EMOTIONAL
INTELLIGENCE AND ORGANIZATIONAL COMPETITIVENESS: MANAGEMENT MODEL APPROACH
John N. N. Ugoani
College of Management and Social Sciences, Rhema University, Nigeria
E-mail: drjohnugoani@yahoo.com
Submission: 19/01/2016
Revision: 23/02/2016
Accept: 28/02/2016
ABSTRACT
Modern organization theory considers emotional intelligence
as the index of competencies that help organizations to develop a vision for
competitiveness. It also allows organizational leaders to enthusiastically
commit to the vision, and energize organizational members to achieve the
vision. To maximize competiveness organizations use models to simplify and
clarify thinking, to identify important aspects, to suggest explanations and to
predict consequences, and explore other performance areas that would otherwise
be hidden in an excess of words. The survey research design was used to explore
the relationship between emotional intelligence and organizational
competitiveness. The study found that emotional intelligence has strong positive
relationship with organizational competitiveness.
Keywords: Hidden in excess of words, Psychometric tradition, Self-regulation,
Self-motivation, Synergistic clusters, Emotional competence
1. INTRODUCTION
An emotionally intelligent
organization is the one that seeks to come to firm terms with any differences
between the values it philosophies and those it lives. Certainty about
organizational values, spirit, and mission leads to a decisive self-confidence
in corporate decision-making. An organizational mission statement is a
statement of purpose that serves as a guide for strategy and decision making.
Such a statement serves an emotional
function articulating the shared sense of goodness that allows the organization
to feel that what it wants to do is worth while. Mission statements of
organizations that survive competition often draw from the imperatives of
emotional intelligence. Emotional intelligence refers to the capacity for
recognizing our own feelings and those of others, for motivating ourselves and
for managing emotions well in ourselves and in our relationships.
It describes abilities distinct
from, but complementary to, academic intelligence, the purely cognitive
capacities measured by intelligence quotient (IQ). A competitive organization
is one that has the ability to satisfy stakeholders, customers, employees, and
other needs of the environment. Competitiveness relates to how effective an
organization meets these needs comparative to other similar organizations.
Competitiveness is based on
strategy, a plan for achieving organizational goals, through tactics, or
methods and actions taken to accomplish strategies. With an operation strategy,
which involves the approach consistent with the organizational strategy,
organizations seek to achieve their goals. Such actions are complemented by
emotional intelligence that provides distinctive competencies, or the special
attributes or abilities that give an organization a competitive edge.
This competitive edge allows that
organization to distinguish between order qualifiers, which is the
characteristics of what customers perceive as minimum standards of
acceptability to be considered for patronage, order winners, which is related
to an organizations goods or services that make it to be perceived as better
than competitors. Competitive organizations are frequently productive
organizations. Productivity is a measure of the effective use of organizational
resources, usually expressed as the ratio of output to input (STEVENSON, 2002).
Managers and workers are the people
responsible for the management of other resources in an organization, and for
them to perform well they require a good dose of emotional intelligence,
Competitive organizations assess themselves in various ways not only through
profit. Knowing how those shared values work amount to emotional self-awareness
at the organizational level.
Just as each person has a profile of
strengths and weaknesses in the different areas of competence so it is with
organizations. For organizational competitiveness can be mapped at various
levels through assessments or internal surveys and models. Models are important
to gauge the pulse of an organization’s viability.
According Goleman (1998) systems
theory states that to ignore any significant category of data is to limit
understanding and response. Sounding the depths of emotional currents in an
organization can have concrete benefits. A model is an abstraction of reality,
a simplified version of something that may lead to a better knowledge of reality.
Models are sometimes classified as
physical, mathematical or schematic. Schematic models include graphs, charts,
blueprints, pictures, drawings, etc. Managers frequently use schematic models
to read organizational reality with the view of enhancing organizational
competitiveness.
Cleary (1992) describes a model as a
simplified representation of the real world. This suggests that it takes the
form of a diagrammatic representation or may be conceptual. Irrespective of
whether the model may be a diagram or be conceptual, the purpose of any model
is to simplify and clarify thinking to identify important aspects, to suggest
explanations, and to predict consequences (DYE, 1992).
Models have been widely employed in
management theory to help clarify relationships and processes, including
McGregor’s (1960) theory ‘X’ and theory ‘Y’ model, Blake and Mouton’s (1964)
nine part grid diagram, and conceptual models developed by Maslow (1954)
Herzberg (1974). These studies confirm that models assist the researcher to understand
the “real” world and to provide a useful touchstone between the real world and
the reality of the researcher.
A schematic model allows a link
between theory and the real world. It is analogous to a map that links analysis
and investigation with the world of observable events. The schematic model
displays the relationships between variables. Keeves (1997) claims that
schematic models are very popular in educational research and such symbolic and
diagrammatic models help to make explicit the structure of a concept that would
otherwise be hidden in an excess of words.
A major advantage of schematic
models is that they are often relatively simple to construct, and change. More
over, they have some degree of visual correspondence. Managers use schematic
models in a variety of ways and for a variety of reasons. Schematic models are
beneficial for organizational competitiveness because they are generally easy
to use and less expensive than dealing directly with the actual situation.
Schematic models provide a
systematic approach to problem-solving, and increase understanding of the
problem. They serve as consistent tools for evaluation, and at the same-time,
provide a standardized format for analyzing problems (MORECROFT; STARMAN, 1994;
JAWORSKI, 1996). The issue of human skills has a rich history in management
theory. Whereas scientific management theory emphasizes the technical and
efficiency aspects of work, the human relations theory emphasizes the human
element, and concludes that in addition to the technical aspects of work,
employee motivation is critical for influencing productivity and overall
organizational competitiveness.
This gave rise to many motivation
theories including theory Z which emphasizes that group motivation such as
lifelong employment, employee problem-solving and consensus building are highly
correlated to organizational competitiveness (STEVENSON, 2002; GERARD; TEURFS,
1995; FINEMAN, 1997; DRUCKER, 1998).
An organization is like an organism,
with a moment of birth, growth through several distinct stages of development,
maturation, and finally an end. However, the competitive ones last longer. And
the ingredients of an effective and competitive organization include a healthy
dose of emotional intelligence because there are numerous variables that can
prove fatal to an organization. But a failure in emotional intelligence can be
fatal to organizational competitiveness (ASTD, 1997; SPECTOR, 2005; KLUEMPER,
2008; PFEIFER, 2000; MCLEOD, 1997; SALONA; SLUYTER, 1997; SJOBERG, 2000;
SAARNI, 1998; WU, et al., 2006; WEISS, 2000).
1.1
Statement of the problem
For decades organizations rooted in
the scientific management theory tend to emphasize the technical and efficiency
aspects of work to the detriment of the human elements that are equally very
critical for competitive advantage. Today the challenge of knowledge workers,
demographic changes, diversity, among others, means that the premium on
emotional intelligence will rise as organizations become increasingly dependent
on the talents and creativity of workers who are independent agents.
According to Goleman (1998) 77
percent of American “knowledge workers” says they decide what to do on the job,
rather then being told by someone else. The rising popularity of flextime is
accelerating this trend. Autonomy can work only if it goes hand in hand with
self-control, trustworthiness, and conscientiousness.
And as people work less for the
organizations, and more for themselves, emotional intelligence will be required
to maintain the relationships vital for workers’ survival and organizational
competiveness.
1.2
Objective of the study.
The study was designed to explore
the degree of relationship between emotional intelligence and organizational
competitiveness.
1.3
Scope of the study
The study was conducted within Abia
State Nigeria. Abia State is one of the 36 states of Nigeria and with the size
of 6,320 square kilometers, almost two times the size of Lagos State which is
3,577 square kilometers. Therefore study in Abia State provides a fine representation
of a study in Nigeria.
1.4
Significance of the study.
The study provides insights on the
importance of emotional intelligence in organizational competitiveness. This
may help in policy formulation and execution. Undergraduate and graduate
students of contemporary management theory, trainers and the general public
will also learn more about the romance between emotional intelligence and
organizational competitiveness.
1.5
Limitations of the study
The study was constrained by
finance, logistics and current literature. However, these critical constraints
did not count against the academic value of this research.
1.6
Hypotheses
To guide the study toward achieving
the objective, two hypotheses were formulated and tested at 0.05 level of
significance.
·
Ho:
Emotional intelligence has no relationship with organizational competitiveness.
·
Hi:
Emotional intelligence has a relationship with organizational competitiveness.
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
In attempts to enhance career
success and enhance organizational effectiveness and competitiveness,
psychologists make a distinction among types of intelligences like practical
intelligence and emotional intelligence.
According to Sternberg (1996)
practical intelligence is intelligence related to overall success in living.
Noting that traditional tests were designed to relate to academic success he
points to evidence showing that intelligence quotient (IQ) does not relate
particularly well to career success.
Sternberg (1996) argues that career
success requires a very different type of intelligence. Therefore, the concept
of practical intelligence is broadened even further beyond the intellectual
realm to involve and consider intelligence involving emotions. Emotional
intelligence is the set of skills that underlie the accurate assessment,
evaluation, expression, and regulation of emotions (GOLEMAN, 1995).
Abilities in emotional intelligence
might help explain why people with only modest IQ can be quite successful,
despite the lack of traditional intelligence. The notion of emotional
intelligence teaches that there are many ways to demonstrate intelligent
behavior, just as there are multiple views of the nature of intelligence. At
the present time, three main models of emotional intelligence exist.
The first model by Salovey and Mayer
(1990) perceives emotional intelligence as a form of pure intelligence,
emphasizing that emotional intelligence is a cognitive ability. A second model
by Bar-On (1997) regards emotional intelligence as a mixed intelligence
consisting of cognitive ability and personality aspects. This model emphasizes
how cognitive and personality factors influence general well-being.
The third model introduced by
Goleman (1995) also perceives emotional intelligence as a mixed intelligence
involving cognitive ability and personality aspects. However, unlike the model
purposed by Bar-On (1997) Goleman’s (1995) model focuses on how cognitive and
personality factors determine organizational effectiveness and competitiveness.
Emotional intelligence research
finds significant relationships among all the three models of emotional
intelligence, by recognizing the co-dependence of both the cognitive and the
noncognitive factors. This suggests that emotional intelligence draws upon a
psychometric tradition, by relating to the measurement of mental data, and that
intelligence must meet three criterions to be defined as such.
This implies that emotional
intelligence must be conceptual, in which case, it must reflect mental
aptitudes rather than behaviours, it must be correlational by sharing
similarities with and yet remain distinct from any other types of
intelligences, and it must be developmental, as it must increase with an
individual’s experience and age. This psychometric tradition entails that
emotional intelligence comprises of a discrete set of abilities that integrate
affective and cognitive skills (PETRIDES; FURNHAM, 2001; MIKOLAJEZAK, et al.,
2007; BAR-ON, 2004).
These skills are the competence
needed by people to perform well in organizations, and an emotional competence
is a learned ability based on emotional intelligence. Emotional competencies
determine the potential for learning the practical skills that are based on
emotional intelligence. Emotional competence shows how much of the potential
the individual can translate into on-the-job capabilities.
For example, being good at serving
customers is an emotional competence based on empathy. Likewise,
trustworthiness is a competence based on self-regulation or handling impulses
and emotions well. Both empathy and trustworthiness are competencies that can
make people outstanding in their work.
According to McClelland (1993)
competence comes in multiples. Organizations and individuals interface in ways
that require a multitude of emotional intelligence abilities, each most
effective when used in conjunction with others in synergistic clusters.
Clusters are behavioural groups of the desired competencies. They are often
linked conceptually or schematically and defined by a theory as a convenient
operationlization and understanding of which competencies are associated with
others. This provides parsimony for organizational competitiveness.
2.1.
Imperatives of Emotional Intelligence
and Organizational competitiveness.
Organizations are formed to pursue
goals that are achieved more competitively by concerted efforts of a group of
people than by individuals working alone. Organizations are devoted to
producing goods and services or providing services. They may be for profit or
non profit organizations. Their goals, products and services may be similar or
quite different.
Nevertheless, their functions and
the way they operate are similar. Strategy and productivity among other factors
are critical to organizational competitiveness. Strategy relates to the plans
that determine the directions an organization takes in providing goods, and
productivity on the other hand is the effective use of organizational
resources.
Organizations must be competitive
enough to be able to sell their goods and services in the marketplace. They compete
with one another in various ways. These include price, product or service
quality, level of flexibility, and quality of manpower. To be significantly
competitive, an organization requires managers and workers who have the
appropriate skills and appetite to perform their jobs well.
This is imperative because managers
and workers are the people at the heart and soul of an organization and if they
are competent and motivated they can provide a distinctive competitive edge by
their skills and the ideas they create. Emotional intelligence is the index of
competencies that help organizations achieve effectiveness and competitiveness.
2.2.
Management model approach.
Some people seem to read best, think
best, or understand best, when concepts are clearly expressed quantitatively,
or in a model form. The idea is that one model is worth a thousand words. To
the management scholar, the importance of the use of models and other
quantitative techniques is the recognition of the impact of these new
approaches in the management process (GEORGE, JR. 1972).
Cherniss (2001) illustrates the
potency of emotional intelligence and organizational effectiveness through his
model of emotional intelligence and organizational effectiveness. Cherniss
(2001) believes that emotional intelligence components like leadership,
organizational climate and culture, individual emotional intelligence, group
emotional intelligence, other human resource functions, result to relationships
that give rise to organizational effectiveness.
Human resource functions like
training and development are important to motivate employees toward
contributing to organizational competitiveness. No single model is complete in
itself, and this model captures some but not all the important competencies
that contribute to the development of individual and group emotional
intelligence in organizations necessary for building organizational
competitiveness.
Figure 1: Leadership and organizational
effectiveness.
Source: Cherniss &
Goleman (2001) The Emotionally Intelligent Workplace.
The model typically shows that the
emotional intelligence of the mentor, boss, or peer will influence the
potential of a relationship with that person for helping organizational members
develop and use talent that is crucial for organizational effectiveness. It
also implies that people who are members of emotionally intelligent groups
become more emotionally intelligent individuals.
The model suggests that ultimately
any attempts to improve emotional intelligence in organizations will depend on
relationships. Even training interceptions or human resource policies will
affect emotional intelligence through their effect on relationships among
individuals and groups in the organization.
According to Cherniss and Goleman
(2001) a Gallup Organization study of two million employees at seven hundred
companies found that how long an employee stays at a company and how productive
the person is there is determined by his or her relationship with her immediate
supervisor. They state that the most effective bosses are those who have the
ability to sense how their employees feel about their work situation and to
intervene effectively when those employees begin to feel discouraged or
dissatisfied.
Effective bosses are also able to
manage their own emotions, with the result that employees trust them and feel
good about working with them. Organizations face intense needs today, both
public sector and private. And in virtually every case, emotional intelligence
must play an important role in satisfying the needs. For instance, coping with
massive change involves among other things, the ability to perceive and
understand the emotional impact of change on ourselves and others.
To be effective in helping their
organizations manage change, managers first need to be aware of and to manage
their own feelings of anxiety and uncertainty. Then they need to be aware of
the emotional reactions of other organizational members and act to help people
cope with those reactions. At the same time in this process of coping
effectively with massive change other members of the organization need to be
actively involved in monitoring and managing their emotional reactions and
those of others.
Cherniss (2001) in his model
suggests that organizational effectiveness is a manifestation of workplace
success and both are essential for organizational competitiveness. The
contemporary organization faces unprecedented environmental and technological
change. To be competitive, one of the biggest challenges for organizations is
to continuously change in a way that meets the demands of this turbulent
competitive environment.
Organizational competitiveness
embraces the concept of the learning organization. The learning organization
can be defined as one in which all employees are involved in identifying and
solving problems, which allows the organization to continually increase its
ability to grow, learn and achieve its purpose. The organizing principle of the
learning organization is not effectiveness or efficiency but problem solving and
competitiveness.
This can only be achieved through a
team-based structure, empowered employees and information sharing processes.
These components of organizational competitiveness among others can be
expressed through business or schematic models so as to simplify or clarify
thinking, to identify important aspects, and to predict possible consequences.
Models are instrumental to making explicit structures and ideas necessary for
organizational competitiveness that would otherwise be lost to mere imagination
(SENGE, 1990).
Drucker (1998) deems models
essential and asserts that most organizations move to correct the culture of
the organization before they accurately establish the assumptions upon which
the organization has been built. He emphasizes that these are the very
assumptions that shape the organization’s decision about what to do and what
not to do. In other words, to successfully generate organizational
competitiveness, it is important to establish correct assumptions about the
organization and its environment.
They must also fit one another, be
known, understood, and constantly tested throughout the organization. According
to Spencer and Spencer (1993) emotional competencies are to a large extent
applicable to top performance in virtually every job. One estimate is that
generic competencies cover about 80 to 98 percent of behaviours typical of star
performance, depending on the specific job.
The estimate includes three that are
purely cognitive: analytical thinking, conceptual thinking, and job specific
expertise and so do not fall among the emotional intelligence group.
Organizations can establish core competencies required for their
competitiveness through models such as Gap Analysis models among others. Gap
analysis can be used to assess the organization’s manpower quality relative to
its expectations, customers, and rivals. Such results help in benchmarking for
the desired levels of competitiveness (HAY/MCBER, 2000).
Figure 2: Gap analysis model of
organizational competitiveness
Source:
Ugoani, 2015.
Based on a scale of 1-10, Figure 2
suggests that an organisation can gauge the quality of its manpower on
emotional intelligence and take necessary steps to fill any gaps needed for
their competitiveness. Another good management model is the five forces model.
This is one of the approaches to evaluating an organisation’s competitive
position in the light of the strucure of its industry.
The five forces are: buyer power,
potential entrants, suppliers, substitute products, and industry rivals. The
model is operationalized by the development of a list of factors that fit under
each of the subheading, with a view to building competitive advantage.
All organisations find models very
useful in matching competition in their respective areas of operations (CHASE,
et al, 2001) Drucker (1998) puts emphasis on the assertion that it is vital to
establish assumptions about the core competencies needed to establish
organisations vision and mission. And this can be done through an analysis that
warrants the measurement of actual and desired levels of performance to
determine the competitiveness of the organisation vis-a-vis competition.
3. METHODOLOGY
3.1.
Research design
The survey research design was
employed for the study. Surveys are very useful in describing the features of a
large population or a particular subset of the population such as the business
community or the working class, or the unemployed. It is critical in
intelligence and psychometric investigations. (NUNNALLY; BERNSTEIN, 1994)
3.2.
Population and sample
The Target population comprised the
people in Abia State Nigeria. Abia State is one of the 36 states in Nigeria;
therefore, the population in Abia State is a good representation of the
Nigerian population. The sample comprised of 352 participants (197 males and
155 females) ranging in age from 21 to 65 (M = 43 years; SD = 22). This sample
for the study was selected through the simple random sampling method, while the
sample size was determined using the Yamane’s technique.
3.3.
Sources of data
Data for the study were collected
through primary and secondary sources, such as questionnaire administration,
interviews, books, journals, newspapers, etc. The mixed method was used so as
to complement, supplement, and validate data through each other.
3.4.
Data collection instrument
The instrument for data collection
was based on the Schutte, et al (1998) scale. The Schutte Self-Report Emotional
Intelligence (SSREI) scale is comprised of 33 5-point Likert scale items, three
of which were negatively, keyed. Previous investigations have found the total
score of the SSREI scale to be acceptably internally consistent and with
Cronbach’s Alpha reliability level of about .87.
3.5.
Data Analysis
Primary data were analyzed by
Chi-square statistical method using the statistical package for the social
sciences (SPSS) and presented in tables.
4. PRESENTATION OF STATISTICAL RESULTS
[DataSetO]
Chi – Square Tests
Table 1: Frequencies
|
|
Observed N |
Expected N |
Residual |
|
8.00 |
8 |
70.4 |
-62.4 |
|
23.00 |
23 |
70.4 |
-47.4 |
|
40.00 |
40 |
70.4 |
-30.4 |
|
93.00 |
93 |
70.4 |
22.6 |
|
188.00 |
188 |
70.4 |
117.6 |
|
Total |
352 |
|
|
Table 2: Test Statistics
|
|
VAR00003 |
|
Chi-Squares |
304.051 |
|
df |
4 |
|
Asymp. Sig |
.000 |
a. 0 cells (.0%) have expected
frequencies less than 5. The minimum expected cell frequency is 70.4
4.1.
Interpretation of results.
From the schematic model in Figure
1, it was observed that the relevant factors of emotional intelligence have
virtual correspondence with organizational competitiveness (CLEARY, 1992). And
from the Test Statistics, in table 2 it was noted that the calculated X2value
of approximately 304 was significantly greater than the table value of
approximately 9, at 0.05 level of significance with 4 degrees of freedom.
By this statistical result it was
found that emotional intelligence has significant positive relationship with
organizational competitiveness. This result supports the results of Cherniss
(2001) and Cherniss and Goleman (2001) that also found positive correspondence
between emotional intelligence and organizational effectiveness as well as
significant positive relationship between emotional intelligence and workplace
success.
4.2.
Discussion
Several studies have found that
emotional intelligence can have a significant impact on various areas of human
endeavour. Palmer, et al, (2001) found that higher emotional intelligence is a
predictor of life satisfaction. Also that people higher in emotional
intelligence are also more likely to exhibit healthier psychological adaption.
Performance measures of emotional
intelligence illustrate that higher levels of emotional intelligence are
associated with an increased likelihood of good health and appearance, positive
interactions with friends, customers and family members. Other researchers find
that high emotional intelligence is associated with increased positive
interpersonal relationships among children, adolescents and adults (RICE, 1999,
RUBIN, 1999).
Again, negative relationships have
likewise been identified between emotional intelligence and problem behaviour
(Mayer, et al, 2000). Mandell and Pherwani (2003) report a high positive
correlation between emotional intelligence and transformational leadership. The
transformational leader stimulates interest among colleagues, inspires a
different outlook on the work, generates an awareness of the goals of the
organization, develops others to higher levels of ability and motivates others
to consider the interests of the group over their own interests (BASS; AVOLIO,
1994).
Emotional intelligence helps
organizational leaders to develop a vision for their organizations, motivates
subordinates to commit to the vision and energize them to enthusiastically work
to achieve this vision. Moreover, emotional intelligence may enable leaders to
develop a significant identity for their organizations and instill high levels
of trust and co-operation throughout the organization while maintaining the
flexibility needed to respond to changing conditions. Individual and group
emotional intelligence contribute to organizational effectiveness and
competitiveness.
According to Cherniss (2001)
emotional intelligence emerges primarily through relationships. At the same
time emotional intelligence affects the quality of relationships. Relationship
can help people become more emotionally intelligent even when they are not set
up for that purpose. This suggests that ultimately any attempts to improve
emotional intelligence in organizations will depend on relationships or human
resource policies which affect emotional intelligence through their effect on
relationships among individuals and groups in the organization. In a model he
illustrates three organizational factors that are interrelated.
Each of these factors influences
emotional intelligence through its impact on relationships, and each factor
influence the other two. The model showed how the emotional intelligence of
organizational leadership influences organizational effectiveness which is a
requisite for organizational competitiveness. Likewise the schematic model,
showed the virtual correspondence between individual emotional intelligence,
group emotional intelligence, leadership and organizational competitiveness.
The model relied on emotional
intelligence as the index of emotional competencies that produce organizational
competitiveness. Organizational competitiveness requires the maximization of
group’s emotional intelligence, the synergistic interaction of every person.
This suggests that the correct measure of excellence involves the capabilities
of the human mind and the competencies critical to workplace success.
McClelland (1993) posits that a set
of specific competencies, including empathy, self-discipline, and initiative
provide a distinction among the most successful from those who are merely sound
enough to keep their jobs. According to him a competence in this tradition is a
personal trait or set of habits that lead to more effective or superior job
performance, in other words, an ability that adds clear economic value to the
efforts of a person on the job that may lead to organizational competitiveness
(MCCLELLAND, 1973).
4.3.
Recommendations
i) Organizations should encourage the development of healthy
relationships so as to encourage effectiveness and competitiveness.
ii) Managers and workers as the heart and soul of organizations
should be properly motivated to enable them perform to their fullest potentials
to enhance organizational competitiveness.
iii) Organizations need more of transformational leaders who can
provide above average incremental changes for the growth and competitiveness of
their organizations.
iv) Organizations should have a tradition of retaining experienced
workers who might have a high dose of emotional intelligence needed for
organizational competitiveness.
v) Organizations should pay attention to training of managers
and workers so as to develop latent competencies. This is unique for
organizational competitiveness because competence comes in multiples.
Organizations and individuals interface in ways that require a multitude of
emotional intelligence abilities each most effective when used in conjunction
with others in synergistic clusters.
4.4.
Scope for further research
Further research should examine the
relationship between emotional intelligence and organizational policy. This is
necessary to help in formulating policies that would help in organizational
stability.
5. CONCLUSION
The Science of emotional
intelligence continues to attract attention in respect of organizational
prosperity, effectiveness and change since it was brought to its academic
zenith by Goleman (1995). Earlier researchers like Groves (2006) found a
positive relationship between emotional intelligence and organizational change,
while Bass and Avolio (1994) also reported a positive relationship between
emotional intelligence, among others.
In furtherance of research in this
domain, and through schematic and statistical analyses; this study found a
strong positive correlation between emotional intelligence and organizational
competitiveness. Competitiveness is based on strategy, a plan for achieving
organizational goals through tactics, or methods and actions taken to
accomplish strategies. This fresh contribution in a great measure; supports the
works of Cherniss (2001) and Mandell and Pherwani (2003). This is the interest
of the study.
REFERENCES
AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT (1997) Benchmarking from member-to-member.
Alexandria Virginia
BAR-ON, R. (1997) The Bar-On Emotional Quotient Inventory
(EQ-i): Technical Manual, Toronto Canada: Multi-Health Systems.
BAR-ON, R. (2004) The Bar-On
Emotional Quotient Inventory (EQ-i): Rationale,
Description and Summary of Psychometric Properties. In G. GEHER (Ed)
Measuring Emotional Intelligence. Common Ground and Controversy Hauppauge, NY
Nova Science Publishers, p. 111 – 42.
BAR-ON, R. (2006) The Bar-On Model of Emotional Social
Intelligence (ESI) Priscothema, n. 18, Supl 13-25.
BASS, B. M.; AVOLIO, B. J.
(1994) Improving Organizational
Effectiveness through transformational leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
BLAKE, R. R.; MOUTON, J. S.
(1964) The Managerial grid. Houston:
Gulf Publishers.
BOUNDS, G.; DOBBINS, H.; OSCAR, S.
F. (1995) Management. A Total
Quality Perspective Cincinnati, South-Western Publishing.
CHASE, R. B.; AGUILLANO, N. J.; JACOBS, F. R. (2001). Operations Management: A Competitive
Advantage 9th edition, New York McGraw-Hill Irwin.
CHERNISS, C. (2001) Emotional
Intelligence and Organizational Effectiveness. In CHERNISS, C.; GOLEMAN, D. (Eds)
The Emotionally Intelligent Workplace
San Fransisco, Jossey, Bass, pp: 3-12.
CHERNISS, C.; GOLEMAN, D (2001) The Emotionally Intelligent Workplace.
Jossey-Bass San Francisco.
CLEARY, R. (1992) Models as
effective research tools. In D. M. CAVANASH & G. M RODWELL, (Eds) Dialogues in educational research,
Darwin, NT: William Michael Press.
DRUCKER, P. F. (1998) Peter Drucker on the Profession of
Management, Boston: A Harvard Business, Review Book.
DYE, T. R. (1992) Understanding Public Policy Englewood,
Cliff, N. J Prentice Hall.
Fineman, G. (1997) Emotion and
Management Learning. Management Learning,
v. 28, n. 1, p. 13-25.
GARDNER, L.; STOUGH, C. (2002)
Examining the relationship between leadership and emotional intelligence in
senior level managers. Leadership and
Organization Development Journal, n. 23, p. 68-98.
GERARD, G.; TEURFS, L. (1995)
Dialogue and Organizational Transformation. In K. CORDZ (Eds) Continuity Building. Renewing Spirit
and Learning in Business pp: 143 – 153, San Francisco. New Leaders Press.
GEORGE, JR. C. (1972) The History of Management Thought: 2nd
edition Prentice-Hall, Inc. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.
GOLEMAN, D. (1995) Emotional Intelligence Why It Can Matter
More Than IQ. New York, Bantam Books.
GOLEMAN, D. (1998) Working with Emotional Intelligence,
New York, Bantam Books.
GOLEMAN, D.; BOYATZIS, R.; MCKEE,
A. (2002) Primal Leadership:
Realizing the Power of Emotional Intelligence. Boston Harvard Business School
Press.
GROVES, K. S. (2005) Linking
leaders skills, follower attitudes, and contextual variables via an integrated
model of charismatic leadership. Journal
of Management, n. 31, p. 255-277.
GROVES, K. S. (2006) Leader
Emotional Expressivity, Visionary Leadership, and Organizational Change.
Leadership and Organization. Development
Journal, n. 27, p. 566-583.
HAY/MCBER (2000) Research into Teacher effectiveness. A
Model of Teacher Effectiveness, Report by Hay/McBer to the Department of
Education and Employment. Available at http://www.dfee.gov.uk/teacheringreforms/mcber/
HERZBERG, F. (1974) Work and the Nature of Man. London.
Crosby, Lockwood and Staples.
JAWORSKI, J. (1996) Synchronicity: The inner path of
leadership. San Francisco. Beret – Koehler Publications.
KEEVES, J. P. (1997) Models and Model Building. In J.P
Keeves (Ed.) Education Research.
KLUEMPER, D. H. (2008) Trait
Emotional Intelligence. The Impact of Core-Self Evaluations and Social
Desirability. Personality and Individual
Differences, v. 44, n. 6, p. 1402-1412 LAK.
MANDELL, B.; PHERWANI, S. (2003)
Relationship between emotional intelligence and transformational leadership
style: A gender Comparison. Journal of
Business and Psychology, n. 17, p. 387-404.
MASLOW, A. H. (1954) Motivation and Personality. New York,
Harper.
MAYER, J. D.; SALOVEY, P. (1997)
What is Emotional Intelligence? In P.
SALOVEY AND D. J SHIYTER (Eds.) Emotional Development, and Emotional Intelligence:
Educational Implications. New York, Basic Books, pp: 3-32.
MAYER, J. D.; SALOVEY, P.;
CARUSO, D. R. (2000) Models of Emotional
Intelligence. In R. J STERNBERG (Ed) Handbook of human intelligence. New
York, Cambridge University Press, p. 396-420.
MAYER, J. D.; SALOVEY, P.;
CARUSO, D. R. (2002) The Mayer, Salovey
Caruso, Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT) Users. Manual, Toronto:
Multi-Health Systems.
MCCLELLAND D. C. (1973) Testing of competence rather than
intelligence. American Psychologist,
v. 28, n. 1, p. 1-14
MCCLELLAND D. C. (1993) Intelligence is not the best
predictor of job performance. Current
Directions in Psychological Research, n. 2, p. 5-8
MCGREGOR, D. (1960) The Human Side of Enterprise. New York,
McGraw-Hill.
MCLEOD, R. J (1997) The
Management of Change. Business Studies
Review, v. 3, n. 2, p. 1-7.
MIKOLAJEZAK, LUMINET, LEZOY; ROY
(2007) Psychometric Properties of the Trait Emotional Intelligence
Questionnaire. Factor Structure, Reliability, Construct and Incremental
Validity in a French-Speaking Population. Journal
of Personality Assessment, v. 88, n. 3, p. 338-353.
MORECROFT, D. W.; STARMAN, J. D.
(1994) Modeling for Learning
Organizations. Portland, Oregon, Productivity Press.
NUNNALLY, J. C.; BERNSTEIN, I. H.
(1994) Psychometric Theory, 3rd
Edition, New York, McGraw-Hill.
PALMER, B. R.; STOUGH, C. (2000)
Swineburne University Emotional
Intelligence Test (Workplace SUEIT). Interim Technical Manual (Version 2)
PETRIDES, K. V.; FURNHAM, A.
(2000) On the Dimensional Structure of emotional intelligence, Personality and Individual Differences,
v. 29,n. 2, p. 313-320.
PETRIDES, K. V.; FURNHAM, A.
(2001) Trait Emotional Intelligence: Psychometric Investigation with reference
to established trait taxonomies. European
Journal of Personality, v. 15, n. 6, p. 423-448.
PFEIFER, S. I. (2001) Emotional
Intelligence: Popular but elusive construct. Roeper Review, v. 23, n. 3, p. 138-143.
RICE, V. H. (2000) Handbook of stress coping and health.
Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage
RUBIN D. C. (1999) Remembering your Past: Studies in
autobiographical memory, New York, Cambridge University Press.
RUBIN, R. S.; MUNZ D. C.; BOMMER
W. H. (2005). Leading from within. The effects of emotion, recognition and
personality on transformational leadership. Academy of Management Journal, n. 48, p. 845-858
SAARNI, C. (1988) Emotional Competence: How emotions and
relations became integrated. In R. A. THOMPSON (ed.) Nebraska Symposium on
Motivation, v. 36
SALONA, P.; SLUYTER D. J. (1997)
Emotional development and emotional
intelligence. New York, Basic Books
SCHUTTE, N. S.; MALOUFF, J. M.;
HALL, L. E.; HAGGERTY, D. J.; COOPER, J. T.; GOLDEN, C. J.; ONCE DORNHEIM, L.
(1998) Development and validation of a measure of Emotional intelligence, Personality and Individual Differences,
n. 25, p. 167-177
SENGE, P. (1990) The Fifth Discipline: The Art and
Practice of Learning Organizations, New York, Double day/Currency
SJOBERG, L. (2000) Emotional
Intelligence: Psychometric Analysis. European Psychologist, n. 6, p. 79-95
SPECTOR P. (2005) Introduction
Emotional Intelligence. Journal or
organizational Behaviour
SPENCER, JR., L. M.; SPENCER, S.
M. (1993) Competence at Work: Models
for Superior Performance. New York, John Willey and Sons
STERNBERG, R. J. (1998) Successful Intelligence: How practical
and creative intelligence determine success in life. New York, Plume
STERNBERG, R. J.; WAGNER, R. K.,
(1986) Practical Intelligence Nature and
Origins of competence in the everyday world. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press
STERNBERG, R. (1996) Successful Intelligence. New York,
Simon & Schuster.
STERNBERG, R. J. (1998) Successful Intelligence: How practical
and creative intelligence determine success in life. New York, Plume
STEVENSON, W. J. (2002) Operations Management. 7th
edition; New York, McGraw-Hill, Irwin.
WEISS, R. P. (2000) Promoting Emotional Intelligence in
organizations: making training in emotional intelligence effective.
American Society of Training and Development.
WU, W.; TIU, Y.; SONG, L. J.;
LIU, J. (2006) Effects of Organizational Leadership on employee commitment: The
moderating role of emotional intelligence. Journal
of Psychology in Chinese Societies, p. 283-326