emotional intelligence&leadership

8/13/2019 Emotional Intelligence&Leadership

1/194

NOTE TO USERS

Page(s) missing in number only; text fol lows. Themanuscript was microfi lmed as received.

VIII

This reproduction is the best copy available.


2/194


3/194

THE RELATIONSHIP OF EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE AND

TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP BEHAVIOR IN NON-PROFIT EXECUTIVE

LEADERS

by

Cheryl L. Meredith

CLIFFORD BUTLER, PhD., Faculty Mentor and Chair

NANCY S. BOSTAIN, PhD., Committee Member

DAVID MULLIGAN, PsyD., Committee Member

Kurt Linberg, Ph.D., Dean, School of Business & Technology

A Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment

Of the Requirements for the Degree

Doctor of Philosophy

Capella University

December 2007


4/194

UMI Number: 3290654

3290654

2008

UMI Microform

Copyright

All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against

unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.

ProQuest Information and Learning Company300 North Zeeb Road

P.O. Box 1346

Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1346

by ProQuest Information and Learning Company.


5/194

i

Cheryl L. Meredith, 2007


6/194

ii

Abstract

What characterizes an effective leader? Are there qualities of effective leaders that could

be used in developmental processes for new emerging leaders? This study seeks to

address these questions by examining the relationship between emotional intelligence and

leadership styles among executives leading in non-profit, faith-based organizations based

in Colorado. A general questionnaire gathered demographic data related to the perceived

importance of basic quality of life and leadership qualities. The Multifactor Leadership

Questionnaire (MLQ Form 5X) developed by Avolio and Bass examined the leaders

self-reported leadership style. Transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire

leadership styles were compared with scores on the BarOn Emotional Quotient Inventory

Test (EQ-i). Statistical cluster analysis demonstrated a strong relationship between

transformational leadership behaviors and emotional intelligence. In addition, linear

regression analysis revealed that five components of emotional intelligence accounted for

over half of the variation in transformational leadership behavior. The five were:

optimism, self-actualization, empathy, problem solving, and assertiveness. All but

empathy scored higher than the general population. The study findings suggest that

developing these five areas in executive leaders could increase the likelihood of the use

of transformational leadership behaviors. Transformational leadership has been studied

extensively and been shown to positively affect organizations. Further study would be

needed to demonstrate the breadth of possible application, but it is worthy of

consideration that a focus on developing emotional intelligence could result in increased

transformational leadership behaviors, positively influencing an organization.


7/194

iii

Dedication

To my familyboth those of blood and spirit; you make me who I am.


8/194

iv

Acknowledgments

There are so many that I wish to thank. Coming to the place of submitting this

study has been a culmination of so many peoples love and support. You know who you

are. You know how deeply I value and appreciate your roles in my life. I am so much

richer for walking this journey with you. We are writing the story together, and wow, is it

beautiful to live lives interwoven with you!

A handful of people must be thanked by name. Alan, you made this opportunity

possible, I am forever grateful. Thanks for being someone committed to seeing those

around you grow and flourish. Bob, your help with design and statistics was invaluable.

Thanks for your patience, grace, and your gift of hope. Your encouragement helped me

believe the finish line would come. Judie, you helped make these words readable. Your

incredible commitment to detail and excellence is seen on every page. Bless you! And

last, those who were first; Mom and Dad, thank-you for being my preeminent and most

enduring taste of love, grace, and hope. You have given me the greatest gift possible in

your example of so generously laying down your lives so that others may live and

flourish. Your lives resonate into eternity. I am most blessed!


9/194

v

Table of Contents

Acknowledgements iv

List of Tables ix

List of Figures xi

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1

Introduction to the Problem 1

Background of the Study 3

Statement of the Problem 6

Rationale 7

Research Questions 8

Significance of the Study 9

Definition of Terms 9

Assumptions and Limitations 12

Nature of the Study 13

Organization of the Remainder of the Study 14

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 15

Introduction 15

Origins of Emotional Intelligence 15

An Overview of the History of EI 16

Is EI A Distinctive Construct? 37

Critique of EI Models 39


10/194

vi

History of Transaction and Transformational Leadership 44

Leadership and Organizational Culture 49

Possible Future Considerations 63

Summary 64

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY 65

Introduction to Methodology 65

Research Design 66

Assumptions and Limitations 76

Ethical Considerations 78

Conclusion 79

CHAPTER FOUR: DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS 80

Introduction 80

Descriptive Statistics 81

Statistical Analysis 99

Qualitative Data 105

Comparison with Construction Executives 112

Summary 116

CHAPTER FIVE: RESULTS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS 117

Introduction 117

Study Overview 117

Findings 119

Comparison with Construction Executives 131


11/194

vii

Implications 135

Study Limitations 137

Recommendations for Further Study and Research 139

Conclusions 144

REFERENCES 145

APPENDICES 161

Appendix A: General Questionnaire 161

Appendix B: Sample List of Organizations 164

Appendix C: Study Website Screen Shots 165

Appendix D: Job Responsibility 170

Appendix E: Job Contribution 174

Appendix F: Greatest Challenge 179


12/194

ix

List of Tables

Table 1: Position by Gender 81

Table 2: Years in Position, with Organization, with Non-Profits 82

Table 3: Education 82

Table 4: Descriptive Statistics: EI and Components 84

Table 5: Descriptive Statistics: MLQ and Components 86

Table 6: Time for Presidents and CEOs in Organization and Position 87

Table 7: Education Level of Presidents and CEOs 87

Table 8: Average Age of Presidents and CEOs by Gender 88

Table 9: EQ-i Scores of Presidents and CEOs 89

Table 10: Comparison of Presidents/CEOs EQ-i scores with the Study Population 90

Table 11: MLQ Scores of Presidents and CEOs 92

Table 12: Education of Senior VPs and VPs 93

Table 13: Service Times of Senior VPs and VPs 93

Table 14: Average Age of Senior VPs and VPs by Gender 94

Table 15: EQ Descriptive Statistics for Senior VPs and VPs 95

Table 16: Comparison of EQ Scores of Presidents/CEOs and Senior VPs/VPs 97

Table 17: MLQ Scores of Senior VPs and VPs: Descriptive Data 98

Table 18: Comparison of MLQ Scores by Presidents/CEOs and Senior VPs/VPs 99

Table 19: Average EQ-i scores by Transformational Leadership Cluster 101

Table 20: EQ-i Versus Transformational Leadership 103


13/194

x

Table 21: Correlation Coefficients 105

Table 22: Life Issues Responses 106

Table 23: Rescoring of life assessment issues, positive questions 106

Table 24: Rescoring of life assessment issues, negative questions 107

Table 25: Averages of life assessment issues 107

Table 26: Life Issues Responses (rescored) 108

Table 27: Life Issues by President/CEOs, Non-Presidents, and Total 109

Table 28: Total Life Issue Scores 110

Table 29: Comparison of Non-Profit Executives and Construction Executives on EI 113

Table 30: Comparison of Non-Profit Executives and Construction Executives !MLQ 114

Table 31: Comparison of Means of Non-profit and Construction Executives 115


14/194

xi

List of Figures

Figure 1: Models of Emotional Intelligence 20

Figure 2: Three Models of Emotional Intelligence 23

Figure 3: Personality and Its Major Subsystems 38

Figure 4: BarOns EQ-i Components 73

Figure 5: Cluster Analysis For Transformational Leadership 100

Figure 6: Scatter Diagram Transformational Leadership versus EQ-I 102


15/194

1

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION

Introduction to the Problem

Leadership qualities and what makes a good leader have taken center stage in

much of current business dialogue. Concurrently, emotional intelligence (EI) has caught

the popular imagination and has emerged as a skill set that enhances leadership.

Emotional intelligence at its essence is the ability to use and manage ones own emotions

and the ability to understand and use the emotions of others. Numerous claims have been

made concerning the impact of this kind of intelligence on a vast array of life areas.

Within the business context leadership behaviors are studied to discover what is

most effective. Transformational leadership behaviors, including those behaviors that

inspire and motivate followers, have been extensively studied. A characteristic of

transformational leaders is that they challenge followers to align their contribution to

their passions and to offer their highest potential to the organization. Transformational

leadership behaviors have been demonstrated to positively impact organizational success

more than transactional and laisse-faire leadership behaviors.

This study has considered if there is a relationship between EI and the leadership

styles used by non-profit executives. The selected population is executives in faith-based,

non-profit organizations. The results of this study can be used to help to better equip


16/194

2

executive leaders for the future. A key issue is identifying future leaders for non-profit,

faith-based organizations, who can respond to the needs of a rapidly shifting culture. This

study has sought to meet this pressing need by asking a series of questions designed to

discover if there is a relationship between emotional intelligence and the use of a

transformational leadership style by non-profit executives. A description of an

emotionally intelligent executive leading in a faith-based non-profit context is proposed.

The findings are compared with the first in-depth, single industry research on the topic,

conducted on construction executives (Butler, 2005). The population of the construction

study provides a backdrop of comparison and possible contrast.

Some of the specific questions addressed in the study include:

1. What is the EI composition of non-profit executives?2. Is there a relationship between the emotional intelligence of non-profit

executives and their preferred leadership style?

3. Is there a difference between EQ-i score and choice of leadershipapproaches of non-profit executives with those of construction executives?

If there are specific EI qualities related to increased transformational leadership in

executives, then the literature suggests that the skills to become a better executive could

be developed. The specific EI theory I will use breaks EI into 15 components which,

when focused upon, can increase emotional intelligence. Further, if there is a relationship

between EI and with the executives use of more effective leadership behaviors, then


17/194

3

developing these EI qualities should increase overall leadership effectiveness. These

finding could also be used in the creation of leader development processes for the future.

Background of the Study

Emotional intelligence burst into the public consciousness with Golemans (1995)

bestselling bookEmotional Intelligence,and the provocative question, why it can matter

more than IQ? His book began an avalanche of interest in the influence of emotional

intelligence. He claimed emotional intelligence is a far greater predictor of success than

ones intellectual intelligence (IQ) (Bar-On & Parker, 2002). Its focus on both intellect

and emotions combined with the advances in cognitive and affective science offer

intertwining perspectives from which to study how people navigate their lives (Grewal

& Salovey, 2005, p. 339). Emotional intelligence brings together head and heart,

marrying intellect and emotions. The two have sometimes appeared at opposite ends of a

behavioral continuum. Throughout much of history this dichotomy in western

philosophical traditionspredated modern psychology, and reason and intellect were

viewed as opposing forces to supposedly non-rational phenomena like passion, intuition,

feeling, and emotions (Matthews, Zeidner, & Roberts, 2004, p. 81).

Theorists had long been interested in what has now come to be called emotional

intelligence. At various historic points, emotions were viewed as dangerous and

unpredictable and therefore not to be trusted. Stoic philosophers stratified this division,

elevating logic above emotion. Mayer, in hisField Guide to Emotional Intelligence(EI or


18/194

4

EQ), admits that philosophically the relationship between the mind and emotions, the

head and the heart, has spanned more than 2000 years of Western culture (as cited in

Grewal & Salovey, 2005). Similarly, Bar-On (2001) places EI in a broad context

recognizing the contribution of Charles Darwin, who began his study in 1837 and

published related work in 1872. Darwins demonstration of the major role of emotional

expression in adaptive behavior continues as an important axiom of todays conception of

EI. Leuner first mentioned emotional intelligence in a 1966 German article translated

Emotional Intelligence and Emancipation (as cited in Matthews, Zeidner, & Roberts,

2004; Mayer, Salovey, & Caruso, 2000). The first English usage came years later is in an

unpublished doctoral dissertation by Payne (1986; as cited in Matthews, et al.; Ciarrochi,

Fogas, & Mayer, 2001). It is against the backdrop of this long debate about passion and

reason, and perhaps because of it, that the reuniting of head and heart in EI theory has

struck such a cord with academics and the general population.

Emotional intelligence is defined as an array of non-cognitive capabilities,

competencies, and skills that influence ones ability to succeed in coping with

environmental demands and pressures (Bar-On, 1997c, p.2). EI is believed to directly

relate to ones ability to succeed in life and to influence an overall sense of psychological

well-being (Bar-On). The genesis of the theory now known as BarOns EQ-i began when

Reuven Bar-On asked Why do some people succeed in possessing better emotional

well-being than others? This gradually evolved into the question Why are some

individuals more able to succeed in life than others? The resulting research led to Bar-


19/194

5

Ons creation of the first defined theory of emotional intelligence. Bar-Ons model has

five categories that are each divided into subscales. The first category, intrapersonal

skills, includes self-regard, emotional self-awareness, assertiveness, independence, and

self-actualization. The second category, interpersonal skills, is broken into empathy,

social responsibility, and interpersonal relationship. The third category is adaptability,

includes reality testing, flexibility, and problem solving. Stress management is divided

into stress tolerance and impulse control. Finally, the fifth category, general mood,

involves optimism and happiness. These components combine to create a theory that is

multifactorial and related to potential for performance rather than performance itself and

is process-oriented rather than outcome-oriented (Bar-On, 1997b, p.3). The BarOn EQ-i

operationally defines and quantitatively describes emotional intelligence. The 15

components can be isolated or dealt with in combination. This allows for a description to

be developed of a particular subject or population, in this case executives leading in non-

profit, faith-based organizations. Once this is created, the skills of emotional intelligence

can be developed thus increasing ones EI. In addition, individuals can be trained in the

elements of EI needed for a particular role or function.

Emotional intelligence includes an array of skills and behaviors that many non-

profit leaders in faith-based organizations would say they value. Very little study has

been done to create a specific portrait of this group of executives. Extensive research has

demonstrated that transformational leadership behaviors increase organizational

effectiveness (Bass, 1999b). To date there has not been a body of study in these areas


20/194

6

focused on this population. The study will form the basis of a leader development plan to

be used with non-profit executives particularly those leading in faith-based organizations.

Statement of the Problem

The literature review provides evidence that transformational leadership increases

organizational effectiveness and that emotional intelligence can be measured and

developed. If there is a relationship between emotional intelligence and transformational

leadership, leaders can be helped to grow in emotionally intelligent behaviors that will

expand and build their leadership ability. If there are particular qualities of an

emotionally intelligent executive in a non-profit, faith-based organization, then the

development of these characteristics can be built into ongoing succession and

development plans. Also, if there are areas of consistently low emotional intelligence,

further study could consider why this is the case and means created to address and build

the specific competencies. Faith-based organizations typically align themselves to values

congruent with their particular beliefs. The credibility of these leaders rests in their ability

to act consistently with their words, to live what they say they believe. Increasingly

questions are raised when a gap is seen between the stated values of these organizations

and how their members and particularly their leaders behave. Many characteristics of

emotional intelligence and transformational leadership behaviors align with values

espoused in faith-based, non-profit organizations. If there is a relationship between these,

there is a possible means to increase alignment to organizational values. There is a great


21/194

7

need for a new generation of leaders to be developed within the non-profit sector of faith-

based organizations. What are the characteristics of these leaders and how can they be

developed? The hope behind the questions of this study is that they may lead to some of

the answers to respond to this pressing need.

Rationale

Emotional Intelligence provides a series of skills that can be developed.

Transformational leadership is a type of leadership that has demonstrated effectiveness to

help build organizations. If there is a relationship between these two, then it is reasonable

to believe that leaders can develop the skills to grow in emotionally intelligent behaviors

leading to increasingly transformational styles of leadership behavior. Many of these

actions strongly align with the values of faith-based organizations and could increase a

leaders effectiveness in authentically modeling desired outcomes. This study will

investigate these questions and compare the non-profit executives in faith-based

organizations with the general population and with a similar study focused on

construction executives. This research may provide further areas of discussion and

development for tomorrows executive leaders.


22/194

8

Research Questions

The focus of the research is the following question: What is the relationship

between emotional intelligence and transformational leadership in non-profit executives?

Investigative Questions:

The following investigative questions are addressed in the study:

1. What is the EI composition of non-profit executives?2. Is there a relationship between the emotional intelligence of non-profit

executives and their preferred leadership style?

3. Is there a difference between EQ-i score and choice of leadershipapproaches of non-profit executives with those of construction executives?

Null Hypotheses:

The following are the research hypotheses:

H01. There is no difference in leadership behaviors between non-profit

executives with high EI scores with those having low EI scores

H02. Non-profit executives with higher EI scores do not demonstrate

more transformational leadership behaviors than those with low EI scores

H03. Non-profit executives with lower EI scores do not demonstrate a

greater propensity to use transactional and laissez-faire leadership behaviors

H04. Non-profit executive leaders and construction executives have no

differences in their EI scores


23/194

9

H05. Non-profit executive leaders and construction executives have no

difference in their use of transformational leadership behaviors on the MLQ 5X

Significance of the Study

This study is one of only four studies to consider a relationship between EI and

transformational leadership using BarOns EQ-i and the Multifactor Leadership

Questionnaire. The study will further the research done on construction executives

(Butler, 2005) by asking this question and seeing if there are similarities or differences in

the populations. The study will be formative in the development of a leader development

process for non-profit executives in the researchers organization.

Definition of Terms

Emotional Intelligence

Emotional intelligence is an array of non-cognitive capabilities, competencies and

skills that influence ones ability to succeed in coping with environmental demands and

pressures (Bar-On, 1997a). This definition was operationalized in the BarOn Emotional

Quotient Inventory Test (EQ-i), which was described earlier. This test was selected for

the study because it breaks EI into five major areas with fifteen subcomponents.

Leadership Behaviors

There are many definitions of leadership, but one of the most extensively studied

and highly validated is transformational leadership. This model of leadership is the basis


24/194

10

of the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire. (MLQ Form 5X) The questionnaire is

derived from the model developed by Avolio and Bass, (2004) which grew out of the

work initially conceived by Burns. The early model included transformational and

transactional leadership; later laissez-faire leadership was added to complete the

continuum for the current test (Avolio & Bass, 2004). Each of these leadership behaviors

will be briefly defined here and discussed later in greater detail later in the study.

Transformational Leadership

Transformational Leadership concerns a focused attempt to arouse awareness and

interest in the organization while seeking to increase the confidence of the individuals or

groups. There is an emphasis on moving with subordinates from merely existing and

producing, to promoting their growth and unique contributions (Gardner & Stough,

2002). The five factors of transformational leadership include: idealized influence

attributed, idealized influence behavior, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation,

and individual consideration (Avolio & Bass, 2004).

Transactional Leadership

Transactional leadership refers to the exchange relationship between leader and

follower to meet their own self-interests. This leadership expression may take the form of

contingent reward and or management by exception that is either active or passive

(Avolio & Bass, 2004).


25/194

11

Laissez-faire Leadership

Laissez-faire leaders avoid taking responsibility; they fail to follow up on requests

for assistance, tend to be absent when required and resist expressing opinions on

important issues (Avolio & Bass, 2002).

Executive Leader

For the purpose of this study executives are those holding leadership roles in the

organizations at the Director, Vice President, Senior Vice President, President, and CEO

level.

Faith-based, non-profit organizations

Faith-based, non-profit organizations are found in the volunteer sector and are

distinguished by the descriptors in the title. They are in the not-for-profit sector and

identify with a particular faith orientation. The work of these organizations cross are a

wide array of activities and usually has a focus of helping people socially, emotional, and

or spiritually. Such organizations fall under Internal Revenue Code Section 501(c)(3) and

encompass the following types of organizations that are exempt from federal income

taxation: religious, charitable, educational, scientific, literary, etc. organizations. Many of

the organizations that qualify for exempt status share the following characteristics: the

organization serves some type of common good, it is not a for-profit entity, its net

earnings do not benefit the members of the organization, and the organization does not

exert political influence. The Internal Revenue Code is a compilation of federal tax

legislation that appears in Title 26 of the U.S. Code. Within the range of these


26/194

12

organizations the researcher further limited the sample to those 501(c)(3) organizations

that consider themselves to hold a Christian faith-based worldview.

Assumptions and Limitations

Cost

The cost of the study has been kept to a minimum through the use of technology,

including the Internet and e-mail. One mailing was sent to invite participants to join the

study. Prior to this mailing a postcard was sent to alert subjects of the upcoming study

and all subsequent communication were by e-mail.

Accessibility

The choice of non-profit executives leading in faith-based organizations was

driven by the possibility of access. This is a population that the researcher is a member of

in her professional role. Additionally, the researchers organization is well known within

these types of organizations. A further factor promoting access is the researchers

membership in a senior executive roundtable with human resource executives in

Colorados largest non-profit, faith-based organizations. These executives agreed to

encourage the leaders in their organizations to participate.


27/194

13

Time

Time was a limitation in the study. The researcher, like most executives, has

extensive work responsibilities and understands that the executives participating in the

study may have limited time to respond. The researcher considered the time to complete

the instrument to be less than one hour. Even this is substantial time for an executive

leader to give to the study. The use of the Internet is another time saving element of the

research design. The research was conducted on a website specifically designed for the

study. Participants clicked the e-mail they received and went directly to the study

website. This saved time and decreased the likelihood of difficulties in finding the study

website. A further timesaving element existed in the ability of the researcher to send

reminder e-mails to the subjects.

Nature of the Study

Quantitative research techniques were used to compare the emotional intelligence

(EI) of non-profit executives in faith-based organizations and their leadership behaviors.

A questionnaire gathered demographic data and asked questions related to the leaders

role. BarOns EQ-I tested for emotional intelligence and the leadership style was assessed

using Basss MLQ 5X leadership questionnaire. A description of an emotionally

intelligent, non-profit executive in faith-based organizations will be suggested. Findings

were compared with the general population and a similar study done on construction

executives (Butler, 2005).


28/194

14

Organization of the Remainder of the Study

The study has been set within the body of literature of emotional intelligence and

transformational leadership in Chapter 2. An outline of the research methodology is

presented in Chapter 3. Findings are reported in Chapter 4. The final chapter, Chapter 5,

includes conclusions and recommendations for further study.


29/194

15

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW

Introduction

Emotional intelligence is one of the most discussed topics in both scientific and

popular literature (Averill, 2004, p. 228). Its focus on both head and heart combined

with the advances in cognitive and affective science offer intertwining perspectives from

which to study how people navigate their lives (Grewal & Salovey, 2005, p. 339). An

overview of this theory will be critiqued. A second body of literature focused on how

people choose to lead others and the leadership behaviors they employ will then be

outlined and analyzed. Transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire leadership will

be the major categories discussed.

Origins of Emotional Intelligence

The popularity of emotional intelligence has exponentially increased in recent

years (Matthews, Zeidner, & Roberts, 2004). The relationship between heart and head,

thinking and emotions, and reason and passion, has been debated across the history of

humanity. Emotional intelligence brings these two together, marrying intellect and

emotions. The two have sometimes appeared at opposite ends of a behavioral continuum.

Throughout much of history this dichotomy in western philosophical traditions


30/194

16

predated modern psychology, and viewed reason and intellect as opposing forces to

supposedly non-rational phenomena like passion, intuition, feeling, and emotions

(Matthews, Zeidner, & Roberts, 2004, p. 81). At various historic points, emotions were

viewed as dangerous and unpredictable and therefore not to be trusted. Stoic philosophers

stratified this division, elevating logic above emotion (Grewal & Salovey, 2005). It is

against this backdrop, and perhaps because of it, that the reuniting of head and heart in EI

theory has struck such a cord with academics and the general population. The theory

finds its roots in a long debate about passion and reason, but for the purposes of this

discussion, the more recent elements shaping the development of EI theory will be the

focus.

An Overview of the History of EI

Mayer (2001), in hisField Guide to Emotional Intelligence(EI or EQ) admits that

philosophically the relationship between the mind and emotions, the heart and the head,

have spanned more than 2000 years of Western culture. Similarly, Bar-On (2001) seeks

to place EI in a broad context recognizing the contribution of Charles Darwin, who began

his study in 1837 and published related work in 1872. Darwins demonstration of the

major role of emotional expression in adaptive behavior continues as an important axiom

of todays conception of EI.

Against this vast backdrop, Mayer (2001) clustered the most recent evolution of

emotional intelligence theory into five eras. In period one, 1900-1969, intelligence and


31/194

17

emotions were considered distinct and separate fields. During period two, 1970-1989, the

precursors of emotional intelligence were identified. From 1990-1993 emotional

intelligence emerged as an identifiable area of focus. The construct was then substantially

broadened and popularized between 1994-1997. In the final period, continuing from that

point until today, Mayer identifies a period of extensive research and the

institutionalization of the construct of emotional intelligence.

Thorndike and Wechsler

Filling in Mayers overview, most theorists agree that Robert Thorndike (1920),

was the first to delineate various elements to intelligence, including three forms:

mechanical, abstract and social. Social Intelligence was defined as the capacity to

understand and to manage others, and to act wisely in interpersonal relationships.

Thorndike, Bergman, Cobb, and Woodyard (1926), mentioned the possibility that people

have social intelligence- the ability to perceive their own and others internal states,

motivation, and behavior, and act accordingly. Once Thorndike delineated social

intelligence, he launched a twenty-year endeavor to measure this dimension of

intelligence. Finally, in exasperation, he expressed doubt that a verbally derived

instrument could be developed to measure social intelligence (Zirkel, 2000).

A few years following this admission, Wechsler, in 1940, concurred with

Thorndikes belief that there are non-intellectual factors, such as affective and cognitive

abilities that should be included in the measure of total intelligence. The study of social

intelligence gradually shifted away from assessing behavior to linking behavior in the


32/194

18

social context and the individuals understanding of that social context, while

prioritizing their potential for change and adaptability (Zirkel, 2000, p. 5). Key theorists

giving definition to social intelligence include Kelly, Rogers, Rotter, Corbach, Cantor,

and Kihlstrom (Zirkel, 2000). It is Bar-Ons (2001) conviction that what has evolved into

todays versions of emotional intelligence is one and the same with the construct of social

intelligence. His preference would be to refer to the wider construct as emotional and

social intelligence (Bar-On, 2001 p. 85).

First Use of Emotional Intelligence

Leuner first mentioned emotional intelligence formally in a 1966 German article

with the English translation of Emotional Intelligence and Emancipation. The author

studied women separated from their mothers at an early age, and hypothesized that due to

the resultant low emotional intelligence, they tended to reject their social roles. (as cited

in Matthews, Zeidner, & Roberts, 2004; Mayer, Salovey et al., 2000; Mayer, Salovey, &

Caruso, 2000) Emotional intelligence is believed to be first used in English, in an

unpublished doctoral dissertation by Payne (1985; as cited in Matthews, et al.; Ciarrochi,

Fogas, & Mayer, 2001) With the current level of interest in emotional intelligence, this

may be the most quoted, never published, dissertation in academic history (Matthews et

al.)!

Gardner

Gardner seizes the concept of social and emotional intelligence to develop a

theory of multiple intelligences (Ciarrochi, Fogas, & Mayer, 2001). His theoretical


33/194


34/194

20

Figure 1. Models of Emotional Intelligence (as adapted from Vitello-Cicciu, 2001)

The two main groupings of EI theory, as either ability models or mixed models

continues until today. At their essence, all theories of EI deal with the ability to regulate

emotions in oneself and in others in various ways (Goleman, 2001 p. 14). Within the

ability model, emotional intelligence is intelligence that is defined and measured as a set

of testable abilities. This is in contrast to mixed conceptions that combine personality


35/194

21

character and social skills. Mayer and Salovey believe restricting EI to an ability model,

focused on the emotionally related processes, allows for a purer examination of the

degree to which EI impacts a persons behavior, beyond the traditional elements of

personality (Salovey, Brackett, & Mayer, 2004). This contrasts with the mixed model

theorists who believe EI arises from diverse roots and can only be fully described and

assessed with a broader range of elements.

Mixed Methods combine a variety of components including personality, skills,

and emotional competencies. Golemans original model had five major components for

personal competencies. These determine how individuals will manage themselves. They

included: 1. self-awareness: knowing ones internal states, preferences, resources, and

intuitions, 2. self-regulation: managing ones internal states, impulses and resources, 3.

motivation: emotional tendencies that guide or facilitate reaching goals. 4. empathy:

awareness of others feelings, needs and concerns, and finally 5. social skills: being adept

at inducing desirable responses in others (Goleman, 1995, 1998, 2001, 2002).

As Golemans theory evolved, he divided the competencies into personal and

social competencies. Self-awareness and self-management considered a persons ability

to understand their own emotions and manage or control them. The social competencies

included social awareness such as empathy, organizational awareness, and service; and

relational management, including some elements such as inspirational leadership,

influence, change catalyst, and conflict management (Goleman, 2002). A number of

similarities exist with the mixed model created by (Cooper & Sawaf, 1997). This


36/194

22

construct includes the four cornerstones of 1. emotional literacy: being real or true to

ones self, 2. emotional fitness: being clear and getting along, 3. emotional depth:

character and influence, and finally, 4. emotional alchemy: sensing opportunities and

creating a future. This model also combines emotions with character traits and

motivational aspects.

Both Goleman (2002) and Cooper and Sawaf (1997) have a high value on

recognizing emotions as a signal informing a person of some significant occurrence in or

around them. The authors have a high value on taking responsibility for ones emotions

and learning to manage them. In fact, this is also seen as a core competency in Golemans

model.

The following figure, Figure 2, compares two mixed-models and one ability-

model, demonstrating the similarities and differences between them. Each of these

models contains the common area of identifying and managing emotions. Similarly, the

ability to recognize emotions in others and apply them is seen in all of the models. The

way qualities are described varies and may be broken into more categories, but these

elements are present in each of the three models. There are also a number of differences

in the models. Mayer & Salovey (1997), as well as Bar-on (2001), specifically highlight

how emotions can be used in productive thinking and problem solving. In the first model

there is an identified area of assimilating emotions in thought, while in the later model

these elements are found in the adaptability scale.


37/194

23

Mayer & SaloveyAbility Model

Bar-OnMixed Model

GolemanMixed Model

Overall Definition Overall Definition Overall DefinitionEmotional intelligence is the set

of abilities that account for how

peoples emotional perception and

understanding vary in theiraccuracy. More formally, we

define emotional intelligence asthe ability to perceive and expressemotion, assimilate emotion in

thought, understand and reason

with emotion, and regulate

emotion in the self and others.

Mayer & Salovey (1997)

Emotional intelligence isan

array of non-cognitive

capabilities, competencies, and

skills that influence ones abilityto succeed in coping with

environmental demands andpressures. Bar-On (1997)

The abilities called here

emotional intelligence, which

include self-control, zeal and

persistence, and the ability tomotivate oneself. There is an

old-fashioned word for the bodyof skills that emotionalintelligence represents:

character. Goleman, (1995a)

Major areas of Skills and

Specific Skills


Specific Skills


Specific SkillsPerception and Expression of

Emotion:

* Identifying and expressing

emotions in ones physical

states, feelings, and thoughts.

* Identifying and expressingemotions in other people,

artwork, language, etc.

Assimilating Emotion in

Thought:* Emotions prioritize thinking in

productive ways.

* Emotions generate aids to

judgment and memory.

Understanding and Analyzing

Emotion:

* Ability to label emotions andsimultaneous feelings.

* Ability to understand

relationships associated with

shifts of emotion.Reflective Regulation of

Emotion:* Ability to stay open to feelings

* Ability to reflectively monitor

and regulate emotions.

Intrapersonal Skills:

* Emotional self-awareness,

* Assertiveness,

* Self-Regard

* Self-Actualization,

* Independence

Interpersonal Skills:

* Interpersonal Relationships

* Social Responsibility* Empathy

Adaptability Scales:

* Problem Solving

* Reality Testing

* Flexibility

Stress-Management Scales:

* Stress Tolerance

* Impulse

* Control

General Mood:* Happiness

* Optimism

Knowing Ones Emotions:

* Recognizing a feeling as it

happens

* Monitoring feelings from

moment to moment

Managing Emotions* Handling feelings so they are

appropriate, ability to soothe

oneself, ability to shake off

rampant anxiety, gloom, orirritability

Motivating Oneself:

* Marshalling emotions in the

service of a goal.

* Delaying gratification and

stifling impulsiveness, being

able to get into the flow stateRecognizing Emotions in Others:

*Empathic awareness and

attunement to what others need

or wantHandling Relationships:

* Skill in managing emotions inothers.

* Interacting smoothly with

others

Figure 2. Three Models of Emotional Intelligence


38/194

24

The Popularization of Emotional Intelligence

Golemans name (1995) will be forever linked with the concept of emotional

intelligence. His bestselling bookEmotional Intelligence(EI) asked on the cover Why it

(EI) can matter more than IQ? His claim that emotional intelligence is a far greater

predictor of success than ones intellectual intelligence (IQ) captured the worlds

imagination (Bar-On & Parker, 2002). His book quickly became a bestseller and began

an avalanche of interest in emotional intelligences influence. In the midst of this

popularity, EI miscellaneous applications have earned it the scholars dubious

designation of being the most protean of all psychological constructs, a virtual tower

of Babel and a present day zeitgeist (Matthews, Zeidner, & Roberts, 2004, p. 9;

Mayer, Salovey, and Caruso, 2000, p. 92).

There are a number of possible reasons why Goldmans theory struck such a note

of resonance with the general populace. Just prior to the publication ofEmotional

Intelligencethe book The Bell Curve was published(Matthews, Zeidner, & Roberts,

2004; Mayer, Salovey, & Caruso, 2000). Herrnstein and Murrays book touts intelligence

as the best predictor of success. This seemingly pessimistic message of a cognitive elite,

may have laid the groundwork for the immediate acceptance and widespread

embracing of Golemans more utopian, classless society, unconstrained by biological

heritage (Matthews et al., 2004, p. 6, 7). Golemans theory brought the hope of an

intelligence that could be developed and was directly linked to success.


39/194

25

The EI issue also took center stage in a Time(Gibbs, 1995) magazine cover story in

the year following Golemans book (Matthews, Zeidner, & Roberts, 2004). During this

same time frame, aHarvard Business Review (HBR) article summarizing Golemans

theory of EI was published and has since had the highest percentage of readers of any

article published by HBR in the past 40 years (as cited in Cherniss, 2000). The popularity

of Golemans theory in such a respected business journal put the question of EIs

potential impact in the forefront of business leaders thinking. Goleman claims EI is

related to ones success and is in fact, the most critical of all capacities for engaging in

lifes challenges (Goleman, 1995).

The potential for increased effectiveness as proposed by Goldman would cause

most reasonable business leaders to at least consider the possible applications of

emotional intelligence theory within their business context. Two-thirds of companies

linked superior performance to emotional or social qualities such as self-confidence,

flexibility, persistence, empathy, and the ability to get along with others (Cherniss, 2000

p.449). In addition, Cherniss says ninety percent of the necessary competencies for

leadership positions are emotional and social in nature. This has resulted in the

willingness of companies within the American context to spend $50 billion annually on

training, much of it in the areas of social and emotional capacities. Four out of five

companies reported spending training dollars to promote emotional intelligence. The

areas believed most essential for training include developing greater emotional self-


40/194

26

awareness, self-management, and empathy as well as building social skills (Cherniss,

2000, p. 449).

Golemans Theory

Golemans theory of emotional intelligence has continued to evolve since it was

first introduced in 1995 (Goleman, 1995, 1998, 2002). The evolution has simplified and

focused the theory, as well as specifically applying EI to leadership and leadership styles.

The previous model included five domains. These have now been simplified to include

four domains: self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, and relational

management, with eighteen competencies instead of the original twenty-five (Goleman,

2002). The most striking shift in this evolution is the departure from elements of the

framework categorized as social skills and empathy.

The criticisms of Golemans model, as an eclectic mixture of various constructs,

may have influenced the shifts present in his current construct. It appears to more cleanly

delineate between elements of EI relating to the individual and those relating with others.

The factors previously grouped as social skills and empathy have been recast under the

broad categories of social awareness and relational management (Goleman, 2002).

These categories provide a more defined umbrella than the previous components,

and may well simplify the theory, making it more memorable and readily accessible

particularly in a business setting. Golemans current iteration of the theory has personal

and social competencies, each divided into awareness and management. The personal

competencies focus on the capacity essential to manage oneself. These are grouped in


41/194

27

two categories, that of self-awareness and of self-management. Similarly, the social

competencies, those capacities that determine how one manages relationships, are divided

into social awareness, and relational management (Goleman, 1998, 2002).

These broad categories seem to provide a much more easily managed and clearly

delineated construct. EI can now be described in a relatively simple sentence such as

Emotional Intelligence is about how we read and manage our emotion, and how well we

read and engage with the emotion of those around us. Goleman summarizes the body of

EI theory as the abilities to recognize and regulate emotions in ourselves and in others

(Goleman, 2001b, p.14). Though this simplification may potentially heighten criticism, it

has similarly decreased barriers for popular engagement and consideration.

The big idea of Golemans theory may be readily grasped, and this simplicity is

reinforced by a well thought out theory and a contextualized expression of EI in

leadership. The theory of emotional intelligence domains and their associated

competencies focus around four major areas: self-awareness and self-management as the

personal competencies and social awareness and relationship management as social

competencies (Goleman, 2002).

Each of these competencies has a series of components. The first element of the

personal competencies is self-awareness, which is reading ones own emotions and

recognizing their impact for using ones gut sense in making decisions. Secondly, there

is accurate self-knowledge, the ability to know ones own strengths and limitations. The

final component of self-awareness includes self-confidence, where one has an accurate or


42/194

28

sound sense of ones capacities and worth. Goleman (2002) begins his theory with the

leader developing the capacity to know him or herself. A wise leader once said be a

student of life, a student of others, and a student of yourself (W. Wiersbe in a personal

conversation, 1978). Golemans theory reflects this same sentiment. The degree to which

the leader understands his or her own internal workings will directly relate to their ability

to understand others.

Self-management is made up of six competencies, including the ability to control

ones emotions; here one needs to keep disruptive emotions and impulses under control.

Second is transparency, the ability to display integrity and honesty in ones emotions,

which creates a sense of trustworthiness. Adaptability follows with flexibility in dealing

with changes in situations and overcoming obstacles. Achievement includes the ability or

drive to improve performance to meet ones internal standard of excellence. The

readiness to act and take advantage of opportunities is considered initiative. A final

quality of self-management is optimism, the ability to see the positive elements in events.

The second domain of emotional intelligence is social competence. These

capabilities relate to how one manages relationships. The two areas of social awareness

and relational management similarly have a variety of competencies. Social awareness

includes empathy, which is the ability to sense others emotions, truly gaining an

understanding of their perspective, and actively engaging in their concerns.

Organizational awareness includes knowledge of current events, networks, where


43/194

29

decisions are created, and politics at the organizational level. Finally, service is ones

response to customer, client, and followers needs (Goleman, 2002).

Relational management includes the capacity to be an inspirational leader, able to

give guidance and motivation, generated by a compelling vision. Influence flows from an

ability to persuade others with a variety of methods. The ability to develop others focuses

on recognizing abilities and providing opportunities to use these, while providing

feedback and guidance. Being a change catalyst, able to lead in a new direction, and

initiate, and manage the process is the next competency. Next, conflict resolution

includes managing disagreements, as well as being able to build bonds and cultivate a

web of relationships. Finally, the capacity for collaboration and teamwork makes up the

relational management cluster (Goleman, 2002).

The applications of the social competencies are at the core of much of a leaders

key functions. Goleman (2002) has provided clarity to the elements that are readily

grasped and interacted over. The social awareness area is somewhat truncated and could

have included other components, but again, this may have excessively complicated the

theory decreasing potential utilization. Now that the basic components of Golemans

theory have been clarified, an overview of Bar-Ons EI model will be provided.

BarOn EQ-i Theory

Bar-Ons model of emotional intelligence was initially developed before Goleman

popularized the concept (Bar-On, 1997c). The major elements of the theory will be

discussed with the connection to Golemans model of emotional intelligence for leaders.


44/194


45/194

31

Emotional Self-Awareness (ES): Emotional self-awareness is the ability to

recognize ones feelings. It is not only the ability to be aware of ones feelings and

emotions, but also to differentiate between them, to know what one is feeling and why,

and to know what caused the feelings.

Assertiveness (AS): Assertiveness is the ability to express feelings, beliefs, and

thoughts and to defend ones right in a nondestructive manner. Assertiveness is

composed of three basic components: (1) the ability to express feelings, (2) the ability to

express beliefs and thoughts openly, and (3) the ability to stand up for personal rights.

Assertive people are not overly controlled or shy- they are able to outwardly express their

feelings outwardly, without being aggressive or abusive.

Independence (IN): Independence is the ability to be self-directed and self-

controlled in ones thinking and actions and to be free of emotional dependency.

Independent people are self-reliant in planning and making important decisions. They

may, however, seek and consider other peoples opinions before making the right

decision for themselves in the end; consulting others is not necessarily a sign of

dependency. Independence is essentially the ability to function autonomously versus

needing protection and support -independent people avoid clinging to others in order to

satisfy their emotional needs. The ability to be independent rests on ones degree of self-

confidence, inner strength, and desire to meet expectations and obligations, without

becoming a slave to them.


46/194

32

Self-Actualization (SA): Self-actualization pertains to the ability to realize ones

potential capacities. This component of emotional intelligence manifests through

becoming involved in pursuits that lead to a meaningful, rich, and full life. Striving to

actualize ones potential involves developing enjoyable and meaningful activities and can

mean a lifelong effort and an enthusiastic commitment to long-term goals. Self-

actualization is an ongoing, dynamic process of striving towards maximum development

of ones abilities, capacities, and talents. This factor is associated with persistently trying

to do ones best and trying to improve oneself in general. Excitement about ones

interests energizes and motivates him or her to continue these interests.

Interpersonal Skills:

Empathy (EM): Empathy is the ability to be aware of, to understand, and to

appreciate the feelings of others. It is tuning in to what, how, and why people feel the

way they do. Being empathetic means being able to emotionally read other people.

Empathetic people care about others and show interest in and concern for others.

Social Responsibility (RE): Social responsibility isthe ability to demonstrate

oneself as a cooperative, contributing, and constructive member of ones social group.

This ability involves acting in a responsible manner even though one may not benefit

personally. Socially responsible people have social consciousness and a basic concern for

others, manifested by being able to take on community-oriented responsibilities. This

component relates to the ability to do things for and with others, accepting others, acting

in accordance with ones conscience, and upholding social rules. These people possess


47/194

33

interpersonal sensitivity and are able to accept others and use their talents for the good of

the collective, not just the self. People who are deficient in this ability may entertain

antisocial attitudes, act abusively toward others, and take advantage of others.

Interpersonal Relations (IR): Interpersonal relations skill involves the ability to

establish and maintain mutually satisfying relationships that are characterized by

intimacy and by giving and receiving affection. Mutual satisfaction includes meaningful

social interchanges that are potentially rewarding and enjoyable. Positive interpersonal

relationship skill is characterized by the ability to give and receive warmth and affection

and to convey intimacy to another human being. This component is not only associated

with the desirability of cultivating friendly relations with others, but with the ability to

feel at ease and comfortable in such relations and to possess positive expectations

concerning social intercourse. This emotional skill generally requires sensitivity toward

others, a desire to establish relations, and feeling satisfied with relationships.

Adaptability:

Reality Testing (RT): Reality testing is the ability to assess the correspondence

between what is experienced and what objectively exists. Reality testing involves a search

for objective evidence to confirm, justify, and support feelings, perceptions, and thoughts.

Reality testing involves turning in to the immediate situation, attempting to keep things

in the correct perspective, and experiencing things as they really are, without excessively

fantasizing or daydreaming about them. The emphasis is on pragmatism, objectivity, the

adequacy of ones perception and authenticating ones ideas and thoughts. An important


48/194


49/194

35

systematic in persevering and approaching problems. The skill is also linked to a desire to

do ones best and to confront problems, rather than avoiding them.

Stress Management:

Stress Tolerance (ST): Stress tolerance is the ability to withstand adverse events

and stressful situations without falling apart by actively and positively coping with

stress. It is the ability to weather difficult situations without getting too overwhelmed.

This ability is based on (1) the capacity to choose courses of action for coping with stress,

(2) an optimistic disposition toward new experiences and change in general, and towards

ones ability to successfully overcome the specific problem at hand, and (3) a feeling that

one can control or influence the stressful situation. This component of emotional

intelligence is very similar to what has been referred to as ego strength and positive

coping. Stress tolerance includes having a repertoire of suitable responses to stressful

situations. It is associated with the capacity to be relaxed and composed and to calmly

face difficulties, without getting carried away by strong emotions. People who have good

stress tolerance tend to face crises and problems, rather than surrendering to feelings of

helplessness and hopelessness. Anxiety often results when this component of emotional

intelligence is not functioning adequately, which has an ill effect on general performance

because of poor concentration, difficulty in making decisions, and somatic problems like

sleep disturbance.

Impulse Control (IC): Impulse control is the ability to resist or delay an impulse,

drive, or temptation to act. It entails a capacity for accepting ones aggressive impulses,


50/194

36

being composed, and controlling aggression, hostility, and irresponsible behavior.

Problems in impulse control are manifested by low frustration tolerance, impulsiveness,

anger control problems, abusiveness, loss of self-control, and explosive and unpredictable

behavior.

General Mood:

Optimism (OP): Optimism is the ability to look at the brighter side of life and to

maintain a positive attitude even in the face of adversity.Optimism assumes a measure of

hope in ones approach to life. It is a positive approach to daily living. Optimism is the

opposite of pessimism, which is a common symptom of depression.

Happiness (HA): Happiness is the ability to feel satisfied with ones life, to enjoy

oneself and others, and to have fun. Happiness combines self-satisfaction, general

contentment, and the ability to enjoy life. This component of emotional intelligence

involves the ability to enjoy various aspects of ones life and life in general. Happy

people often feel good and at ease in both work and leisure; they are able to let their hair

down and enjoy opportunities to have fun. Happiness is associated with a general feeling

of cheerfulness and enthusiasm. Happiness is a by-product and/or barometric indicator of

ones overall degree of emotional intelligence and emotional functioning. A person who

demonstrates a low degree of this factor may possess symptoms typical of depression,

such as a tendency to worry, uncertainty about the future, social withdrawal, lack of

drive, depressive thoughts, feelings of guilt, dissatisfaction with ones life and, in extreme

cases, suicidal thoughts and behavior (Bar-On, 2002, p. 15-18).


51/194

37

Bar-Ons theory of emotional intelligence can be tested using the BarOn EQ-i.

The EQ-i is scored similarly to the IQ test. The average score of 100 with a standard

deviation of 15 and is based on 3831 participants in the North American sample (Bass,

2000, p. 26). A score of 130 and above is considered markedly high and atypically well

developed. 90-100 is average and less than 70 is considered markedly low and may

indicate impaired emotional capacity. More details of the test will follow in the

methodology section, but first a discussion of the validity of the concept of emotional

intelligence must be considered.

Is EI a Distinctive Construct?

This overview of the models highlights the similarities and differences of the four

models. A major question confronting the various theories of emotional intelligence

relates to the overall distinctiveness of emotional intelligence. Is it merely a new label

for existing constructs or is it indeed a new construct (Neubauer and Freudenthaler,

2005, p. 48)?

Historically, personality theory is one of the best-defined constructs, so the

relationship of EI to personality theory is a helpful place to begin a discussion of its

distinctiveness. Salovey and Sluyter (1997) overlay the three major EI models with

personality theory, and its major subsystems. Figure 3 highlights the overlap of Bar-On,

Goleman, and Mayer and Salovey theories with the established qualities of personalitys

intrapersonal and interpersonal qualities (Mayer, Salovey, & Caruso, 2004). In the figure


52/194

38

each theorist is given a symbol to identify elements from their respective theories. Bar-

On uses a , Goleman a !, and Mayer-Saloveya ". This allows for the elements of the

major theories to be identified with components of personality theory.

Satisfying Internal Needs Responding to the External World

Intrapersonal Qualities

Interpersonal Skills

!Motivating Oneself

Interpersonal Qualities

Interpersonal Skills

!Handling Relationships

Motivational and

Emotions Interactions

Stress

Managements Skill

Emotional and Cognitive Interactions

" Perception of Emotion !Knowing Ones

Emotion

" Facilitating Emotion !Recognizing

in Thought Emotions in Others

" Understanding Emotion !Managing Emotions

" Regulating Emotions

High:

LearnedModels

Middle:

Interactive

Functions

Low:

Biologically

RelatedMechanism

Motivational

Directions

Emotional Qualities

General Mood

Cognitive Abilities

Adaptability Skills

Bar-On (1997) !Goleman (1995) " Mayer-Salovey (1997)

Figure 3. Personality and Its Major Subsystems

A lack of substantial overlap between the three theories is evident to some degree.

The greatest overlap with personality theory is in the emotional and cognitive

interactions. Here Goleman, Bar-On, as well as Mayer and Salovey, have major

theoretical components commonly associated with personality. Bar-On and Goleman

Purpose of Subsystem


53/194

39

both have included intra and interpersonal qualities, overlapping with personality theory,

while Mayer and Saloveys theory is more associated with the middle interactive

function, where personality skills are defined. There is overlap with Goleman in some of

the acknowledged lower biologically related personality mechanisms.

EI theories have significant overlap with personality theory, but it would not be

accurate to view them as lacking distinctiveness. EI theory may include personality

qualities but EI is broader and more inclusive. The question of EI being a distinct

construct is only one of a variety of criticisms confronting the EI theories. These

criticisms will now be considered in more depth.

Critique of EI Models

EIs exuberant following has led to a similar burst of critics. An overarching

concern is the number of measures, practices, and interventions that have emerged before

critical questions have been answered though empirical research (Wilhelm, 2005). The

most comprehensive criticism of EI and the various models has come from Matthews,

Zeidner, and Roberts highlighting of seven myths of EI theory (Matthews, Zeidner, &

Roberts, 2004). These so called seven myths of EI will serve as an outline for the broader

criticisms of the EI construct. The authors believe that there are major conceptual,

psychometric, and applied problems and issues to be overcome, before EI can be

considered a genuine, scientifically validated construct, with real life practical

significance (Matthews et al.). These authors have categorized EI as primarily a


54/194

40

cheerleading function, focused on whipping up support for interventions based on

cognitive, emotional, and behavioral skills (Matthews et al.).

The So-called Seven Myths of EI

The first myth considers the conceptual coherence of EI definitions. Mathews,

Roberts, and Zeidner (2004), see a number of different and divergent definitions that vary

in their internal cohesion. They identify the need for consensus between researchers on a

definition of emotional intelligence and a greater connection to the existing body of

theory for emotion, personality, and intelligence.

Myth two questions the standardization of the psychometric criteria in the

measurement of EI. There is little convergence between the ability based and self-report

based tests. Content validity is questionable due to conceptual problems, similar

constructs and predictive validities. These theorists believe EI has demonstrated some

promising beginnings, but believe the validity is limited as yet (Matthews, Roberts, &

Zeidner, 2004; Neubauer & Freudenthaler, 2005). A related concern focuses on EI tests

bypassing critical steps to arbitrarily defined sampling domains and processes (Perez,

Petrides, & Furnham, 2005).

Myth three highlights the distinction of personality constructs from self-report

emotional intelligence tests. Personalitys Big Five, particularly optimism, empathy,

and self-esteem demonstrate substantial overlap. This lack in discriminate validity with

personality theory substantially diminishes the usability of a self-report test (Matthews,

Zeidner, & Roberts, 2004). Similarly, Brody finds that there is no convincing evidence


55/194

41

that the MSCEIT provides incremental predictive validity over and above standard

measures of intelligence and personality (Brody, 2004, p. 237). Various combinations of

constructs are discussed with the common theme of delineating one from the other and

highlighting areas of overlap. Some have recommended the need to establish discriminate

and convergent validity of crystallized and fluid abilities in the major domains of

emotional, academic, and social intelligence (Kang, Day, & Meara, 2005). Other theorists

add the category of practical intelligence (Austin & Saklofske, 2005).

The fourth myth questions if emotional intelligence ability tests meet the criteria

of cognitive intelligence. The substantial challenges in standardizing vertical criteria, and

in scoring EI ability tests, leave questions regarding the measure of a true ability

(Matthews, Zeidner, & Roberts, 2004). The self-report tests appear to largely index

personality traits rather than abilities (MacCann, Mathews, Zeidner, & Roberts, 2003),

and remain rather contained to a psychometrically driven focus (Neubauer &

Freudenthaler, 2005).

Myth five focuses on the assumption that emotional intelligences relationship

with emotion is similar to IQs relationship with cognition. Mathews, Zeidner, and

Roberts find the separation of the emotional and cognitive systems as distinctive

intelligence to be conceptually confusing and in conflict with substantial bodies of theory

related to self-regulation and emotion (Matthews et al.). They highlight four defined

constructs worthy of further delineation: temperament, information processing, emotional


56/194

42

self-confidence and emotional knowledge and skills (Zeidner, Roberts, & Matthews

2004).

The sixth myth queries the predictive ability of EI on adaptive coping. In question

are the veracity of correlations between coping skills and various outcome measures. The

authors question as simplistic a single continuum to differentiate individual adaptation

(Matthews, Zeidner, & Roberts, 2004).

Finally, myth seven focuses on the assertions of EI as essential for success in the

real world. The lack of applied studies to support this belief is highlighted, in addition to

the costly nature of EI training interventions, with their proposed benefit (Matthews,

Zeidner, & Roberts, 2004). Specific to the issue of leader effectiveness, Antonakis states

the empirical evidence of EIs impact on leader emergence or effectiveness as

nonexistent, or very weak at best, and contradictory at worst (Antonakis, 2003, p. 359).

Further concern focuses on the increasingly common EI educational programs in the

academic setting that lack a scientifically and theoretically sound base (Goetz, Frenzel,

Pekrun, & Hall, 2005).

A Response

Despite such harsh criticism, emotional intelligence is a topic that transcends

disciplines and fields (Schmidt, 2004, p. 442). EI provides an important conceptual

framework for guiding research on emotional phenomena (Barrett & Salovey, 2002, p.

7). Emotional intelligence is viewed as an intelligence that operates on and with

emotional information, such as the meaning of emotions, emotional patterns, and


57/194

43

sequences, and the appraisals of the relationships they reflect (Mayer, Salovey, &

Caruso, 2004, p. 209). These authors had two responses to the criticism of Mathews,

Zeidner, and Roberts. First, they sought to separate themselves from Golemans claims of

EIs as the best predictor of success in life (Goleman, 1995, p. 34) by stating such

claims do a disservice to the field and by reminding the reader of their frequent

arguments against such claims (Mayer, et al., 2004 b, p. 206).

Mayer, Salovey, and Caruso also have a number of comments on their MSCEIT

test countering the criticism leveled against them (Mayer, Salovey, & Caruso, 2004).

They conceded that some of the criticism is indeed legitimate, especially in the near

infinite list of desirable, but possibly unattainable criteria for just about any measurement

procedure (Mayer, et al., 2004 b, p. 211). Other theorists suggest there is hope in using

consensus based scoring as way forward to measure validity (Legree, Psotka, Tremble, &

Bourne, 2005). A general affirmation of the MSCEIT as the most ambitions and, to date,

the most appropriate approach to the broad assessment of emotions related capabilities,

furthers the dialogue on EI testing in the positive direction (Wilhelm, 2005, p. 149).

With full recognition of some of the testing challenges, a number of theorists

affirm the promising nature of EI. Researchers are considering applications of EI within

the field of clinical psychology for possible applications in treatment of disorders such as

those associated with alexithymia (Parker, 2005). Others go as far as viewing EI as the

most promising of the new constructs emerging from psychological science that is

directed towards improving the human condition (Roberts, Schulze, Zeidner, &


58/194

44

Mathews, 2005, p. 312). What is most striking about this affirmation is that three of the

authors now affirming EI were the very ones to scathingly highlight the Seven Myths of

EI (Matthews, Zeidner, & Roberts, 2004).

This concludes the overview of emotional intelligence. Despite challenges to the

theory, most agree that the relevance and application of the theory has significant

potential benefits in business and everyday life. Next an overview of transformational

leadership theory will be provided.

History of Transaction and Transformational Leadership

Burns first introduced the model of transactional and transformational leadership

in 1978. In the intervening years, this seminal work has spawned extensive research,

supporting the distinction between, and the impact of, these expressions of leadership

(Bass, 1999a). Transformational leadership theory finds its roots in the Socratic and

Confucian typologies advocacy of moral character and virtue (Bass). This moral

character forms the foundation for a transformational leader to motivate followers

towards transcendent goals and higher levels of self-actualized needs, rather than a

simple exchange relationship with followers (Burns, 1978). Transformational leadership

occurs when leaders broaden and elevate the interests of employees, while generating

awareness and acceptance of the purposes and mission of the group, they stir their

employees to look beyond their own self-interest for the good of the group (Bass, 1990).


59/194

45

The Model

Bass originally conceived transactional and transformational leadership to

include seven leadership factors including: charisma, inspiration, intellectual stimulation,

individualized consideration, contingent rewards, management-by-exception, and laissez-

faire leadership (Bass, 1985). Gradually, the lack of empirical distinction between

charismatic and inspirational leadership led to collapsing these two factors into one, and

the current six-factor model of transformational and transactional leadership (Bass, 1988,

1997, 1997 Summer; Bass & Avolio, 1990). In spite of this shift, charismatic leadership

is seen as central in the transformational leadership process, and has resulted in the model

at times being called Charismatic/Transformational Leadership (Bass, 1985).

Transformational leadership is built on an augmented expression of transactional

leadership, as it contributes to subordinate effort, satisfaction, and effectiveness (Seltzer

& Bass, 1990, p. 695). Transactional leadership focuses on the elements of contingent

rewards, management-by-exception, and laissez-faire leadership. The four components of

transformational leadership include: idealized influence, inspirational motivation,

intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration (Bass, 1988, 1997; Bass &

Avolio, 1990). These elements are in contrast with pseudo-transformational leadership by

demonstrating: 1. moral character and genuine concern for others and self, 2. deeply

embedded ethical values as the foundation for the leaders vision and articulation of

programs that followers are free to embrace or reject, and 3. the foundational morality for


60/194

46

processing social and ethical actions or choices, where followers and the leaders

collectively engage (Bass & Steidimeier, 1999).

The two models of transformational leadership and EI have tremendous

relevance for each other. The transformational leadership models emphasis on clearly

articulating a vision as well as explaining how it can be reached, overlaps with

Golemans visionary leadership style. A visionary style has been demonstrated as the

most effective of the six leadership styles. The capacity to continually remind people of

the larger picture and gain meaning, amidst the dailies of the work world, results in

shared objectives and connections with peoples own motivations and interests. Visionary

leadership tends to result in inspired work (Goleman, 2002). Visionary leaders do well in

a variety of business situations, particularly when changes are needed. The visionary

mode comes naturally to transformational leaders who seek to radically change an

organization (Goleman, 2002 p.58).

This leadership style draws on the EI competencies such as self-confidence,

empathy, and acting as a change agent. Bass identifies the highest expression of

transformational leadership as charismatic or idealized influence, followed by

inspirational influence. The latter may also involve Golemans affiliative leadership. Both

are involved in the process of vision casting and realization.


61/194


62/194

48

Avolio, Jung, & Berson, 2003). The emotional awareness of an emotionally intelligent

leader facilitates the development of this type of trust. The accurate self-assessment and

self-confident approach in combination with a humble, genuine transparency builds this

sense of trustworthiness in the hearts of followers. At times the leaders empathy and

willingness to serve those he or she leads may further develop this trust (Bass, 1997;

Goleman, 2002).

In addition to trust, the broad application of transformational and transactional

leadership has even been demonstrated in the military, (Bass, Jung, Avolio, & Berson,

2003) and trans-cultural settings (Bass, 1997). Todays increasingly globalized

marketplace and military theatre are prime contexts for transformational and transactional

leadership application.

One study placed world-class industrial, political, and military leaders along a

continuum from transformational to transactional leadership. Transformational leadership

factors included charismatic, individualist consideration, and intellectual stimulation,

while the transactional leaders were characterized by a focus on contingent reward and

management by exception. Each of these leaders was given a mean factor score. The

extensive list of world leaders living and dead could provide a provocative foundation for

a study projecting emotional intelligence with these transactional and transformational

designations (Bass, Avolio, & Goodheim, 1987). In these varied settings, a leader would

need to show many of the competencies in the relationship management domain. The

need to act as a catalyst for change, to work through conflict, to build strong networks, to


63/194

49

develop future leaders and to influence and inspire, would most likely be characteristics

of the leaders most strongly identified as transformational (Goleman, 2002).

Leadership and Organizational Culture

The Organizations culture develops in large part from its leadership (Bass &

Avolio, 1993, p.112). Cultures that are highly satisfying and innovative will tend to see

more transformational leaders demonstrating foundational presuppositions such as:

people are trustworthy and purposeful; everyone has a unique contribution to make; and

complex problems are handled at the lowest possible level (Bass & Avolio, 1993, p.

113). These leaders inspire ownership in a clearly stated vision and readily empower

others to attain their shared vision. Transformational leaders delight to teach and develop

people, with recognition of their strengths and unique motivations or contributions. These

leaders promote a dynamic, nimble environment that readily adapts and views change

positively (Bass & Avolio, 1993). The resonance created by a strongly emotionally

intelligent leader can be one of the strongest influences on corporate culture (Abraham,

2005). Goleman cites a Hays Group study that found a leaders EI may be the most

important driver in the corporate climate. The organizations climate is believed to be

responsible for twenty to thirty percent of its performance (Goleman, 2001a). A

transformational leader can use this ability to influence the environment along the values

and mission of the organization. Clearly emotional intelligence competencies are highly


64/194


65/194


66/194

52

challenges of construct validity and the numerous criticisms of the lack of scholarly

studies (Matthews, Roberts, & Zeidner, 2004). In the area of emotional intelligence this is

dramatically evident within the executive population. The ways emotional intelligence

impacts an executives effectiveness is worthy of scholarly focus.

Possible reasons for this apparent gap in the study of emotional intelligence may be

due to issues of access and motivation. The challenge of gaining access to executive

leaders who are busy and possibly unwilling to participate in academic studies may be a

primary reason why so few research studies exist. Additionally, the time required to

complete testing and or interviews, apart from a personal commitment or interest in the

topic, may be very difficult to secure. The economic gap and/or social

emotional intelligence&leadership

Documents