ijcrb.webs.

com
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
COPY RIGHT 2013 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research


394


MAY 2013
VOL 5, NO 1

Emotional Intelligence (EI) and Employee Outcomes:
The Mediating Effect of Authentic Leadership Style

Kiran Kiyani (Corresponding Author)
Dr. Noreen Saher
Sumaira Saleem
Madiha Iqbal
International Islamic University, Islamabad

Abstract
The objective of our study is to investigate the potential mediating effect of managers authentic leadership style
on the relationship between managers emotional intelligence and employee outcomes. Data was gat her ed
f r om 300 wor ker s through questionnaires. The outcome showed that managers Authentic Leadership style
mediates the relationship between managers emotional intelligence and employee outcomes. The outcome of
our study contributes to the current insight about the interrelationship of the leadership style, managers
emotional intelligence and employee outcomes. Our study shows that the influence of managers emotional
intelligence on job performance and OCB should be expressed by using a third mediating variable, which is
authentic leadership style. Future research and recommendations are discussed in the paper.

Keywords: Emotional Intelligence, Authentic Leadership Style, Employee performance, Organizational
Citizenship Behavior, Pakistan.

1. Introduction
Our growing discontentment with sleek, ersatz, airbrushed leadership is what makes authenticity such a
fascinating quality in todays corporationsa quality that, sadly, is briefly offer. Leaders and followers each
associate authenticity with sincerity, honesty, and integrity. Its the important thingthe attribute that
unambiguously defines authentic leaders. Recently, in Islamic Republic of Pakistan the foremost effective
leadership style is taken into account as authentic leadership style. Authentic leaders are individuals who are
deeply aware of how they think and behave and are perceived by others as being aware of their own and others
values/moral perspective, knowledge, and strength; aware of the context in which they operate; and who are
confident, hopeful, optimistic, resilient, and high on moral character (Avolio, Gardner, Walumbwa, & May,
2004).

To attract followers, a leader has to be many things to many people. The trick is to pull that off while remaining
true to you (Rob Gofee & Gareth Jones, 2005). The expression of an authentic self is important for excellent
leadership; the idea of credibility is commonly misunderstood, not least by leaders themselves. They usually
assume that credibility is an innate qualitythat individual is either authentic or not. In fact, credibility may be
a quality that others should attribute to you. No leader will look into a mirror and say, I am authentic.
someone cannot be authentic on his or her own. Credibility is basically outlined by what people see in you and,
as such, will to a good extent be controlled by you. If credibility were strictly an innate quality, there would be
very little you may do to manage it and, therefore, very little you may do to create yourself more practical as a
leader.

Many researchers contributed within the model development and definition of emotional intelligence. This idea
has original roots in study of social intelligence by Thorndike in, 1920. A widely known emotional
intelligence model was developed by Goleman (1996). He defines emotional intelligence as the capability for
recognizing our own feelings and those of others, for motivating ourselves and for managing emotions well in
ourselves and in our relationships (Goleman, 1996, p. 317). Numerous Studies shows that emotional
intelligence relate to variety of job-related outcomes, together with job performance (Bachman, 2000; Goleman,
1996; Tichler, 2002), leadership success (Cooper & Sawaf, 1997; Gates, 1995; Goleman, 1998b; Higgs, 2003;
ijcrb.webs.com
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
COPY RIGHT 2013 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research


395


MAY 2013
VOL 5, NO 1

Fekken & Sivanathan and, 2002), citizenship behaviors (Carroll & Day, 2004), and quality problem solving
(Rahim & Minors, 2003).

In Pakistani context leaders who are perceived to be more authentic play a central role in facilitating employee
helping behavior by making employees more aware of the importance of helping one another and demonstrating
the value and safety of openly sharing information. Some empirical evidences support this link. For example,
research by (Meyer, Paunonen, Gellatly, Goffin, & Jackson, 1989) demonstrated a significant relationship
between ethical leadership, a major component of authentic leadership and citizenship behaviors. Other
researchers have also shown that employees who experience more honest and trusting relationships with their
supervisors display higher levels of OCB and job performance (Dionne, Yammarino, Atwater & Spangler,
2004; Mayer & Gavin, 2005).

Both emotional intelligence and authentic leadership seem to be connected with similar positive effects on
worker outcomes and performance. Thus, it would be attention-grabbing to understand whether or not each
emotional intelligence and authentic leadership is necessary for the positive outcomes, or whether or not each is
adequate in itself. Thus, major objective of this study is to explore the dynamic interaction among these three
concepts, specifically, the potential mediating role of authentic leadership style on the link between managers
emotional intelligence and employee outcomes (employee performance and organizational citizenship
behavior).

2. Literature Review
2.1 Emotional Intelligence
Psychologists Mayer & Salovay (1991) defined the term Emotional Intelligence (EI) as the subset of social
intelligence that involves the ability to monitor ones own and others feelings and emotions, to discriminate
among them and to use this information to guide ones thinking and actions (p. 189).

Interest within the emotional intelligence has grown up dramatically within the past decade. Analysis shows that
intelligence quotient alone only explains 4-10 percent of accomplishment at work (Sternberg, 1996). Emotional
intelligence is double as vital as technical skills and intellectual intelligence for jobs at all levels; intellectual
intelligence solely contributes about 20 percent of the factors that confirm life success that leaves eighty percent
to different forces (Goleman, 1996). Martinez (1997) even claimed that emotional intelligence doubtless
accounts for the remaining eighty percent. Recent research clearly shows that emotional intelligence is the sine
qua none of leadership. Without it, a person can have the best training in the world, an incisive, analytical mind,
and an endless supply of smart ideas, but still will not become a good leader.

Intelligent and experienced leaders are not always successful in dealing with environmental demands and with
life in general (Rosete & Ciarrochi, 2005), they examined the relationship between emotional intelligence,
personality, cognitive intelligence and leadership. Their results revealed that higher emotional intelligence was
associated with higher leadership effectiveness, and that emotional intelligence explained the variance not
explained by either personality or IQ.

2.2 Authentic Leadership
Philosophers and social scientists have debated the construct of authenticity for hundreds of years, and it might
be foolish for us to imagine that this discussion can be synthesized by us or anyone else.

Establishing your authenticity as a leader could be a two-part challenge. First, you have to make sure that your
words are in step with your deeds; otherwise, followers will never accept you as authentic. Everybody
acknowledges and understands the necessity for consistency when establishing credibleness; however an
excellent leader does a lot more than simply pay lip service to it. He will live it every moment of the day.
Indeed, its not an exaggeration to mention that an excellent leader is obsessive concerning embodying his
beliefs. Authentic leadership shows some overlap with different modern perspectives like transformational,
charismatic, servant, and spiritual leadership. The construct is gaining legitimacy in its own right as researchers
are starting to differentiate authentic leadership from connected constructs. Transformational leaders, for
ijcrb.webs.com
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
COPY RIGHT 2013 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research


396


MAY 2013
VOL 5, NO 1

instance, like authentic leaders, are represented as being optimistic, hopeful, developmentally oriented and of
high ethical character (Bass, 1997). Likewise, transformational leadership traces out a complex ethical spectrum
on that most leaders mix authentic and inauthentic behaviors that led to the excellence between (a) authentic
transformational leaders who as ethical agents, expand the domain of effective freedom, the horizon of
conscience and whose actions aim toward noble ends, legitimate suggests that, and truthful consequences
and (b) pseudo or inauthentic transformational leaders who fall prey to self-aggrandizement (Bass &
Steaidlmeier, 1990, p. 211). These researchers warned of the dark facet of charismatic/pseudo transformational
leaders who purport to be authentic however instead use their positions to feed their narcissism,
authoritarianism, machiavellianism, flawed vision and need for power (Bass & Steaidlmeier, 1990, p. 182).

However, as Avolio and Gardner (2005) distinguished, authentic leaders, in contrast to transformational leaders
might or might not be actively or proactively focused on developing followers into leaders, even though they
need a positive impact on them via role modeling. Similarly, Bass and Steaidlmeier (1990) noted that like
authentic leadership, each servant and spiritual leadership include either explicit or implicit recognition of leader
self-awareness or the focus on integrity, trust, courage, and hope. However, in servant and spiritual leadership,
these constructs have remained mostly a theoretical phenomenon and have not been supported by empirical
research. Let be completely clear: authenticity is not the product of pure manipulation. It accurately reflects
aspects of the leaders inner self; therefore it cant be an act. However great leaders appear to grasp which
temperament traits they ought to disclose to whom and when. They are like chameleons, capable of adapting to
the demands of the situations they face and therefore the people they lead, yet they do not lose their identities
within the process. Authentic leaders stay centered on wherever they are going however never lose sight of
where they came from. Highly attuned to their environments, they consider an intuition born of formative,
generally harsh experiences to grasp the expectations and considerations of the people they seek to influence.
They maintain their distinctiveness as individuals, however they know how to win acceptance in strong
corporate and social cultures and the way to use elements of these cultures as a basis for radical modification.

Authentic leadership, then, can incorporate transformational, charismatic, servant, spiritual, or other kinds of
positive leadership. However, authentic leaders are not essentially transformational or charismatic; instead, they
influence followers awareness from a values/moral perspective and energize followers by making meaning and
completely constructing reality for themselves and followers (Avolio, Gardner, Walumbwa, & May, 2004).
Avolio and colleagues (2004) argued that the most distinctive component that differentiates authentic leadership
from related kinds of leadership is that it is at the very core of what constitutes deeply positive leadership in
whatever type it exists. Avolio and colleagues (2004) additionally argued that in authentic leadership the main
focus on transparency, positivity, and high moral standards is vital. Moreover, authentic leaders are expected to
evoke followers self-concept, recognizing that they share similar values with the leader.

Authentic leaders are very comfortable in their own skin; they understand where they come from and who they
are, and they know how to use their background to make a relationship with followers. Authentic leaders are not
vulnerable by individuals with other origins; they welcome them and they are sensitive in communicating their
origins and are responsive to the variations in cultural attitudes toward their background (Rob Gofee & Gareth
Jones, 2005). Once Albert Einstein said, I speak to everyone in the same manner, whether he is the garbage-
man or the president of the university. That statement reflects not only Einsteins comfort with himself but also
with the more open society he selected to live in.

2.3 Job Performance
Despite the great relevance of individual performance and the widespread use of job performance as an outcome
measure in empirical research, relatively little effort has been spent on clarifying the performance concept.
However, during the past ten to fifteen years, one can witness an increasing interest in developing a definition of
performance and specifying the performance concept.

Not every behavior is subsumed under the performance concept, but only behavior which is relevant for the
organizational goals. Performance is what the organization hires one to do, and do well (Campbell, McCloy,
Oppler & Sager, 1993, p. 40). Thus, performance is not defined by the action itself but by judgmental and
evaluative processes (Ilgen & Schneider, 1991; Motowidlo, Borman, & Schmit, 1997). Moreover, only actions
which can be scaled, i.e., measured, are considered to constitute performance (Meyer, Paunonen, Gellatly,
Goffin & Jackson, 1989). Interestingly, individual performance is mainly treated as a dependent variable which
ijcrb.webs.com
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
COPY RIGHT 2013 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research


397


MAY 2013
VOL 5, NO 1

makes perfect sense from a practical point of view as individual performance is something organizations want to
enhance and optimize.

2.4 Organizational Citizenship Behavior
OCBs are often understood as individual behaviors that are voluntary, and don't seem to be directly or explicitly
outlined by the formal reward system. Over time, they promote the efficacious and efficient functioning of
organizations (Organ, 1988). During a recent meta-analysis (Podsakoff, Whiting, & Blume, 2009), administered
with 168 independent samples, it was found that OCBs were associated with a series of organizational
advantages like productivity, efficiency, price reduction, consumer satisfaction, and decrease in turnover rate.
Consistent with Podsakoff, Mackenzie, Paine, and Bachrach (2000), these behaviors have an effect on the
efficiency of organizations, a) increasing social control and coworker productivity; b) liberating resources so
they may be used for a lot of productive purposes; c) reducing the necessity for the use of scarce resources in
maintenance functions; d) serving to coordinate activities through work teams; e) strengthening the power of the
organization to draw in and retain the most effective employees; f) increasing performance stability of the
organization; and g) enabling the organization to adapt more effectively to changes within the setting.
There is no consensus concerning the number or types of OCBs. However, the most widely accepted OCB
categories (Podsakoff, 2000) have been: (a) helping behavior, which means serving to coworkers to resolve
difficulties at work; (b) a sportspersons perspective, understood as the act of maintaining a positive perspective
when things don't end up as desired; (c) organizational loyalty, that consists of protecting the organization,
supporting and upholding its goals; (d) obedience, understood as the incorporation and acceptance of the person,
the rules, norms, and procedures of the organization; (e) civic virtue, characterized by employees participation
and active interest within the lifetime of the organization; (f) self-development, which includes workers
behaviors to interact in processes of improvement that enable them to better perform their job; and (g) individual
initiative, which implies creativeness and innovation to boost personal performance within the tasks of the
organization. This proliferation of the ways in which the OCBs manifest has led authors to reflect on the number
and also the relevance of the dimensions that should be thought of among citizenship behaviors (Organ,
Podsakoff, & MacKenzie, 2006). These authors argue that if two sorts of manifestation of the OCBs have
completely different antecedents and effects, it is reasonable to state that they are, at least partially, different
dimensions.
Recently, numerous investigators have targeted on a bi-dimensional approach of the OCBs, supported the
consideration of 2 completely different receivers of the behavior (Dovidio, Piliavin, Schroeder, & Penner, 2006;
Finkelstein, 2006; Finkelstein & Penner, 2004; Williams & Anderson, 1991). In this sense, they propose, on the
one hand, organizational citizenship behaviors directed towards individuals (OCBI). These are pro-social
behaviors directed towards specific individuals inside the organization. The assistance could also be associated
with work or to personal issues. Among this kind of behaviors are helping behaviors and sportspersonship. On
the opposite hand, remainder of the aforementioned varieties of OCBs is heading towards the organization
(OCBO), because they are preferentially directed to learn the firm as a whole. There are inadequate empirical
studies of these 2 dimensions of OCBs.

Proposed Model











Managers
emotional
intelligence
Authentic
Leadership style
Job performance
Organizational citizenship
behavior
ijcrb.webs.com
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
COPY RIGHT 2013 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research


398


MAY 2013
VOL 5, NO 1

2.5 Managers Emotional Intelligence and Authentic Leadership
Many studies have found a positive relationship between emotional intelligence and authentic leadership style
(Barling, 2000; Duckett & Macfarlane, 2003; Leban & Zulauf, 2004; Palmer, 2001; Sivanathan & Fekken,
2002). Palmer (2001, p. 8) asserted that the inspirational motivation and individualized consideration
components of authentic leadership were significantly correlated with both the ability of emotional monitoring
and management in oneself and others. Leaders who motivated and inspired subordinates to work toward
common goals (inspirational motivation), and paid special attention to the achievement and developmental
needs of subordinates (individualized consideration), reported that they monitored and managed emotions both
within themselves and others.

2.6 Managers Emotional Intelligence and Employee Performance
There is support that managers emotional intelligence positively accounts for differences in employee
outcomes. Studies show that emotional intelligence is positively related to employees performance (Higgs,
2004). Managerial emotional intelligence influences team satisfaction (Langhorn, 2004). Leaders in positive
affective states may energies the people they manage, causing them to approach tasks actively and
enthusiastically, as they have high levels of confidence in their ability to succeed (George, 1995). Kupers and
Weibler (2006, p. 380) reporting Gardner and Stoughs (2002, p. 77) study, emphasized that recognizing and
expressing feelings enables leaders to take advantage of and use their positive emotions and emotional
information to facilitate organizational performance, including prioritizing demands and solving problems.

Wong and Law (2002) also found that the emotional intelligence of managers has a causal effect on the job
performance and organizational citizenship behavior of their subordinates.

2.7 Managers Authentic Leadership and Employee Performance:
Consistent with previous studies, (Fu, Chow, & Zhang, 2001) found a positive correlation between managers
consideration behavior and employees job performance in mainland China. Managers with authentic leadership
demonstrated more concern for others feelings, which led to positive work related outcomes. In a leadership
study conducted in China, the US, the Netherlands, Singapore, the UK and Japan. Bass (1997) showed that
authentic leadership was positively related to leader effectiveness and employees performance and
organizational citizenship behavior.

Moreover, authentic leadership can have a causal effect on employees job performance, job satisfaction,
organizational citizenship behavior and organizational commitment (Bono & Judge, 2003; Bycio, 1995; Hater &
Bass, 1988; Judge & Bono, 2000; Krishnan, 2005; Walumbwa & Lawler, 2003; Walumbwa, Lawler, Avolio,
Wang & Shi, 2005).

According to Baron and Kenny (1986), the first condition of a mediator is that variations in levels of the
independent variable significantly account for variations in the presumed mediator (i.e. managers emotional
intelligence can predict authentic leadership style), as the mediator accounts for the dependent variable (i.e.
employee outcomes employees performance and organizational citizenship behavior). This is how a
managers authentic leadership may play a mediator role in the relationship between that managers emotional
intelligence and employee outcomes.

Therefore, the following are hypothesized:
H1. Managers emotional intelligence is positively related to Authentic Leadership style.
H2. Authentic leadership style has a positive impact on employee outcomes.
H3. Managers emotional intelligence is positively related to employee outcomes.




ijcrb.webs.com
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
COPY RIGHT 2013 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research


399


MAY 2013
VOL 5, NO 1

3. Research Methodology

3.1 Participants and Demographical Analysis
The sample of our study includes the managerial and non-managerial workforce of four leading software
companies and two telecom companies in Islamabad, Pakistan. Total 300 questionnaires were distributed, out of
which 283 employees responded, giving 94.33 percent response rate. Of the sample, 90.5 percent were male in
managerial group and 79.9 percent were male in employees group. In managers group 60.8 percent belonged to
age group of 41 to 50, 29.3 percent belonged to age group of 31 to 40 and 9.9 percent belonged to age group of
20 to 30. In managerial group 69.6 percent respondents were Masters, 20.5 percent respondents were
Mphil/PHD and 9.9 percent were Graduates. In managerial group 50.9 percent respondents had tenure of 6 to 10
years and 49.1 percent respondents had tenure of 1 to 5 years. In employees group 68.6 percent belonged to age
group of 20 to 30 and 31.4 percent belonged to age group of 31 to 40. In employees group 68.6 percent
respondents were Graduates and 31.4 percent were Intermediate. In employees group 69.6 percent respondents
had tenure of 1 to 5 years and 30.4 percent respondents had tenure of less than 1 year.

3.2 Measures
In our survey, responses were rated on the Likert-scale format, with answer ranging from 1 to 5 (1 = strongly
disagree and 5 = strongly agree). To measure emotional intelligence (EI) we used the Schulte et al. (1998) EI
scale, which is a self-report, Likert-type scale. It is a 33-item emotions scale that assesses the extent to which
individuals perceive, understand, regulate, and harness emotions adaptively. On a five-point Likert-type scale (1
= strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree), respondents rate their agreement with such items as I am aware of my
emotions as I experience them and I help other people feel better when they are down. The cronbach alpha of
Emotional intelligence items in our study is 0.951. Authentic leadership was measured by using 8 item scale
developed by Avolio, Gardner and Walumbwa (2007) and in our study the Cronbach alpha of Authentic
leadership items is 0.959. To measure Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB); we used scale adopted from
Podsakoff (1997) with 22 items (e.g., Helps others who have heavy workloads.), in our study cronbach alpha
of OCB items is 0.992. The 6-item scale measuring job performance (e.g., I am effective in my job.) used the
studies by Angg (2003) and Kimm (2009), Cronbach alpha of these items in our study is 0.967. A few changes
in wording in the questionnaire were made as we are doing research from managerial perspective.

3.3 Procedure
We administered the survey instrument in the targeted companies during the office hours. The data were
collected through hard copy questionnaires. Each subject was assured of the confidentiality of his/her
anonymous responses. Based on the information provided by the top management of the companies, a coding
system on the surveys was used to associate employees with their direct manager in pairs. Thus, one manager
was identified in each team with their employees. Although this person may have a different position title, such
as team coordinator, manager, supervisor or executive, they were all defined as manager in this study. The
survey instruments were administered in English. We used convenience sampling in our research. The study
used SPSS 17.0 for descriptive statistical analysis.

4. Findings and Results
4.1 Mean and Standard Deviation of the Variables

Mean Std. Deviation N
EMOINT
3.9779 .52928 283
AUTLEA
3.5950 1.17576 283
JOBPER
3.4417 1.16584 283
OCB
3.4464 1.29988 283

ijcrb.webs.com
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
COPY RIGHT 2013 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research


400


MAY 2013
VOL 5, NO 1

Correlation of all Variables:

EMOINT AUTLEA JOBPER OCB
EMOINT Pearson Correlation 1 .850(**) .898(**) .861(**)
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000
N 283 283 283 283
AUTLEA Pearson Correlation .850(**) 1 .980(**) .981(**)
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000
N 283 283 283 283
JOBPER Pearson Correlation .898(**) .980(**) 1 .987(**)
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000
N 283 283 283 283
OCB Pearson Correlation .861(**) .981(**) .987(**) 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000
N 283 283 283 283
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Managers emotional intelligence is significantly positively correlated with Authentic
Leadership style, Employee job performance and OCB.

Regression Analysis of Managers Emotional Intelligence and Job performance:
Job performance
R
2
in R
2
Step: 1
Control Variables
0.434***
Step: 2
Managers emotional
intelligence

1.837*** 0.869*** 0.435***

Mediation of Authentic Leadership:
Job performance
R
2
in R
2
Step: 1
Control Variables
0.434***
Step: 2
Authentic leadership
0.966*** 0.976*** 0.541***
Step: 3
Managers emotional
intelligence
0.330*** 0.979*** 0.004***
a. Predictors in the Model: (Constant), Etenure, Equali, Egender
b. Predictors in the Model: (Constant), Etenure, Equali, Egender, AUTLEA
c. Predictors in the Model: (Constant), Etenure, Equali, Egender, AUTLEA, EMOINT
d. Dependent Variable: JOBPER
ijcrb.webs.com
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
COPY RIGHT 2013 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research


401


MAY 2013
VOL 5, NO 1

According to the conditions proposed by Baron and Kenny(1986) it was observed that the authentic leadership
partially mediated the relationship between Managers Emotional intelligence and Job performance as Beta
reduced from 1.837 to 0.330, whereas in R
2
reduced from 0.435 to 0.004 when p<0.000

Regression Analysis of Managers Emotional Intelligence and OCB:
OCB
R
2
in R
2
Step: 1
Control Variables
0.536***
Step: 3
Managers emotional
intelligence
1.767*** 0.859*** .324***

Mediation of Authentic Leadership:
OCB
R
2
in R
2
Step: 1
Control Variables
0.536***
Step: 2
Authentic leadership
0.987*** 0.990*** 0.454***
Step: 3
Managers emotional
intelligence
-.061 0.990 .000
a. Predictors: (Constant), Etenure, Equali, Egender
b. Predictors: (Constant), Etenure, Equali, Egender, AUTLEA
c. Predictors: (Constant), Etenure, Equali, Egender, AUTLEA, EMOINT
d. Dependent Variable: OCB

According to the conditions proposed by Baron and Kenny (1986) it was observed that the authentic leadership
fully mediated the relationship between Managers Emotional intelligence and Organizational citizenship
behavior as Beta reduced from 1.767 to 0.061, whereas in R
2
reduced from 0.324 to 0.000 when p=0.094) the
existing significant relationship between EI and OCB became insignificant when Authentic leadership was
added to the regression equation.

5. Conclusion
Our study revealed that managers emotional intelligence could be a characteristic that directly influences the
maintenance and development of authentic leadership. It is believed that emotional intelligence not only
nourishes and builds authentic leadership, but also transfers to leaders behaviors and thoughts. As a result,
emotionally intelligent managers who easily recognize and handle the emotions of themselves and others
employ authentic leadership style that eventually enhances employees job performance and employee
organizational citizenship behavior. Therefore, the mediating effect can explain the process of how or why
managers emotional intelligence predicts or causes these outcome variables, since a mediator is the mechanism
through which a predictor influences an outcome variable (Barron and Kanny, 1986).

6. Limitations and Future Research
We recognize that our study has some limitations, and readers should be conscious of these to understand results
presented in this research paper within the context of these limitations. Emotional intelligence of managers is
self-reported which can be subjected to biases, and employees job performance and employees organizational
ijcrb.webs.com
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
COPY RIGHT 2013 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research


402


MAY 2013
VOL 5, NO 1

citizenship is rated by managers only, an employee may respond differently from manager. We tried our best to
eliminate common human biases by including some reverse questions in our questionnaire. Future studies
should take response from both managers and employees for every variable, to eliminate the chances of human
biases. Future studies should investigate emotional intelligence and authentic leadership together with the
employee personal characteristics and contextual factors. Therefore, the inclusion of different contextual and
personal factors could provide an even richer model of the relationship between emotional intelligence,
authentic leadership style and employee outcomes. Our study presented some solid evidences, but more
longitudinal and continual studies invoking more variables should be conducted. Future research could replicate
our current study in many different samples and different industries as well.


7. Implications for the Management of Human Resources:
This study has shown that the leaders role is a key think about employees behavior. The results offer support
to the model of authentic leadership (Avolio & Gardner, 2005; Avolio, 2004; Gardner, 2005; Luthans & Avolio,
2003) and, in accordance with previous analysis (Clapp-Smith, 2009; Moriano, 2011; Walumbwa, 2008;
Walumbwa, 2010; Wong & cummings, 2009) it shows that authentic leadership style can completely mediate
the managers emotional intelligence and employees behavior. in this sense, it is necessary for organizations to
own authentic leaders and to style their processes of choice, promotion, and coaching programs, considering the
leaders relative transparency and internalized ethical perspective as relevant variables, as a result of these
authentic leadership dimensions stimulate employees OCBs and Performance, that are completely associated
with the efficacy and efficiency of the organizations (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Paine, & Bachrach, 2000;
Podsakoff, Whiting, Podsakoff & Blume, 2009).

ijcrb.webs.com
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
COPY RIGHT 2013 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research


403


MAY 2013
VOL 5, NO 1


References
Abraham, R. (1999). Emotional intelligence in organisations: a conceptualization. Genetic, Social and General
Psychology Monograph,. 125 (2), 209-19.
Agho, A. P. (1992). Discriminant validity of measures of job satisfaction, positive affectivity and negativity.
Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 65 (3), 185-96.
Alimo-Metcalfe, B. (1995). An investigation of female and male constructs of leadership and empowerment.
Women in Management Review, 10 (2), 3-8.
Avolio, B., Gardner, W., Walumbwa, F., & May, D. (2004). Unlocking the mask: A look at the process by
which authentic leaders impact follower attitudes and behaviors. Leadership Quarterly, 15(6), 801-823.
Avolio, B.J., & Gardner, W.L. (2005). Authentic leadership development: Getting to the root of positive forms
of leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 16, 315-338.
Bachman, J. S. (2000). Emotional intelligence in the collection of debt, International Journal of Selection and
Assessmen. 8 (3), 176-82.
Baron, R. a. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual,
strategic, and statistical considerations, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51 (6), 1173-82.
Barling, J., Slater, F., & Kelloway, E.K. (2000). Transformational leadership and emotional intelligence: An
exploratory study. Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 21, 157-161.
Bass, B. a. (1990). Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire, Consulting. Psychologist press, Palo Alto, CA.
Bass, B. M. (1997). Full range Leadership Development: Mannual for the Multifactor Leadership
Questionnaire, Palo Mindgarden Alto CA.
Bono, J. E., & Judge, T. A. (2003). Core self-evaluations: A review of the trait and its role in job satisfaction and job
performance. European Journal of Personality, 17, S5-S18.
Bycio, P. H. (1995). Further assessments of Basss (1985) conceptualization of transactional and
transformational leadership. Journal of Applied psychology , 80 (4), 468-78.
Campbell, J. P., McCloy, R. A., Oppler, S. H., & Sager, C. E. (1993). A theory of performance. In E. Schmitt,
W. C. Borman, & Associates (Eds.), Personnel selection in organizations (pp. 3570). San Francisco: Jossey-
Bass.
Clapp-Smith, R., Vogelgesang, G., & Avey, J. (2009). Authentic leadership and positive psychological capital:
The mediating role of trust at the group level of analysis. Organizational Studies, 15(3), 227-240.
Cooper, R. A. (1997). Executive EQ: EI in Leadership and Organisations, Grosset, Putnum , New York, NY.
Day, A.L. & Carroll, S.A. (2004). Using an ability-based measure of EI to predict subordinates performance,
group performance, and group citizenship behaviors. Personality and Individual Differences, 36 (6), 1443-58.
Dovidio, J.F., Piliavin, J.A., Schroeder, D.A., & Penner, L.A. (2006). The social psychology of prosocial
behavior. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Dionne, S.D., Yammarino, F.J., Atwater, L.E. and Spangler, W.D. (2004). Transformational leadership and
team performance, Journal of Organizational Change Management, 17(2), 177-93.
Duckett, H. & Macfarlane, E. (2003).Emotional intelligence and transformational leadership in retailing,
Leadership& Organization Development Journal, 24 (6), 309-17.
Fu, P.P., Chow, H.S. & Zhang, Y.(2001). Leadership approaches and perceived leadership effectiveness in
Chinese township and village enterprise, Journal of Asian Business, 17 (1), 1-12.
Finkelstein, M.A. (2006). Dispositional predictors of organizational citizenship behavior: Motives, motive
fulfillment and role identity. Social Behavior and Personality, 34(6), 603-616.
Finkelstein, M.A., & Penner, L.A. (2004). Predicting organizational citizenship behavior: Integrating the
functional and role identity approaches. Social Behavior and Personality, 32(4), 383-398.
Gardner, L. & Stough, C. (2002). Examining the relationship between leadership and emotional intelligence in
senior level managers, Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 23 (2), 68-78.
Gardner, W.L., Avolio, B.J., Luthans, F., May, D.R., & Walumbwa, F. (2005). Can you see the real me? A
self-based model of authentic leaders and follower development. The Leadership Quarterly, 16, 343 372.
Gates, G. (1995). A review of literature on leadership and emotional: exposing theory, posing questions, and
forwarding an agenda, The Journal of Leadership Studies, 2 (4), 98-110.
ijcrb.webs.com
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
COPY RIGHT 2013 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research


404


MAY 2013
VOL 5, NO 1

George, J.M. (1995). Leader positive mood and group performance: the case of customer service, Journal of
Applied Social Psychology, 25 (9), 778-94.
Goleman, D. (1996). Emotional Intelligence: Why It Can Matter more than IQ. London: Bloomsbury
Publishing.
Goleman, D. (1998a). Working with Emotional Intelligence. New York: Bantam Books.
Goleman, D. (1998b). What makes a leader? Harvard Business Review, 76 (6), November-December, 93-102.
Hater, J.J. & Bass, B.M. (1988). Superiors evaluations and subordinates perceptions of transformational and
transactional leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73(4), 695-702.
Higgs, M. (2003). How can we make sense of leadership in the 21st century? Leadership & Organization
Development Journal, 24(5), 273-84.
Higgs, M. (2004). A study of the relationship between emotional intelligence and performance in UK call
centers. Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 19 No. 4, 442-454.
Judge, T.A. & Bono, J.E. (2000). Five factor model of personality and transformational leadership. Journal of
Applied Psychology, Vol. 85 No. 5, 751-765.
Krishnan, V.R. (2005). Transformational leadership and outcomes: role of relationship duration, Leadership &
Organization Development Journal, Vol. 26 No. 6, 442-457.
Kupers, W. & Weibler, J. (2006). How emotional is transformational leadership really? Leadership &
Organization Development Journal, Vol. 27 No. 5, 368-383.
Langhorn, S. (2004). How emotional intelligence can improve management performance. International Journal
of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 16 No. 4, pp. 220-30.
Luthans, F., & Avolio, B. (2003). Authentic leadership development. In K.S. Cameron, J.E., Dutton, & R.E.
Quinn (Eds.), Positive organizational scholarship. Foundations of a new discipline (pp. 241-259). San
Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
Leban, W. & Zulauf, C. (2004). Linking emotional intelligence abilities and transformational leadership styles.
Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 25 No. 7, pp. 554-64.
Martinez, M.N. (1997).The smarts that count. HR Magazine, Vol. 42 No. 11, pp. 72-8.
Meyer, J.P., Paunonen, S.V., Gellatly, I.R., Goffin, R.D. & Jackson, D.N. (1989), Organizational commitment
and job performance: its the nature of the commitment that counts. Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 4 No.
1, pp. 152-6.
Mayer, R. C., & Gavin, M. B. (2005). Trust in management and performance: Who minds the shop while the
employees watch the boss? Academy of Management Journal, 48, 874 888.
Moriano, J.A., Molero, F., & Lvy-Mangin, J.P. (2011). Liderazgo autntico. Concepto y validacin del
cuestionario ALQ en Espaa. Authentic leadership. Concept and validation of the ALQ in Spain]. Psicothema,
23(2), 336-341.
Organ, D.W. (1988). Organizational citizenship behavior: The good soldier syndrome. Lexington, MA:
Lexington Books.
Organ, D.W., Podsakoff, P.M., & MacKenzie, S.B. (2006). Organizational citizenship behavior: Its nature,
antecedents, and consequences. London: Sage.
Palmer, B., Walls, M., Burgess, Z. & Stough, C. (2001). Emotional intelligence and effective leadership.
Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 5-10.
Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Paine, J.B., & Bachrach, D.G. (2000). Organizational citizenship behaviors:
A critical review of the theoretical and empirical literature and suggestions for future research. Journal of
Management, 26(3), 513-563.
Podsakoff, P. M., Ahearne, M., & Mackenzie, S. B. (1997). Organisational citizenship behavior and the quantity
and quality of work group performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(2), 262-270.
Podsakoff, N.P., Whiting, S.W., Podsakoff, P.M., & Blume, B.D. (2009). Individual and organizational -level
consequences of organizational citizenship behaviors: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(1),
122-141.
Podsakoff, P.M., Mackenzie, S.C., Lee, J. & Podsakoff, N.P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral
research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 88
No. 5, pp. 879-903.
ijcrb.webs.com
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
COPY RIGHT 2013 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research


405


MAY 2013
VOL 5, NO 1

Rahim, M.A. & Minors, P. (2003). Effects of EI on concern for quality and problem solving. Managerial
Auditing Journal, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 150-5.
Rob Goffee & Gareth Jones. (2005). Managing Authenticity: The Paradox of Great Leadership. Harvard
Business Revi, December 2005, pp 87-94
Rosete, D. & Ciarrochi, J. (2005).Emotional intelligence and its relationship to workplace performance
outcomes of leadership effectiveness. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 26 No. 5, pp. 388-
99.
Salovey, P. & Mayer, J.D. (1990). Emotional Intelligence. Imagination, Cognition and Personality, Vol. 9 No.
3, pp. 185-211.
Sivanathan, N. & Fekken, G.C. (2002). Emotional intelligence, moral reasoning and transformational
leadership. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 198-204.
Sternberg, R.J. (1996). Successful Intelligence. New York:Simon and Schuster.
Tischler, L., Biberman, J. & Mckeage, R. (2002). Linking EI, spirituality and workplace performance. Journal
of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 203-18.
Walumbwa, F.O. and Lawler, J.J. (2003). Building effective organisations: transformational leadership,
collectivist orientation, work-related attitudes and withdrawal behaviours in three emerging economies. The
International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 14 No. 7, pp. 1083-110.
Walumbwa, F.O., Lawler, J.J., Avolio, B.J., Wang, P. and Shi, K. (2005). Transformational leadership and
work-related attitudes: the moderating effects of collective and self-efficacy across cultures. Journal of
Leadership and Organisational Studies, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 1-16.
Walumbwa, F.O., Avolio, B.J., Gardner, W.L., Wernsing, T.S., & Peterson, S.J. (2008). Authentic leadership:
Development and validation of a theory-based measure. Journal of Management, 34(1), 89-126.
Walumbwa, F.O., Wang, P., Wang, H., Schaubroeck, J., & Avolio, B.J. (2010). Psychological processes linking
authentic leadership to follower behaviors. The Leadership Quarterly, 21, 901-914.
Williams, L.J., & Anderson, S.E. (1991). Job satisfaction and organizational commitment as predictors of
organizational citizenship in a non-work setting. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 1(3), 601-617.
Wong, C.A., & Cummings, G.G. (2009). The influence of authentic leadership behaviors on trust and work
outcomes of health care staff. Journal of Leadership Studies, 3(2), 6-23.
Wong, C.S. & Law, K.S. (2002). The effects of leader and follower emotional intelligence on performance and
attitude: an exploratory study. Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 243-74.