When customers cross the line: how anger and emotional intelligence shape service sabotage

Purpose Frontline service employees are increasingly exposed to customer aggression, yet existing research continues to portray emotional intelligence (EI) as an inherently protective personal resource against destructive employee responses. This assumption remains theoretically incomplete, as high EI does not necessarily preclude employees from engaging in service sabotage. Drawing on Frustration–Aggression Theory (FAT) and Affective Events Theory (AET), this study aims to examine employee anger as the emotional mechanism linking customer aggression to service sabotage, while investigating whether EI consistently functions as a protective resource. Design/methodology/approach Multisource data were collected from 267 employees and 25 supervisors working in 25 five-star hotels in Vietnam. Employees provided information on customer aggression, anger and EI, while supervisors assessed employees’ service sabotage. To reduce potential bias, social desirability was controlled for in both employee and supervisor responses. The hypotheses were tested using partial least squares structural equation modeling with SmartPLS 4.1.1.8. Findings Customer aggression increased employee anger, which, in turn, promoted service sabotage. More importantly, the findings challenge the dominant “EI-as-panacea” perspective. Instead, EI may function as a double-edged resource: although it weakens both the direct effect of anger on service sabotage and the indirect effect of customer aggression on service sabotage through anger, it does not necessarily eliminate retaliatory tendencies among employees with high levels of EI. Research limitations/implications Findings should be interpreted in light of the study’s cross-sectional design and its focus on luxury hotels in Vietnam. Future research should examine whether the proposed relationships generalize across other service settings and use longitudinal design to capture the dynamic evolution of customer aggression, employee anger and service sabotage over time. Practical implications Organizations should reduce employees’ exposure to customer aggression through clear organizational policies and timely managerial intervention, provide anger-management and emotion-regulation training following aggressive customer encounters and treat EI as a capability that requires organizational support rather than a universal solution by simultaneously leveraging its protective benefits and mitigating its unintended risks. Originality/value This study contributes to service research in three important ways. First, it challenges the prevailing assumption that EI is an inherently protective personal resource by demonstrating that its influence on service sabotage is more complex than previously assumed. Second, by integrating FAT and AET, the study explains why highly emotionally intelligent employees may engage in more sophisticated forms of sabotage. Third, the study strengthens the validity and credibility of its findings by using multisource data to reduce common method bias and controlling for social desirability bias.