Linking Emotional Intelligence and Performance at Work

Current Research Evidence With Individuals and Groups

Vanessa Urch Druskat, Gerald Mount, Fabio Sala, Vanessa Urch Druskat, Gerald Mount, Fabio Sala

• Éditeur: Psychology Press
• Année: 2013
• ISBN:
  9781134998760
• Édition: 1
• Sujet: Psychologie
• Sous-sujet: Histoire et théorie en psychologie

In this edited volume, leading edge researchers discuss the link between Emotional Intelligence (EI) and workplace performance. Contributors from many areas such as social science, management (including organizational practitioners), and psychologists have come together to develop a better understanding of how EI can influence work performance, and whether research supports it.A unique feature of this book is that it integrates the work of social scientists and organizational practitioners. Their mutual interests in EI provide a unique opportunity for basic and applied research and practices to learn from one another in order to continually refine and advance knowledge on EI. The primary audience for this book is researchers, teachers, and students of psychology, management, and organizational behavior. Due to its clear practical applications to the workplace, it will also be of interest to organizational consultants and human resource practitioners.

Part I

EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE AND INDIVIDUAL PERFORMANCE EFFECTIVENESS

Chapter 1

The Impact of Emotional Intelligence on Performance

Reuven Bar-On
University of Texas Medical Branch

Richard Handley
United States Air Force

Suzanne Fund
Israeli Defense Forces

Much has been said about the impact of emotional intelligence (EI) on human performance since the 1995 publication of a best-seller by the same name (Goleman, 1995). However, a great deal of what has been said is, unfortunately, based on supposition rather than scientific research. It is the purpose of this chapter to empirically demonstrate that EI does indeed impact performance.

Rather than beginning with an in-depth and lengthy review of the EI literature from Charles Darwin (Darwin, 1872/1965) to the present, exhaustively comparing what we want to do with what others have and have not done, we will suffice to explain only what we have found, how we found it, and how it may be applied to improve individual and organizational performance. In an effort “to tell it like it is,” our chapter presents the empirical evidence that we have regarding the impact of emotional intelligence on performance. Findings are presented that might help explain why some people function better than others, assume positions of leadership, and even volunteer for highly stressful and potentially dangerous tasks at times, whereas others are unable to emotionally and socially deal with daily demands in a more intelligent and effective manner.

Two major studies provide the foundation for our discussion. One study was conducted in the U.S. Air Force (USAF) and the other in the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF). To the best of our knowledge, the former is the first study that has directly examined the impact of emotional intelligence on occupational performance (Handley, 1997), and the latter is the most extensive validity study conducted to date based on over 5,000 participants during a 3-year period. Both the USAF and IDF were interested in examining the impact of EI on performance and to see if it could be applied in recruiting the right people for the job and reducing mismatches. The USAF was interested in seeing if EI assessment could help predict performance in military recruiters. More specifically, they wanted to improve their recruitment of successful recruiters and decrease the high cost of mismatches. Essentially, they were asking: Do people with higher EQs make more effective recruiters, and how can we use this information to recruit them if so? In addition to examining the extent to which EI assessment could improve their ability to evaluate new recruits in general, the IDF also expressed a specific interest in examining if this type of assessment could help identify leadership potential as well as predict performance and attrition among recruits who serve in combat units that demand performance in stressful and potentially dangerous situations.

The Bar-On model of emotional and social intelligence provides the theoretical foundation of the present chapter, and the Emotional Quotient Inventory (EQ-i) was used in both studies to assess and examine various aspects of this construct. Performance ratings were based on individual productivity in the USAF study and on peer nomination, criterion group membership, and commander evaluations in the IDF study. The conceptual model and psychometric measure of EI, the databases, as well as the method of rating performance used in both studies are explained. The EI models that were found to significantly predict performance are described in depth. The implications of these models are discussed, and possibilities are explored for applying them in recruiting, hiring, training, and promoting “the right people with the right stuff.”

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

Although the term emotional intelligence was coined in 1966 by Leuner, the general concept was first defined by Thorndike in 1920 and the construct itself was initially studied by Darwin as early as 1837 (Darwin, 1872/1965). From Darwin to the present, most descriptions of this construct have included one or more of the following key components: (a) the ability to understand and express oneself; (b) the ability to understand others and relate with them; (c) the ability to manage and control emotions; (d) the ability to manage change, adapt, and solve problems of a personal and interpersonal nature; and (e) the ability to generate positive mood and to be self-motivated. The Encyclopedia of Applied Psychology (in press) describes three major conceptual models of emotional intelligence, which are the Salovey-Mayer model, the Goleman model, and the Bar-On model. The Bar-On model of “emotional and social intelligence” provides the theoretical framework for the present chapter. Bar-On's definition of this construct states that emotional and social intelligence is a cross-section of interrelated emotional and social competencies that determine how effectively we understand and express ourselves, understand others and relate with them, and cope with daily demands and pressures (Bar-On, 2000). The emotional and social competencies described in this conceptualization of the construct include the five key components described previously, and each of these components comprises a number of closely related emotional and social competencies, all of which are measured by the EQ-i as defined in the appendix. After more than two decades of empirically developing this model, the senior coauthor of this chapter is now convinced that self-motivation is a facilitator of emotionally and socially intelligent behavior rather than an actual component of the construct itself (Bar-On, 2000).

METHOD

EI Assessment in the USAF and IDF Studies

The Bar-On Emotional Quotient Inventory was used to measure various aspects of emotional intelligence in both of the studies that are presented in this chapter. According to the Encyclopedia of Applied Psychology (in press), the three most popular measures of emotional intelligence are the Mayer–Salovey–Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT; Mayer, Salovey, & Caruso, 2002), the Emotional Competence Inventory (ECI; Boyatzis, Coleman, & Hay Group, 2001), and the Bar-On Emotional Quotient Inventory (EQ-i; Bar-On, 1997a). The EQ-i is a self-report measure of emotionally and socially intelligent behavior, which provides an estimate of one's underlying emotional and social intelligence. The EQ-i was the first EI measure to be published by a psychological test publisher and the first such measure to be reviewed in the Buros Mental Measurement Yearbook (Plake & Impara, 1999). More than one million assessments have been administered worldwide during the first 5 years since its publication in 1997, making it the most widely used EI measure. A detailed description of the psychometric properties of this measure and how it was developed is found in the instrument's technical manual (Bar-On, 1997b), in the Buros Mental Measurement Yearbook (Plake & Impara, 1999); and in a recent publication by the senior coauthor (Bar-On, 2004). In brief, the EQ-i comprises 133 items and uses a 5-point response scale with a textual response format ranging from very seldom or not true of me (1) to very often true of me or true of me (5). A list of the inventory's items is found in the EQ-i Technical Manual (Bar-On, 1997b). The individual's responses render a total EQ score and the following five composite scale scores comprising 15 subscale scores:

• Intrapersonal (comprising Self-Regard, Emotional Self-Awareness, Assertiveness, Independence, and Self-Actualization)
• Interpersonal (comprising Empathy, Social Responsibility, and Interpersonal Relationship)
• Stress Management (comprising Stress Tolerance and Impulse Control)
• Adaptability (comprising Reality-Testing, Flexibility, and Problem-Solving)
• General Mood (comprising Optimism and Happiness)

A brief description of the emotional and social intelligence competencies measured by the 15 subscales is found in the Appendix. The EQ-i was developed over a period of 17 years and normed (standardized) on 3,831 adults in North America. It has been translated into more than 30 languages, and data have been collected in numerous settings around the world. Raw scores are computer-tabulated and automatically converted into standard scores based on a mean of 100 and standard deviations of 15. The EQ-i has a built-in correction factor that automatically adjusts the scale scores based on scores obtained from the Positive Impression and Negative Impression scales (two of the instrument's validity indexes); this is an important psychometric feature for self-report measures in that it reduces the potentially distorting effects of response bias, thereby increasing the accuracy of the results obtained. The correlation between the EQ-i self-assessment of emotionally intelligent behavior and ratings of this behavior made by friends and family members is .69 based on a North American sample of 185 (Bar-On & Handley, 2003). It is also important to point out that braindamaged individuals suffering from anosognosia (the lack of self-awareness) obtained scores on the Emotional Self-Awareness subscale, and on other closely related subscales like Assertiveness, that were significantly lower than a control group (Bar-On, Tranel, Denburg, & Bechara, 2003). These findings suggest that this particular self-report measure is capable of fairly accurately assessing emotional intelligence even in respondents whose emotional intelligence is below average. The EQ-i is acknowledged as a valid and reliable measure of emotionally and socially intelligent behavior based on independent review (Plake & Impara, 1999). Moreover, the EQ-i is significantly correlated with other measures that assess various aspects of this construct—for example, with the Mayer–Salovey–Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test, the Trait Meta Mood Scale, the Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire, and the 20-item Toronto Alexithymia Scale (Bar-On, 2000) and more recently with the Emotional Intelligence Scale (Kohan & Mazmanian, 2003). This suggests that the EQ-i indeed measures various aspects of emotional intelligence.

Participants, Performance Ratings, and Data Collection in the USAF Study

After we received permission from the U.S. Air Force, 1,171 recruiters agreed to participate in this study to determine the impact of EI on occupational performance. This rather large number of volunteers represented approximately 70% of all Air Force recruiters at the time this study was conducted in 1996. The participants were from every state in the United States, and the vast majority of them were White (75%) males (91%) with an average age of 33. To assess their EI, they were all administered the EQ-i, and these scores were then compared with their performance as recruiters. The USAF defined high performance among recruiters as meeting or exceeding 100% of their annual recruitment quotas, whereas low performance was defined as meeting less than 80%. Using this operational definition of performance, we divided the USAF database into a group of 477 high performers and 114 low performers. The results presented in this chapter are based on comparing the EI of 114 low performers with that of a randomly selected group of 114 recruiters among the 477 high performers. Recruiters were assigned to geographical regions in a way that gave each of them a comparable number of potential recruits so that the...

Table des matières

• Cover Page
• Half Title page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Contents
• Foreword
• Preface
• About the Authors
• Introduction: Emotional Intelligence and Work Performance
• Part I Emotional Intelligence and Individual Performance Effectiveness
• Part II Emotional Intelligence in Groups and Group Effectiveness
• Part III The Agenda for Future Research and Practice: What We Know and Stll Need to Know About the Link Between Emotional Intelligence and Work Performance
• Author Index
• Subject Index