1. "Sailing twixt scylla and charybdis": Negotiating multiple organisational musculinities
Maree V Boyle. Women in Management Review. Bradford: 2002. Vol. 17, Iss. 3/4; pg. 131,
11 pgs
Abstract (Summary)
This qualitative study explores the intersection between organizational masculinity and
emotionality within a pre-hospital emergency services organization. The existence of
multiple masculinities within a male-dominated and emotion-laden organization indicates
that men who work within this context are required to negotiate multiple forms of
masculinities within heavily emotionalized organizational regions or spaces. It was found that
there were competing tensions between at least 2 forms of masculinity within the
organization in question. While militarized and managerial/technical forms of masculinity
dominate as the principal hegemonic form, a heroic and caring masculinity is also essential to
how the organization in question produces its key services. It is argued that forms of
masculinity that are closer to the hegemonic ideal type are not "compensatory," but have to
co-exist with other, albeit more marginalized, masculinities.
» Jump to indexing (document details)
Full Text
(7016 words)
Copyright MCB UP Limited (MCB) 2002
[Headnote]
Keywords
[Headnote]
Organization, Men, Environment, Emergency services, Work, Environment
[Headnote]
Abstract
[Headnote]
This qualitative study explores the intersection between organizational masculinity and
emotionality within a prehospital emergency services organization. The existence of multiple
masculinities within a male-dominated and emotion-laden organization indicates that men
who work within this context are required to negotiate multiple forms of masculinities within
heavily emotionalised organizational regions or spaces. This study found that there were
competing tensions between at least two forms of masculinity within the organisation in
question. While militarized and managerial/technical forms of masculinity dominate as the
principal hegemonic form, a heroic and caring masculinity is also essential to how the
organization in question produces its key services. It is argued that forms of masculinity that
are closer to the hegemonic ideal type are not "compensatory", but have to co-exist with
other, albeit more marginalized, masculinities.

2. [Headnote]
Electronic access
[Headnote]
The research register for this journal is available at
http://www.emeraldinsight.com.ezp.lib.unimelb.edu.au/researchregisters
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
http://www.emeraldinsight.com.ezp.lib.unimelb.edu.au/0964-9425.htm
Introduction
The study of the gendered and emotionalised nature of organisations has traditionally focused
on women. This growing body of literature indicates that women are responsible for the bulk
of emotional and caring labour (Hochschild, 1983). Studies that have focused specifically on
men and emotion within organisations are hard to find. In order to understand fully how the
intersection of gender and emotionality impact upon organisations, there is a need to focus on
understanding how men experience emotionality within organisations, and how their
experience constructs the norm for organisational emotionality. A useful place to commence
such a study is within an organisation where men perform considerable amounts of emotional
labour.
This paper therefore examines the emotional ambiguity inherent when men perform public
caring work within a traditionally hegemonically masculine context. The works of Connell
(1995, 2000) and Goffman (1959) provide a framework for illustrating how multiple
masculinities and organisational emotionalities intersect within an organisational setting. In
this instance, the setting chosen is emotion-laden, and this also compounds the process of
switching between masculinities. This paper is based upon a study of emotionality and
masculinity within an Australian public sector organisation, the Department of Paramedical
Services (DPS) which provides pre-hospital emergency care and transportation. The
organisation in question is over 100 years old, male dominated and has both military and not-
for-profit origins.
With regards to the organisation under discussion here, the question that needs to be
answered is how male workers who engage in the "feminine" skill of emotional labour
reconcile these tasks with the demands of a hegemonically masculine gender regime. In other
words, how does an organisation juggle the tension-ridden co-existence of caring and
masculinity? Observational and interview data indicated that there were competing tensions
between at least two forms of masculinity within the DPS. As like many other organisations,
militarized and managerial/technical forms of masculinity dominate as the principal
hegemonic form. However, a heroic and caring form of masculinity is also essential to how
the organisation in question produces its key services. While this form is clearly more
subordinated than the latter forms, there is a constant struggle over what which form gains
ascendancy. It is argued that forms of masculinity that are closer to the hegemonic ideal type
are not "compensatory", but have to co-exist with other, albeit more marginalized,
masculinities.
Organisational masculinity

3. The literature on masculinity within organisations has moved from a primary focus on
dichotomous inter-gender relationships to a recognition of the existence of multiple
masculinities and the relation of various forms of masculinity to power, culture and
subjectivity (Collinson and Hearn, 1996; Kerfoot and Knights, 1998). Within organisations, it
has been suggested that managerialism is replacing militarism as the principal hegemonic
form (Hopton, 1999). While most recent studies have focused on hegemonic masculinity as
the central phenomena in terms of gendered organisational culture, few have fully explored
the complex and contradictory relationship between hegemonic masculinity and the existence
of multiple masculinities. Connell's (1995) work has been especially instructive here,
providing a framework for analyzing multiple masculinities. Recent literature on how men
"do" masculinity in feminized organisational contexts indicates that men engage in
compensatory gendered practices so as to "restore" a dominating position (Alvesson, 1998;
Nixon, 1998).
This study therefore draws on the works of Connell (1995) to explore how intra-gender
relations between men within an emotionladen organisation can be driven by a very virulent
form of hegemonic emotionality that in turn supports and drives the dominant hegemonically
masculine practices within the same organisation. Attention paid to organisational
masculinity within organisational theory is a relative new endeavour (Kilduff, 2001). Earlier
studies of men and work in the context of the study of masculinity in the workplace indicates
that the terms "work" or "working" and "men" are nearly always linked (Morgan, 1992). This
verifies Acker's (1990) claim that the disembodied worker so prevalent in organisational
theory is assumed to be male. This cultural construction of "organisational man" consists of
an image of the typical organisational member as affectively neutral, without work-family
conflict and favouring a hegemonically masculine demeanour. However, this is a reading of
organisational man that recognises the implicitness of masculinity as a basic feature of the
organisational ideal type. The masculinity of work and organisation is rarely made explicit
(Cockburn, 1983). To counteract this there has been a move to name male workers as "men"
(Cockburn, 1983; Kimmel and Messner, 1989; Connell, 1987; Brittan, 1989; Hearn and
Morgan, 1990; Collinson and Hearn, 1996).
However, as Morgan (1992) assiduously points out, bringing men back in to organisational
theory is not without its difficulties. Paid work has been described as the centre of men's lives
and, as such, is also the basis of dominant forms of masculinity and masculine identity (Ford,
1985; Ingham, 1984). But masculinity is also the sum of what it rejects. According to Connell
(1995), masculinity is defined in relation to femininity. Therefore masculinity is not only
what constitutes being a man (for example, strength, emotional control and an ability to
control the immediate environment) but also everything that femininity is not. For instance,
the linkage between masculinity and paid work is in direct contrast to that of femininity and
unpaid work. Paid work involves control over tasks, people and ideas, where one constructs
the world through rational action. On the other hand, unpaid work is associated with
maintaining relationships between people within the private sphere. The construal of paid
work as real work that occurs solely within the public sphere contrasts significantly with
unpaid work, which is construed as maintenance work that occurs within the private sphere.
The former is clearly visible within the public sphere; the latter is viewed as invisible and
intangible. These dichotomies are closely tied to gendered ideological constructs of
appropriate masculine and feminine practice. What these dichotomies do not indicate is that
masculinity is contingent upon the symbolic annihilation of femininity, homosexuality and
disembodied forms of masculinity.

4. However, the workplace is only one site where dominant masculinities are created. It is
therefore erroneous to assume that changes at the level of work will create a destabilising
influence within current gender orders that privilege the role of men as controllers of
emotion. If anything, the change is occurring in the other direction. Women are increasingly
expected to simultaneously behave like their male colleagues while bringing "special"
qualities into the workplace that are supposed to "soften" the corporate world (Sinclair,
1998). Therefore, Morgan's warning about the contradictory nature of the relationship
between masculinity and work is heeded. To understand this contradictory relationship, a
framework is needed to assist in the exploration of the conceptualisation and practice of
masculinity.
Connell's theory of masculinities
Connell's theory of gender as structuring social practice assists in developing a working
definition of masculinity that accounts for both its complex and contradictory nature.
Essentialist definitions that attempt to account for what is the "core" of masculinity are often
at odds with each other, because there is no agreement about what the core is. Similarly,
normative definitions recognise differences and offer a standard of what men ought to be.
Semiotic definitions highlight symbolic differences through the study of masculinity in
contrast to what it is not -femininity (Connell, 2000). Connell (1995) argues that any
definition of masculinity needs to incorporate a relational focus on processes and practices
through and in which both men and women are a part.
Connell recognises the existence of multiple masculinities, which can either be hegemonic or
subordinated. The essence of Connell's (1995, p. 77) definition of hegemonic masculinity is
the:
Configuration of gender practice ... which guarantees the dominant position of men and the
subordination of women.
Connell acknowledges at least two forms of non-hegemonic masculinity - subordination and
marginalisation, which indicates that between men there are gender relations of subordination
and dominance. Gay masculinities can be found at the bottom of this hierarchy, what Connell
(1995, p. 78) refers to as:
The repository of what is symbolically expelled from hegemonic masculinity.
However, it would be simplifying the process of subordination to the extreme to suggest that
the gay/straight dichotomy is the only manifestation of intra-gender relations among men.
Other heterosexual men are also excluded from the "circle of legitimacy", and this manifested
through what Connell (1995, p. 79) refers to as the "vocabulary of abuse". This raises the
question of just what and who represents the embodiment of hegemonic masculinity. Connell
argues that while most men do not actually practice hegemonic masculinity in its purest form,
most men benefit from the ideology of masculinism that privileges men over women in a
general sense.
Therefore, Connell asserts that most men do enter into a "relationship of complicity" in that
men can benefit from particular forms of masculinity that are constructed within the
ideological realm of patriarchy. This process of complicity occurs most blatantly through the
marginalisation of certain groups of men. As Connell (1995, p. 80):

5. Marginalisation is always relative to the authorisation of hegemonic masculinity of the
dominant groups.
The emotion-laden organisation
The process of organising is an emotional process and organisations are ostensibly emotional
arenas (Fineman, 1993, 2000; Albrow, 1992). The emotionalising of organisations is a
complex process that involves the participation of all individuals, groups and external
influences within a particular organisational context (Ashforth and Humphrey, 1995). While
all organisations can be considered emotional entities, not all organisations are totally
emotion laden. Whether or not an organisation is emotion laden depends on a number of
factors, but for the purposes of this paper the most important indicators are organisational
output and how much emotion is explicitly intertwined in this. Is there a deliberate fostering
of emotionality through particular modes of service delivery, production or marketing? To
what degree does the embodiment of emotion occur through the organisational person?
The life-cycle stage of an organisation will also be a clear indicator as to whether or not an
organisation is emotion laden. For example, a major restructuring or downturn or uplift in the
fortunes of the company will evoke strong emotional reactions which, in turn, will increase
the degree to which that organisation is emotion laden (Huy, 1999). In the case of the DPS,
male officers perform emotional labour as a crucial part of their work, and this performance
is integral to delivery of services to patients. As well, the DPS has experienced large amounts
of organisational upheaval, which has caused ambivalent and confused work feelings among
officers. At the time, the level of turbulence within the organisation was extremely high, and
this has impacted upon how officers view their work and the organisation in which they
work. The DPS is also unique in that the kinds of organisational emotionality experienced by
officers is spatialised and regionalised in that there are specific feeling rules that govern the
expressed and felt emotion of officers. The best way of illustrating how emotionality is
regionalised within the DPS is to apply a dramaturgical perspective.
Emotional regions and the dramaturgical perspective
The concepts of frontstage and backstage emotional cultures are derived from Goffman's
(1959) dramaturgical perspective. Goffman's concepts of front and back regions are used here
heuristically to further Fineman's (1993) notion of the "emotional architecture" of
organisational culture, in which he suggests that organisations have physical spaces in which
different kinds of feeling rules apply. The concept of emotional culture builds upon Gordon's
(1984) original conceptualisation, joining both Goffman's description of regional behaviour
and audience segregation and the differentiation perspective of organisational culture which
recognises the importance of sub-cultures. In addition, Hosking and Fineman's (1990)
differentiation between frontstage and backstage organisational emotionality helps to
illustrate how a full understanding of the nature and consequence of emotional labour can
only occur if it is considered within the context of emotional culture. Therefore, emotional
culture can be observed within three "regions" - front or onstage, backstage and offstage. The
frontstage sector is where emotional labour is performed. The backstage sector is where
interaction with organisational members occurs and where emotional process work is likely
to occur. Offstage spheres are found outside the realm of the organisation itself, such as
family or household.

6. There are three main gendered sub-cultures and regions within the DPS. The frontstage
region is the bulk of the interaction with patients occurs, and is also where most of the
emotional labour is performed. The backstage region is characterised by the absence of the
public. These spaces are inhabited by co-workers, supervisors and non-frontline staff within
the organisation. The offstage region is found outside of the organisation, mainly within the
home and family.
Observational data indicated that a significant amount of emotional "switching" occurs
between frontstage and backstage regions. Officers are expected to switch quickly from a
caring, compassionate persona in the frontstage region to a more wisecracking, cynical and
nonchalant stance in backstage regions. Observations indicated that there is considerable
pressure in backstage regions for officers to adopt a tougher, less compassionate stance
towards patients and other officers.
Research context: the Department of Paramedical Services
The site chosen for this study is a public sector provider of pre-hospital emergency care, the
DPS. A qualitative ethnographic style study was conducted over a period of two years. Data
collection included 110 on road observations, qualitative interviews with 30 officers, more
than 500 hours of organisational observation and analysis of organisational documentation.
The author spent 18 months as an "observer as participant" within the organisation, but did
not become fully immersed within the setting. She remained a "civilian" because she did not
wear an ambulance uniform, and therefore was able to observe free of the constraints full
membership would have brought.
The DPS is a male-dominated organisation with 90 per cent of the shopfloor level workforce
being men. At some stage during their working day, these men publicly perform emotional
labour. As part of their duties as ambulance officers, DPS staff are expected to perform as
emotionally complex individuals while simultaneously adhering to a rigid hegemonically
masculine code of conduct. On the one hand, officers are expected to display the softer
emotions of compassion, empathy and cheerfulness in public regions while on the other hand,
refraining from public expressions of grief, remorse or sadness.
At first glance this would seem quite a contrast to the status quo, where men are less likely to
perform emotional or caring work in either a public or private context, let alone within a
male-dominated environment. However, this study indicates that the DPS expends a
considerable amount of energy denying the existence of "feminine" forms of emotionality
while at the same time being highly dependent upon the expression of the same for its very
existence.
Officers themselves describe the emotional culture of the DPS as "macho", and are aware, at
least on a superficial level, of the role that masculinity and masculinism plays in defining the
culture. Although Critical Incident Stress Debriefing (CISD) has been introduced and is used
by officers, a request for a defusing or debriefing is still viewed as a sign of emotional
weakness:
There is a macho thing amongst the men and the women, and if you said to an ambulance
officer, I want you to go inside to be debriefed, he would punch you.

7. Prior to the introduction of CISD, officers were subject to operational debriefings after
particular cases. One officer explained that counsellors often paid little attention to the reality
of shopfloor masculinity, and the ensuing tendency of officers to refuse to acknowledge
between themselves that a case may have deleterious emotional effects:
They talk about how the patient presented and this is what the outcome was. I ask, how did
you feel about all of this? Oh, we're talking about feeling here. This is not good. They
become very uncomfortable.
This quote validates my experience as an observer in similar situations at stations after
traumatic cases. Officers appeared extremely reluctant to express any negative or "unmanly"
emotion. In many instances, officers engaged in long bouts of "black" humour. This is not to
say that humour is not useful as an emotional process technique. However, humour appeared
to be used as a way of denying emotional reactions to cases. Officers who engage in these
rituals of black humour are not necessarily callous or unfeeling. The tendency to deny or
suppress feeling during work hours is something that is learnt very early in an officers' career.
The message both men and women within the DPS receive from senior officers can be very
stark - "take it or leave it". This feeling rule is passed on from senior to junior officers at the
scene of traumatic cases. Younger officers who are visibly upset or approach senior officers
about how they feel are given a number of signals about "not feeling". Messages such as
"take it or leave it", "don't be a wimp or sook", or "if you can't stand the heat", all indicate
that it is not only inappropriate to acknowledge feelings about certain cases, it is dangerous
even to feel at all.
When dealing with patients, officers are allowed to step out of the traditionally hegemonic
frame within the confines of performing emotional labour. When officers experience
emotional dissonance or exhaustion as a result of the emotional component of the service
provider-patient relationship, the DPS had an expectation that an individual officer will
receive the bulk of his emotional support from within a traditionally heterosexual relationship
from the spouse. In addition to this, the DPS has an expectation that officers can easily slip in
and out of the hegemonic masculinity characteristic of backstage masculinity.
Multiple masculinities within the DPS
Within the DPS, at least five broad types of masculine subjectivities and practices have been
identified:
(1) militarized;
(2) managerial;
(3) techno;
(4) hero/community; and
(5) nurturing/caring.
In keeping with the theme of this paper, I will group these categories of masculinities into
two groups - the first group of categories exemplifies and mirrors a close fit between
masculine practice and ideal hegemonic type. Militarized and managerial masculinities are

8. not unique to the DPS. However, a newer, generational-based form called techno masculinity
has emerged with the advent of increased technical specialization and a push towards
professionalisation. In contrast, officers also cite the importance and centrality of a caring,
community hero-oriented type of masculinity within the DPS. Both of these broad groups are
deeply embedded in the wider DPS culture. In terms of shopfloor practice, there appears a
constant tension between what is appropriate masculine practice and what the edicts of the
emotional culture as described above dictate.
Militarized masculinities
The modern ambulance service evolved out of religious and military institutions and
practices, both influences that are evident in many ambulance services today (Barkley, 1978;
Haller, 1992). The DPS is not unusual in this regard as a strong military influence can be
traced from its beginnings. The militaristic dimensions of the DPS include a centralised
command structure with a rigid chain of command:
* clearly delineated lines of communication and authority;
* emphasis on maintenance of the status quo;
* a highly centralised system of operations;
* promotional opportunities which are only usually available to members of the organisation;
and
* lack of flexibility when confronted with situations not covered by existing drectives, orders
or policies and procedures (Auten, 1981).
In addition to this, there is close alliance between militaristic influences upon emotional
culture and the privileging of masculinist forms of emotional expression and coping
strategies. This alliance forms the cultural foundation upon which organisational emotionality
within the DPS is based. Indeed, it could be argued that the militarized nature of the
emotional culture is the key to explaining why attempts at extensive emotional cultural
change have failed. These findings are similar to those of Barrett (1996) and Mills (1998).
When problems on the road arise, officers explained that the militaristic chain of command
leaves lower ranking officers with very little room for explanation when called up before
management for disciplinary action. Officers complained that because management tend to
assume guilt prior to talking to the officer, the "offending" officer is alienated and left to fend
for him or herself. When problems do arise on the road, officers tend not to talk freely with
their peers about the problem and what could be done to avoid it in the future. Because
officers fear being disciplined, they are less likely to publicly support officers who are
perceived to be unfairly castigated.
The most obvious manifestation of militaristic masculinity is the number of ex-military
officers that occupy key positions within the DPS. These range from station officer positions
right through to senior management positions. Officers interviewed were of the belief that the
proliferation of officers with military service, especially those who had done a "tour of duty"
in recent wars, had a significant impact upon the development of the organisation as a whole.
More specifically, there is also a belief that applicants with military backgrounds were chosen

9. in favour of civilians because they were considered more emotionally hardened and,
therefore, more suitable for ambulance trauma work where an officer was required to
compartmentalise emotional states:
I've had a fair bit of experience with the army, in a combat zone where you learn to look after
yourself. You can turn the adrenaline on and off. If you stay "up" all the time you become a
basket case. Turning yourself on and off... it becomes automatic.
Many officers interviewed with civilian backgrounds expressed a feeling of disquiet about the
significant amount of influence militarism had within the organisation. At least one officer
believed that senior managers with a military background were unable to totally dissociate
themselves from their military past. As the following quote indicates, he believed that this
created a cultural barrier between the heavily militarized higher management and the civilian-
oriented officers of middle and lower ranks:
The assistant commissioner was in the army, so he comes from a background of killing
people. We come from a background of coming behind people like him. But he says he
knows how this culture works. He doesn't. His culture and our culture are worlds apart ...
This quote also illustrates the inherent tension caused by the mix of militarized masculinities
with the more subordinated caring form. It also refers to the existence of multiple emotional
cultures within the DPS. Because the militarized form is hegemonically in the ascendency,
many officers attempt to develop new militarized symbols. For example, the hegemonic ideal
type of Rambo as ex-military man gone wild is seen as an influence within the DPS, where
much of the high adrenaline, high pressure, emergency work occurs on the street. Hence, for
some officers, the officer as community hero is not masculine enough, and a more aggressive,
street-fighter kind of image needs to be developed.
In order to raise their community profile, ambulance officers need to contend with the sheer
aggression, authoritarianism and para-military practices of the police, especially on the street
where police are assumed to be in control. More recently, they also need to counteract the
charge that they are not as "manly" as firefighters, particularly in a corporeal and sexualised
sense. For instance, firefighters who work with the DPS engage in charity fundraising
activities such as selling "beefcake" calendars. In comparison to other emergency service
workers, ambulance officers may be viewed as more asexual and gender neutral than police
officers or fire and rescue workers. In contrast to the sexualised image of the firefighters,
DPS officers carry teddy bears dressed as ambulance officers with them to settle small
children who are in pain or distress. Apart from developing militarized images that
successfully compete with other street rescue occupations, the DPS has also encouraged the
development of two other forms of masculinity - managerial and techno.
Managerial and techno masculinities
The rise of managerial masculinity occurred during the 1990s, when the DPS engaged in
extensive organisational restructuring. The major change that occurred involved the move
from a community-based governance structure to a government-controlled bureaucratic one.
This meant that a whole layer of managers was employed to manage the new bureaucratic
structure. In addition, the power of senior managers grew significantly, with several
managers in urban areas in charge of hundreds of shopfloor staff. Predictably, this change
was met with confusion and hostility from many long-serving officers because they believed

10. non-ambulance staff were making decisions that directly impacted upon emergency
treatment. Officers expressed opinions about the non-caring nature of mostly male
bureaucrats, and their inability to understand the emotional demands of the job:
I think that some of the higher bureaucrats have absolutely no concept of what it is like to be
hurt or need an ambulance. As far as they are concerned it is all dollars and cents and
numbers. And that's sad. I think we should go back to the idea where all the hierarchy should
spend time at the coal-face and find out what it is really like.
However, the most virulent form of masculinity that has arisen in recent years within the DPS
is based on a technological focus to the exclusion of the development of emotional skills.
This new form appears to be generationally based. Officers who have entered the service
during the past five years are more likely to have gained higher qualifications than those
officers who have been in the service longer. It is interesting to note that young women who
have entered the service recently are not placed in this category by older male officers. Older
officers often referred to younger, technically-oriented officers as "techno kids". Older
officers were often quick to dissociate themselves from what they saw as "showing off" or
intellectual "wizardry". Older officers who are critical of "techno kids", particularly those
who were trained during the pre-DPS era, argue that recruits are now not chosen for their
ability to "care" but rather their academic skills. These officers are adamant that the "caring"
component should be the crucial factor in choosing new recruits.
However, there is a need to look beyond a simple reading of the techno form of masculinity
as being separate because of the young man-older man dichotomy. The intersection between
all forms of masculinity are well illustrated in the following example. One younger officer
referred to non-emergency work as "granny-busting". Others referred to these cases as
"bumpers" or "geries". Officers who found non-emergency work tedious were more likely to
objectify their patients in this way. However, even with emergency cases involving older
women, younger male officers were observed to be emotionally ambivalent. Older officers
view this redefinition of ambulance work, and the students' eagerness to embrace technical
competency above all else as a cultural change that excludes and demotes the "caring" and
"empathetic" skills that once distinguished an ambulance officer from a mere "taxi driver".
This image of the new breed of ambulance officer as technically brilliant but emotionally
challenged begs the question of how this frontstage cultural change may affect the backstage
culture. Given that the backstage culture is still one that is not described by officers
themselves as emotionally supportive, it is worth considering the possibility that the "new"
frontstage culture may actually reinforce the worst aspects of the backstage culture. There is
some evidence here to suggest that this might be the case.
Heroic/communitarian masculinities
During observations, I gained first hand insight into how ambulance officers are viewed
within their communities, and what these communities expect of the role of the ambulance
officer. Based on my observations of how people reacted when the officers arrived at the
scene of an accident or at the home of a patient, the biggest expectation was that the officers
would "solve" their problems and act as "heroic" in face of disaster or personal tragedy. I
often observed the relief on people's faces and the general easing of tension when the officers
stepped onto the premises. Many people displayed a level of deference in front of the officers
that is usually only seen in the presence of the "true" professionals such as a doctor's and

11. lawyer's job. In a rural context, this expectation is further exacerbated by the fact that rural
officers are more likely to be "on call" after hours. When officers are out on the road
providing services to patients, they do possess a status shield, which may offer them some
emotional protection. The uniform and the air of authority and command, technical expertise
and the ability to "save" lives, permission to enter any establishment or personal space, and
the permission to touch, all combine to give DPS officers some form of status and authority
in the eyes of the public. While DPS officers may not possess the same degree of shielding as
medical practitioners or lawyers, officers are still in a more
authoritative position than most interactive service workers. The "masculine" nature of
ambulance work also serves to provide an emotional shield in that officers are free to be
masterful, competent and directive towards patients, relatives or bystanders who do not
follow instructions.
In contrast to the flight attendants in Hochschild's (1983) study, there are situations where
ambulance officers can command compliance and co-operation. However, the autonomy that
officers experience on the road can dissipate once they complete their case and come once
again under the "command" of communications and management. Therefore, this status
shield tends to diminish when officers have to switch to backstage militarized masculinities.
Caring masculinities
Most officers referred to the importance of recognising the physical and emotional
vulnerability of patients, and the need to address this in appropriate ways. Officers describe
their occupation as a "caring" one, and many cite this as a component that keeps them in the
job. How they define "care" nearly always involves the ability to empathise with the patient
as well as providing "patient care". Patient care incorporates both emotional and physical
labour, which is similar to James' (1992) definition of care. The differences between the
rational and technical focus of care in the public sphere and the relational focus of care within
the private sphere are clearly gendered. As James explains, while the role of male carers
within the private sphere has been recognised (Ungerson, 1987a, b), the ideology and practice
of caring as symbolic of femininity remains entrenched. For example, this officer indicates
that although he "cares", he is still a man, and does this in a uniquely masculine way:
To me, it comes from my heart ... Provide service with feeling ... as a male I just get this
feeling that you feel strong about things, and once you know that is happening, I don't think
you cannot be genuine ...
The emotional component of care is especially subject to a gendered division of labour.
"Caring about" is considered an essential component of "women's work" within both the
public and private domains. Because this aspect of care involves the practice of emotional
labour, this distinguishes it from "caring for", which involves the physical and organisational
aspects of caring work. While on-road officers may acknowledge that the difference between
caring about and caring for is an important one, the reality is that the heavy emphasis placed
upon technical and physical aspects of ambulance work in training programs means that
officers are trained primarily to "care for
For example, in cases that involve children, male officers are permitted to display a whole
range of emotions in public that they would not otherwise be comfortable doing. The

12. following quote indicates that, in the context of caring for children, officers are freer to
display full range of emotional labour skills:
With jobs involving children, you feel more protective towards them. If they're sick they've
got a life ahead of them and they haven't had a chance.
Within the DPS, the term "care" is particularly ambivalent. The invisibility of the emotional
component of care work contributes significantly to the non-recognition of emotional labour
as a legitimate skill. This does not mean that care work is unrecognised. At the shopfloor
level, officers are quick to point out that care work is a skilled part of their work. DPS
managers and trainers, however, are comfortable with the notion that care work is mainly
physical. This is because this component of care requires the mastery of skills that are easily
measured. Because emotional labour, which is a part of emotional care work, is not easily
quantified, it is therefore dismissed as an essential part of ambulance training curricula.
While it is possible to rectify this omission by changing the curricula, it is much more
difficult to problematise the prevailing gendered ideologies of care. In the case of the DPS,
there exists a considerable amount of ambiguity as to whether an explicit acknowledgement
of male ambulance officers as total carers is warranted. That is, the service is comprised of
men who not only care for, but also care about.
Within the ranks of on-road officers, men in the service equate the term caring with emotion.
Because of this association, male ambulance officers are in a unique ideological, gendered
and cultural position. Caring is generally associated with femininity, privacy and intimacy.
Men who enter female-dominated caring professions are more likely to move up the ranks
and locate themselves in technical and managerial positions (Williams, 1995), thus
reinforcing the notion that the "caring about" work is really a woman's domain.
Therefore, men in the DPS find themselves in an ambiguous position. Through being in the
rare position of doing caring work in a male-dominated occupation, they are located outside
the traditional ideological and economic framework of caring. The public promotion of the
DPS as a "caring" organisation illustrates this clearly, where men are portrayed "caring" for
the sick and injured. However, most official images of ambulance officers very rarely display
officers in nurturing or "feminine" poses with other men, older women, or children. Even
though less than ten per cent of the DPS workforce are women, they figure frequently in
"caring" advertisements and official images of ambulance officers.
Conclusion
Collinson's (1992) work on masculinity and subjectivity in the workplace recognises the
centrality of work as a cultural marker of masculinity, as well as an important site for the
exploration of the interconnections between masculinity, subjectivity and class. However,
Collinson is critical of the "compensation" theory of work (Cockburn, 1983). This theory
suggests that particular kinds of masculinities, such as "macho" identities, develop as a way
of compensating for the "indignities of commodified and controlled manual labour"
(Collinson, 1992, p. 36). If this theory is correct, then compensatory masculinities would
develop in other sites where men are similarly subjected to conditions not of their own
choosing. It is suggested that while individual male workers may lead very rich and fulfilling
emotional lives, they do this in the face of increasing pressure from within both public and
private spheres to act as traditionally hegemonically masculine "men". This expectation is the
basis upon which organisational emotionality is constructed. The ideology of masculinism

13. promotes certain organisational practices that stymie attempts to de-institutionalise
hegemonic patterns of masculinity. This is achieved through a devaluation of emotional
labour and the ensuing emotional process work, and the privileging of "individualised"
responses to emotive dissonance. A collective response to certain kinds of emotionality, in
the case of the DPS, that is, a recognition that men are as emotionally capable of caring for
each other well as patients, is thwarted because it conflicts with the basic tenets of the wider
gender regime - men are not carers, and if they engage in public caring work, they need to
continually reproduce their manhood in a way that disallows a challenge to hegemonic
masculinity. Consequently, the clash between the public "caring" and the private "conviction"
is explained via an analysis of the interrelationships between organisational masculinity and
organisational emotionality.
The ambiguity between what is emotionally acceptable within the frontstage culture of the
DPS and what is not within the backstage culture is fuelled by the notion that men who care
in public are required to engage in backstage compensatory work in order to avoid being
castigated as not quite "man" enough. When officers find themselves in time and space that is
not constitutive of frontstage emotional culture, they are required to conform to masculinist
cultural edicts. One of the main roles of the backstage emotional culture is to ensure that no
slippage occurs from frontstage emotionality and pollutes the wider masculinist culture.
Thus, DPS officers are denied organisational emotional support because of the gendered and
ideological notions of what a backstage male officer should be. However, the DPS relies
heavily upon officers' ability to switch between hegemonically ascendant and subordinate
masculinities as necessary for the kind of emotional labour they perform.
In conclusion, the "Scylla" of frontstage expectations and the "Charybdis" of backstage
realities create competing tensions for DPS officers. In addition to this potential "lose-lose"
predicament in terms of individual organisational identity, the customer's desire for a pure
form of masculinity manifested through miltarized and managerial masculinities contributes
to negation of the existence of multiple masculinities within this organisational context.
[Reference]
References
[Reference]
Acker, 1. (1990), "Hierarchies, jobs, bodies: a theory of gendered organisations", Gender and
Society, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 139-58.
Albrow, M. (1992), "Sine Ira et studio - or do organizations have feelings?", Organization
Studies, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 313-29.
Alvesson, M. (1998), "Gender relations and identity at work: a case study of masculinities
and femininities in the advertising industry", Human Relations, Vol. 51 No. 8, pp. 969-1005.
Ashforth, B.E. and Humphrey, R.H. (1995), "Emotion in the workplace - a reappraisal",
Human Relations, Vol. 48 No. 2, pp. 97-125.
Auten, J.H. (1981), "The paramilitary model of police and police professionalism", Police
Studies, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 67-78.
[Reference]
Barkley, K.T. (1978), The Ambulance: The Story of Emergency Transportation of the Sick
and Wounded Through the Centuries, Exposition, New York, NY.

14. Barrett F.J. (1996), "The organisational construction of masculinity: the case of the US
Navy", Gender, Work and Organization, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 129-42.
Brittan, A (1989), Masculinity and Power, Oxford, Blackwell.
Cockburn, C. (1983), Machinery and Dominance: Women, Men and Technical Know-How,
Pluto, London.
Collinson, D.L. (1992), Managing the Shopfloor Subjectivity, Masculinity and Workplace
Culture, De Gruyter, Berlin, New York, NY.
Collinson, D.L. and Heam, J. (Eds) (1996), Men as Managers, Managers as Men: Critical
Perspectives on Men, Masculinities and Managements, Sage, London, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Connell, R.W. (1987), Gender and Power, Policy Press, Oxford.
[Reference]
Connell, R.W. (1995), Masculinities, Polity Press, Oxford.
Connell, R.W. (2000), The Men and the Boys, Allen and Unwin, Sydney.
Fineman, S. (1993), "Organisations as emotional arenas", in Fineman, S. (Ed.), Emotion in
Organisations, Sage, London, pp. 1-26.
Fineman, S. (2000), "Emotional arenas revisited", in Fineman, S. (Ed.), Emotion in
Organisations, 2nd ed., Sage, London.
Ford, A. (1985), Men, Weiden and Nicolson, London. Goffman, E. (1959), The Presentation
of the Self in Everyday Life, Double Day Anchor Books, New York, NY.
[Reference]
Gordon, S.L. (1984), "The self in emotion interpretation", unpublished paper, University of
California, Los Angeles, CA.
Haller, J.S. (1992), Farmcarts to Fords: a History of the Military Ambulance - 1790-1925,
Southern Illinois University, Southern Illinois, IL.
Heam, J. and Morgan, D. (Eds) (1990), Men, Masculinities and Social Theory, Unwin
Hyman, London. Hochschild, A.R. (1983), The Managed Heart University of
California Press, Berkeley, CA.
Hopton, J. (1999), "Militarism, masculinism and managerialism in the British public sector",
Journal of Gender Studies, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 71-82.
Hosking, D. and Fineman, S. (1990), "Organizing processes", Journal of Management
Studies, Vol. 27 No. 6, pp. 583-604.
[Reference]
Huy, Q. (1999), "Emotional capability, emotional intelligence and radical change", Academy
of Management Review, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 325-45.
Ingham, M. (1984), Men: The Male Myth Exposed, Century, London.
James, N. (1992), "Care = organization + emotional labour", Sociology of Health and Illness,
Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 488-509.
Kerfoot, D. and Knights, D. (1998), "Managing masculinity in contemporary organizational
life: a 'man'agerial project", Organization, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 7-26.
Kilduff, M. (2001), "Hegemonic masculinity and organizational behavior", in Golembiewski,
R.T. (Ed.), Handbook of Organizational Behaviour, 2nd ed., Marcel Decker, New York, NY.
Kimmel, M.S. and Messner, M.A. (1989), Men's Lives, Macmillan, New York, NY.
Mills, A.J. (1998), "Cockpits, hangars, boys and galleys: corporate masculinities and the
development of British Airways", Gender, Work and Organization, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 172-87.

15. Morgan, D.H. (1992), Discovering Men, Routledge, London.
Nixon, S. (1998), "From lads to maverick geniuses: masculinity and creative industries in the
UK
[Reference]
advertising industry", unpublished paper, International Sociological Association.
Sinclair, A. (1998), Doing Leadership Differently: Gender, Power and Sexuality in a
Changing Business, Melbourne University Press, Melbourne.
Ungerson, C. (1 987a), Policy is Personal, Tavistock, London.
Ungerson, C. (1987b), "The life course and informal caring: towards a typology", in Cohen,
G. (Ed.), Social Change and the Life Course, Tavistock, London.
Williams, C. (1995), Still a Man's World: Men Who do "Women's Work", University of
California Press, Berkeley, CA.
[Reference]
Further reading
[Reference]
Fineman, S. (1995), "Stress, emotion and intervention", in Newton, T. (Ed.), Emotion and
Stress: Emotion and Power at Work, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Hearn, J. (1993), "Emotive subjects: organisational man, organisational masculinities and the
(de)construction of 'emotions'", in Fineman, S. (Ed.), Emotions in Organizations, Sage,
London.
[Author
Affiliation]
The author
[Author Affiliation]
Maree V. Boyle is a Lecturer, School of Management, University of Queensland, Brisbane,
Queensland, Australia.