Research note
Visible body modification (VBM): evidence from human resource managers and recruiters and the effects on employment

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2004.12.004Get rights and content

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to measure the perceptions of hospitality industry human resource managers and recruiters of interviewees with visible tattoos and body piercings. A questionnaire was sent via e-mail to 37 human resource managers and college recruiters, which contained a single open-ended question regarding tattoos and piercing, for the purpose of obtaining some baseline data on their impact on employment. Thirty (81.08%) of the human resource managers and recruiters responded with the majority (86.67%) saying that visible tattoos and body piercings on an interviewee would be viewed negatively by their organization.

References (10)

  • J. Adler

    Living canvas

    Newsweek

    (1999)
  • J. Gardner

    Ink-stained wretches

    National Review

    (2000)
  • Gibbons, T., 2003. Body art gains popularity as form of expression, but it's not quite mainstream. Knight Ridder...
  • Girion, L., 2000. Pierced, dyed, tattooed—and hired. The Los Angeles Times (Home edition). September 24, p....
  • M. Ligos

    Does image matter?

    Sales and Marketing Management

    (2001)
There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (35)

  • Hospitality aesthetic labor management: Consumers’ and prospective employees’ perspectives of hospitality brands

    2020, International Journal of Hospitality Management
    Citation Excerpt :

    As a major component of a firm’s branding strategy, aesthetic labor practices help hospitality companies achieve a desired corporate image (Witz et al., 2003). An array of hospitality service brands, from high-class luxury hotels (e.g., Ritz Carlton; Sherman, 2007) to exciting tourism organizations (e.g., Disney; Bryman, 1999; Houston and Meamber, 2011) and companies providing consumers their daily coffee (e.g., Starbucks; Swanger, 2006), have adopted policies regarding line-level aesthetic labor practices (Efthymiou, 2018; Luoh and Tsaur, 2009; Korczynski and Ott, 2004; Tsaur et al., 2015; Tsaur and Tang, 2013). Despite ample managerial interest, the topic of aesthetic labor has garnered relatively little attention in the contemporary hospitality management literature.

  • Deviance, deviant behaviour and hospitality management: Sources, forms and drivers

    2019, Tourism Management
    Citation Excerpt :

    Customers who do not use words like ‘please’ may be seen by staff as rude, even though this may actually stem from the absence or differing use of such terms in certain languages (see e.g. Doerr, 2013). Cultural practices regarding clothing, tattoos, piercings and other forms of body modification, including the use of makeup and perfumes may be seen as contravening the cultural codes and expectations of the hospitality setting between and amongst organisations, their staff and their customers (cf. Brallier, Maguire, Smith, & Palm, 2011; Swanger, 2006). Cross-cultural relationships often cause a range of complications for operators and employees.

  • Worker body-art in upper-market hotels: Neither accepted, nor prohibited

    2018, International Journal of Hospitality Management
    Citation Excerpt :

    Employees with visible tattoos are often seen as disturbances in the consistency of corporate image (Pettinger, 2005). In addition, while front-of-house employees with body-art have lower employment chances (Timming, 2015; Timming et al., 2015; Swanger, 2006), the negative implications are reduced significantly when applicants apply for non-customer-facing positions (Timming et al., 2015). In view of the above, it seems that the emphasis is on front-of-house employees whereby back-of-house workers are somewhere hidden and not expected to generate negative perceptions.

  • A tattooed workforce-still a liability?

    2023, The Emerald Handbook of Appearance in the Workplace
View all citing articles on Scopus
View full text