• Amporn Tamronglak


This chapter presents the evolution of administrative reform as it has been affected by the political and cultural changes in Thailand bureaucracy. Through the creation of an authoritarian military administration as a result of various coup d’états, together with the cultural value of collectivism, Thai rulers have been able to maintain a cultural distance from the country’s citizens, which impedes democratic development. Survey responses were collected from a sample of civil servants, comprised of police officers in Bangkok and its vicinity, and Deputy District Chiefs from all provinces in Thailand. Responses reveal how emotional labor is experienced by them. Results show direct positive effects of emotive capacity on job satisfaction and on personal fulfillment and an inverse relationship between emotive capacity and burnout. There is also a positive relationship between the performance of authentic emotive expression and increased burnout. On the other hand, using emotive pretense to hide how one feels while displaying a task-appropriate emotion is not related to burnout.


  1. Abraham, R. 1998. “Emotional Dissonance in Organizations: Antecedents, Consequences, and Moderators.” Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs 124 (2): 229–46.Google Scholar
  2. Bhumibol Adulyadej. 1992. “Royal Intervention.” May 20. Accessed August 10, 2018.
  3. Case, William F. 2001. “Thai Democracy 2001 Out of Equilibrium.” Asian Survey 41 (3): 525–47. Accessed May 10, 2018. Scholar
  4. Diefendorff, James M., and Robin H. Gosserand. 2003. “Understanding the Emotional Labor Process: A Control Theory Perspective.” Journal of Organizational Behavior 24 (8): 945–59. Accessed September 20, 2018. Scholar
  5. Election Commission. 2019. “Criteria and Method in Calculating Party List Representatives.” May 28. Accessed May 29, 2019.
  6. Grandey, Alicia A. 2000. “Emotional Regulation in the Workplace: A New Way to Conceptualize Emotional Labor.” Journal of Occupational Health Psychology 5 (1): 95–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Grandey, Alicia A., James M. Diefendorff, and D. Rupp. 2013. Emotional Labor in the 21st Century: Diverse Perspectives on Emotion Regulation at Work. London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
  8. Guy, Mary, Meredith A. Newman, and Sharon H. Mastracci. 2008. Emotional Labor: Putting the Service in Public Service. Armonk, New York: M. E. Sharpe.Google Scholar
  9. Hirschfeld, John. 1994. “Thai Politics.” Culture Mandala: The Bulletin of the Centre for East-West Cultural and Economic Studies 1 (1): 6368. Accessed August 10, 2018.
  10. Hochschild, Arlie R. 1983. The Managed Heart: The Commercialization of Feeling. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  11. Hofstede, Geert, Gert Jan Hofstede, and Michael Minkov. 2010. Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  12. Lysa, Hong. 2000. “Twenty Years of ‘Sinlapa Watthanatham’: Cultural Politics in Thailand in the 1980s and 1990s.” Journal of Southeast Asian Studies 31 (1): 26–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Maisrikrod, Surin. 1999. “Joining the Values Debate: The Peculiar Case of Thailand.” Sojourn: Journal of Social Issues in Southeast Asia 14 (2): 402–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Morris, J. A., and D. C. Feldman. 1997. “Managing Emotions in the Workplace.” Journal of Managerial Issues 9 (3): 257–74.Google Scholar
  15. Nag, Sen Oishimaya. 2018. “The Five Tiger Cub Economies of Southeast Asia.” Economics, January 27. Accessed October 15, 2018.
  16. Neher, Clark D. 1995. “Democratization in Thailand.” Asian Affairs: An American Review 21 (4, Winter): 195–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Neher, Clark D. 1996. “The Transition to Democracy in Thailand” (Special Issue on A Peace Regime on the Korean Peninsula) Asian Perspective 20 (2): 301–21.Google Scholar
  18. Paribatra, Sukhumbhand. 1993. “State and Society in Thailand.” Asian Survey 33 (9): 879–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Prime Minister’s Delivery Unit (PMDU). 2018. “National Strategy.” March 20. Accessed October 15, 2018.
  20. Ramangkul, Weerapong. 2017. “The Distinguished Characteristics of Thai People.” Prachachatthurakit, December 16. Accessed October 15, 2018.
  21. Riggs, Fred W. 1964. Administration in Developing Countries: The Theory of Prismatic Society. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  22. Rutter, D. R., and P. J. Fielding. 1988. “Sources of Occupational Stress: An Examination of British Prison Officers.” Work and Stress 2 (4): 291–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Samudavanija, Chai-Anan. 2002. Thailand State-Building, Democracy and Globalization. Bangkok, Thailand: Institute of Public Policy Studies (IPPS).Google Scholar
  24. Tamronglak, Amporn. 2011. The Study of Independence and Accountability of Thai Public Organizations. Bangkok, Thailand: Thammasat University.Google Scholar
  25. The Economist. 2005. Thaksin’s way: A Formidable Success Story, Though With Some Worrying Signs.” The Economist, February 23. Accessed September 2, 2018.
  26. The Nation. 2018. “Weak Education Holds Back Thailand in Worldwide Human-Capital Index.” October 15. Accessed October 16, 2018.
  27. U.S. Library of Congress. n.d. “Political Developments, 1980–87.” Accessed September 20, 2018.

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Amporn Tamronglak
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculty of Political ScienceThammasat UniversityBangkokThailand

Personalised recommendations