Question

The magic and excitement of theme parks have enthralled Rabea since her first visit to the Ferrari theme park in Abu Dhabi, a few years ago. The characters, the enchanted atmosphere, the immaculate park grounds, and the stories told by the Ferrari theme park employees – all of this made such a memorable impression that Rabea would now like to use a theme park as the focus for her Masters’ research project at Al Ain University.

Her interest in the sociology of work leads Rabea to read about theme park employees' accounts of their experience. These shed light on the burdens and troubles of being a theme park employee. She is particularly struck by the ethnography of the sociologist John van Maanen, who worked for three summers as a rides operator in a U.S. theme park and wrote up his experiences as a participant-observation ethnography of these workers (van Maanen, 1989).

Theme parks such as the Ferrari world in Abu Dhabi usually proclaims themselves as the 'happiest place on earth'. However, for employees, the picture may be less rosy. John van Maanen describes theme parks as 'smile factories'. He observes that theme parks’ employees vie for status and respect in a highly-regimented employment structure where standardized rules and procedures ensure that grimy operations such as cleaning are almost invisible, so that customers only experience joy and pleasure (and perhaps buy more from the concession outlets and merchandising stores). He writes about how employees find tricks to subvert the rules; for example, having more than the permitted number of 'time-outs'. But more often than not, employees come to accept and buy into the theme park’s culture. They 'glide into their kindly and smiling roles' with ease (van Maanen, 1989, p73). The success of this feat of social engineering is largely due, according to van Maanen (1989) and Bryman (2003), to the socialization process which employees go through.

A big part of the socialization process is achieved through influencing employees' emotions, or at least the emotional aspect of their interactions with theme park visitors. Hochschild (2003, p186) argued that for many service industries such as air-travel and hospitality, what used to be considered a private act of emotional display – idiosyncratic, spontaneous, and personal to a customer and service worker – may now be controlled, managed and standardized through organizations’ training and socialization practices. This is perhaps the darker side of theme parks that Rabea never saw as an excited child, growing in Abu Dhabi. But with her interest in the sociology of work, she now feels that it reaches insidiously into all aspects of service work. Recently, scholars have talked of the 'emotional labour', which employees have to provide as part of their jobs. Their appearance, demeanor and emotional responses to customers are all aspects of work over which they usually have some control; but increasingly in organizations, employees' conduct is tightly scripted and regulated. It's not just a question of pretending to smile and be happy. The socialization process into the organization’s culture and values aims to make employees want to smile all day.

Rabea wonders whether the stresses and strains of emotional labour have been ignored by many business researchers. She’s particularly interested in getting the ‘insider’ view, and settles on a provisional title for her Masters project: Inside a theme park: what are employees' experiences of emotional labour?

But what sort of research design would be best for doing this? Rabea has some friends at Al Ain University already working at the Ferrari world theme park, and wants to ask them if they can be interviewed for her project. However, having read van Maanen’s (1991) ethnographic study she has a nagging doubt: would semi-structured interviews be enough to expose the emotional labour which these employees have to perform?

Questions

(1) Looking at Rabea’s research question, is the research 'purpose' exploratory, descriptive or explanatory? Explain fully your choice

(2) Is Rabea’s research design (based only on semi-structured interviews in one case study organization) likely to be sufficient to answer the research question?

(3) What are the possible issues associated with Rabea interviewing her university friends?

Answer 1

1) looking at Rabea's research question explanatory research is better.because it would clarify the exact nature of the problem and it demand for priorities generate operational definitions and it explain the aspect of study.

2)Rabea's researsch design based only on semi structured interviews in one case study organisation is not sufficent to answer the research question.

3) there is inconsistency among interview

Do not get accurate result

Interviews are inherently dishonest