Emotional Intelligence: Predicting Workplace Performance

EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE:
PREDICTING WORKPLACE
PERFORMANCE
Literature Review

AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY

Organizational Behavior: MGMT 2007

0|Page
Emotional Intelligence: Predicting Workplace Performance

Abstract
This paper will try to study the concepts surrounding emotional intelligence and its influence on
workplace performance and answer the question: Does EI predict workplace performance?
Consequently, this paper will go through different approaches and models of emotional intelligence
measurements. Three streams of EI measures and two models (ability and trait) will be analyzed to
determine whether emotional intelligence can predict workplace performance. From the study done in
the literature, it was found that emotional intelligence has a positive relation to workplace success.

1|Page
Emotional Intelligence: Predicting Workplace Performance

Contents

Emotional Intelligence: Streams Based Approach .................................................................................. 3

Emotional Intelligence Models: Trait and Ability .................................................................................... 4
Does Emotional Intelligence Predict Workplace Performance? ............................................................. 5
Gap in the literature................................................................................................................................ 5
Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................... 6
Bibliography ............................................................................................................................................ 6

2|Page
Emotional Intelligence: Predicting Workplace Performance

Emotion management has been at the core of management theory and practice for years.
However, EI is a relatively new topic which has gained sufficient interest of the researchers (K. V.
Petrides & Furnham, 2001). Relevant literature found that people with higher EI have healthier,
happier and more productive life and experience work success (Tischler, Biberman, & McKeage, 2002).
Thus, Emotional intelligence (EI) has become a useful construct in workplace research (Schutte & Loi,
2014). While most of the researchers found strong links between EI and workplace performance or at
least concluded that it could be a measure to enhance workplace environment, some of the
researchers criticized highly of its links to workplace success. The debate surrounded around the
definition, nature, measurements and application of EI (Spector, 2005). For instance, Locke argued
that EI is not a form of intelligence and questioned the definition of EI (Locke, 2005). Researchers
responded to his claims stating critics failure to distinguish between different models of EI (Neal M.
Ashkanasy & Daus, 2005). Moreover, a meta-analysis done by OBoyle suggested that EI is positively
related to workplace performance (O'Boyle, Humphrey, Pollack, Hawver, & Story, 2011). Furthermore,
other studies indicated the association of higher EI with superior leadership and management qualities
(Harms & Cred, 2010). Howbeit, the cultural impacts on EI is still to be uncovered by the researchers.
This is perhaps, a limiting factor of EI with the growing nature of diverse multicultural working groups.
Consequently, considering both ends of the argument and scrutinizing their findings current research
suggests that, EI is indeed an important concept for leadership positions and workplace environment.
However, the connection between EI and workplace success depends highly upon the nature of its
application.

In 2009, researchers found that higher EI is related to better mental health and a high sense
of control over an individuals work(Johnson, Batey, & Holdsworth, 2009). This study explored the
roles of trait EI and work locus of control and their connections with Big Five personality traits.
Limitations pitfall of this study was its smaller sample size and sampling method. Moreover, the paper
did not consider the lower order personality factors either (Johnson et al., 2009). Another important
aspect of workplace behavior is individuals interpersonal skills and interpersonal relationships in
workplaces. Lopes, Salovey and Straus concluded that EI is also associated with variety of interpersonal
skills and better interpersonal relationships (Lopes, Salovey, & Straus, 2003). The study discovered the
links between EI and personality traits using the Mayer, Salovey, and Caruso Emotional Intelligence
Test (MSCEIT). However, reliance on self-report measures and uncertainty related to MSCEIT limits
the application of the results (Lopes et al., 2003). Nonetheless, these studies on emotion provides
further insights and lightens the paths to discover the relationship between EI and workplace success
from organizational point of view.

Emotional Intelligence: Streams Based Approach

Ashkanasy and Daus (2005) have outlined the research on EI into three different streams
based on their analysis. Researchers have used these streams to identify attributes of EI in their
studies. The first stream (Stream 1) is a four-branch based abilities model developed by Mayer and
Salovey in 1990 (Neal M Ashkanasy & Daus, 2002). Mayer and Salovey proposed four branches in their
model of EI: (1) perception of emotion; (2) assimilation of emotion to facilitate thought; (3)
understanding of emotion; (4) managing and regulating emotion in self and others (Neal M Ashkanasy
& Daus, 2002). MSCEIT version 2 (MSCEIT V.2) gives total score for EI and the four branches using 141
items (Conte, 2005) with a reliability ranging from 0.68 to 0.71 (Mayer, Salovey, Caruso, & Sitarenios,
2003). Conte has expressed his concern about the scientific standards for determining the precision
of MSCEIT V.2 and argued that these ability based models do not provide meaningful scores at the
higher end of EI (Conte, 2005). However, other researchers found that MSCIET has incremental validity
in social deviance (Brackett & Mayer, 2003). The second stream (Stream 2) focuses on the Mayer-

3|Page
Emotional Intelligence: Predicting Workplace Performance

Salovey representation model based on various self and peer report measures (Neal M. Ashkanasy &
Daus, 2005). Howbeit, this stream differs from ability based measures in many ways (O'Boyle et al.,
2011). Stream 3 is represented by EQ-I and ECI and includes components not covered by Salovey and
Mayer. Mayer, Salovey and Caruso characterized Stream 3 as a mixed model as it shows similarity with
different personality types and behavioral preferences (Mayer, Caruso, & Salovey, 2000).
Furthermore, this model also overlaps with other traditional methods of personality measures
(McCrae, 2000). This stream takes advantage of Emotional Competence Inventory (ECI) and Bar-On
Emotional Quotient Inventory (EQ-i). The ECI assesses 20 competencies using 110 items which are
organized into 4 clusters: (1) self-awareness; (2) social awareness, (3) self-management and (4) social
skills. The internal consistency of this measure varies from 0.61 to 0.95 (Gowing, 2001). Researchers
argued that ECI competencies overlap with most of the Big Five personality dimensions and does not
deserve serious considerations (Conte, 2005). EQ-I is another self-report measure that uses 133-items
to provide overall Emotional Quotient (EQ) scores based on (1) interpersonal; (2) adaptability; (3)
general mood and (4) stress management (Conte, 2005). ECI and EQ-I measures are extremely popular
in consultation applications (Neal M. Ashkanasy & Daus, 2005). However, Conte argued that EQ-I lacks
some validity evidence to provide incremental validity over cognitive ability and Big Five personality
dimensions (Conte, 2005).

There is an active debate going on between the advocates of three different streams.
However, all these types of measures predict job performance to some extent and measure the core
concepts of EI in different study scenarios (O'Boyle et al., 2011). The researcher found that all three
streams relate to job performance at similar levels and all of them are positively related to
extroversion, openness, agreeableness, conscientiousness and cognitive abilities and inversely related
to neuroticism (O'Boyle et al., 2011). MSCEIT illustrated the weakest relations with the Five Factor
Model (FFM) whereas cognitive abilities showed stronger relations. The study also showed substantial
incremental validity of stream 2 and stream 3 over and above cognitive intelligence and FFM while
questioning the incremental validity for stream 1 (O'Boyle et al., 2011). However, the meta-analysis
had some limitations. It has only considered a handful number of moderators to predict workplace
performance. Moreover, the study only included task-based job performance. However, the biggest
limiting factor of this research was that the rigidity of the scope as the study excluded several
contextual factors (O'Boyle et al., 2011).

Emotional Intelligence Models: Trait and Ability

Schutte and Loi (2014) analyzed 319 working adults from United States and Australia and
found that higher EI was related to better mental health, more work management, social support
satisfaction in the workplace and more sense of power in the workplace (Schutte & Loi, 2014). Schutte
and Loi took advantage of the positive psychology theory (PPT) to uncover the connection between EI
and workplace flourishing. PPT is one of the newest methods which can be applied to work to
understand the workplace success (Schutte & Loi, 2014). This approach focuses on positive emotion
of engagement and healthy relationships (Seligman, 2012). Another aspect of PPT is that its ability to
recognize and foster positive organizational behavior and individual strengths as well as the
relationships between workplace conditions. Moreover, studies have found employee strength plays
an instrumental role to develop self-efficacy, optimism, resilience, positive emotions and
transformational leadership abilities (Fitzgerald & Schutte, 2010; Fullagar & Kelloway, 2012). The study
judged the participants on how they identify, understand, regulate and harness emotions in
themselves and others based on The 33-item Assessing Emotions Scale developed by Schutte,
Malouff, & Bhullar. The authors focused on trait EI and explored its relation to workplace outcomes.
Trait EI is concerned with personality framework and situational consistencies in behavior (K. Petrides

4|Page
Emotional Intelligence: Predicting Workplace Performance

& Furnham, 2000). According to the paper, higher work engagement, mental health and perceived
power at workplace environment were significantly related to trait EI. However, trait EI heavily relies
on the self-report inventories which can be unreliable to some extent. Consequently, the results of
the study done by Schutte and Loi demands further attention to validate the claims by using ability EI
(Schutte & Loi, 2014).

The ability model of EI refers to individuals expertise in demonstrating skills in the four
branches outlined in stream 1 (Daus & Ashkanasy, 2005). The researchers used stream 1 abilities
model of EI measurement methods such as MEIS and MSCEIT (Daus & Ashkanasy, 2005). Daus &
Ashkanasy (2005) considered the claims made by various researchers and refuted their claims from
an ability based EI approach. The study has used the Mayer-Salovey-Caruso ability model of EI (1997)
which is essentially the stream 1 discussed above. The study has considered leadership, job
performance and individual performance to study the connection between ability based of EI in
organizational environment and concluded that ability based models of EI adds value in the domain
of organizational psychology (Daus & Ashkanasy, 2005). However, the study only reviewed the
literatures which constituted a firm base of evidence against the critics (Daus & Ashkanasy, 2005). This
may lead to selection bias of the study and may not illustrate a holistic picture.

Researchers like Landy, Locke and Conte have questioned the ability of EI in predicting
workplace performance (Daus & Ashkanasy, 2005). Locke (2005) has argued that EI is an invalid
concept as it does not have any precise definitions and talked about some fundamental problems
regarding EI. Conte (2005) expressed his concern about EI measures as they lack adequate scientific
researches. Moreover, Landy (2005) claimed that EI is still outside the typical scientific domain and
much of the data supporting the relation between EI and workplace performance is inaccessible.
Consequently, Daus and Ashkanasy (2005) presented their logics to refute the claims. The researchers
have argued that ability model of EI acts psychometrically intelligent enough and illustrates robust
convergent and discriminant validity (Daus & Ashkanasy, 2005). Moreover, Mayer et.al (1999)
provided evidence that EI meets the benchmarks for something to be regarded as intelligence (Daus
& Ashkanasy, 2005). Furthermore, there were number of scientific studies done on the claims by critics
which contested their claims. Howbeit, discussion on that is out of this papers scope.

Does Emotional Intelligence Predict Workplace Performance?

In recent years number of works done on EI has increased significantly which indicates the
issue of emotion in workplace is shaping up as a major field of study in organization management(Neal
M Ashkanasy & Daus, 2002). Recent studies found the evidence supporting EI to be related with better
mental health, more work engagement, satisfaction in the workplace and more perceived power in
the workplace (Schutte & Loi, 2014) . The discussion done above illustrates that researches have made
significant progress to understand the nature of employee behavior and predict their potential
performance using the tools of EI. The different streams of EI may have different influence on
predicting individual success, but if applied together in a coherent manner these can facilitate
organizations with useful toolset.

Gap in the literature

However, more comprehensive studies need to be carried out in order to make the measures
of EI more coherent and robust. One of the important aspect of this discussion is that the application
of EI is highly contextual and may vary from situation to situation. Thus, making the notion of EI
measures difficult to understand. Another potential gap can be the lack studies on EI in different
cultural constructs. With the increasing number of multinational companies and cross-cultural

5|Page
Emotional Intelligence: Predicting Workplace Performance

working space it has become an essential skill for the workers to merge with people all around the
world while maintain high performance.

Conclusion
The literature review explored the different streams of EI measures and models to understand
its influence on workplace performance. The individual, social, interpersonal concepts were analyzed
to determine the incremental validity of EI on workplace success. The results suggested that, EI can
predict employees workplace performance if proper application is ensured. Thorough understanding
of the relationship between EI and workplace success will enable managers to maintain and confirm
an efficient and sustainable working environment in an organization.

Bibliography

Ashkanasy, N. M., & Daus, C. S. (2002). Emotion in the workplace: The new challenge for managers.
The Academy of Management Executive, 16(1), 76-86. A*
Ashkanasy, N. M., & Daus, C. S. (2005). Rumors of the death of emotional intelligence in organizational
behavior are vastly exaggerated. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26(4), 441-452.
doi:10.1002/job.320 A*
Brackett, M. A., & Mayer, J. D. (2003). Convergent, discriminant, and incremental validity of competing
measures of emotional intelligence. Personality and social psychology bulletin, 29(9), 1147-
1158. A*
Conte, J. M. (2005). A review and critique of emotional intelligence measures. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 26(4), 433-440. doi:10.1002/job.319 A*
Daus, C. S., & Ashkanasy, N. M. (2005). The case for the abilitybased model of emotional intelligence
in organizational behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26(4), 453-466. A*
Fitzgerald, S., & Schutte, N. S. (2010). Increasing transformational leadership through enhancing self-
efficacy. Journal of Management Development, 29(5), 495-505. C
Fullagar, C., & Kelloway, E. K. (2012). New directions in positive psychology: Implications for a healthy
workplace. Contemporary occupational health psychology: Global perspectives on research
and practice, 2, 146.
Gowing, M. K. (2001). Measurement of individual emotional competence. The emotionally intelligent
workplace: How to select for, measure, and improve emotional intelligence in individuals,
groups, and organizations, 83-131.
Harms, P. D., & Cred, M. (2010). Emotional Intelligence and Transformational and Transactional
Leadership: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 17(1), 5-17.
doi:10.1177/1548051809350894 C
Johnson, S. J., Batey, M., & Holdsworth, L. (2009). Personality and health: The mediating role of Trait
Emotional Intelligence and Work Locus of Control. Personality and Individual Differences,
47(5), 470-475. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2009.04.025 A
Locke, E. A. (2005). Why emotional intelligence is an invalid concept. Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 26(4), 425-431. doi:10.1002/job.318 A*
Lopes, P. N., Salovey, P., & Straus, R. (2003). Emotional intelligence, personality, and the perceived
quality of social relationships. Personality and Individual Differences, 35(3), 641-658.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(02)00242-8 A
Mayer, J. D., Caruso, D. R., & Salovey, P. (2000). Selecting a measure of emotional intelligence: The
case for ability scales. 320-342.
Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P., Caruso, D. R., & Sitarenios, G. (2003). Measuring emotional intelligence with
the MSCEIT V2. 0. Emotion, 3(1), 97-105.
McCrae, R. R. (2000). Emotional intelligence from the perspective of the five-factor model of
personality. In R. B.-O. J. D. A. Parker (Ed.), The handbook of emotional intelligence: Theory,

6|Page
Emotional Intelligence: Predicting Workplace Performance

development, assessment, and application at home, school, and in the workplace (pp. 263-
276). San Francisco, CA, US: Jossey-Bass.
O'Boyle, E. H., Humphrey, R. H., Pollack, J. M., Hawver, T. H., & Story, P. A. (2011). The relation between
emotional intelligence and job performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 32(5), 788-818. doi:10.1002/job.714 A*
Petrides, K., & Furnham, A. (2000). On the dimensional structure of emotional intelligence. Personality
and Individual Differences, 29(2), 313-320. A
Petrides, K. V., & Furnham, A. (2001). Trait emotional intelligence: psychometric investigation with
reference to established trait taxonomies. European Journal of Personality, 15(6), 425-448.
doi:10.1002/per.416
Schutte, N. S., & Loi, N. M. (2014). Connections between emotional intelligence and workplace
flourishing. Personality and Individual Differences, 66, 134-139.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.03.031 A
Seligman, M. E. (2012). Flourish: A visionary new understanding of happiness and well-being: Simon
and Schuster.
Spector, P. E. (2005). Introduction: emotional intelligence. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26(4),
409-410. doi:10.1002/job.316 A*
Tischler, L., Biberman, J., & McKeage, R. (2002). Linking emotional intelligence, spirituality and
workplace performance: Definitions, models and ideas for research. Journal of Managerial
Psychology, 17(3), 203-218. doi:doi:10.1108/02683940210423114 C

7|Page