. . .. . . . . . . . .. . .. .. ....
115
Appendix A: Consent Statement.............................................
Appendix B: General Data on Interviewees................................................
Appendix C: Interview Guide.....
117
118
119
Section
4.1
4.2
Expressing Gratitude
Showing Respect.
3.2.1
Structural Determinants of Respect.
3.2.2
Workplace Culture and Personalities
Conforming to the Workplace Culture
44
63
65
.
.
.
.
.
Section
VI
102
104
106
Chapter One: Literature Review
1.1 Introduction
Manners have been the subject of popular and scholarly concern since ancient times.
Whenever social conditions change, definitions of what is appropriate behavior undergo
change. This thesis examines the use of contemporary American manners among whitecollar workers, and their significance in building good working relationships. My interest
in this subject began through my own personal experiences working in a white-collar
position. A common complaint that I have heard throughout my personal and
professional life from those who held white-collar positions, is that manners are
deteriorating in the workplace.
My exploration of this subject matter began to expand into a thesis topic from my
interest in answering the following questions: What kinds of interactions and behaviors
are defined as good manners in today's workplace? Are good manners important in
establishing and maintaining good working relationships? Do good manners contribute
to success in the workplace? Whose interests are served when employees practice good
manners? Can the use of or the lack of good manners be expressions of power, or can
they assist in controlling workers? And finally, have manners deteriorated in the whitecollar workplace as a result of the rapid technological changes that have affected our
culture?
2
1.2 "The Golden Rule"
As I began formal research for this thesis, the most common reference found in the
literature has been to the Christian principle called "The Golden Rule," which states, "Do
unto others as you would have them do unto you" (Mathew 7:12). This Christian
principle describes the premise of the use of good manners in American society. Many
other religious cultures have very similar understandings of this principle in their own
doctrines. For example, in the Koran of Islam it states, "None of you [truly] believes
until he wishes for his brother what he wishes for himself." (The Prophet Mohammad,
An-Nawawi's Forty Hadith 13, p. 56). The doctrine of Judaism states, "Thou shalt not
avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy
neighbor as thyself: I am the LORD (Leviticus 19: 18). Confucius said, "Never impose
on others what you would not choose for yourself' (Representative work of Confucius,
Analects XV.24). These four examples of what has been called "a moral principle" and
the basis for the modern concept of human rights, have never-the-Iess been challenged.
George Bernard Shaw, music and literary critic and author, once said that "The Golden
Rule is that there are no golden rules." He also said, "Do not do unto others as you
would expect they should do unto you. Their tastes may not be the same." But the
underlying point of these works are that the use of good manners is to help others in
society feel comfortable.
3
1.3 Popular Literature Review
One of the leading twentieth century secular writers on traditional popular manners
was Emily Post. Still a household name and synonymous with manners, Emily Post is
recognized as a luminary on etiquette. She wrote in a variety of styles for numerous
magazines and newspaper articles throughout her career. Post responded to sought
advice by writing a book titled Etiquette, In Society, In Business, In Politics and At Home
(1922). In it, she explains the authority and responsibility that manners of "best society"
must take in social situations. In the sixteenth edition, Emily Post's Etiquette (1997), her
successor Peggy Post quotes Emily Post by saying, "Rules of etiquette are nothing more
than sign posts by which we are guided to the goal of good taste (p. xvi)." As in many
other periods of rapid change in the United States, society calls for the revision of certain
etiquette in an effort to keep up and maintain social order.
During the publication of Etiquette (1922), America was experiencing the Roaring
Twenties. Etiquette appears to be addressing a privileged and elite group of people
during a period of social unrest where perhaps class distinctions were becoming blurred.
Being "civilized" was a term that implied the distinction between upper-classes and
lower-classes. Emily Post primarily defined guidelines for those who could afford
certain lifestyles during a time when America was more accustomed to having clearer
class distinctions. For example, Post's first edition's contents directs its readers on how
4
to introduce socialites to presidents, monarchy and those in other various high-ranking
authority, or how to dine in high-society. However, in her defense, she claimed that it is
dignified to show others respect regardless of their social rank. She says, "No
thoroughbred lady would ever refuse to shake any hand that is honorable, not even the
hand of a coal heaver at the risk of her fresh white glove" (Post, 1922, p. 19).
In 1946, Emily Post founded The Emily Post Institute, where her work continues
primarily by her family who carries on her name and teaches her fundamental principles
on the use of good manners. Her successors recognize the rapid changes that effect
American society and are continuously revising Etiquette (1922) to reflect the current
changes that American society faces today. Peggy Post (1997), Emily's greatgranddaughter-in-Iaw and current director of the institute, points out in the sixteenth
edition that sometimes co-workers live in other parts of the world and that it takes
additional efforts and reconstruction of etiquette to be able to work in a global economy.
Additionally, she says that the sixteen edition's focus is on how to use "codes of behavior
based on consideration and thoughtfulness" (as cited in Post, 1997, p. xvi). Like Emily
Post (1922), Peggy Post ( 1997) instructs on how to greet those who are of high-ranking
authority, but empathizes that most people do not have the privilege to travel in
presidential circles. Peggy Post's approach is more casual and is directed at the common
every day encounters that people have in a variety of social settings.
Peggy Post explains that one's personal actions must be constructed so that other
people are made to feel at ease. Peggy Post says:
5
Manners, ultimately, are a combination of common sense, generosity of spirit, and
some specific know-how that helps us do things thoughtfully and with care for
one another. Etiquette, ultimately, is the guiding code that enables us to practice
these manners, to celebrate our traditions and ceremonies, and to be flexible at the
same time. Both must be fluid. Both embrace all that encompasses our lives
today, from blended families, cyberspace courtesies, multicultural customs, global
workplaces, and world religions to communal living space. These are not
'prescriptions for properness,' comprising rigid, formal, stuffy rules. Rather, they
are guidelines for doing things with consideration, gracefully and well (1997, p.
xvii).
When comparing the messages between Emily Post and Peggy Post, it is understandable
why some people shun etiquette and feel uncomfortable in certain social situations. By
today's standards, many of Emily Post's first edition's thoughts are not applicable to
contemporary society because American society has evolved.
In 1952, Amy Vanderbilt published a bestselling book, followed by several editions
of Amy Vanderhilt's Complete Book
(~f Etiquette:
A Guide to Gracious Living (1952). In
her 1958 edition, Vanderbilt claims that she is an authority on the usage of traditional
good manners. She based her authority on years of experience as an etiquette advisor,
that included working for the u.S. Department of State, her partly European education,
and fairly extensive travels in the United States and abroad. During her career, she
hosted a television program, "It's in Good Taste," and from 1960 to 1962 she hosted the
radio program, 'The Right Thing to Do." To add to her experiences, she explains in her
book that it took four years to write her first edition, where she relied on interviews from
dozens of authorities in their own fields. She wrote that she referred to her own book at
times because it isn't possible for anyone to remember every bit of etiquette, but it is the
wise who seek out this knowledge (1958).
6
Vanderbilt acknowledges that changes in etiquette usually comes slowly, but
believes that they can also change overnight with the introduction of inventions, wars,
political upheaval, and legislation, all which dictate etiquette. This idea appears to be
consistent with American history. Furthermore, Vanderbilt believes that etiquette is for
anyone who is interested in upward mobility. By establishing good relationships with
others, people are allowed access into other social circles. She shows that the use of good
manners enables people from all social classes to move with flexibility into different
environments.
Vanderbilt began her research approximately two years after WWll ended, speaking
to readers who were familiar with the trials of war and the hardships that it brings. Her
audience was primarily those who sought to return to a "civilized lifestyle" that was once
known prior to WWII. Unlike Peggy Post, Vanderbilt believed that manners are more
than codes of behavior; they are rules for social intercourse. She wrote:
For we must all learn the socially acceptable ways of living with others in no
matter what society we move. Even in primitive societies there are such rules,
some of them as complex and inexplicable as many of our own. Their original
raison d'etre or purpose is lost, but their acceptance is still unquestioned
( 1958, p. 2).
Like others, Letitia Baldrige's resume includes a long list of experiences which
helped her compose her theory on the use of good manners. Letitia Baldrige's Complete
Guide to Executive Manners (1985) uses a contemporary approach to the use of good
manners. In her career, she has served as a social secretary to U.S. ambassadors David
Bruce and Clare Boothe Luce and was called to the White House to serve as Jacqueline
7
Kennedy's Chief of Staff during the Kennedy administration. In 1978 and 1979, Letitia
Baldrige assumed the responsibility of writing revised editions of The Amy Vanderbilt
Complete Book of Etiquette. Her work particularly addresses young managers whom she
believes often have not had the proper training at home due to rapid changes in the
family. These changes include blended families, women entering the workplace, but in
addition, new technology and innovations in education.
In Letitia Baldrige's Complete Guide to Executive Manners (1985), she claims that
her book is imperative for all executives and those who aspire to become an executive
because it is a guide for every successful possible business situation, including a section
that emphasizes new business etiquette for women. For Baldrige, good manners are one
part common sense and another part consideration. In her opinion, both aspects must be
taken seriously if a profit is to be made in business.
In business, profit and pay scales are often related to power. According to Baldrige,
" ... good manners are cost-effective, because they not only increase the quality of life in
the workplace, contribute to optimum employee morale, and embellish the company
image, but they also playa major role in generating profit" (1985, p. 3). Also, she attests
that good manners foster good working relationships that benefit clients and employees in
the white-collar workplace.
From a more contemporary view of popular manners, Judith Martin, better known
by the pen name "Miss. Manners," has been writing advice columns for the last thirty
years in over two hundred newspapers worldwide. Unlike the traditionalists, Post (1922)
8
and Vanderbilt (1958), Martin (1996) addresses complaints and unique problems of rude
behaviors that face individuals by delving into the core of the infraction. Similar to the
traditionalists, her readers are common everyday people who read their local newspaper.
The general audience attracted to Martin's column receives selected individual published
feedback. By addressing specific issues, Martin shows that unique scenarios still show
commonly underpinned problems that usually affect an individual's pride. Her advice is
primarily about preserving or protecting pride. In her popular column, individuals are
also advised on how to better handle certain social situations should they reoccur.
In 1996, Martin published Miss. Manners Rescues Civilization: From Sexual
Harassment, Frivolous Lawsuits, Dissing and Other Lapses in Civility (1996). In her
first chapter, 'The Case Against Etiquette," Martin indicates that people are intimidated
by the word "etiquette." She rejects the claim that manners are artificial, elitist, oldfashioned, and arbitrary (1996, p. 3). Instead, Martin believes that etiquette is carefully
designed to prevent conflict and put others at ease. She states the obvious, that
everybody eats, and professes that all societies have rules about some very basic rituals
such as when dining. She points out that people use a standardized way of eating when
sharing the same space with others. For Martin, good manners are about making others
feel comfortable in a shared environment. According to her, all interests are being served
when good manners are used at the table because they allow for comfortable discourse
and the safety of others.
9
Martin (1996) believes that there is a rudeness crisis and implores her readers to
evaluate the intentions of their actions. Martin shows that people will chose to use good
manners in certain contexts while using bad manners in others. For example, she says:
People have always used periods of social unrest to play class identification
games with toys. Silverware was the Victorian's weapon of choice (a notable
exception to the rule that the less industrialized the society, the more complicated
are its eating rituals), and now the weapons are status cars and clothes. Has that
given a bad name to driving and dressing (1996, p. 3)?
Worse villains have misused the law to promote injustice, but the majesty of the
law manages to survive. You don't judge a system by the people who abuse it
(1996, p. 4).
In Martin's opinion, looking down upon and judging another as a form of insult and
separation is considered rude and bad manners.
Martin (1996) adamantly believes that business environments should return to a
more formalized standard, claiming that familiar relations in the office don't work. By
removing false emotions that are genuinely experienced in a family setting, employees
are able to accept authority and grasp the reality that they are not one and the same in the
workplace. Martin says:
Comparisons of co-workers to family and friends are sweet but unfortunate,
especially when you think of how some people treat their families. Relatives
can't be fired when they fail to perform, and should be able to draw on quantities
of sympathy and tolerance that are not available in the corporate world, no matter
how syrupy the language in which employers attempt to disguise harsh reality.
As for friends, one of their greatest advantages is that you get to choose your own,
and you can avoid them when you're annoyed or bored with them (1996, p. 258).
In exchange for workers suppressing their emotions, they earn a paycheck. This is often
seen as the catalyst for professionalism and this is why Martin believes that personal
compliments have no place at work. Compliments should be directed towards the skill
10
and performance of an employee. She says, " ... the best of all are the ones that go into
the paycheck or the record" (1996, p. 260). Baldrige (1985) emphasizes that it is
necessary to rei y on interpersonal skills in the workplace, but Martin (1996) emphasizes
that the workplace should be free from personal interests.
1.4 Scholarly Literature Review
John F. Kasson, currently a Professor of History and American Studies at The
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, provides a scholarly and historical account
of how manners have shaped American culture in Rudeness and Civility: Manners in
Nineteenth-Century Urban America (1990). His expertise in American history includes a
timeline for when manners became most significant in this country. This is important
because according to Kasson, manners primarily developed in America during a period
when romantic love heightened as Industrialization began to make significant changes to
society and the economy. During this era, the rise of polite behavior began to spread
through American society, and define class distinctions through certain abilities to use
good manners well. Additionally, American society continues to primarily select life
partnership based on romantic love, allowing for the need to use good manners to express
emotions during the courting process.
During Industrialization, the control over one's emotions came to be considered an
essential aspect of gentility. He says that manners are not deteriorating in American
culture, but are constantly changing (1990). He also says that manners are codes of
11
behavior that have emerged out of political, social and culture contexts, and are
ramifications that are extended deep into human relations and an individual's personality.
Furthermore, he shows how manners have shaped our personalities where it has
introduced shame during periods of social unrest, such as during Industrialization when
one was defined by society for their manners.
Kasson (1990) explains that manners are also a subject for scholarly concern. He
relies heavily on Norbert Elias' (1939) work, but Kasson shows that manners are a
process that is developed when a society is trying to exert some control over emotions.
For example, Kasson points out that people in the late Middle Ages expressed their
darkest emotions with directness and intensity. At one point in history, displays of
emotional gratification that came from hurting another human being or animal was
acceptable emotional behavior, such as those displays during public tortures and
executions. Kasson also shows that as the state began to control the actions of others,
manners increasingly developed by ruling societies to define class distinctions.
Kasson's theory on how class distinctions became defined is also found in popular
books on manners, such as in the work of Judith Martin (1996). Martin believes that
people will always take advantage of situations where they can draw class distinctions
and benefit from upward mobility. As government involvement curtails certain
behaviors, secrecy and desire of certain intense emotions begins to develop. Standards of
what is acceptable behavior in society begin to take shape through sanctions. As desires
and emotions became suppressed during Industrialization, two spheres of reactions to
12
emotions began to take shape: those actions that are acceptable in public and those that
are acceptable in private. The separation of emotions and the acts that may follow them
epitomize the process of modern civilization as it developed. However, according to
Kasson (1990), this separation between private and public emotions brought
embarrassment, shame and guilt to individuals and society for emotions that at one point
were considered normal and acceptable, but later, people were forced to suppress because
they were then considered unacceptable social behaviors.
Norbert Elias was another prominent author on the use of manners. His influential
work, The Civilizin[? Process (1939) shows the historical importance of power relations
and class status dynamics by developing a history of upper class driven changes in
standards of repugnance and shame related to controlling bodily functions violent
outbursts, other strong emotions, and feelings of superiority. Elias' work also shows how
other strong emotions and feelings of superiority were gradually restrained as social
classes became more interdependent. The European "civilizing process" produced
standards that Europeans used to caste themselves as more civilized than those they were
colonizing. Further, Elias explains that failure to submit to social constraints, such as
etiquette, results in shame. The feelings of shame can coerce individuals into self-control
and self-presentation that operates through fear of social humiliation to more internalized
controls.
What we call "manners" is not spontaneously present; they are formed in social
processes that involve an always shifting balance of power. Such a movement may come
13
from the use of a modern invention, trend or even war. In his historical accounts, Elias
shows that traditional and contemporary manners constitute and arise out of class
structures. These structures draw boundaries between social classes. Manners are used
to differentiate, and police class boundaries. Intruders must go through a long, often
multigenerational process of socialization and emulation in order to raise their social
standing. Manners formed in aristocratic or elite circles are diffused and transformed
throughout society when aspiring classes emulated elite manners. The dominant classes
will typically respond by tightening constraints and redrawing boundaries. The upper
group is forced into increased restraint and isolation, and the contrasts and tensions in
society are increased (Elias, 1939, p. 430). This may lead to a dialectical process of
pretension and distinction whereby elite manners are diffused and democratized while
lines of distinction are sustained. By and large, this is a continuous process that Elias
observed that appears to still continue today.
Elias (1939) contrasts historical etiquette practices with modern ones by
emphasizing how people's behavior is changed through the development of manners. He
says in warrior societies people relied heavily on their emotions and instincts to protect
themselves from harm. Elias gave the example that illustrates ancient societies as a
people with a readiness to fight when they had concern about being killed on a road by
thieves or soldiers. Moving forward into the future, he says that as societies became
more complex with greater functional interdependence, it became necessary to have
social constraints in order to function.
14
Another sociologist who ruminates on shame is Thomas Scheff. In Bloody Revenge:
Emotions, Nationalism, and War (Scheff, 1994), he theorizes that pride and shame are the
causes of all conflict in the world. Like Kasson (1990), Scheff says that those who feel
shame endeavor to improve social relationships. He says that as shame infringes on a
person's pride; it forces them to respond in ways to reinstate it. This is similar to what
Martin (1996) says by pointing out that shame emerges from not understanding society's
expectations. Like Scheff, Martin believes that people will go to extreme lengths to
protect their pride.
In Bloody Revenge, Scheff (1994) begins his analysis with a marital dispute to give
us a very personal understanding on how pride and shame are intertwined with one
another at the micro level. By analyzing a situation on a small scale that many of us can
relate to, he sets the stage for how conflict can and has developed at a national or macro
level. In Scheff's work, he largely focuses on WWII and how Adolf Hitler was able to
capitalize on the feelings of shame that Germans felt through the loss of war. According
to Scheff, Hitler portrayed Germany as shameful to its people. He convinced the
majority of his country that the only way to reinstate pride was to become a conquering
nation. Scheff's analysis indicates that the atrocities that happened to over six million
people during WWII, was an act of revenge for the humiliation Germany had experienced
in WWI. Scheff defines the combination of emotions that evoke shame and pride as
"feeling traps." Events and episodes that summon "feeling traps" are patterns of anger at
someone who insults or rejects us. "Feeling traps" can be experienced at the
interpersonal level and at the national level. Anger is a substitute or defense against
15
feelings of shame. Hitler successfully convinced Germany to engage in war with several
countries in an attempt to regain pride through vengeance. According to Scheff, pride
and shame are a human's basic social emotions, and too much emphasis on the individual
leads to isolation and open conflict (alienation from others) between nations, but also
engulfment (alienation from self) within. Coupled with anger and rage, this becomes a
breeding ground for conflict (Scheff, 1994).
Scheff explains the origins of the word "shame" came from showing that fear, anger
and grief are widely recognized in the world:
Shame seems to arise from our need to feel the right degree of connectedness with
others. Shame is the emotion that occurs when we feel too close or too far from
others. When too close, we feel exposed or violated; when too far, we feel
invisible or rejected. Pride is the signal of being at the right distance: close
enough to feel noticed but not so close to feel threatened (1994, p. 40).
Like Scheff (1994), Vanderbilt (1959) agrees that war makes people want to reclaim
pride, however; Vanderbilt says that the way to do that is by showing others how to do
things well by regaining civility during periods of social unrest.
Scheff's (1994) theory of pride versus shame explains tension that often arises in the
white-collar business world where personal and professional lines are often vague. He
adds that many times shame goes unacknowledged in Western society. Westerners will
typically choose other words and phrases to describe shame, such as "awkwardness" or
"being uncomfortable." Perhaps shame is something that people fear in Western society
because it is viewed as a form of weakness. White-collar workers are eager to cultivate
pride in their work, and when pride is not felt they may be more apt to experience shame.
16
Manners aid working relationships in order to prevent feelings of humiliation in a whitecollar environment. As Scheff suggests, "feeling traps" can be avoided if a constructive
form of communication is made possible. When workers use good manners in their dayto-day activities, it allows them to negotiate situations that might otherwise be considered
hostile.
Manners can be seen as transactions in which respect is exchanged between
individuals in order to maintain peace. Scheff says, "The apology-forgiveness
transaction signifies the removal of a threat to the social bond" (1994, p. 136). According
to popular texts on manners, codes of behavior and following guidelines on how to
conduct one's self can save the pride of individuals. This suggests that manners can
prevent offensive behavior so that the apology-forgiveness stage is not ever reached.
When looking at the effectiveness of good manners among white-collar workers,
Erving Goffman provides theories to indicate that common social actions are actually
performances that people use to express their character. In The Presentation of Self in
Everyday L~fe (1959), Goffman uses "dramaturgical perspective," to describe how one
believes that he is perceived according to his audience. In relation to time and place,
"dramaturgical perspective" describes how an individual portrays an image that he would
like his audience to believe. Ultimately, the success of an individual's performance
means that communication has been achieved.
Goffman's work explains that we are all actors on stage, performing for others what
we want them to know about us. According to Goffman, what appears to be a
17
masquerade or performance is really a social understanding of how our interactions are
supposed to play out according to the social etiquette of the moment. He says, "A
'performance' may be defined as all the activity of a given participant on a given
occasion which serves to influence in any way any of the other participants (1959, p. 15).
Goffman collected his data and developed his theory in The Presentation ofSe?fin
Everyday LU"e (1959) while staying at a hotel in the Shetland Isles. He points out how
important it is for workers to establish the "us" from "them" and how distinctions are
made between individuals to determine which group they belong to. He explains that an
individual's behavior can cultivate an audience. By comparing social interactions with a
stage performance, he further explains that it is important for the actor to be successful,
one who appears genuine and believable, so that harmony is felt between those who are
acting and those who are observing. Harmony emerges from the control that the actor
has over his audience before the audience controls the actor. For example, Goffman
defines a good first impression as a successful performance that portrays the image the
actor wants to give his or her audience. Since the audience is carefully following the
performance, they will look for truths between the actor's words and his actions. During
Goffman's time spent in the Shetland Isle, he recalled how a crofter's wife listened to the
compliments of a man who proclaimed how delicious her cooking was. She also
observed how the man's table manners were, to see if they matched his words. For
example, she watched to see if he was chewing with gusto or making wincing faces that
showed displeasure when he swallowed his food. As Goffman puts it, 'The Shetlander,
in short, would observe the unobserved observer" (1959, p. 7). He admits, however, that
18
when an actor fails at his performance and the failure allows the audience to become
privy to what the actor is trying to conceal, social etiquette calls the audience to observe
some tact. According to Goffman, this act will free the performer from further
embarrassment.
Goffman describes a process similar to what white-collar workers may feel
challenged with regarding how they manage their emotions at work. If white-collar
workers emotionally detach themselves from their personal lives, does this define them
professionally? Also, Goffman states that those in leadership positions working in the
service industry must project a performance that is firm, but polite, to a subordinate in
order to keep an upper-hand in a situation (1959, p. 11).
Unlike GotTman, who thinks that our performance mask represents our truer self
(1959, p. 19), Arlie Hochschild, in The Managed Heart: Commercialization o.lHuman
Feeling (1983) says that people do "emotion work" to bridge the gap between what they
feel and what they ought to feel in order to suppress their true feelings from surfacing,
which could potentially damage their professional image. A fundamental difference
between these two sociologists is that Goffman believes how an individual presents
himself is really who he is, and Hochschild believes that an individual's work to remove
an initial emotion from a situation can cultivate a new and more fitting one.
Hochschild claims that emotion work is an art fundamental to civilized living (1983,
p. 21). In other words, creativity on an individual's part enables us to assess situations,
and then project an appropriate code of civility. When we are civil, we are conforming to
19
social norms. For example, Hochschild reports that flight attendants are trained to see
situations through the eyes of passengers. She shows that each occupation carries out
their respective role, emphasizing the appropriate emotion for a given situation. This can
be seen as keeping situations under control in the same way Goffman describes how the
performer keeps an upper-hand on the audience. By keeping an upper-hand in
controlling their own emotions, flight attendants are able to manage the emotions of their
passengers. These emotions are demonstrated through the acts of certain good manners
that put passengers at ease. This is important because, as Hochschild points out, these
efforts are done exclusively for profit, which is the goal of business. Customers and
clients assume different rights with regard to the displaying of emotion. "The ledger is
supposedly evened out by a wage" (1983, p. 86). Additionally, Hochschild says:
Display is what is sold, but over the long run display comes to assume a certain
relation to feeling. An enlightened management realizes, a separation of display
and feeling is hard to keep up over long periods (1983, p. 90).
She adds later that:
We try to reduce this strain by pulling the two closer together either by changing
what we feel or by changing what we feign (1983, p. 90).
Consequently, Hochschild explains that after long periods of time doing emotion work,
employees find it difficult to differentiate between their true feelings and how an
organization wants them to feel. Emotion work can be seen as performing good manners,
and Hochschild shows through her examination of emotion labor that this is necessary in
order stay in control of situations.
20
Hochschild claims that we use "emotional memory" when our true feelings do not
match a situation. In one example, she describes how a person may not feel grief for the
deceased at a funeral. She says that we will begin to think of imagery to bring us up to
speed with the rest of the people who are mourning. We then are able to internalize these
feelings so they project an appropriate emotion in a given situation. In applying this
theory to a white-collar work environment, perhaps "emotional memory" is initiated
through feelings or a desire to earn culture capital (Bourdieu, 1983/1986). When a
professional relies on emotional memory, it could also be because he or she recognizes
the importance of maintaining professional relationships in a setting that requires an
appropriate emotional response to a situation. If inappropriate emotion is displayed, a
worker could be seen as unprofessional, which may possibly have a variety of
consequences.
In The Commercialization of Intimate
L~fe:
Notesfrom Home and Work (2003),
Hochschild delves deep into the emotion that fuels "misgivings" when gratitude is not
expressed as something extra from what is expected by the recipient of a gift. Gift giving
is a common way people apply the use of good manners in ways that show gratitude, but
according to Hochschild, gifts can be received as expected and dull when they are not
considered an extra, much to the dismay of the giver. Hochschild shows that expressions
of gratitude can cause relationships to flounder if they are not appropriate or demonstrate
three reference points. These three reference points are "current ideas about honor that
derive from a moral frame of reference, to ideas about current realities that derive from a
21
pragmatic frame of reference, and to precedents that derive from a historical frame of
reference" (2003, p. 116).
When "misgivings" are felt, Hochschild says that they, "can cut dangerously into
relationships" (2003, p. 112), and these cuts can make it difficult for people to accept
well intended expressions of appreciation that are carried out according to what society
calls the use of good manners. Emotions that are found in "misgivings, lead to
individuals feeling short-changed, disappointed and deprived of gifts. According to her
research on heterosexual relationships in the Bay Area, this can lead to resentment. We
can easily apply this theory to the white-collar workplace where employees expect certain
forms of appreciation based on what they think their performance is worth. Whereas
Hochschild feels that marital relationships suffer from "some early injury to human
character" (2003, p. 116), perhaps it is not too far off base to assume that the same
applies early on in a person's career when appropriate expressions of gratitude are not
being met as seen by the recipient.
"The Economy of Gratitude" (Hochschild, 2003) defines the value of exchange of
gifts between those in love relationships. How individuals value a gift from a giver is
determined by their cultural beliefs and often their circumstances of hardships. Some of
these hardships include, but are not limited to, working a "second shift," which she
describes as the burden of unequal distributions of housework after leaving the cash
economy.
22
Like all economies, the flux of supply and demand often has an impact on its
market. In the emotional sense, how much a giver pours out appreciation onto the
receiver in love relationships is determined predominately by the emotion of the giver.
But Hochschild points out that it is the receiver who usually determines the value of the
gift. Although some professional relationships have an intimate feel, especially after
years of service together, popular authors on etiquette seem to agree that the
responsibility of the person who is using good manners should determine what actions
are reasonable responses to show expressions of gratitude. The sense of a gift is
considered an 'extra' in the eyes of the receiver. This 'extra' moves the emotion of the
receiver to feel appreciated for being recognized for something that is beyond what is
normally expected (2003, p. 104), or what a person feels obligated to give. Hochschild
links this process of the strong obligation to give, to receive and to reciprocate gifts as
cultural and a way for us to express love.
But unlike Hochschild explanation of "The Economy of Gratitude" as being Janusfaced, this may not be the case in the context of the white-collar workplace where
appreciation is most often valued when financial reward is given to an employee for their
hard work. Interestingly, the white-collar workplace has been described as an
environment that resembles the family, especially by the female interviewees in this
thesis. According to Judith Martin, this is considered "unfortunate" because it is an
illusion in a place of business. But Hochschild says that even though women have
consistently moved into the cash economy for the past several decades, the distribution of
housework has not kept up with the changes. She also points out that, "A 'culture lag' in
23
the wider society, then, echoes as a 'gender lag' at home" (2003, p. 106). Even though
Martin believes that a business setting should not be misunderstood as a surrogate family,
a 'gender lag' is still apparent in the white-collar workplace, which does surface the same
unevenness of power at work as it does at home. This theory seems applicable to the
white-collar workplace where employees can become frustrated as they bring their
expectations of how emotions should be dealt at the professional level, but are confronted
on a more personal level because of one's gender.
Editor for the "Philadelphia Inquirer, Alfred Lubrano, tells the story of his personal
experiences as well as analyzing one-hundred interviews of social mobility in Limbo
(2004). Born into a Brooklyn working class, blue-collar home, Lubrano makes his
transition into a white-collar status through education. When he began writing for the
"Philadelphia Inquirer," he soon learned to recognize the differences in mentality of those
whose family roots lay in blue-collar jobs versus those whose family's work history had
mostly been in white-collar jobs. Now a white-collar employee, he points out that he
benefits from both his scholastic education and his street smarts of a blue-collar worker to
maneuver in situations at work. While he claims street smarts give him an upper-hand in
his white-collar position, he still is faced with inner-turmoil because he feels unnatural in
a white-collar work environment. He describes workers who share similar experiences as
having dual consciousness as they make a transition from blue-collar jobs to white-collar
jobs. Lubrano calls people who experience dual consciousness - "Straddlers." This is
very similar to what W.E.B. DuBois describes in The Souls qlBlack Folks (1903). But
unlike DuBois's account of the painful limbo, or veil, that African Americans lingered in
24
during Reconstruction, it is easier for a "Straddler" to learn how to act, speak and dress
like a white-collar employee since there are no differences in physical characteristics
between white-collar and blue-collar workers. "Straddlers" make conscious choices in
their career paths in order to fit in with their peers. On occasion, a "Straddler" must
return to his or her blue-collar origins, such as when family is called together over
holiday dinners. Lubrano says that "Straddlers" learn to shut up or dumb down their
knowledge when they find themselves in their old social networks. He also says that this
is his personal survival technique in order to fit back into the neighborhood he originated
from. He reiterates this phenomenon over and over again throughout his book with
examples from his interviews.
Lubrano's analysis on how workers sell their identity is very similar to how
Goffman and Hochschild show how people present themselves in ways that not only
change their behavior, but also how they project a specific image for profit. Lubrano,
however, sees selling identity as a form of "kissing-up." He says:
Along with blatant kissing up, networking and socializing with bosses and
colleagues also are dirty words to some 'Straddler's.' It all smacks of phoniness
and is antithetical to their blue-collar backgrounds, which emphasize honesty in
human relations -'real' relationships" (2004, p. 144).
Lubrano does consider "kissing-up" a way to advance in white-collar jobs. He also
believes that promotions are granted to those who know how to play office politics
correctly, unlike blue-collar workers who often rely on directness and seniority.
According to Lubrano, friendship is valued differently among office mates because
white-collar workers befriend those who can help them move ahead. This is similar to
25
popular views on what using good manners can do for white-collar workers. Knowing
how to "play office politics" corresponds to what Post and Martin describe as acceptable
behavior for an environment. Even though all popular authors cited in this thesis agree
that the use of good manners· are a great way to earn upward mobility, good manners are
also used to show civility, treating those with respect, and demonstrates common sense.
Lubrano identifies the language of blue-collar and white collar-workers, claiming
that blue-collar workers say what they mean. One "Straddler" that he interviewed said,
"You just don't find a hell of a lot of arrogant working-class people. And blue-collar
people say what they mean" (2004, p. 18). In other interviews, Lubrano discovered that
white-collar bosses often begin employee criticism with a complement. According to
Lubrano, white-collar workers demonstrate what constitutes the use of good manners
differently than blue-collar workers, which is often seen as a sign of weakness instead of
civility to a blue-collar worker. He explains that glazing over important issues is not
considered the use of good manners to blue-collar workers. Instead, glazing over an
important issue is a way of undermining an individual and a display of bad manners. But
later, when referring to white-collar workers, Lubrano says, "It's wiser doing social
lubrication than simply keeping the nose to the grindstone" (2004, p. 156). Tone of
voice, actions, dress, attitudes, and according to Lubrano, "social lubrication," are codes
of behavior necessary and important to a white-collar worker in order to be successful at
work. FUlthermore, he points out that it is difficult for a person whose origins lay in
povelty to succeed in a white-collar world. Since life experiences are so different from
26
those from white-collar roots, it requires great determination from an individual to learn
how to blend into their new environment.
Robert Sutton, author of No Asshole Rule: Building a Civilized Workplace and
Surviving One That Isn't (2007), is Professor of Management Science and Engineering at
Stanford Engineering School. Sutton studies the links between managerial knowledge
and organizational action, innovation, and organizational performance, and has published
over one-hundred articles in academic and applied publications. The No Asshole Rule
outlines the detrimental effects that bullying can have on co-workers, and how they affect
the success of a company. Sutton also writes about his own experiences of being the
culprit and the victim of bullying in the workplace. He shows that everyone has the
potential to become a jerk in the workplace. Given the right conditions, he says:
We all have the potential to act like assholes under the wrong conditions, when
we are placed under pressure or, especially, when our workplace encourages
everyone - especially the 'best' and 'most powerful' people to act that way.
Although it is best to use the term sparingly, some people do deserve to be
certified as assholes because they are consistently nasty across places and times
(2007, p. 12).
Sutton shows that we all can be subjected to boorish behavior in one form or another.
He gives the example that people's safety can even be compromised under certain
contexts, such as in the airline industry when workers may feel intimidated telling their
superiors of accidents and mishaps. According to Sutton's research, this is especially
true in the airline industry (CWC, July 9, 2007). "In a fear-based organization,
employees constantly look over their shoulders and are constantly trying to avoid the
finger of blame and humiliation; even when they know how to help the organization, they
27
are often afraid to do it" (2007, p. 38). Good manners are ineffective to Sutton, who
suggests that we should consult Miss. Manners if we want to learn the virtues of speaking
quietly." He is, however, a firm believer in the "virtues of conflict" (2007, p. 17), and
later says that, "Even seemingly small differences in language that we hear and use can
determine whether we cooperate or compete" (2007, p. 105).
Sutton shows that rank and hierarchy are factors in boorish behavior. He explains
that those in higher positions are more prone to acting like an "asshole to underlings,"
than underlings are to act in that way towards those in superior positions. He found
interesting data regarding how people change their behavior towards newly appointed
subordinates when they are given even trivial power. In his analyses of two experiments
showing how situations arise for how individuals may change their behavior, Sutton says,
the choice of words a person uses affects and influences the attitudes of people. He
describes the traits of human behavior found in these experiments as scary, because, "it
shows how having just a slight power edge causes regular people to grab the goodies for
themsel ves and act like rude pigs" (2007, p. 72).
Sutton attests that one can avoid people with rude behavior with the use of
technology. He warns that e-mail and conference calls, rather than face-to-face
interaction, tends to cause more mistrust and fighting. Sutton believes that people can not
see the full picture that comes with face-to-face interaction. This includes
misunderstanding the demands that people encounter as well as their physical work
settings, "So group members develop incomplete, and often overly negative, opinions of
one another" (2007, p. 143).
28
Titles are not the only thing that give people power; pay does too. The larger the
gap between different pay scales, the more likely bullying is to occur. When the
"difference between the highest- and lowest-paid people in a company or team is
reduced, a host of good things happen - including improved financial performance, better
product quality, enhanced research productivity, and, in baseball teams, a better win-loss
record" (Sutton, 2007, p. 76).
These literature reviews supports the hypothesis that the use of good manners in a
white-collar business environment is essential to the success not only of the individual
employee, but to the organization as a whole. However, what is considered good
manners is outlined by those in power. This can buck the general understanding of what
is considered "good manners" when this term is defined as a response to how well an
etiquette is followed. Traditional popular authors show that what was formerly
considered in good taste often were ways to exclude individuals from certain groups.
Contemporary popular authors are more inclusive. They tend to show people niceties and
emphasis how to get along with others. These books still teach how to address those in
power and how to act as if in power, but they mostly emphasize ways for all members of
society to share communal space. According to contemporary popular experts, exclusion
is an act of poor manners.
The popular literature on manners shows that there is a general code of etiquette for
specific social contexts that continuously change as a response to changing social
conditions. Traditional popular authors on etiquette describe how manners uphold
traditions and maintain social status. Many contemporary authors consider the use of
29
good manners as a method for encompassing and elevating general society to freer access
towards upward mobility.
The scholarly literature provides a historical perspective on the use of good
manners. Scholarly literature also shows how poor manners in relationships between
nations and groups of people can induce shame and engender anger. Scholarly literature
describes a method for how etiquette is determined primarily for the protection of class
status, responses to protecting pride through war and other forms of social upheaval.
Scholarly literature often takes in account timelines for when certain etiquette is defined
by ruling members of society. Ultimately, scholarly concern shows that those who rule
society also govern the prevailing etiquette.
Nobody is exempt from the cost of what is considered the use of poor manners. In
fact, popular and scholarly literature includes examples of the repercussion of the use of
bad manners and the consequences of not understanding the prevailing etiquette. Where
in some situations, not following certain etiquette can forfeit a person's ability to join a
social club; it can also bring about hostile acts between individuals and groups of people.
Etiquette are rules to live by in which they serve the interests of a ruling class of people.
When etiquette is not followed by the use of good manners, that is, how well the etiquette
is followed; repercussions are taken against an individual. Therefore, depending on the
age of a publication and the current circumstances of social upheaval, mixed emotions
can be found on the use of certain manners and how well they are applied in situations.
In a rapidly changing environment such as the white-collar workplace, perhaps it is an
30
arena where changes are difficult to follow when etiquette is governed differently from
workplace to workplace.
31
Chapter Two: Methods
2.1 Introduction
This research is an exploration of the use of manners among wh.ite-collar workers.
This study attempts to add to our understanding of manners and how they are used in the
workplace. It contributes to the understanding of how today's pressures and strains in
America's fast paced society are revealed in workplace interactions. Good manners are
defined in this study as behaviors that are considered desirable and proper by experts and
generally accepted by those in leadership positions in workplaces and society in general.
Poor manners are those that go against or ignore the prevailing etiquette (Visser, 1991).
Four primary questions that will be addressed in this thesis are: Are good manners
important in establishing and maintaining good working relationships? What kinds of
interactions and behaviors are defined as good manners in today's workplace? Does the
use of good manners contribute to success in the workplace? Can good manners or bad
manners be expressions of power, or can they assist in controlling workers?
This study also attempts to address the reasons why people deliberately choose to
use good manners in certain situations and not in others. Is there ever a time when
manners are of little importance? What uses do manners serve in a white-collar
workplace, where professionalism is often defined by manipulating or removing your
emotions from work?
32
This study grew out of a discussion during a graduate seminar. Some students
believed developing good manners were very important because doing so increased
access to different social circles, hence, allowing people to become upwardly mobile.
Several students contended that manners are not important to them and claimed that
manners are often used as a way to separate social classes and ethnic groups. To those
students, manners that are carried out in mainstream society are "white manners," and
they are practiced to identify individuals as members of an in-group and to keep others
from attaining white privilege.
After the class discussion, I began this research quite informally among my own
personal social network before giving this topic formal consideration. I invited three
women to my home to participate in a discussion around this subject. There ages ranged
from 27 to 94. Each woman had a different interpretation of the use and function of
manners. I generated five pages of notes from this informal meeting. This discussion
reinforced my interest in exploring manners in the workplace.
In casual conversations with my co-workers, I learned that people believe that
technology in the workplace is developing at a very fast pace. E-mail, the Internet, and
courier services that promise same day delivery, enable us to share information faster
than ever before. A few of my co-workers confided that they do not always apply good
manners when using these tools and services because they feel time restraints interferes
with their ability to see how their words affect co-workers. My co-workers described a
33
speed up process and explained how we retrieve information faster can lead to earning a
quicker profit.
With this in mind and when I had the opportunity, I began observing how my coworkers conducted themselves while dining out and their display of manners in the
office. It then became apparent that some people chose to not use good manner, while
others did. I had questions as to how manners were related to the workplace and how
manners are related to professionalism.
Concern that civility is deteriorating in today's society is rampant. Many of those
who express this sentiment believe this is a new problem, but this same complaint was
noted as well in literature from the past (Kronenberger, 1955). The uncertainty about the
value of traditional manners is not new. So perhaps, it isn't odd for students, workers or
anyone for that matter, to question why certain etiquette tell us to do something that may
slow us down when maybe we are able to work at a quicker pace without them.
Additionally, it was reading The Civilizing Process (Elias, 1939) that convinced me
that this subject was clearly a worthy topic for research. Elias made it clear that manners
were often as powerful as formal laws and regulations with significant social
consequences extending to and including violence. His linking of manners to the
prevention of violence piqued my curiosity and confirmed my interest in determining the
extent to which this was true in the context of the contemporary workplace.
Elias's insistence on the importance of manners in maintaining order was reinforced
by the wide range of emotions I observed among those with whom I brought up the
34
subject. From the beginning stages of this research, I have heard manners defined in
dramatically different ways by those whom I have encountered. When I speculated that
manners were deteriorating in the workplace with acquaintances, I was often surprised by
the intensity of the emotions with which they responded. This encouraged me to
continue my inquiry.
I believe we are in a transition period, much like what Elias describes in The
Civilizing Process. He said that:
The sons begin to think further where their fathers saw no reason to ask: Why
must "one" behave in this way here and that way there? Why is this permitted
and that forbidden? What is the point of this precept on manners and that on
morals (1939, p. 440)?
Finally, good manners were regarded as a top priority during my childhood. They
were strictly enforced in my household and violations were a source of great
embarrassment to my mother; therefore, the idea that manners could control my actions
and behaviors and of those around me became very intriguing. My personal interests led
me to explore this idea further. I felt that manners were used to teach me discipline,
conformity, courtesy, and respect as a child living at home, but what was occurring at
my, and others places of employment? The concept that employees are made to conform
by the use of good manners suggests that power and even intimidation is used to cultivate
an employee's behaviors and emotions.
I originally submitted a proposal to the California State University East Bay
Sociology Department following the guidelines for writing a university thesis. I was
35
going to explore this study combining qualitative and quantitative research methods. The
guidelines for writing a university thesis required me to present a hypothesis for research.
In the proposal that I submitted to my selected committee chair, I hypothesized that
manners play an important part in the success or failure of upward mobility for whitecollar workers. After approval was granted by the California State University East Bay
Sociology Department, I selected two additional committee members who supported my
efforts. I composed an informed consent statement (Appendix A) and interview guide
(Appendix C) that was approved by the California State University East Bay Institutional
Review Board. Approval was granted on the first attempt with minor critiques to the
interview guide.
2.2 Data Collection
In my initial attempts to collect data for this research, my inquiries were spread out
over areas where I thought one might find data on this subject. I searched the General
Sociological Survey (GSS) 1972 - 2002, but much data had not been gathered using
questions that pertained to manners. I also searched journal articles, but I found very
little information that was specific to manners among white-collar workers. However, I
found many resources beneficial in applying concepts of manners to the white-collar
work environment.
In addition to my first attempts to collecting data for this research, I compiled
literature reviews on popular books about the use of good manners. I sought information
36
on the use of good manners on-line and found interesting books in local bookstores.
Often, I found popular books on good manners categorized under an area different from
the next store. For example, 1found books on manners in the "how to," "wedding" and
"beauty" sections of stores. I found it curious that there was not a consistent place in
bookstores for literature on traditional manners. I wondered if manners were
deteriorating or simply changing because the concepts of traditional manners seem no
longer functional. Is there an embarrassment around conducting good manners for fear
that one might not fit into their social spheres if they seem too haughty?
I found that sociological works on the use of manners often focused on topics such
as "emotion" and "behavior." Those sociologists I came across theorized that manners
were about preventing violence, disease, warfare, protecting pride, and living without the
intrusion of the possibilities of these problems. I sifted through Goffman' s (1959) and
Hochschild's (2003) writings, which explored managing emotions in service jobs. I also
had numerous conversations with those in white-collar jobs, where manners seem to not
be so much about congeniality, but mobility, power and submissiveness. Focusing on the
works of Hochschild and a well known writer for the "Philadelphia Inquirer," Alfred
Lubrano (2004), I found that they brought up the issues of managing emotions while on
the job.
As my research began to move forward, it became apparent that a qualitative
approach would lead to a deeper understanding because there were so many
contradictions and complexities around this subject. I found that my questions could not
37
be easily explored through hypothesis testing or with survey methods since manners
turned out to be an emotionally laden topic and emotions are difficult to quantify. Oneon-one in-depth interviews were the most beneficial strategy for collecting data in this
research because they provided individual first-hand interpretations of how manners were
carried out among white-collar workers. Since interviews were given in confidence,
interviewees gave candid accounts of their relationships with their co-workers, with the
understanding that I would not divulge identities and places of an individual's
employment. Confidentiality was a must.
To protect the identity of participants, I have used pseudonyms for individuals, job
titles and have given only brief descriptions of the companies they work for where I felt
necessary. Some participants expressed concern that their responses could result in their
dismissal at their company if they could be recognized. I was entrusted with their beliefs
and attitudes about their work, and became privy to their opinions of their superiors and
subordinates. All written documentation was kept at home and identities and responses
were not shared with other participants.
My initial interview guide that can be found in Appendix C often was limiting the
richness in the responses of participants because each had a story to tell. While I
continued to use my interview guide, I encouraged participants to elaborate on their
responses. I found that this approach made participants much more relaxed instead of
rigidly answering the interview questions. As I did so, interviewees moved into more of
a story-telling mode. Through these stories, interviewees became more candid because
38
they felt they were allowed to speak freely and were able to expand on their thoughts.
These stories provided richer data than when participants answered open-ended questions
that were presented more formally.
2.3 Grounded Theory
My experiences conducting interviews for this research led me to move in the
direction of using a Grounded Theory approach. Empirical data was emerging quickly
with every interview conducted and conversation held. There was little research on this
specific subject in the area I was focusing on, so I chose this exploratory, qualitative
method to proceed with research.
At this point, I was convinced that Grounded Theory was the method I needed to use
in order to understand how manners were perceived among white-collar workers. I then
shifted my method from a more tightly structured questionnaire to incorporate some of
the practices that Kathy Charmaz outlines in Constructing Grounded Theory (2006).
According to Charmaz, a very important part of the analysis process is writing
memos. The majority of memo writing sprung from my interviews, but sometimes
included bits of data gathered in impromptu conversations I had with individuals. I made
mental notes of the responses to the interviews, noted issues, themes and processes,
particularly ones that seemed to recur. One category of memos focused on complaints.
For example, I made notes when interviewees shared memories of times they felt they
39
had been subjected to bad manners. Later, I summarized the major components of the
complaints by jotting them down on 3" x 5" index cards and filed them away. These
index cards were stored in a box and coded at a later time. I then typed them
electronically and tried to understand the bitterness I heard and observed. After sorting
through my memos, I used theoretical sampling to test my first findings and to eliminate
the initial hypotheses that were not holding any weight. I was also able to explore
exceptional situations. Ultimately, sorting allowed me to find hearty trends that I was
able to expand upon. Whenever I saw a trend, I would often try to privately contact
another employee from the same institution and find out if results were similar. Then, I
would compare these findings with other interviewees who worked at a different
company. I began to develop a theory to explain what my emergent data was suggesting.
In using Grounded Theory, an analytical process occurred and took place for over a
year. Through my memo writing process, I was able to codify specific data when I
found similarities in what participants were describing from their experiences. I was then
able to utilize theoretical sampling among my professional and personal networks. I
continued to rework these processes with follow-up interviews. Finally, I compared my
findings to popular traditional and contemporary books on manners and what sociologists
theorized. I kept returning to theories that sociologists held on emotions, and was able to
analyze my findings by applying various theoretical concepts. This process took one year
before I was able to begin constructing this thesis, all the while themes and processes
continued to emerge.
40
Recruitment for individual in-depth interviews was carried out with fourteen whitecollar professionals from July 2006 through October 2007. By using my personal and
professional network of people of who work in white-collar positions, I was able to
interview a range of positions that included Administrative Assistants to Presidents of an
organization. Nine of these interviews were conducted face-to-face, while the other five
were carried out over the telephone. In my attempts to interview over E-mail, I found
that this technology removed emotions from a story; otherwise, I often misinterpreted the
emotions felt by the participant. Therefore hearing a participant's voice was essential in
my data collection. The recorded interviews were transferred electronically and remain
confidential, per the confidentiality statement agreement.
2.4 Sample Population
Six females and eight males were selected based on their career experience in a
white-collar working environment. Their ages ranged from 34 to 62, with a mean age of
45 years old. All but one interviewee was American born, but none were employed in the
United State under a work visa. Ten of those interviewed in this research are Caucasian,
two are African American, one is Hispanic and one is Asian.
Further research should be conducted including more individuals from a wider
variety of ethnicities.
Each interview began with an explanation of the aim of this study, and then
participants were asked to sign a confidentiality statement before interviews were
conducted. The interviews lasted from 30 to two and one-half hours with follow-up
41
questions that were pursued at a later time for clarification during analyses. Forty-eight
pages of written notes were generated from just under six hours of taped recordings. The
majority of the participants showed concern about their privacy, so confidentiality was a
priority in my research. I assigned a pseudonym for each participant. Times were chosen
to accommodate the interviewee between work schedules and home life.
Those interviewed ranged from the elite echelons of white-collar jobs to lower level
white-collar positions. I sought individuals whom I suspected might have different
perspectives based on their rank of service at a company. Two participants held highlevel executive positions and had the authority to make final decision in all aspects of
company policy and procedure. Both were middle aged, male and dressed in a jacket and
tie on a daily basis. The difference between these two men was that one traveled
frequently while the other primarily stayed in the office. One of the company executives,
who primarily stayed in the office, was hired initially for a mid-level managerial position.
Although he began his career in middle management, it took him 15 years to become
vice-president of the company. The other executive interviewed traveled frequently, and
had invested 20 years at his company before becoming president of the company. This
person also began his career in a mid-level white-collar position before he acquired his
title as president.
Other interviewees in this thesis are part of upper-management. They have generous
amounts of power in decision making and have other employees who look up to them for
guidance. I found that these workers are dedicated to their jobs and often made their
42
career at one company. They must present ideas that affect company profits to others
who are higher in position than they are for approval. One such participant is a male who
has a tremendous travel schedule. His position entails overseeing profits and employee
relations. The second is a female, who rarely leaves the office. As Financial Director,
she is responsible for overseeing the company's budget. Both are extremely valuable at
their companies. They receive feedback on their abilities from above and below the
organizational hierarchy. There were a total of four participants who were classified as
holding high-level, white-collar positions, often with a staff who worked for them. Six
participants in this research are classified as mid-level, white-collar workers, usually with
a staff that he or she directs. The remaining four participants hold low-level, white-collar
positions. (See Appendix B.) They did not have any employees working directly under
them; however, they played an intricate part in their company's success. They are valued
as "team-players" and expected to get along and understand the dynamics of all corporate
hierarchy. These employees are more easily replaceable, but they certainly offer a skill
that requires finesse, education and tact in order to appropriately carry out their daily
tasks. In this research, those four who hold low-level white-collar jobs work in
administrative positions.
This research is peppered with recorded case vignettes that often expose the intense
emotions of white-collar workers in situations that may initially seem as trivial
interactions with subordinate, co-workers and superiors. These case vignettes also depict
popular attitudes and understandings of the use of manners. Usually participants
responded to specific questions about the use of good manners by referring to table
43
manners. I often had to direct them to think of manners in a professional setting. I
became ambitious to explore solid findings to determine if manners were disappearing in
the workplace or changing. Also, perhaps manners were more difficult to recognize
when a business moves at a fast pace and the use of electronic equipment is the norm·in
daily work functions.
44
Chapter Three: Findings
3.1 Expressing Gratitude
Using good manners at work creates comfortable social situations and ease among
workers. Three processes emerged from my data as key components of good manners in
the workplace. These processes are: expressing gratitude, showing respect, and
conforming to the workplace culture.
When encountering a lack of manners or poor manners in interactions with coworkers, employees report that they experience emotions that they feel they have to
suppress. Among these are anger, aggressiveness and even self-consciousness about their
ability to perform thcir jobs. These emotions, and the efforts required to suppress them
are thus related to the use of good manners in the workplace and have implications for
how employees function at work. Interactions which do not include anyone of the three
components of good manners often evoke emotions that undermine an employee's ability
to do good work. In some cases interactions in which good manners are not practiced
lead to cmployees leaving their jobs.
In this chapter, I will describe how gratitude is expressed in the workplace and how
expressions of gratitudc contribute to bettcr relationships and greater productivity in the
workplace, and how its absence or perceived absence can lead to problems.
Let mc begin by making it clear what is meant by "expressing gratitude." Gratitude
is the quality or feeling of being thankful. After noticing the frequency by which this
45
process was mentioned by my interviewees, I looked at the various ways gratitude was
expressed by employees towards their superiors, peers and subordinates. According to
those interviewed, there was no difference between expressions of gratitude and
expressions of appreciation, but scholarly concern does point to a separate definition
between the two. Gratitude is an expression of warmth, thankfulness and a desire to
return a favor. It is also known as a gift (Hochschild, 2003). Appreciation is an obligated
act of recognition towards an individual, group or agency. This separation provided
some insight into the power dynamics of the workplace in that expressions of gratitude
may be considered a gift and expressions of appreciation may be necessary transactions
between workers to show acknowledgment for a certain effort. After talking with
interviewees, I learned that they found little difference between the two. This thesis
often uses the word gratitude to describe the admixture of gratitude and appreciation,
expect where it is explicitly indicated.
My research focused on expressions of gratitude primarily from the perspective of
employees who received or felt they were due appreciation. Interesting patterns emerged
in the expression of gratitude related to the employee's location in the workplace
hierarchy. The higher status an employee held, the less gratitude they expected or were
shown, but these individuals did see their compensation and fringe benefits as gifts.
High-level, mid-level and low-level workers, by and large, experienced gratitude
differently.
46
Over the long run, receiving gifts of appreciation are not sufficient according to
those interviewed. Expressions of gratitude and expressions of appreciation must above
all be perceived as genuine. What is or is not perceived as genuine varied by location in
the organizational hierarchy. Two company executives whom I interviewed said that
they were shown gratitude simply by virtue of being employed. Because of their high
status, each interpreted his employment in his present position to mean that he is
appreciated. The level of financial compensation that each of these employees earn is
seen as implicit gratitude. An unevenly divided amount of power and compensation is
often a characteristic of hierarchical social structure. Each executive felt appreciated
primarily for two reasons. First, the high salary each is paid and powers they wield are
seen as unquestionable evidence of appreciation. They are honored because of their high
position in their company, and they are given respect for wielding the power to make
decisions that affect employees' livelihood. Secondly, because the company organization
often resembles a pyramid, there are fewer people high-level employees can use as a
support group. Even in the case where shareholders own a company, they have little
interaction with the highest level employees that could present opportunities to express
gratitude.
Low-level workers experience gratitude quite differently from high-level workers.
They experience a lack of gratitude from their superiors and often feel worthless and
unappreciated. They may have received remarks of gratitude from their peers, but they
report receiving few from those who have authority over them. When low-level workers
do receive expressions of gratitude from their superiors, it is important that these
47
expressions be perceived as genuine. Negative emotions surface when such expressions
are not seen as genuine.
Examples of expressions of gratitude often perceived as non-genuine emerged in my
data in relation to "Administrative Professionals' Day," formerly known as Secretary's
Day. This is an institutionalized celebration that has been practiced in many offices for
nearly five decades. When this event is not celebrated with what is perceived to be lessthan-genuine enthusiasm it results in bad feelings that leave employees resentful.
Secretaries who are not appreciated on a daily basis, but are only recognized on this
specific day, may feel such acknowledgement is staged. Some of those in this research
who are in administrative positions wished this day never existed because it made them
angry. On the other hand, some administrative assistants report that they enjoy this day
because they are pampered by their bosses with lunches, spa days, manicures and time
off, which feels to them like genuine expressions of gratitude.
When Julia worked in an office that was dominated by males, she encountered a
struggle over ownership of her services among several departments that claimed she was
"their secretary." Hired as an Office Manager, and not a secretary, she increasingly
became resentful of belittling remarks designed to make her submit to the demands of
one of her co-workers. This co-worker increasing became hostile towards her as she
began to make it clear that she didn't "belong to him." On Administrative Professionals'
Day, the demeaning co-worker came up to her and pulled out his wallet. He dropped
sixty dollars on her desk and said, "Go have lunch on me." With that, she became so
48
angry with his "tacky and demeaning gift," that she retorted by saying, "Keep it, and I'm
not your secretary." She explained that she felt angry for days after this episode and it
left lasting hard feelings between her and her co-worker.
For Sandy, Administrative Professionals' Day is an enormous event that requires the
company she works for to hire temporary secretaries while the entire permanent
administrative staff is treated to a luncheon at a local winery. She said they are also
given American Express gifts cards in the amount of $100 and not expected to work the
remainder of the day. She explained that she feels truly valued for her work because she
is recognized with a monetary gift, and able to witness the expense that her company is
willing to go to by bringing someone else in while she enjoys herself. Not only does she
feel appreciated, she feels the gifts are a genuine expression of gratitude because she is
shown appreciation often. Sandy added that she has feelings of loyalty towards her
company.
It is among mid-level workers that forms of gratitude become most complex.
Because they are not as replaceable as low-level workers, appreciation is often expected.
These expectations are reinforced by what Hochschild defines in The Commercialization
of Intimate
L~le
(2003) by describing appreciation as an obligation towards another.
These expectations also show how gratitude is a necessary part of the employee and
employer association in order to establish a quality relationship. The paycheck is not
merely enough; expressions of gratitude must be present to fulfill the expectations of the
49
employee and to help reduce negative feelings. Expressions of gratitude also help an
employee establish their worth in an organization.
Four types of expressions of gratitude are particularly clear from the interviews with
mid-level workers. These four types emerged from the interplay of two aspects of
gratitude. One aspect is the public versus private nature of the expression of gratitude.
The other is its monetary or non-monetary character. Monetary expressions include a
raise, a bonus, gift cards and certificates. They do not include tokens such as plaques,
candy, flowers, thank you notes, or applause. The interplay of these aspects makes
possible four types of expressions of gratitude. I will discuss each in detail in the pages
to follow. The four types of expressions found are: receiving gratitude privately without
money, receiving gratitude privately with money, receiving gratitude publicly without
money, and finally, receiving gratitude publically with money.
Mid-level employees often work extra hard for superiors who compensate them with
gifts that have monetary value. Likewise, superiors realize that mid-level underlings will
pay more careful attention to their projects when monetary compensation may result.
This also has a tendency to insure that mid-level workers will make themselves available
the next time a superior needs special attention. This is a way of purchasing services
above and beyond the normal expectations of a worker's typical job responsibilities.
Theo, Director of Sales for a communications company, reports that he notices huge
differences in how mid-level employees will work harder for him because he passes
along gift cards ranging from $50 to $100 to employees who go beyond what is expected
50
of them. He also mentioned that word of his gift cards gets around and that as a result he
notices that his projects often get more enthusiasm than from those projects of other
directors.
Mid-level workers repeatedly reported that they believe that gratitude is not genuine
if it is not accompanied by a monetary reward. Mid-level workers experience gratitude
more than high-level or low-level white-collar workers. The emphasis in genuine
expressions of gratitude is a key element in the delivery of expression of gratitude for all
hierarchies.
When workers receive gratitude in private it is presented in one of two ways: with
monetary reward or without monetary reward. And when workers receive gratitude in
public, it is presented in the aforementioned ways. By dividing expressions of gratitude
into two distinctive categories: private and public, with each having two sub-categories:
without money or with money, my research reveals that there is a preference to how
gratitude is preferred to be expressed. Evidence shows that these preferences in
expressions of gratitude are interrelated with emotions that range from job satisfaction to
emotional resentment towards an employer. Some workers grow to resent their
employers based on how gratitude is expressed, and it can have ill effects on their work
performance.
The most popular way that all levels of employees like to be thanked is privately and
with the accompaniment of some sort of monetary gift. Often the workers in this
research are thanked with tokens of appreciation that do not have any monetary value
51
attached to it. It is important that the employer show sincere gratitude towards all levels
of employees if they want gratitude to have any value. Gifts without monetary value are
nevertheless appreciated among low-level workers. This seems to be because low-level
. workers often are not exposed to the same gift transactions that mid-level workers are and
therefore it is not expected.
Adverse affects were noted when a worker did not believe they were truly valued.
Several respondents reported that if they were compensated financially, then they would
take expressions of gratitude seriously. A majority of respondents also said that if their
relationship with their employer was based on mutual respect, then gratitude was also
taken seriously. A key point in accepting gratitude from an employer is that gratitude
must be believable and sincere. When people are compensated, gratitude is seen as
believable. Also, when employers have a respectful relationship with their employees,
gracious words of appreciation are believable. An employer's words are viewed as
sincere because a civil connection has been already established. But how employees
reached their preference as to how gratitude should be expressed was correlated with
their position in the hierarchy.
Thanking someone privately without any monetary reward attached to it may
include gestures such as flowers or other gifts without significant monetary value. This
form of thank you may be received as thoughtful, and is often appreciated. When these
forms of appreciation come from co-workers, they are more likely to be received as
genuine because it appears to be given without any strings attached. When they are
52
received from superiors, such as in the form of a private note, they may also be seen as
genuine because it took the personal time of an individual to write. In an environment
where time equates to money, this act is received as a personal effort to appreciate an
individual. However, resentment tends to fester if an employee receives a plaque of
appreciation in lieu of raise, even if the plaque is unexpected.
In the case of Sandy, who is an Executive Assistant, she received a thank you note
from her boss after becoming upset with a geographical change to her position that
appeared to be a demotion. Her boss indicated in the note that she was appreciative of
Sandy's professional behavior and was happy to see that she was willing to move
forward. This encouraged Sandy to continue to move forward in her career with the
company because she felt appreciated with the acknowledgment of the hand written note.
She was also appreciative that she did not receive a cut in her salary.
Respondents often indicated that any hand written note that did or did not have the
accompaniment of a gift was nevertheless appreciated. People report that they like to
know where they stand with their superiors and enjoy being honored with nice words.
But most significant, a hand written note absorbed a person's time to write. This is seen
as honor in itself, where superiors are often viewed as too busy to be involved with a
worker's emotions. Furthermore, it is often interpreted that this form of gratitude
contributes to potential raises or promotions in the future. When gratitude is expressed in
private, it becomes important to the recipient that the person expressing gratitude doesn't
forget because it is construed as an opportunity for advancement at a later date.
53
Helen, a paralegal, appreciates being shown gratitude in private because it makes her
feel genuinely valued at work. She said, "Any comment that comes from clients that are
passed on to my boss and makes him recognize what a good job I'm doing is the best
recognition .. My boss will comment to me, "Good job on that." This personal
acknowledgement makes Helen feel valued because it comes across as sincere even
though no financial compensation accompanies the expression of gratitude. She has an
established mutually respected relationship with her boss.
Janet, who is a communications layout editor, experienced a superior co-worker's
expression of private gratitude as insincere. She explained that a particular co-worker
always has an emergency. The co-worker is constantly unprepared and relies on others to
bail her out. She told Janet repeatedly that she is the only person who can help her. Janet
said that she finally came to the consensus that the co-worker kept her verbal expressions
of gratitude private because it would alert others of the abuse she was giving Janet. Janet
knew very well that she would never receive further recognition for what she was doing.
In fact, Janet was helping this woman continue her cycle of abuse until she demanded
that all of her requests be put in writing. This ceased the requests and non-genuine
expressions of gratitude.
For Nora, a legal secretary, private expressions of gratitude, are nevertheless
sometimes appreciated because she feels that they are genuine. In her eyes, however,
when a superior is grateful for significant and sustained work that she has done, she
should be recognized for it with a pay increase, otherwise, she doesn't think that her
54
efforts are valued enough. Nora prefers to be shown gratitude privately because it keeps
her out of the lime-light. For her, public praise embarrasses her and so she is angered
with someone who attempts it. But a private expression of gratitude is welcomed from
her peers, where she believes it is not part of an attempt to bait her to get her to do extra
work without compensation.
Preferences for receiving gratitude privately with the accompaniment of a monetary
reward are most prevalent among mid-level workers. I found that mid-level employees,
who were shown gratitude privately, were often conditioned to work harder for
expressions of gratitude if money was attached to them. This occurred among workers,
but was most prevalent with mid-level white-collar workers. It wasn't the warm feeling
of being thanked that was wanted; it was the economic rewards that are earned through
the worker's extra efforts. The most appreciated form of gratitude felt genuine and
thoughtful if the employer compensated the employee for their work. Participants feel
happiest with this form of expression of gratitude because this convinces them that they
are valued.
When workers become conditioned to work for expressions of gratitude that has
financial compensation attached to it, secrecy sometimes develops between those who are
thanking and who are doing favors. The downside to this form of expression of gratitude
appears to make workers feel, and even outwardly show, that they are owed a gift when
they are generous with their time. In an office where some superiors express gratitude in
this way to underlings, and others who do not, it was explained to me that there is a
55
significant difference on how far the underling is likely to assist another superior. This
ultimately creates a backlash in hierarchy of authority because it gives underlings power
over their superiors.
Theo explained that he receives small bonuses on commission checks in the form of
gift cards when his profit numbers are high. Additionally, he receives a thank you in the
form of various gift cards, which he passes along to underlings who help him succeed.
He knows that he will "get more miles" out of a person whom he thanks in this way. He
has noticed huge differences in how people will help others in sales when they know they
are not going to receive anything in return. He says, "You want to make sure they help
you next time." He pointed out that he can't do his job alone and claims that this kind of
gratitude is how he privately "nurtures employees."
In my interviews, about half of the low-level workers I spoke with said that they
didn't always believe that the expressions of gratitude they received were genuine. These
workers felt that if the expression of gratitude was genuine, they should be compensated
with something substantial, such as a bonus or a raise. This group was the most difficult
bunch to convince that gratitude was genuine. They did not believe that their employer
was sincere unless they received some financial reward. More than half of the mid-level
workers I interviewed believed that the gratitude they experienced was genuine because
they were privately compensated for their efforts.
Receiving public gratitude without any money attached to it in the context of the
workplace is often experienced as meaningless or even offensive. In an Internet poll I
56
distributed, I asked twenty people to tell me how they preferred to be thanked by their
employers. People who responded were equally divided on their feelings about this.
Some really liked public adulation, while others loathed it. For those who did not care
for public expressions of gratitude, it was because they were uncomfortable in the
spotlight, or felt mocked since they were not receiving any compensation for their good
work efforts. Those who like receiving gratitude in public were generally people who
also liked public attention and are outgoing. For those who enjoy public adulation and
attention, saying thank you in a public forum is seen as thoughtful because it makes them
feel recognized and feel noticed for their work. To these workers this form of gratitude
feels personalized because it means someone took the time to bring it to everyone's
attention. Usually, the person who recognized the employee's work is mentioned. In
place of monetary reward, plaques and flowers are sometimes given to show gratitude.
These gifts, however, are recognized for having minimal financial impact on a company.
Denise is a mid-level worker, who holds the title of Senior Business Analyst. She
was shown and felt gratitude when her superiors gave her full credit for discovering the
reason for the decline in sales at her company. Even though she was not compensated for
this, she still felt valued because the relationship she has with her employer and coworker's is based on mutual respect. Denise said:
I sent over an article to my boss on how our market was experiencing one of the
worst years since the 1990's. So I said to my boss that I thought that the numbers
looked kind of soft and I thought that gave us some explanation as to what the
article was describing. When I sent it in, I was a little bit early and everybody
said, 'Oh no, the numbers are fine ... the numbers are fine.' So I said, ok,
whatever you guys think. Well about four weeks later, our numbers started
57
looking very soft and I found that every meeting I was going into, they were
quoting the article that I had sent them. At the last meeting I was at, somebody
asked where the information had come from and an executive said, 'Well actually,
that information came from Denise.' They had me explain it further by how we
could turn it around and what I felt the long range implications were. They're
quoting me in meetings. They give me full credit for all my ideas.
In this vignette, Denise felt valued because she was held as a credible witness for
what was occurring at her company. Full attention was paid to her around a table, much
like it would be if she were called in front of a room. But when someone is around the
table, it gives the illusion that hierarchy doesn't exist. Also from Denise's story, we see
that when underlings are lifted up to their superior's status it makes them feel valued, and
they accept this as genuine gratitude. This is an extra (Hochschild, 2003), in the sense
that the acknowledgment that Denise received felt like an honor because all attention was
on her and she was valued for her expertise. In another story that Denise gave me, she
commented, "I don't need the public adulation for what I do, but I do need to know that
I'm trusted and valued." During the time of Denise's interview, she was working
extremely long hours compared to her male co-workers.
For Helen, who is classified as a low-level worker in this thesis, public gratitude is
believable without compensation because of the constant referrals she gets based on her
credibility. Helen likes the buzz around the office that she is the "Information Booth"
which she takes as an acknowledgement, a gift, that she is a good employee, and as an
expression of appreciation or gratitude. Whenever somebody needs to know how to do
something, she says that they go to her. Workers tell other workers to "go see Helen"
because she is a valuable employee at the law firm in which she works. She is frequently
58
given a simple verbal "thanks" from her peers, and as a result she feels valued and is
"happy to help out." She sees herself as valued in her office which is believed as genuine
gratitude.
Though she is not considered as valuable as the attorneys that she works for,
she has established her high value in the administrative leagues. Her status and value in
her office makes her feel appreciated.
Unique ways of expressing gratitude were described by several participants in this
research. Among low-level employees, games are made out of these expressions that
most everyone can participate in. Games seem to have a positive effect on workers
because they create pleasure and excitement. In most cases, everyone goes home with a
prize so that they are made to feel appreciated. The company is sometimes able to get
away without parting with too much money in this way. A good example of this is
illustrated in Janet's case.
Janet was honored at a staff meeting in front of her peers. She received a "Gold Key
Award" for work that was considered above and beyond the call of duty. The award also
entitled her to a chance to participate in another contest at the end of the year. Janet also
received a clock with a personal inscription on it, and a chance to spin a game wheel for
cash. With all of the props in front of an audience of co-workers, it resembled a game
show. Cash rewards did not exceed $500. The marker landed on $100 and she was very
happy about it. The game show aspect of this event caused a surge of excitement for all
who observed it. It was a fun event and made others want to strive for a chance to win
the cash, too. Because of Janet's entitlement to participate in the second contest at the
59
end of the year, at Christmas she was asked to pick from a pile of keys to see if her
choice would start the engine of a brand new car. If it did, the car was hers. Janet didn't
win the car, but the game show aspect of it continued to make other employees feel that
the company appreciated good work and was acknowledging employees' efforts to go
"above and beyond." Janet believed that it gave other employees encouragement to hope
that maybe they would have a shot at it next year.
Expressions of gratitude must be perceived as authentic; otherwise they can be seen
as mockery or an embarrassment. Employees can also view expressions of gratitude with
skepticism when they do not believe that a thank you is genuine. In general, the effect
that this form of gratitude has on employees is a heavy negative that outweighs a positive.
Such as in Nora's case, who shed some light on why she feels anger when public
adulation is bestowed on her at work. She said that:
We get recognition from our supervisors on Secretary's Day. Whoop-dee-doo. I
just assume that they didn't do it. I think it is a forced issue. Once in awhile,
maybe in a meeting, they will recognize somebody, but it's not all that often. My
direct supervisor doesn't really know what it takes to do my job and that is what
really irks me.
The only other recognition that Nora values, other than a pay raise, is from her coworkers who might say, "Gee, thanks for helping us," "You're doing a great job," and
"You do that well."
The difference between Janet and Nora is that Janet believes the public presentation
of gratitude and Nora does not. In other words, Nora does not believe that in the context
of the workplace, in which the bottom line is the main issue for the employer, verbal
60
gratitude is always genuine. Pay is always seen as genuine, but saying thank you for
efforts that may significantly increase company profits is seen as exploitation. This
suggests that displays or expressions of gratitude must be authentic to be effective. The
efforts an employer makes to show gratitude can have an adverse affect when they are
not believable. When an expression of gratitude isn't believable, and the recipient feels
exploited, he or she is more likely to not feel valued and appreciated. It ultimately affects
an employee's mobility in their position because they are not interested in exerting
themselves in ways that could result in a promotion.
Exploitation is clear in the case of Sandy, who was presented flowers after she made
a heroic effort to host foreign company executives during a three day meeting in San
Francisco. Initially, being presented with flowers made her feel appreciated, but when
she reflected upon the event in conversation, she thought it was a cheap way for the
company to pay her for the three days and two nights she spent away from her family.
Sandy spent two nights in a hotel, away from her family, to escort a group of
international executives through San Francisco. Her presence gave them the luxury of a
personal assistant day and night. Even though she was able to reap some perks from the
event, it infringed on her personal life to a great extent.
Receiving gratitude with money in public, I call the 'The Big Show." 'The Big
Show" is when people receive public adulation with the accompaniment of a gift. It was
reported by the two presidents that I interviewed that this was not often seen among highlevel employees. I found that 'The Big Show" was most motivating for mid-level and
61
low-level employees. The gift is often of monetary value and is presented in front of
others to admire. This form of expressing gratitude to a worker is supposed to induce
feelings of honor and inspire other employees.
Depending on who explains how an act of gratitude is carried out, we may get two
different scenarios. Harold, a now retired Market Manager, was acknowledged by his
boss in front of his peers with various types of gifts upon his retirement. The most
obvious gift was a dinner party given in his honor. He was also given free airline passage
for him and his wife from the West Coast to the East Coast to attend his retirement dinner
party. At his retirement dinner party, he was presented with a pair of Broadway tickets
and told that he and his wife would be enjoying a luncheon cruise around New York
Harbor. These gifts were presented to Harold as his peers looked on.
The role of money in expressions of gratitude is further illustrated in Harold's case.
In the end, Harold felt that the gratitude he received was not as legitimate as he had
initially had though because of the inadequate financial reward. When Harold retired
after serving his entire career to one company, a lovely dinner party was given in his
honor by his immediate co-workers on the West Coast, funded by the company he
worked for. After the dinner party, as already mentioned, he and his wife were invited to
fly to the East Coast to his corporate office for another party in his honor. At first,
Harold was overwhelmed with appreciation because it was unheard of to have two
retirement dinners at his company. The company put him up in a luxury hotel and held a
retirement dinner in his honor. During the dinner, Harold was also presented with tickets
62
to a dinner cruise around New York City Harbor and a Broadway show while staying in
New York. Out of his peer's view, he was given a check for $400 designated for "some
extras." After he returned, Harold submitted his expenses from his trip to his boss who
works on the East Coast. To his dismay, Harold saw that not only did his boss deduct
$400 from his expenses, but received an angry telephone call from his boss telling Harold
that the $400 was for his expenses. Since the check was presented in front of another
witnessing employee in a way that seemed to honor Harold, he was unaware that the
money was being given in secret and intended to be spent to cover the costs he would
incur during his trip. Harold said, "Why handle expenses as a secret? Everyone in the
room would have understood that I did not pay the trip out of my own pocket." Harold
felt tricked, angry and hurt. Harold didn't appreciate the debt. He felt manipulated and
shortchanged financially, which undermined his feelings that appropriate gratitude
toward his work had been expressed.
"The Big Show" can also put a spotlight on the giver. Since the original generous
attitude of Harold's boss didn't match the lack of financial reward he received, its
misgiving casted a dark cloud over the memory of the event for him and Harold felt used.
Overall, the trip left Harold with some positive memories, but it was also a big
misunderstanding. The terms of the invitation were not clear to Harold and the
miscommunication made him doubt the motives of his employer. In addition to not
feeling genuinely appreciated, he felt that his boss was putting on a show. In the end,
Harold was angry and not happy about the way he ended his relationship with his boss.
This is in contrast to Janet, who was congratulated by her boss after being presented the
63
"Gold Key Award," and was encouraged to continue her good work. The major
differences between these two scenarios is that one white-collar worker felt that her
employer was giving her a gift, that is, an extra, and the other felt that by his boss
deducting expenses from his own retirement farewell was far from the mark of genuine
appreciation.
Appropriately expressing gratitude is extremely beneficial to the employer and the
employee as shown in these stories. I encountered concrete testimonies that attest to the
quality of the work an employee will put out when they feel genuinely appreciated.
When workers do not believe in the gratitude that their employers express, it produces
negative emotions at work which affect the employee's ability to perform. My research
indicates that when employees feel genuinely appreciated and are shown gratitude, they
enjoy their jobs more than those who do not. Employees are also more cheerful and take
their jobs seriously because negative emotions are not in the forefront of their daily
activities. The happiest of white-collar workers were those who experienced believable
expressions of gratitude, and had a mutual agreement with their superiors on how
appreciation should be shown towards the employee. Not only was monetary reward
most appreciated, it was valued more by the employee if the element of a gift was
embedded into the reward and not received as the only exchange for services.
3.2 Showing Respect
When discussing manners with interviewees, respect emerged as a major issue.
People generally viewed giving respect to someone, or receiving it from others, as
64
essential to good manners. Respect is defined differently in different contexts, but its
presence or absence is often noted in verbal interactions both by the tone of voice and
content of language. There is also often a physical dimension of showing respect, for
example, holding doors open for others, or stepping aside to let them pass. By and large,
respect is a key component of what interviewees perceive as part of practicing good
manners in the workplace.
Showing respect is a process that has two major determinants. The first is structural.
That is, showing respect seems to be patterned, if not determined, by formal institutional
structures in that who is showing respect to whom is highly influenced by where each is
in the organizational hierarchy. Time and experience on the job are additional structural
conditions that emerged as predictive of patterns of showing respect. The second source
of patterns of respect appears to be individual, possibly the result of primary and
secondary socialization outside of the workplace, but brought into the workplace as a
form of cultural capital. This aspect of patterns of showing respect relates to how people
inspire or demand respect from others, and how they treat their co-workers. This
dimension of showing respect appears highly correlated with self-respect. Each of these
two determinants of patterns of respect in the workplace will be discussed below.
Participants experience expressions of respect differently based on their location within
their organization, but as I will show, both showing and receiving respect are central to
understanding how valued workers feel at their jobs and how well they get along with coworkers.
65
3.2.1 Structural Determinants of Respect
Where individuals are located in the social hierarchy of the workplace tells us a lot
about patterns of showing respect. Those who hold powerful positions in the
organizational hierarchy often are given privileges that consequently separate them from
the rest of the employees. These include private offices, company cars, expense
accounts, more control over their time, and more varied responsibilities. Workers
interviewed revealed that they see employees divided into two groups. They often spoke
of "we" when they felt powerful and respected and spoke of management as "they" when
they felt less respected in the workplace. This division or hierarchy is reinforced by the
fact that some workers possess unique skills or training and so are compensated with
higher salaries, another indicator that they are more valuable to the company.
Sometimes, pcople do not see rank or hierarchy when they have been working
together for long periods of time. The evidence of this comes from a large proportion of
interviewees who at first claimed that their office was "just like family" and "rank didn't
make a difference," only later to give examples of how organizational hierarchy governs
office interactions. Helen, who is a paralegal for a law firm, is one of those who claimed
that her office was like a family and that rank in the organization didn't influence office
interactions. But latcr she reported:
Some people's opinions are valued more than others because you have to consider
the type of service we offer. The attorney's opinion is going to obviously matter
more than a paralegal's. Legally, a paralegal cannot give advice. I can give my
opinion to the attorney and he can consider that.
66
In Helen's work, she knows that her opinion is not respected as much as an
attorney's. She points out that it is even illegal for her to give her opinion to a client.
She interprets this as attorneys having more respect based on credentials that give them
the power to give legal advice. Their opinions are sanctioned by law to be worth more
than hers. Helen explained that this shapes how respect is distributed in her office
because clients view her as being less important than an attorney. Besides strict legal
restrictions on her giving advice, Helen also feels that she is treated differently by clients
and attorneys based on her rank in the office. She said, "I've had people (clients) get
frustrated with me because they are upset with my boss, so they take it out on me." She
believes that this is unfair, and she tries not to take it personally. At the same time, she is
resigned to the fact that she does not get the same level of respect that the attorneys do.
Helen notices other ways in which respect is distributed in her office based on
hierarchy. She confessed that sometimes co-workers will take their aggressions out on
her even though they are intended for the attorneys she works for. For example:
One attorney felt that I wasn't giving him the same respect I was giving another
attorney. He was a young 'baby lawyer.' It wasn't that I was disrespecting him,
but I had to divide my time up between him and another attorney. He didn't like
that.
Perhaps Helen has her own biases toward those who have more experience than others,
but she says that attorneys generally govern the office. Those on the administrative side,
such as herself, who have been there the longest, have a tendency to govern all social
activities and day-to-day office functions. Others give them respect by accepting their
leadership in these arenas. But overall, institutionalized authority has been established in
67
her office. Legally, and then on a social level, attorneys have earned credentials that
some others lack.
There are two dominant groups at Helen's place of employment. The first group
describes the attorneys. In this group, Helen is considered the subordinate and receives
less respect than when she is participating in the second group that is comprised of the
administrative staff. In the second group, Helen receives a generous amount of respect.
Helen believes that she receives more respect in the second group based on her
experience, knowledge and time vest in her office.
1.R., a microbiologist, said that the people, who are most respected in his field are
those who hold the highest degrees. He described how blunt scientists are in his field and
that blunt speech is only appreciated by other scientists. 1.R. said:
If you're blunt in the lower-echelons of science, it can be annoying and a turn off.
It is also irritating. Being blunt is reserved for those in the upper-echelons. Those
who are masters of a science, art or trade, are showing authority when they are
blunt. Someone who is in the lower ranks would do well to put up with the flack
in order to fit in.
In this quote, 1.R. is describing how respect should be given to those who are recognized
as masters of their science, art or trade. He also gives his opinion that those who are not
masters in their field should be conservative in their opinions and their use of language in
order to show respect. 1.R. works as a microbiologist in his organization, but even
though his title sounds advanced, he is considered an employee who has lower status
because of his age and the little length of time he has work there. He is in his early 30's
and has only been part of a team of scientists at his current place of employment for a
68
short while. In his mind, he feels that someone in his position must earn a certain level of
respect through maturity and promotions. He says that those who continue to work in the
lower-echelons of science, such as him, should expect a certain amount of "flack" in
order to fit into their work environment because-of their inexperience. According to 1.R.,
putting up with "flack" is a form of disrespect and abuse that he deserves based on his
lack of experience.
One interviewee works for a company that has such rigid rules regarding conduct
and manners that some regard it as cult-like. Despite an employee's position in the
organizational hierarchy, all workers are to be granted the same respect. Each employee
is seen by the company as an important team member. When an employee is found not to
be cooperating with this standard by disrespecting a co-worker, he or she is terminated
regardless of their rank. She attests that no employee is exempt from this rule, and has
witnessed employees and a senior official being fired because they refused to respect
another employee, regardless of rank. Even disrespecting a subordinate in this company
is seen as disrespecting the entire institution.
The company described above manages to soften the typical pattern of displays of
respect. In this company, displays of respect are not primarily directed upward. There
are possibly fewer senior executives than normally found in an organization of its size
that are exempt from this rule. But it is only by having extremely rigid rules, intensive
training, and frequent workshops to reinforce the company's culture, and their ideas of
how you treat people that they are able to deviate from the more common pattern. The
69
very first item in the company's self-definition is "Respect for the individual:
Demonstrating trust and respect for the individual strengths, talents and ideas of every
employee is the underlying philosophy running through ...." The tremendous efforts
made by this company to enforce these values are useful in understanding the more
typical pattern in which respect is directed upward.
Patterns of showing respect typically are shaped not only by location in a social
structure, but also emerge as products of experience and knowledge in relationships. The
length of time an employee has been on the job, the experience they have gathered and
knowledge that derives from both usually makes a person valuable to the company, as
well as to fellow workers. This value is communicated in respectful treatment from
coworkers.
In contrast, disrespect was linked to inexperience by workers. These individuals had
to prove themselves with accomplishments and longevity in their positions. My data
show that track records of employees are extremely important. Denise, who has worked
at her company for eight years, said that workers in her office will lose respect if they
frequently make errors. Respect for experience is shown when a worker turns to a more
experienced worker for information or advice. Being asked one's opinion is generally
experienced as validation or acknowledgement of one's importance in the workplace.
Not only is asking another's opinion a way of showing respect, but the tone of voice and
language used often reinforces the communication of respect.
70
The feeling of pride in being asked one's opinion was apparent in the tone of voice
of Helen who has been at her position for over 15 years, when she said:
I think I have respect there (work) because of my experience and how long I've
been there. It is those two things. People look to me for whenever they have a
question about anything. If it's how to do something procedurally or had
experience on a particular type of case, they will come to me and ask about it.
I'm one of the paralegals that have been there the longest so people come to me
for stuff.
In the work pool of paralegals, Helen holds a high rank in her office because she
assists two senior attorneys at her job. She has been in her position for over 15 years and
therefore is one of the highest paid paralegals in her office. She has also earned respect
because of her position and her high salary. Because of the time she has vested at the law
office where she works, she has respect from the attorneys and from her co-workers who
recognize her valuable experience.
Individual agency is an important factor in showing respect in the workplace. Some
individuals inspire respect from others. Workers, who function well at their jobs and get
along with others, will try to earn respect from their co-workers through courtesy, with
the purpose of establishing professional relationships. In the experience of these workers,
these ties are the key to their success. They believe that it would not be possible to be
successful in their jobs without an understanding of how respect nurtures relationships.
Additionally, this also seems to be a function of their willingness to be respectful of
others combined with their own self-respect.
Being respectful to others is a way of promoting yourself in the workplace and can
be linked to Bourdieu's (1986) theory on cultural capital. This is confirmed by my
71
intcrviewees, in which workers report that using good manners, which includes showing
respect, helps them advance in their careers in various ways. For example, Theo said that
he could count numerous times when he deliberately showed respect to a subordinate
worker. He believes that mutual respect is built in this way. Additionally, he thinks that
by building relationships on mutual respect, it becomes possible that a subordinate
employee will go above and beyond a standard expectation of work performance
specifically for him. In return, the employee who helped Theo is also recognized and
sometimes rewarded for his or her achievements because of the help given to him and
this also scts a ncw standard for other employees. When people understand the
importance of showing respect in social interactions in the workplace there is evidence
that everyone benefits. Further evidence shows that it is important to the success of an
employee if they are shown respect regardless of their length of time on the job and
experience, but this is not always the case.
Mathew, the newly appointed president at his company, said that treating everyone
the same is the way he is showing respect to his employees. Since he began his career in
the mid-level ranks at his company, he believes that treating everyone the same today, as
he did in the past, creates rcspect between those who hold higher and lower positions.
For example, he explained that he insists on employees calling him by his first name,
where traditionally someone of his rank would be called by his surname. In Mathew's
mind, showing respect means treating his subordinates the same way he treated them
before his promotion to president.
72
Workers create professional ties in unique ways and rely on their people skills to
build these bridges by soliciting assistance through the use of respect. This form of
solicitation is what Jack, a Sales Engineer, calls building professional relationships.
Additionally, Jack says that he uses his "tool box" to gather information about a person
so he can use it later in conversations that may benefit him in relationship building. He
believes that taking an interest in a worker's personal life and fully understanding what
he is asking a person to do, is a way of showing respect. He says that he never takes a
co-worker for granted, regardless of their place in the organization. Jack said:
My relationship to the people back there on the East Coast is the result of trying to
earn their respect so that they will do things for me. I have to because it has to get
done, and they understand it, and not because I demand it. Nobody back there
works directly for me. I have no authority; therefore, I have to solicit their
assistance.
For Jack, solicitation comes in the form of being respectful to another worker so that a
mutual professional bond is established.
Several interviewees said that earning respect from co-workers by the way you
speak to them is essential because it helps make them feel at ease. This is seen as a way
of extending common courtesy and was paramount in conducting good manners at work.
An understanding of the importance of extending respect to co-workers regardless of
their rank is extremely beneficial in relationship building. Mutual respect makes for
pleasant working conditions as reported by those who I interviewed.
Those who attempt to get respect at work by pushing others around are often seen as
boorish. Even though most workers interviewed acknowledged the power behind the
73
rank of their superiors, they were more inclined to be cooperative with superiors who
treated them with respect. Negative emotions emerge from workers who feel they are
being pushed around or bullied. Such was the case for Max, a Systems Programmer,
who said he was forcefully pressed into giving a new manager respect. Max said:
An indirect manager once felt that I was disrespecting him by not giving him a
couple of books from my office library. In the past, other employees never
returned books that I had loaned them, so I said that he couldn't have them and
explained why. He became so angry with me, that he started swearing and
invaded my personal space. He did all this in front of my direct manager, so I
decided that if my manager wasn't going to stick up for me, I was going to stick
up for myself. I couldn't believe that he was insinuating that he was going to take
them by force.
The indirect manager in this example was terminated based on his numerous attempts to
intimidate employees. In this extreme case of disrespect and what many may see as
classic bullying, the evidence suggests that showing respect to Max would have
prevented the hostility found in this scenario and perhaps the offender's job.·
Jack gave an example of the negative response to aggressive demands for respect,
when discussing why a certain group of lower level employees didn't like a superior. He
said:
I would think to myself, why in the world would one person not like another
person? It always came down to the fact to the way they were treated. I always
felt that from someone up above, he might be more intelligent than that guy, may
think he is more important than that guy, no matter what the reasons are; he never,
ever, has the right to not treat that guy respectfully. I've told people that you may
be more intelligent than this person and because of that, you have to use your
intelligence you have to figure out how to get things done and if you don't do that
you're failing. But don't degrade people and expect them to work for you.
74
Jack added how angry he becomes when others are not treated with dignity and
respect. He went on to say:
Manners are just a plain level of respect in how you speak to people. You use
civil terms. You can adjust your vernacular to his, or to a subordinate's
vernacular for communication purposes, just as long as you are respectful. If you
don't maintain a level of dignity, and manners, quite frankly are part of dignity,
then you miss the basic ability to communicate, and I think manners are a code of
communication. Somebody is evaluating you ... manners are for essential interfacing with people.
A few respondents strongly believed that practicing good manners and showing
respect to others is a reflection of self-respect. A common belief among these
interviewees is that respecting others and conducting yourself in a way that puts other
people at ease, is a reflection of what you think of yourself. Showing self-respect
through respecting others is one way that Jack communicates with people because he
thinks that others are more receptive when they are talking to someone who shows
respect for them.
An employee who feels taken for granted may not go out of his or her way for an
employer. This occurred with Nora, who has been in her position for over 15 years. She
believes a promotion will never be an option because she does not do enough to please
her superiors. What her employer defines as respect and a good attitude at work, she
defines as "kissing butt." Nora says:
I think they (supervisors) thrive off of it. It makes it difficult for those who don't
want to feed into that because they overlook you. They'll give you as much as
they can give you without giving you the payor the step increase. You're not
going to get anything for it. I stay where I'm at because I don't want to kiss
anybody's butt to get where I want to go. Everything is so political.
75
Nora feels that in order to excel in her organization, she must pay a form of homage to
supervisors by doing extra work without pay. Further, she thinks that the way
supervisors use employees is ultimately a way to indulge their pride, seen as "political"
and as an abuse of power. She expressed to me that it makes her angry that in order to
advance at her company, one must indulge egos. She feels that work should be a cut and
dried relationship, and not one that strokes her supervisor's ego.
At Nora's workplace, she believes that the standard way for how respect is expected
to be shown has been outlined and is governed unfairly. Those who do not submit to
what is seen as demeaning work practices suffer in their careers. In her case, Nora
explained that her decision to not "stroke egos" may not be means for termination, but
make for sometimes uncomfortable working conditions. Nora's workplace only allows
for positive or negative relationships between superiors and subordinates, and these
relationships determine the professional success of the employee.
Regardless of a worker's status, participants report that when people are not
respectful of each other it affects their ability to function at their best while on the job.
Maria believes that the lack of respect she is shown at her job leads to continuous
physical illness and presents an obstacle to her upward mobility. She explained how her
superiors make her feel inadequate, which diminishes her self-respect at work. She also
thinks that this has caused a snowball effect among other workers. She complains that
she often feels ill and nervous to go to work because she doesn't feel like she is taken
seriously. Maria said:
76
I had an idea on how to get more sales for the company, so I made an appointment
with the Sales Manager to discuss them. They made me feel like, 'why am I
butting my nose into their business?' Maybe I should lay low. I got the
appointment, but I felt like I was just nonsense to them. I kept interpreting my
manager's words to mean: He didn't have time for my ideas. I felt terrible the
next day and called in sick. When I got back to work, I went into the Sales
Manager's office to follow up on my missed appointment. While I was in his
office, he kept staring down at something he was reading and wouldn't look at
me. I said, 'Well, I want to meet with you sometime to talk about my ideas for
getting more business, and we can do it after my work hours if you want so it
doesn't conflict with my other responsibilities.' He told me, 'Well, I have to see
what my schedule is.' I felt like he was giving me the brush off. He'd always
smile at me and say you can come to me for anything, but he wasn't paying
attention to me when I did. I know because I'm not at his level he doesn't respect
me. If I were at his level, I would demand that he talk to me now.
Maria doesn't feel valued at her workplace because of the disrespect that she receives
from a manager. She also feels disrespect among her peers. She frequently feels
uncomfortable at work and is unable to express her ideas. She says that even though she
and her fellow co-workers are told they are welcome to bring up their ideas in group
meetings, the disrespect she feels undermines the authenticity of the invitation.
3.2.2 Workplace Culture and Personalities
One thing that became apparent during this research is that each office has its own
culture and this is shaped by those in power even when they do not interact directly with
all levels of employees. The standards that a company's leadership sets for showing
respect often appear to be contagious. The leadership of an organization can create
pleasant or fear-driven working conditions. When superiors indicate that they value an
77
underling's opinions, mutual respect can be established. Furthermore, it sends a signal to
others to value a worker's professional judgment.
For those who struggle with the transition of moving into a white-collar workplace
from a blue-collar one, they sometimes face difficulties fitting into their new
environment. For example, those from lower socioeconomic backgrounds may
sometimes standout because of their speech patterns. All of a person's life experiences
seem to surface at the interpersonal level in a white-collar position. Lubrano discusses
this in his findings and refers to these people as "Straddlers" (2004). For the most part,
he uses the term "Straddlers" to demonstrate successful workers with blue-collar roots
who are able to fit into a white-collar environment. But not everyone is successful in
their efforts in making a leap from blue-collar roots to a white-collar working
environment. It takes a self-educated person to pay attention to the often subtle
differences and a strong desire to want acceptance to mask or change certain learned
social skills. Without making these changes, people from lower socioeconomic groups
can have limited access into a white-collar workplace. Those who stand out have
experienced disrespect. There were interviewees who gave examples of situations where
they knew of another employee who were considered "unpolished" or "didn't fit in." In
the minds of these interviewees, these labels prevented the success of certain co-workers.
The leadership of an organization determines the etiquette of a workplace setting.
They also determine whether or not employees are using appropriate manners in a given
situation. These judgments can bar access and ostracize employees from promotions and
78
advancements based on their cultural capital. This form of discrimination ultimately
demonstrates to other employees what their employer's expectation is as far as how an
employee is expected to act at work. It also has a tendency to spread fear of
repercussions which can include dismissal of an employee if he or she refuses to submit
to the etiquette of an office.
Perhaps race may also have an effect on access to white-collar work environments,
but this research did not rcveal that. Further research would be necessary to determine if
this is true. Those who were interviewed for this research never indicated that race was a
factor in their professional success nor their failures. Instead, interviewees shared
experiences of discrimination around socioeconomic backgrounds and gender, but not
race.
In this research, white-collar workers experienced respect primarily on the bases of
their position in the organizational hierarchy. Where this was certainly not always the
case, those who had been at their position the longest and had more knowledge and
experience of their job or their workplace functions, had more respect. Those who were
new to their position and lacked previous knowledge and experience, tend to receive less
rcspect. In some cases, employees were shown disrespect and abuse.
I encountcred showing respect as an important ingredient of good manners at work.
In summary, without respect work conditions can be unpleasant. Under these conditions
employees may be seen as lacking loyalty to their employers and they may dislike their
jobs and co-workers as well. Where there is mutual respect, the workplace is more
79
pleasant, employees like their jobs better, and work relationships transpire more
smoothly. This research supports the view that mutual respect is beneficial, and that
awareness of its significance enables workers to be more successful in their work.
3.3 Conforming to the Workplace Culture
According to the majority of those who participated in this research, another facet
pointed out in using good manners is seen as conforming to the workplace culture. Along
with expressing gratitude and showing respect, conforming is a component of a worker's
success. Conforming is closely related to respect, in that the two often seem to be
experienced together. There are many benefits to those who conform within their
workplace culture, which include advancement and the reciprocity of respect. In order
for a worker to fit into their place of employment, he or she must adapt the manners of
those who lead the organization. As I will show in the following pages, people believe
that conforming to the workplace culture often benefits them. Those who face challenges
in fitting into their workplace culture are often excluded from certain forms of networks
that have the potential for upward mobility. For example, those who come from lower
socioeconomic backgrounds may have difficulty fitting into a white-collar environment.
Their life experiences may have not presented opportunities in the same way they have
been presented to those who were born into a higher socioeconomic background.
Learning to conform to any workplace's standards can take some time. Such was
the case for Mathew, who started out as a mid-level manager twenty years ago and now is
80
president of the same company. Mathew explained how he made a conscious effort to
conform to the culture of his company because he recognized that it was the way to
succeed. First, there was the technical side to his job that he had to learn. Secondly, and
perhaps most crucial to his success, was the interpersonal side of the socialization
process. He said that it was very difficult to learn how to conform because he had to
struggle with it internally. He told me that it took almost three years for him to act in
accordance with what was expected from him by his superiors because he resisted many
of the company's Euro-centric business practices. Although he works in the United
States, his company headquarters are in Germany, as are most of the top executives. He
was particularly challenged by European social customs, which are seen by his company
as necessary in conducting business, and are in many respects much different from his
own Midwestern American customs.
Mathew had to adapt to European business practices while serving an American
clientele. For example, he had to learn how to formally address women and men. He
also had to learn variations of table manner because he could not expect his European
counter-parts to understand his ignorance. He said, "I believe that my efforts to change
the way I use manners paid off when I became president in 2006." Mathew attributes his
success to the way he conformed at work. He said that if he had not learned to conform
to what is considered the use of good manners by his superiors, he would have not been
offered the position that he holds today.
81
In Mathew's case, he believes that had he not been willing to adapt the manners of
another ethnic group, he may not have been successful. Perhaps the strain of this change
of how he uses manners is softened when working for an organization when it is
headquartered in a different country. Most likely this strain would be stronger if an
American worker felt obliged to conform to the etiquette of a different ethnicity in an
American based company where all workers are American regardless of their ethnicity.
Like Mathew, others interviewed explained how important their speech was in the
workplace. There is a common consensus that conforming to what others expect, helps
make people feel at ease. For Jack, the basics in communication are what he refers to as
"codes of communication." "Codes of communication" means to Jack how a person
addresses another to effectively communicate an idea. Jack thinks that you must be
consistent with what is expected from those who lead a company in order to fit in and be
taken seriously. He explained how he carefully evaluates another's ability to express a
point so that he knows how to convey a response back to them. This is his attempt to talk
to someone at their level in order to achieve good communication.
Another way people conform in the workplace is through speech patterns. It is
important how a person demonstrates emotion in the tone of their voice and particularly
the content of their language during conversation. When Theo encounters an upset
worker, he changes not only the tone of his voice, but the content of the conversation. If
he is conversing with a subordinate worker, he first becomes empathetic to his or her
problem and will speak in the "we" as if he and the subordinate employee are at the same
82
level in the workplace hierarchy. Theo said that he changes his style of speech when
talking with subordinates in order to communicate. He gave me an elaborate example
during his interview when there is a cont1ict between departments. In his example, he
first addressed his fictitious male as "Man-" and became chummy and friendly towards
the distressed worker. Then he reiterated the problem to validate the workers feelings,
followed by the history of something he had once been a part of. He explained that this
seems to give the employee who is complaining the confidence that Theo understands his
or her problem. He then would tell the employee enlightening information about the
company in hope that it will satisfy the person with the knowledge that change will occur.
He believes that this kind of information makes a subordinate worker feel privileged and
included. He understands the key to this process is acknowledging and conforming to
their reality.
Carefully choosing the content used in a conversation can have many benefits,
including earning the respect of co-workers. When a worker does not carefully choose
the content of his or her contributions to a conversation, such as using foul language or an
unsuitable topic choice, he or she risks not being taken seriously. Denise described how
a particular employee is treated at her company because she once made a reference about
somebody who "pulled an idea out of their ass." Denise said that she is now thought of
as "The pull it out of your ass-girl." She said, ''I'm sure she would be mortified if she
knew people were saying that about her." But instead of addressing the issue of
inappropriate language content, the employee is disrespected in various ways. For
example, she is interrupted in mid-conversation and is excluded in meetings because of
83
some others' apprehension of what she may say next. Because this employee violated
what is thought of as inappropriate language content, she is also given little respect to
professionally express her ideas and not taken seriously.
There is one exception to the general pattern that conformity protects one's job.
Occasionally, a company may keep an uncouth employee around in order to make an
example out of him or her. By secretly poking fun at a certain employee who speaks and
behaves against the norm, this informs others on how not to act or they will lose
respectability. For example, Denise could not offer an explanation as to why anybody
had not taken the time to explain to the "The pull it out of your ass-girl," that her
reference was unprofessional, non-conforming and considered inappropriate language at
work. Instead, it appears to be more effective to keep her in the dark and others in fear of
a similar loss of respectability at work should they follow her example.
Perhaps the most interesting way some workers try to conform to speech is by
mimicking co-workers. This is usually done out of the willingness to make a person feel
comfortable by trying to show a worker that they are similar in character. Jack believes
that "a person can change their vernacular just as long as they are respectful." Theo will
talk to a subordinate in a casual, friendly manner that may be seen as unprofessional by
his superiors. But he believes that talking with subordinates in a way that they can
identify with, will open up lines of communication between them. He thinks that this is
highly effective in calming down workers who are upset and emotional at work. But
making people feel comfortable by this form of conformity isn't always achieved. David,
84
a Sales Representative, will use different speech patterns to communicate. For example,
David will use a form of Spanglish (Spanish spoken with a large admixture of English),
when addressing those who appear to be Hispanic in heritage. English was spoken as a
first language in his home, but I observed him speaking to a certain worker in a broken
language dialect. However, this did not seem to offend the worker described, even
though David did appear unnatural. Interestingly, when I asked David about this, he
didn't believe that he did this. In fact, he thought that an action like that would be
insulting to another worker.
Conforming to the workplace culture is also about physical actions. These actions
mostly encompass how a person demonstrates their ability to conform to the workplace
culture. Unfortunately, my data show that people notice the negative more than they do
the positive from others at work. Denise explained how it can be detrimental for those
who do not understand which actions are considered non-conforming. For example, she
described how she corrected a new employee who she thought was trying to get her in
trouble with management. At the company she works for, innuendos are read by other
employees to help them determine how an employee is perceived by management. So
when a new employee began copying his boss on E-mails pertaining to an unresolved
issue, she became angry. She said:
One way to get a person into trouble is by using passive/aggressive tactics.
You've addressed something with a person and they're not getting it. You can get
someone in trouble by copying E-mailsto you to your boss. Basically, so
somebody else can see where someone is screwing up. I had one guy back on the
East Coast who kept asking for some data, and I wasn't giving him what he
wanted. He kept copying his boss on the E-mails he was sending me. I was
85
getting really ticked because I felt he was trying to get me in trouble with his
boss. So, I picked up the phone and I was like, 'Chuck, what the hell are you
doing? Are you trying to get me in trouble? I'm trying to work with you here.
I'm trying to get your stuff together. What's going on? We need to work this out
together.
'No! I'm not h.aving any problems with you.'
'Then stop copying your boss on this stuff. The company's way is that you are
trying to get me in trouble.'
'That's not what I meant.'
Now he's my best buddy to work with. Until you address something with
somebody, you don't always know what their intent is.
Even though Denise believes that the way to correct what is seen as bad behavior is
by addressing the issue with the employee found at fault, she said that it is rare for
anyone in management to do so. Instead, her management will continue to let the person
make their mistakes and feel the repercussions. The goal is to get the employee to quit on
his or her own accord instead of being fired if they are seen as not a natural fit in her
workplace's culture. Denise explained that this is important to management because it
was considered poor judgment in hiring an individual who has difficulty conforming.
Mathew also thinks that actions are a strong indicator whether or not a worker is a
conformist. He watches how people behave at the dinner table to see if they will blend
into his work culture. This is important to him because he believes a person's character
is revealed during intimate settings such as when dining together. He watches how a
worker treats the wait staff and especially his table manners. For example, if a person
orders first without the courtesy of letting another order first, it is an indicator that a
worker may do this to a potential customer. This offense could lose business.
86
Often, people relate manners to dining. Dining is of particular importance in
business because it is seen as a person's ability to make others feel comf0l1abie or
uncomfortable. It often takes personal attention to enhance one's table manners for
business purposes since most people learn these primary skills as a child from their
earliest surroundings. However, some of the technology that exists now was not
available when those who are working today were children. One example is the cellular
telephone. Deciding when to answer a call or how to intercept a call during a business
meeting over a meal is something that is learned long after the child's home training.
But experts say that answering a call during a business meal is never acceptable
(Northern California School of Etiquette, 2007).
Since business sometimes rely on meetings during meals, it is imperative for those
who wish to be successful to understand what is considered proper table manners in their
business environment. Those who do not seek ways to conform to common etiquette at
the table can face negative consequences. Such was the case for an employee who
worked for Mathew, who lacked the knowledge of dining etiquette. When Mathew sat
down to dine at an upscale Los Angeles restaurant with the employee mentioned and
another employee, he became shocked by the table manners of his latest new hire that had
been with the company just two weeks. Mathew and the third employee ordered a filet,
but the subject employee ordered a steak with a bone in it. Towards the end of their
meal, the employee picked up the bone and began to gnaw on it. This flabbergasted
Mathew, so he said to the employee, "Fred Flintstone, you just don't do that." Mathew
87
explained that this embarrassed the employee tremendously, but admitted that he did this
on purpose. He said, "So we had to tell him how to eat."
After the group returned to their office on the East Coast, Mathew spread the story
arol)nd the office and began referring to the employee as "Fred Flintstone" to further
embarrass him. By embarrassing the employee, Mathew hoped it would be motivation to
change his behavior. This incident prompted Mathew to decide to send the worker to
etiquette school. The school primarily focused on table manners with an emphasis on
European etiquette, since the company was European based. The reason that the
employee needed to learn these skills was because a good portion of his job entailed
entertaining potential buyers and meeting with his European counterparts. Making
buyers feel comfortable is essential in securing a sale, so it is imperative that the
employee's table manners were not going to offend anyone that he would be sharing a
meal with. After the employee completed his course in table manners, he soon found
himself in another awkward situation. Mathew explained:
Another time, we were in Dodge City with a customer, and he (the same subject
employee) ordered ribs. Traditionally in Europe, the Europeans would eat their
pork ribs with a knife and fork, and here in the States, generally speaking, you
would pick them up with your hands. Well, this particular time, we were out with
a customer and he's using his fork and knife to eat his ribs and the customer said,
'You know, you can pick those up and eat them with your hands.'
We had to fire him, because first of all, he wasn't dealing well with customers,
and he wasn't doing his job.
In this situation, the employee's table manners were symbolic of the employees ability to
conform to changing conditions, which he had difficulty doing. This difficulty was not in
the best interest of the company's. In fact, his table manners were seen as a threat to
88
earning potential profit. Table manners, that is, conforming table manners were essential
and functional in his success or failure, and his inability to practice them appropriately
cost this individual his job.
Employees rely on consistent behaviors at work. When workers are subjected to
inconsistent moods such as erratic temperaments or attitudes out of the norm of what is
expected, it causes frustration and confusion in an office. Jack describes being
consistently professional, as truly professional. He further described being professional
as an emotional trait, since it requires self-discipline to prevail over initial thoughts. He
said, "People tend to be consistent. If you are consistently an idiot, you can deal with
that. The one's that aren't, stand out like a sore thumb." Data show that when a person
practices a consistent attitude in their personal and professional life, it greatly helps them
at work because the transition is more simple and genuine. A common consensus from
those interviewed thought that it was difficult to have good behavior at work, but ill
behavior in one's personal life.
For those who hold high-level white-collar positions, it is thought that it is in their
best interest to always be "on," in the sense of conforming to workplace norms even
when not in the office. When Donald is in public, he feels that he must always be on his
best behavior and practice good manners outside of the office, as if he were inside his
office being observed by his peers. He explained that if you have any demons in your
closet, it might be difficult to do your job. Since Donald's work requires him to interact
with the public, he believes that he can't afford to be "off' some days and "on" others.
89
He is consistent in his behavior because he knows that the line between his professional
and personal lives is often blurred. Donald said, "It is difficult for me to be in the public
eye without feeling two degrees of separation."
One of the complications of practicing conformity in the workplace is that under
some social conditions workplace cultures undergo rapid change and thus require
employees to keep pace with changing norms. For example, during the 1970's, many of
America's government regulated companies experienced a major change with
deregulation. With the increasingly competitive norms that deregulation brought, strict
guidelines on how employees should present themselves at work, began to diminish.
Workers, who hold on to the traditions that were established before deregulation, often
conflict with newer employees who are not use to the previous strict guidelines. Many of
these workers who are unfamiliar with the past's guidelines are younger, have had
multiple jobs and have experienced professionalism differently than those who have
worked for the same company over 30 years.
According to employees interviewed who work for deregulated companies, age is a
major factor in stress levels at work. Mature and younger workers are described as two
different kinds of workers, according to Donald. Matured in age workers, such as
Donald, are challenged by the casualness that has been introduced into his workplace.
For example, through the use of E-mail and voicemail, co-workers are able to correspond
with each other at a quicker pace, and with more informality than in the past.
Technology has enabled communication to occur at a faster rate. Donald believes that
90
this has also introduced sloppy writing and immature correspondence through E-mail
between workers. He thinks that because of the rapid pace that technology brings to
business today, there is a lack of appropriate formality between workers.
The age gap has also affected the way employee's dress at work. Where once
wearing a jacket and tie to work was mandatory, in many workplaces it is now acceptable
to wear short sleeve shirts and blue jeans to work. This casualness has brought a level of
comfort to the office, but according to some, it seems to make employee's attitudes just
as casual in other aspects of their work. Such as in the case for Theo, who will dress
casually in the office, which he partly believes enables him to interact with co-workers in
a breezy manner. Theo conforms to these new norms within the workplace because he
believes doing so enhances communication among him and his co-workers. But when
Theo must work outside of the office, he feels compelled to present himself dressed in a
jacket and tie. Even though his in-office environment allows for casualness, he doesn't
assume that his clients share the same norms.
Donald explained that up until 20 years ago there was a certain expectation of how
an employee should dress to reflect a high level of professionalism. He said:
It is much more informal and somewhat apparent on many levels. At the highest
levels, those who have been here 20 to 30 years are employees who still embrace
some of the older culture than some of the folks who have joined the company
more recently. There is a change with the younger employees new to the
company who may not be aware of the previous expectation that were within the
company before. It causes periodic tension, in as far as people's various styles
and when they have more formalized way of doing things versus people who are
much more informal and are not willing to go through the regular channels to deal
with things. Particularly from workers who come from technology companies,
91
where it is somewhat notorious for having a high energy, very goal focused kind
of approach toward things.
As Donald makes clear, he directly links dress style to a worker's attitude. He holds onto
the traditional way of thinking about how an employee should present himself at work.
Furthermore, he links dressing habits directly to professional relationships and attitudes.
In the opinion of those who work in deregulated organizations, the age gap between
employees has also been responsible for conflicting values at work. Younger employees
are believed to hold the value of working as an individual or being "out to win." But to
some, this value is seen as presenting difficulties in building relationships. Those who
are older believe that younger workers do not see the benefits of having established
relationships in place that enhance teamwork and thereby to make their work more
successful and enjoyable. Donald added:
I think in a historically traditional company like this, relationships were probably
a little bit more important than they are now. Probably there has been a loss in
those relationships. For those kids who are coming here and being so goal
oriented, I don't think that they see the importance of building relationships. Not
only for the task at hand, since most of the time you are working as a team, but
also in the long term as far as having a group of people you can count on as
having as resources to achieve your future objectives.
Those who grew up with the massive technological changes as we know them today,
have an advantage over those who were forced to learn during the middle or end of their
careers. Younger people are introduced to technology in their classrooms and they are
also targeted by marketing firms trying to sell their products through retail. Those two
arenas are where the bulk of technology has made an impact on younger people. Those
who are not in these arenas often find out about technology through secondary sources.
92
For example, many adults over thirty-five years of age learn about the latest trends in
technology through their children and the media. Often employees are forced to conform
to new technologies because their jobs depend on it, and they must go through extensive
training to understand the new products they sell, support and use to· perform their jobs.
Such is the case for Nora who has struggled with technology since 1985 when her
organization began implementing advanced technology in day-to-day operations. She
also felt the need to learn how to access the Internet because her company made her
healthcare and retirement vesting options available only in cyberspace. If she didn't learn
how to maneuver around these new obstacles that technology has brought, she would
have allowed herself to become discriminated against from options that affect her well
being today and as she approaches retirement.
Lauren, a 34 year Finance Director for a communications resale company, explained
how age is a factor in conflict because it makes conforming particularly difficult. She
believes technology has divided older and younger workers in how they view what
proper conformity should be in the workplace. Those who are schooled in contemporary
views of professionalism are experiencing conformity differently than those who
experienced professionalism traditionally. She has learned to "work smart" as opposed to
working longer hours. She says that her boss is concerned about the work being
accomplished and not the hours spent at work. This does not always work to her
advantage, but she feels comfortable knowing her boss trusts her to work faithfully on a
project. Not only has she noticed how technology presents a division between her and
93
older workers, she also feels resentment towards her skills by those who are approaching
retirement. She said,
... after deregulation, the market opened up to people like us, who understood the
technology and who are go-getters. A lot of resentment is shown towards young
people because older ones feel pushed out. Setting new standards (such as in
deregulation) made them (older workers) compete for their jobs. I have heard
comments like, 'that the ones who have been around for a lot time are
lackadaisical' and' Young blood will do circles around you,' and ' Young people
think they know everything.' It's just a different culture.
Lauren also explained that the dress habits for younger white-collar employees are
more relaxed. She is happy that she is able to wear jeans and a t-shirt to work. On the
occasion that she will meet with the public, she said that she doesn't wear a suit, but will
wear a button down blouse, slacks and heals. She explained that wearing a suit "just isn't
the company's style." She claims that the company that she works for is about the work,
and that all employees must figuratively wear different hats in order to survive against the
giants. Even though she agrees that there is a casualness about her age group in today's
workplace, she thinks that by rejecting traditional dress habits that are seen as
professional by some, enables her to work at a quicker pace. The mentality behind casual
dressing is similar to that of a laborer who is there to get the task at hand done without
being distracted by bureaucracy. This form of thinking changes the image and self-image
of the white-collar worker which can present conflicts between those who hold different
opinions on how to conform.
Those who do not conform to their workplace environment face many obstacles and
have lower success rates than those who do conform. The end result of not conforming is
usually termination of employment. But as we see in companies who have faced
94
aggressive changes through the birth of new technologies, ideas on the ways an employee
conforms appropriately at work has changed. In order for changes to occur it must be
sanctioned by the organization. Ultimately, for those who do understand how to
conform, they tend to be more successful than those who do not. It is a long and bumpy
road for a worker who does not understand how to conform to their workplace culture.
Often, employees are humiliated, disrespected and reprimanded before the result of
termination. All of which are considered ways to force an employee to conform to their
workplace culture before a serious measure is taken against their status of employment.
What constitutes the use of good manners is imperative to the success of a white-collar
worker because good manners serve as a form of social cohesion, but at the same time,
they work as a tool of social control. Those who are unable to follow the trend are often
ostracized, excluded and even terminated from their positions.
95
Chapter Four: Conclusion
3.1 Introduction
This preliminary study of the usage of manners among white-collar workers has
attempted to add to our understanding of how today's pressures and strains in America's
fast paced society are revealed in workplace interactions and the relevance of manners in
coping with them.
Initial questions in this thesis arose from both the literature and my own work
experience. My daily work routine included using good manners and I noticed when
others were not using them. Often I observed those in high ranking positions to exhibit
poor manners, while those in lower ranking positions tried their best to use good manners
to appease those in higher ranking positions. I saw awkwardness from those whom I
knew came from underprivileged families as they mingled with those who came from
more privileged families.
These observations led me to ask: Are good manners important in establishing and
maintaining good working relationships? Do good manners contribute to success in the
workplace? Whose interests are best served when employees practice good manners? As
my research progressed and I began to analyze interviews, additional questions arose:
Can good or bad manners be expressions of power, or can they assist in controlling
workers? Are there ever times when manners are of little importance? Are the uses of
good manners today used as expressions of nostalgia instead of functionality?
96
In order to answer these questions, I conducted in-depth interviews comprised with
fourteen men and women who work in a range of white-collar positions. The interviews
were conducted over a period of one year. The length of individual interviews ranged
from thirty to two and a half hours. During this process the data led me to expand and
refine my questions. Using this inductive or modified grounded theory approach, I
created stacks of memos containing examples of key ideas, processes, concepts, and
developed categories of similar responses that emerged from my interviews. In the early
stages of analysis, I used three by five note cards. For better organization, I then
transcribed them to electronic format.
I found participants eager to tell me about their careers and it was interesting how
each respondent perceived his or her work environment differently. Even in cases where
I was able to interview more than one participant from the same company, his or her
interpretations differed on what constituted good manners in the workplace. This finding
drove me to appreciate how personality and prior socialization influence the way each
individual uses good manners. At the same time that differences became apparent I was
struck by recurring themes that make up the major findings of this research. Regardless
of each employee's socialization, personality, current occupation, or workplace, key
themes occurred repeatedly. Even though additional interviews might have yielded more
details related to each of these themes, I am confident that I achieved what Glaser and
Strauss (1967) call "theoretical saturation" in terms of the major processes making up
workers perceptions of good manners: expressing gratitude, showing respect and
conforming to the workplace culture.
97
Early socialization and personality are not the only factors in how people learn good
manners; changing social conditions playa significant part in defining what is considered
appropriate behavior. At the same time there is consistency in manners. My interviews,
popular notions, popular literature, and scholarly literature agree that the fundamental
principle of the use of good manners is to treat others the way you want to be treated.
This is expressed in the Christian principle called "The Golden Rule," (The Living Bible.
Matt. 7: 12, n.d.) which states, "Do for others what you want them to do for you." Several
other religious cultures have similar understandings of this principle.
Possibly one of the most popular writers on American etiquette was Emily Post who
died September 25, 1960. Her legacy is continued through her family by well known
author Peggy Post. Emily Post wrote Etiquette, In Society, In Business, In Politics and At
Home (1922) during the Roaring Twenties as a response to social changes that seemed to
blur class distinctions. Most of her writing was directed towards those aspiring to join
the upper-classes. Peggy Post's editions of Etiquette: The Definitive Guide to Manners,
Completely Revised and Updated (2004), which now has reached to number seventeen in
publication, is directed towards an audience whose class distinctions are definitely
blurred. Contemporary etiquette speaks to an audience that encompasses all members of
society. Those interviewed for this thesis tended to reflect upon etiquette according to
Emily Post's work from her book's first editions, indicating that her advice was often
seen as stuffy social rules having tendencies to separate social classes.
98
Other popular authors, such as Amy Vanderbilt (1959) and Judith Martin (1996),
believe that etiquette must be a response to social needs, such as to war, inventions,
political upheaval and legislation. Vanderbilt (1959) claims that these factors control
how the prevailing etiquette will change. Martin (1996) suggests that without
appreciation for the appropriate use of good manners interaction may injure an
individual's pride. She further suggests that pride is protected through the use of good
manners (Martin, 1996). Her work often focuses in at the micro level, such as in
common family interactions and individual problems people encounter on the job.
Many of the authors on popular manners served United States presidents and
important dignitaries who relied on their advice to help prevent misunderstanding and
appease individuals and groups of people. There seems to be a widespread concern that
without such guidance, tension or even conflict may arise and interrupt the flow of
communication. This is very similar to what Scheff describes in Bloody Revenge (1994).
He suggests that when the flow of communications is interrupted by inappropriate
behavior, such as too much social distance or too much closeness, pride is damaged
(1994). His work makes connections between pride and shame at the interpersonal level
and conflict at the macro level, even including war (1994).
Today in American society, people often question reasons to why individuals should
suppress their emotions. But Martin thinks that it is nonsense that manners, " ... represses
people from expressing their true feelings" (1996, p. 3). Good manners are often the face
of professionalism, that is, a mask that one is able to wear in trade of a paycheck. By
99
removing emotion from the workplace, it is easier to separate one's professional life from
one's personal life, thus remaining professional. Martin (1996) describes a professional
attitude as another emotional trait, much the way Hochschild does in The Managed
Heart: Commercialization of Human Feeling (2003): Her work shows how emotion is
traded for a paycheck in the airline industry (Hochschild, 2003). Hochschild addresses
how emotion labor can take its toll on workers as they strive to fit their actual emotions
into what is considered an appropriate feeling for a given situation in the workplace
(2003).
In The Commercialization qllntimate L~le (Hochschild, 2003), her chapter on 'The
Economy of Gratitude" (2003) defines the value of exchange of gifts given between those
in love relationships. How individuals value a gift from a giver is determined by their
cultural beliefs and often their circumstances of hardships. Some of these hardships
include, but are not limited to, working a "Second Shift," which include the burden of
unequal distributions of housework after between couples. The sense of a gift is
considered an 'extra' in the eyes of the receiver. This 'extra' moves the emotion of the
receiver to feel appreciated for being recognized for something that is beyond what we
normally expect (Hochschild, 2003). This is something more than what couples in
relationships feel obligated to give. Hochschild links this process of the strong obligation
to give, to receive and to reciprocate gifts as cultural and a way for us to expresses love.
This thesis shows that job satisfaction is tied directly into how a person is made to feel
appreciated. Several examples clearly illustrate the fact that the level of satisfaction felt
100
between the giver and the receiver is based on the feelings of the genuineness of
gratitude.
In The Presentation of Self of Everyday Lite (Goffman, 1959), it addresses how
workers present themselves as if they were on a stage in ways that help other's form an
opinion that the actor is trying to cultivate. Martin (1996), Hochschild (2003) and
Goffman (1959) share the conclusion that the use of manners is crucial for acceptance of
a worker in his or her environment if he or she wants to be successful. Their work
supports my finding that conforming to the workplace culture is essential for the success
of white-collar workers and to an organization. Without this cooperation, workers fail at
fitting into their environment. Evidence shows that certain attributes, such as primary
socialization and socioeconomic backgrounds, playa part in the success of a white-collar
worker.
Elias (1939) and Kasson (1990) point out that civility is born out of social
movements. Without social unrest, society will remain status quo. Etiquette that defines
class distinctions is challenged, according to Elias, when those from lower-classes begin
to emulate manners from the upper-classes in order to gain upward mobility (1939). As a
historian, Kasson believes a pivotal moment in American society was during
industrialization, when "Emotional control came to be considered an essential aspect of
gentility... " (1990, p. 18). As a sociologist, Elias portrays significant social unrest
between the proletariat and bourgeoisie, as one tried to emulate the manners of the other
(1939). Both historical events show how etiquette is defined during periods of social
101
unrest. This explains why in certain situations using the prevailing etiquette may not
always be in the best interest of some, but benefiting others. Elias further shows how the
dominant group will prevail in defining what is considered appropriate behavior, leaving
those without power to struggle towards upward mobility and often justice.
My findings are also supported by Lubrano's (2004) work. As discussed earlier, he
believes that one's life experiences are directly related to how one uses manners (2004).
For example, those who came from families that traditionally held blue-collar jobs had to
struggle to learn different manners than those who came from families that traditionally
worked in white-collar jobs. Lubrano mentioned in an e-mail to me that he thought that it
was very difficult for someone from an impoverished family to make it in the whitecollar work environment (personal communication, February 6, 2007). He based this on
an individual's exposure to different opportunities that privilege can bring. My data
supports this.
The literature on manners reviewed for this thesis and the emotional responses that
came from participants helped me formulate further questions on the importance of the
use of good manners in the white-collar workplace. Scholarly findings suggest that
individuals must practice how to remove emotion from the workplace in order to remain
professional (Hochschild, 2003). Popular authors suggest that individuals carry out
certain etiquette in the workplace that helps them become professional (Martin, 1996).
Some of the etiquette involves the use of emotion work, but also how to present the self
102
in order to help feel the part. For example, dressing as a professional can help an
individual feel and be perceived as professional.
4.2 Findings: Three Major Components of Using Good Manners in the Workplace
Three processes emerged from my data as key components of using good manners
in the white-collar workplace that contribute to an individual's success. These processes
are: expressing gratitude, showing respect, and conforming to the white-collar workplace
culture. Each key component is unique in the way these processes are carried out. The
absence of any of these components can have adverse effects on an employees' position
with a company. Further, these three processes also coincide with what is considered to
be good manners by experts in this field (Post, 2004).
4.2.1 Showing Gratitude
Gratitude is the quality or feeling of being thankful. Most people in this study,
viewed gratitude as a form of appreciation given to the employee from the employer. But
depending on an employee's place in the organizational hierarchy, they experienced
gratitude differently. Two participants that held executive positions (president and vicepresident of different companies) saw that expressing gratitude was important at all levels
in the organizational hierarchy. Interestingly, these individuals often experienced a lack
of gratitude from their superiors. Their experiences of lack of gratitude shed light on how
103
human emotion is sold in the workplace in exchange for a paycheck (Hochschild, 2003.
Martin, 1996). Those in mid-level white-collar positions often experienced gratitude
accompanied by some form of monetary reward, such as in the form of gift cards. This
type of gratitude sometimes encouraged secrecy between workers. It also gave those in
subordinate positions more power over their superiors because they expected something
extra in return for special attention to projects. Low-level workers experience gratitude
and lack of gratitude similar to those in high-level positions. Since low-level workers are
more easily replaceable, they report receiving gratitude infrequently from those in
superior positions. High-level workers could rely on fewer people for demonstrations of
expressions of gratitude. The biggest difference between high-level and low-level white
collar worker's experiences of gratitude is that low-level workers are not compensated as
well as those in high-level positions. This often leaves low-level workers feeling
unappreciated. They do not feel the exchange of the paycheck for emotion in the same
way that those in high-level positions do. This is mainly because there usually are other
fringe benefits that high-level workers are privileged to that those in low-level positions
are not. Also, low-level workers experience domination from those in high-level
positions. This domination sets the tone for how gratitude is expected to be shown and
sometimes it marginalizes people without cultural capital typically coming from lower
socioeconomic backgrounds.
104
4.2.2 Showing Respect
In my findings, another key component in the use of good manners in the workplace
is showing respect. Participants described how showing respect seems to be patterned by
formal institutional structures in that who is showing respect to whom is highly
influenced by where each is in the organizational hierarchy. Participants experience
expressions of respect differently based on their position within the organization. At the
same time, privileges are given to those in powerful positions in the organizational
hierarchy. These privileges are often tangible, such as company cars, which show the
elite status of an individual to others in an organization. Those who do not hold powerful
positions within an organization, receive less respect, fewer privileges and less use of a
corporation's assets.
Often superiors and co-workers give respect to employees who have been at a
company for long periods of time because they have gathered the knowledge and
experience of the organization's leadership. Respect is commonly communicated by the
treatment from co-workers and job security. Showing and receiving respect are essential
to workers in that it helps them understand their value within an organization.
Secondly, expressions of respect appear to be individual, possibly the result of
primary and secondary socialization outside of the workplace, but brought into the
workplace as a form of cultural capital (Bourdieu, 1983/1986). Prior socialization is
revealed in how people inspire or demand respect from others, and how they treat their
co-workers. In addition, showing respect appears highly correlated with self-respect. A
105
few participants strongly believed that practicing good manners and showing respect to
others was a ret1ection of self-respect. Conducting themselves in ways that put others at
ease is a reflection of what participants feel about self-respect.
Some individuals show respect to inspire respect from others. Workers, who
function well at their jobs and get along with others, will attempt to earn respect from
their co-workers through courtesy, with the goal of establishing professional
relationships. In the experience of these workers, these practices are the key to their
successes. They believe that it would not be possible to be successful in their jobs
without an understanding of how respect nurtures relationships. For these employees,
respect is a function that helps them deal with maintaining an uneven balance of power
and partial interest. Nevertheless, this seems to be a function of their willingness to be
respectful of others combined with their own self-respect.
Being respectful to others i's a form of cultural capital (Bourdieu, 1983/1986).
Workers report that using good manners, which includes showing respect, helps them
advance in their careers in various ways. Several interviewees said that earning respect
from co-workers by the way you speak to them was essential because it helped make
them feel at ease. This is seen as a way of extending common courtesy and was
important in conducting good manners at work. An understanding of the importance of
extending respect to co-workers regardless of their rank is helpful in relationship
building. Where mutual respect is found, it made for pleasant working conditions and
promising career advancements for people. Regardless of a workers status, participants
106
report that when people are not respectful of each other it affects their ability to function
at their best while on the job. Where there is a lack of respect, employees were often
found to dislike their co-workers and their jobs.
4.2.3 Conforming to the Workplace Culture
Another condition of using what are considered good manners is conforming to the
workplace culture. In addition to expressing gratitude and showing respect, conforming
to the workplace culture is essential in the white-collar world. Respect and conforming
seem to be experienced together since conforming is often viewed as being respectful of
the wishes of others. This includes respecting and conforming to the leadership of an
organization as well as fitting in with all workers within the organizational hierarchy. In
order for a worker to conform, he or she must learn the culture of his or her organization
which is usually determined by the organization's leadership.
During the interview process, interesting accounts were told of the journeys taken
while learning how to conform to the workplace culture. Some participants discovered
that often maturity was a factor of blending into their environment. A few spoke of their
dismal efforts to stand out and impress employers with their individuality, and learning
that what was expected was a certain amount of conformity or team work. Individualism
is a gesture of separation and white-collar workers are often representatives, the face and
the personality of a team. Those who come from a lower socioeconomic background
struggle to fit into a setting that is comprised of those who have experienced a certain
107
amount of privilege. When this becomes apparent to the leadership in an organization, it
can have adverse effects on the success of an individual. Consequently, data suggests
that individualism can send confusing signals to clients which can affect profits, such as
seen in Hochschild's (2003) work. White-collar workers condition their emotions and
thinking in collective ways to help them stay focused on the needs of the organization.
Those who achieved mastery over their emotions and desires by forfeiting individualism
were often found very successful.
Another aspect revealed in conforming to the workplace culture was through speech.
How emotions are demonstrated through the tone of voice and the content of language
can build or break working relationships. Dialect and mastery over a language can also
suggest to co-workers the life experiences of an individual. Emotion, tone of voice,
content of language, dialect and mastery over a language can help an individual fit into
their environment, but also has the potential of excluding them. One participant
explained how he had a technique for building relationships with workers when he felt he
had to diffuse upset emotions. He would empathize with them and speak in the "we"
during his interaction with an employee, but during the interview process he addressed
these individuals as "they." He introduced examples of similar concerns to these workers
so that they felt there was a shared concern. Finally, by sharing light company
information with a subordinate worker, it made the worker feel privy to a secret. He
expressed that special attention was paid to his speech patterns because he wanted to
make sure he was communicating in a way that could be understood by those whom he
was addressing. Others, who said that they did this, thought that they had to be aware
108
that they didn't offend another when they chose to change their vernacular. I observed an
interviewee that appeared to be trying to make an employee feel comfortable by talking
with him in Spanglish, but he didn't believe that his speech patterns changed when I
brought it up.
One exception found to the general pattern that conformity protects one's job is that
sometimes an organization may keep an employee around who speaks or behaves badly
so that an example can be made of him. This is apparent when a worker is repeatedly
admonished or reprimanded in front of others. Their fallen grace is to serve as a warning
to others of the fate they will share if they choose to act in similar ways. This is
ultimately a fear tactic and has sometimes proven to be successful. The company "jerk"
or "clown" doesn't advance because he does not know how to conform to what the
leadership expects (Sutton, 2007).
Physical actions are another aspect of conforming to the workplace culture. It is
detrimental for those who do not understand which actions are considered nonconforming. This seems to affect newly hired employees when they try to carry their
former workplace culture into their new environment. Although some leniency is given
to new employees, they are expected to adapt quickly if they want to be successful.
Often, another employee will groom or educate a newly hired employee on what is
expected of them. These actions include how a worker addresses superiors or perhaps
responds to E-mail. What may seem like small issues on the surface can challenge a
person's pride and irreversibly damaged working relationships.
109
People rely on the use of manners to separate themselves and exclude others from
certain social situations. Both popular and sociological experts in this field believe that
when given the opportunity, people will try and imitate the manners of a higher social
class for the purpose of upward mobility (Martin, 1996. Elias, 1939). The use of
traditional good manners, popular experts claim, was a satisfactory way for people to
protect their social classes more rigorously (Post 1922). But by today's opinion in
contemporary manners, separating yourself in social situations by acting in a way that is
not befitting to an environment is considered bad manners because it causes separation or
harm to individuals and groups of people (Martin, 1996).
Ultimately, participants in this study felt that the use of what constitutes good
manners in the workplace was beneficial in upward mobility. Because these workers
were able to help make others feel at ease during business operations, they attributed this
to polished social skills that helped them achieve promotions, raises and earn job
stability.
Successful white-collar workers realize the benefits in using good manners in their
workplace environment because it permits them acceptance. When a worker is accepted
by his or her peers and recognized as someone who can maneuver well in business
relationships, they experience positive feedback through promotions, raises and general
upward mobility. Non-acceptance is usually a result of not being able to comply with a
standard that is in place. Failure to use good manners at work can create conflict and
even result in losing one's job. Sometimes non-acceptance is not the fault of the worker,
110
but of a stereotype of how an individual is perceived. Most participants believed,
however; than even stereotypes can be demolished through the use of good manners.
However, more research should be conducted to explore this assumption.
A major focus in this research is to determine how good manners are defined in the
contemporary and rapidly changing white-collar workplace. This thesis further
contributes to our understanding of what roles manners play in a white-collar work
environment. Manners are ultimately necessary for social cohesion and congruity, but
can also be used as a tool for social control. Without the use of what is defined as good
manners in the white-collar workplace, people are generally unsuccessful at fitting into
their environment. Often those who come from blue-collar work origins have difficulties
learning to maneuver in a white-collar work environment because their own socialization
can be very different from someone whose origins are embedded in a white-collar work
ethic. The most apparent factor seems to be that white-collar and blue-collar workers
experience gratitude and respect differently based on their position in the organization's
hierarchy.
Three key components in using good manners are expressing gratitude, showing
respect and conforming to the workplace culture. These key components are emphasized
by workers in this research to flow downwards from the peak of an organizational
hierarchy. By implementing these practices of good manners in the workplace, it creates
comfortable working conditions. Comfortable working conditions have a positive effect
on white-collar workers. Some of these effects include, but are not limited to, loyalty to
111
an organization, camaraderie among workers, dedication to the responsibilities of a
worker's position, and comfortable working conditions with less absenteeism.
Workers reported that when they have been exposed to poor manners, that is, what is
considered not appropriate for their professional environment, they experience emotions
that they feel they have to suppress. Participants described some of these emotions as
anger, aggressiveness and self-consciousness about their ability to do their jobs well.
People generally believed that even though they were being subjected to bad manners, it
was theoretically important for them to still use good manners. In other words,
responding to the culprit by treating an individual the way they would like to be treated.
This theory is called using "The Golden Rule," (The Living Bible. Matt. 7: 12, n.d.) which
is a Christian principle, and the foundation of American manners. This ideology is
shared by many religious cultures and coincidently, was mentioned by most of the
participants in this thesis. The participants in this study were not necessarily religious,
but recognized this principle as a fundamental practice in the use of good manners.
Many reported how difficult it is to abide by "The Golden Rule" (The Living
Bible, Matt. 7: 12, n.d.) because bad manners often challenge a person's pride. One
employee believed that by responding to bad manners with good manners is seen as
"kissing up." According to this interviewee, this happens to occur in an office where
"kissing up" is considered good manners. "Kissing up" and "brown nosing" is believed
to be not genuine by those who I interviewed. Being genuine is crucial in the whitecollar work place because this environment emphasizes the importance of self-
112
presentation. Goffman (1959) describes this as dramaturgical acting and this is certainly
appreciated among white-collar workers. However, if the acting appears phony, the actor
has failed his audience and this appears to have detrimental effects on employees. Some
. of these effects include resentment, not being taken seriously and passed over in
opportunities for advancement.
I found that each company defines good manners differently based on the
preferences and characteristics of an organization's leadership. Since there are no
absolute guidelines to follow on what is considered good manners, because they slightly
change from organization to organization, workers sometimes have difficulties adapting
to their new culture. Participants in this study reported that what is expected of them, in
the sense of what is considered the use of good manners, is based on common sense, a
worker's intelligence or something unique about an individual's personality. Ultimately,
workers and organizations feel that it is the worker's responsibility to have interpersonal
skills keen enough to figure out what is considered appropriate behavior. Workers
achieved this feat relying on their own personality, creativity and the three key
components of the use of good manners in this research: expressing gratitude, showing
respect and conforming to the workplace culture. Those who did not understand the
exchange of these three key components found that they lost out on acceptance from their
leadership and peers, which sometimes equated to missing out on chances for
advancement.
113
Perhaps a larger sample population that may have included more input from women
and more diverse ethnicities would have shown striking differences in how people show
gratitude, show respect and conform to the workplace culture. There were hints that
women who hold high-level white-collar positions have to extend themselves further than
men by working longer hours to show that they are participating in all key components of
using good manners at work.
Further research should be conducted on some areas that this preliminary research
did not address. Such as, who is responsible for extending the appropriate etiquette in a
global economy where markets are dependent upon each other's existence across
cultures? Is it always the responsibility of the subordinate? In sensitive global markets,
who should accept the responsibility of bending to the etiquette of whom, when it is
known that certain cultural offenses can become a breeding ground for conflict (Scheff,
1994)'1
This research also primarily focuses on business involvements at the micro-level.
Since the United States markets have experienced globalization to the extent that it is
dependent on certain outsourced programs, new etiquette must be created and foreign
etiquette learned in order to insure peaceful business operations. Should the United
States expect other countries to abide by the principles of good manners that American
etiquette defines?
Do manners really have the potential to be a form of social restraint? How well a
person follows certain etiquette has shown to be a factor in a worker's success, but when
114
is it appropriate to not follow a designed etiquette? Etiquette plays an important part in
how society undergo change because they are guidelines that attempt to address and show
how to act in order for people to live in the same space with those who have different
lifestyles. When should work conditions be allowed to become uncomfortable? Surely,
there must be times when people must balk at the prevailing etiquette in order to make
social changes for the good of mankind. These questions are certainly appropriate for
further research.
115
References
Baldrige, L. (1985). Letitia Baldrige's Complete Guide to Executi ve Manners.
New York: Rawson Associates.
Baldrige, L. (2003). New Manners for New Times: A Complete Guide to Etiquette.
New York: Scribner.
Brinkman, R. & Kirschner, R. (2002). Dealing with People You Can't Stand.
New York: McGraw-Hill. (Original work published 1994).
Bourdieu, P. (1986). The Forms of Capital. In John Richardson (Ed.). Handbook of
Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education. New York: Greenwood
Press, pp. 241-258.
Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide through
Qualitative Analysis. London: Sage Publications.
Crisp, Q. (1985). Mannersfrom Heaven: A Divine Guide to Good Behavior. New York:
Harper Collins.
Du Bois, W.E.B. (1903). The Souls ofBlack Folk. New York: Bantam Books.
Elias, N. (2000). The Civilizing Process. (Vols. 1-2). (Basil Blackwell Ltd., Trans.)
Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing. (Original work published 1939)
Goffman, E. (1959). The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. New York: Doubleday.
Glaser, B., Strauss, A. (1967) The Discovery (~f Grounded Theory: Strategiesfor
Qualitative Research. London: Sage Publications.
Hochschild, A. R. (2003). The Commercialization of Intimate L~fe: Notesfrom
Home and Work. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Hochschild, A. R. (2003). The Managed Heart: Commercialization of Human Feelings.
Berkeley: University of California Press. (Original work published 1983)
Kasson, J. F. (1990). Rudeness and Civility. New York: Harper & Collins.
Kronenberger, L. (1951). Company Manners: A Cultural Inquiry into American Life.
Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill Company.
116
The Living Bible. (1971) Matt. 7:12. Wheaton: Tyndale House.
Lubrano, A. (2004). Limbo: Blue-collar Roots, White-collar Dreams. New Jersey: John
Wiley & Sons.
Martin, J. (2005). Miss. Manners' Guide to excruciatingly Correct Behavior. New York:
W. W. Norton & Company.
Martin, J. (1996). Miss. Manners Rescues Civilization: From Sexual Harassment,
Frivolous Lawsuits, Dissing and Other Lapses in Civility. New York: Crown
Publishers.
Post, E. (1922). Etiquette in Society, in Business, in Politics and at Home.
[Bartleby.com]. p. 627. Retrieved July 9,2007, http://www.bartleby.com/95/.
Post, P. (1997). Emily Post's Etiquette. New York: Harper Collins.
Rotterdam, E. (1530). De Civilitate Morum Puerilium (On Civility in Boys). p. 47.
Scheff, T. J. (1994). Bloody Revenge. Boulder: Westview Press.
Shaw, G. B. (n.d.) Retrieved October 15,2007,
http://thinkexist.com/quotation/the_golden_rule_is_that_there_are_no_golden_
rules/207844.html.
Sutton, R. I. (2007). The No Asshole Rule: Building a Civilized Workplace and Surviving
One that isn't. New York: Warner Business Books.
Sutton, R. I. (Narrator). (2007, July 9). Putting an End to Jerks and Bullies at Work and
in Society [Lecture: Radio Broadcast]. San Francisco, Common Wealth Club of
California.
Town & Country Modern Manners: The Thinking Person's Guide to Social Graces.
(Social Graces Series). (2005). In Thomas P. Farley (Ed.). New York: Hearst
Books. p. 256.
Vanderbilt, A. (1959). Amy Vanderbilt's Complete Book of Etiquette: A Guide to
Gracious Living. New York: Doubleday & Company.
Visser, M. (1991). The Rituals (~f Dinner: The Origins, Evolution, Eccentricities, and
Meaning (~fTable Manners. New York: Harper Collins.
117
Appendix A
Consent Statement
By signing this Consent Statement, I am acknowledging the following:
I have been asked to participate in a study about manners in the workplace. I understand
that this is a voluntary interview that will take between 30 and 60 minutes of my time.
There is no compensation for my participation in this research project, and my time is
completely voluntary. I understand that refusal to participate in whole or in part of this
interview will involve no penalty or loss of benefits to which I would otherwise be
entitled, and that I may discontinue participation at any time.
I understand that my anonymity and the names of the companies I and other interviewees
work for will be kept confidential. However, my anonymous responses may be published
in this research. Individual interview responses will never be shared or sold to
companies, co-workers, nor friends. Responses will be kept in a locked file cabinet until
this research is completed. After completion of this research project, my interview will
be destroyed. The provided information will be used for Sheila R. Warbasse's Master's
Thesis project. No foreseeable harm or injury will result from this interview.
Should 1 have any questions after the completion of this interview, I have been
encouraged to contact Sheila R. Warbasse by telephone at 510-276-6588 or bye-mail at:
[email protected].
If 1 have questions about the validity of this research project, I can contact the
researcher's advisor, Professor Diane Beeson, at California State University East Bay, at
510-885-4127 or bye-mail at: [email protected].
In addition, further inquiry can be made to the Interim Director of Research and
Sponsored Programs, Victoria Jensen, at the California State University East Bay, Office
of Research and Sponsored Programs at 510-885-2205 or bye-mail at:
[email protected].
Participant's Signature
Participant's Printed Name
Date
118
Appendix B: General Data on Interviewees
All l'ourteen mtervIewees
.
.
were assIgne d a pseu donym.
Age Education
Interviewee Job Title
1
Bruce
2
David
3
Denise
4
Donald
5
Helen
6
Jack
7
Janet
8
Lauren
9
Maria
10
Mathew
1I Max
12 Nora
13 Paul
14 Theo
Vice President
49
High-level, white-collar
Sales Representative
37
Mid-level, white-collar
Senior Business Analyst
41
Mid-level, white-collar
Area Manager, External Affairs
55
High-level, white-collar
Paralegal
38
Low-level, white-collar
Sales Engineer
62
Mid-level, white-collar
Communications Layout Editor
38
Low-level, white-collar
34
Finance Director
High-level, white-collar
Customer Service Representative 36
Low-level, white-collar
52
President
High-level, white-collar
Systems Programmer
38
Mid-level, white-collar
Legal Secretary
58
Low-level, white-collar
Sales Manager
46
Mid-level, white-collar
Director of Sales
49
Mid-level, white-collar
Bachelor
Family of
Origin *
B
High School
B
Bachelor
W
Masters
W
Some
College
Bachelor
W
Some
College
Bachelor
B
W
Associates
B
Bachelor
B
Some
College
High School
B
Bachelor
B
Bachelor
B
W
B
Explanation of Appendix B
All participants were given a pseudonym. The fourteen individuals listed in this table are
with those whom I conducted lengthy interviews.
The four individuals below described their experiences briefly in casual conversations.
Harold - High-level white-collar, retired
J.R. - Low-level, white-collar
Sandy - Mid-level white-collar
Julia - Low-level, white-collar
( * ) B = Blue-collar breadwinner, W = White-collar breadwinner
119
Appendix C
Sequence:
Interview Guide
_
Date: -------------
Section I - Geographical Information
Name
Phone Number
Gender:
.>..-(
D Male D
...l....)
_
Female
Age: _ _
Ethnicity:
Marital Status:
_
D Single D Married D Re-Married D Divorced
D Widowed
Highest Level of Education:
_
120
Company Name:
_
Length of time in present position:
_
Your Occupation:
--'-
_
Are you here on a work VISA? DYes D No
If Yes, where from?
Father's Occupation:
Mother's Occupation:
_
_
_
121
How Many People work in your office building? D <25 D <50 D
<100
D <200 D 200+
How Many People work at your company? D <25 D <50
D < 100 D <200 D 200+
Does your company employ white-collar employees? DYes D No
Does your company employ blue-collar employees? DYes D No
Does your company have a dress code? DYes D No
If yes, what is it?
Does your company have a corporate policy on conduct?
DYes DNo
If Yes, what is it?
122
i
Section II - Detailed Job Information
Tell me about your job:
What does it take to
be successful in a
position like yours?
How would you
describe the
management style of
your superiors?
Are some people's
opinions valued more
than others at your
company?
What enables
someone in a position
Iike yours to have
more or less
influence in decision
making?
Do you feel included
in decision making?
123
Do people from your
work socialize
together?
If you could change
anything about how
people relate to each
other in your
workplace, what
would that be?
Are fellow coworkers cordial with
one another?
How do people get
along with each
other at your job?
Have you noticed
differences in how
co-workers treat each
other when they are
outside of their
workplace?
Explain?
124
Have you noticed if
rank or hierarchy of
position makes a
difference in
working
relationships?
Have you noticed
gender differences?
Does gender playa
role in your position?
Do you think coworkers talk
differently to each
other than they do to
their boss?
What other words do
you associate with
the word "civility"?
Do you have a
corporate policy on
civility?
Do you think civility
can be implemented
into a company
policy?
125
Do you think
manners matter at
your workplace?
How so?
What do you think is
meant by the term
"politically correct"?
Are people
"politically correct"
at your company?
What kind of
environment does
"political
correctness" create in
your office?
Thinking back what
was most effective in
conversation at the
office, being cordial
or being "politically
correct"? How?
126
IV - Self Value and Limits
What kind of feelings
have you
demonstrated at
work?
Have your own or
other's feelings ever
been an obstacle for
you at work?
To what extent do
you mask your true
feelings at work?
How are you able to
sustain this on a daily
basis?
How open are you
about your personal
life at work? What
limits do you set?
What kind of
recognition do you
value from your coworkers?
127
What kind of
recognition do you
value from your
boss?
To what extend do
you feel your input is
valued and
respected?
128
v . Obstacles
What are the main
sources of tension in
your workplace?
How are conflicts
resolved?
What kinds of
situations provoke
uneasiness at work?
Does your workplace
ever feel
uncomfortable to you
or become a hostile
environment? If so,
under what
conditions?