International Review of Administrative Sciences-2011-Kotzé-397-427

International Review of Administrative Sciences
http://ras.sagepub.com/ Differences in emotional intelligence between effective and ineffective leaders in the public sector: an empirical study
Martina Kotz and Ian Venter International Review of Administrative Sciences 2011 77: 397 DOI: 10.1177/0020852311399857 The online version of this article can be found at: http://ras.sagepub.com/content/77/2/397
Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com
On behalf of:
International Institute of Administrative Sciences
Additional services and information for International Review of Administrative Sciences can be found at: Email Alerts: http://ras.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Subscriptions: http://ras.sagepub.com/subscriptions Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav Citations: http://ras.sagepub.com/content/77/2/397.refs.html
Downloaded from ras.sagepub.com at University of Nottingham on October 16, 2011
>> Version of Record - Jun 13, 2011 What is This?
Article
International Review of Administrative Sciences

International Review of Administrative Sciences 77(2) 397427 ! The Author(s) 2011 Reprints and permissions: sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/0020852311399857 ras.sagepub.com
Differences in emotional intelligence between effective and ineffective leaders in the public sector: an empirical study
Martina Kotze
University of the Free State, South Africa
Ian Venter
University of the Free State, South Africa
Abstract The literature supporting leadership as the most important factor related to organizational success or failure is burgeoning. To a large extent, this may explain why so much research focuses on factors influencing leadership effectiveness. A crucial aspect of leadership research is to determine why some individuals perform effectively in leadership roles while others demonstrate mediocre or low levels of effectiveness. Once measures of individual characteristics have been validated within a relevant context, they become useful sources of information for selecting, placing, and promoting people into leadership positions. The aim of this study was to determine if there are statistically significant differences in emotional intelligence between effective and ineffective leaders. The sample included 114 leaders at the middle management level in a public sector institution in South Africa. Each leaders effectiveness was rated by themselves (selfrating), as well as by four subordinates, thus involving 570 participants. The EQ-i was used as a measure of emotional intelligence, while Spangenberg and Therons Leadership Behaviour Inventory was used to determine leadership effectiveness. Multivariate analysis of variance indicated that the effective leaders scored significantly higher on the total emotional intelligence measure. They also scored significantly higher on two emotional intelligence composite scales (Interpersonal EQ and Stress Management EQ) and six sub-scales (Self-actualization, Empathy, Social Responsibility, Stress Tolerance, Problem-solving, and Optimism). Points for practitioners The relationship between emotional intelligence and leadership effectiveness seems to warrant organizational consideration of the possible inclusion of emotional intelligence, among other competencies, as a selection and promotion criterion for future leaders. Job analyses and the subsequent identification of job competencies can be used in order
Corresponding author: Martina Kotze, University of Free State, PO Box 339, Bloemfontein 9300, South Africa Email: kotzem@ufs.ac.za
398
International Review of Administrative Sciences 77(2)
to determine, among others, the emotional intelligence requirements of specific leadership tasks, duties, and behaviours at different managerial levels within the organization. Based on such predetermined criteria, valid measures of emotional intelligence could be included as part of the selection and promotion process, along with other desirable individual attributes, such as verbal and numerical abilities, personality attributes, and specific managerial and leadership competencies required for effective leadership specifically within public sector institutions. Leadership development courses may also include programmes to develop emotional intelligence competencies. Potential candidates nominated to attend these courses could be equipped with a vital understanding of their own emotional functioning as well as an awareness of their influence on their followers. The continuous provision of feedback, mentoring, and modelling is also a key consideration in the development of emotional intelligence. Keywords emotional intelligence, interpersonal intelligence, intra-personal intelligence, leadership, leadership effectiveness
Introduction
Public sector institutions depend on their human resources in order to reach their goals. Peters and Austin (1990: 201) state that it is not techniques that produce quality products, educate children, or pick up the garbage on time, but people who care. One topic related to the extraordinary eort of people is leadership, whether referring to team eectiveness (Burke et al., 2006: 288) or individual eort (McCollKennedy and Anderson, 2002: 555). Leadership is generally dened as the ability of an individual to inuence a group towards the achievement of goals (Hersey and Blanchard, 1982: 83; Robbins, 2001: 242). Leaders are often required to be able to drive transformation, lead people, and manage performance of their work units eectively. Thus, the range of skills necessary for leaders to lead successfully within public sector institutions has grown (Bass, 1985). On the one hand, it requires transformational leaders who are able to provide meaning through visioning and the creation of shared values, while eliciting unusual levels of eort from employees to achieve this vision. On the other hand, it requires leaders who are able to ensure that employees meet work requirements, while providing support and work-related feedback (Spangenberg and Theron, 2002: 10). A crucial aspect of leadership research is to determine why some individuals perform eectively in leadership roles while others demonstrate mediocre or low levels of eectiveness. Jewell (1998: 526) states that leaders individual features are essential, not because they correspond in any one-to-one manner with some general ability to lead, but because they aect the perceptions of the individuals who are to be led. These perceptions, in turn, inuence the motivation to be led and how
Kotze and Venter
399
followers respond to leaders behaviour. The literature is lled with eorts to determine which human characteristics are associated with the ability to lead eectively. Studies pertaining to the individual characteristics of eective leaders include aspects such as personality (Judge and Bono, 2000: 760; Moss and Ngu, 2005: 72, 76, 82), humour (Avolio et al., 1999: 219; Kalma and Visser, 1993: 45; Priest and Swain, 2002: 169), gender (Antonakis et al., 2003: 261; Berdahl, 1996: 21), and experience levels (Avery et al., 2003: 673; Bettin and Kennedy, 1990: 219). Others focus on abilities such as cognitive and emotional abilities (Bar-On, 2006: 20; Cherniss, 2000: 449; Marshall-Mies et al., 2000: 135; Mumford et al., 2000a: 87; 2000b: 155; 2000c: 11; 2000d: 115; Wol et al., 2002: 510, 519; Zaccaro et al., 2000: 37). This type of research is also referred to as individual dierence leadership (Yammarino, 2000: 5). Once measures of individual characteristics have been validated within a relevant context, they become useful sources of information for selecting, placing, and promoting people to leadership positions (Jewell, 1998: 527). A growing body of research is examining the association between emotional intelligence and leadership eectiveness. A study conducted by Bar-On et al. (2003: 1790) indicates that poor personal judgement in decision-making resulted from lower levels of emotional intelligence, even though the subjects were of average to above-average cognitive intelligence. Thus, while some researchers claim emotional intelligence, or certain dimensions thereof such as awareness or expression, is a necessity for leadership eectiveness (Bar-On, 2006: 16; Bono and Ilies, 2006: 331; Dasborough, 2006: 175; Dulewicz and Higgs, 2005: 115; Goleman et al., 2003: 5; Humphrey, 2002: 502; Mandel and Pherwani, 2003: 400; Robbins, 2001: 111; Rosete and Ciarrochi, 2005: 390, 394; Sy et al., 2006: 471), others contest such claims as premature or unsupported by scientic research (Cobb and Mayer, 2000: 15). Studies relating to emotional intelligence have been carried out mainly in private sector organizations. Vigoda-Gadot and Meisler (2010: 82) state that there is an absence of serious discourse in public administration theory and writing about feelings, emotions, and emotional intelligence, and that recent writing about the required changes and reforms in the public sector and personnel management have left this eld almost untouched. A search of the major scientic publication search engines reveals that, with the exception of Berman and West (2008) and VigodaGadot and Meisler (2010), since 1990 almost no study has dealt seriously with such topics in relation to public sector organization theory. However, during those same years, 1100 articles were published on the topic of emotions and emotional intelligence in established, peer-reviewed journals in general management and organization psychology (Vigoda-Gadot and Meisler, 2010: 82). According to Ring and Perry (1985: 276), managing conict and getting people to work together are critical skills for leaders in the public sector, since they have to deal with frequently changing agendas and unstable coalitions. Therefore, the ability to encourage people to express their ideas, to listen carefully to what they say, and to integrate many diering but complementary ideas are critical to public sector leadership. Neal (2008: 373) emphasized the importance of educating leaders
400
in the public sector in an integral or holistic way and of nourishing their emotional well-being through understanding the importance of emotional intelligence and their own emotional patterns. On the other hand, because of the specic characteristics of public sector institutions, the requirements for leadership behaviour and eectiveness as well as emotional intelligence might be signicantly dierent from those in private sector and other organizations. The impact of leadership behaviours and emotional intelligence on a wide variety of outcome measures often depends on the presence of various organizational characteristics (Podsako et al., 1996: 259). Rainey et al. (1995: 572) found that public sector institutions show much higher levels of formalization in the functions of personnel and procurement. They note that these functions are heavily inuenced by externally imposed bodies of law, rules, and oversight activities, which take away more discretion from leaders in the public sector. Subsequently, it may be that leaders in public sector institutions generally get less opportunity to inuence situations by means of informal relationships and emotionally intelligent behaviours, such as exemplary interpersonal relations and problem-solving skills, since they may need to focus more on the implementation of these rules and regulations. Both Berman and West (2008: 753) and Vogoda-Godot and Meisler (2010: 84) call for studies in the arena of emotional intelligence within the public sector and recommend that future research should explore the eect of emotional intelligence on specic aspects within public sector institutions, such as the performance of leaders.
Theoretical overview Emotional intelligence

Emotional intelligence, a relatively new construct, has sparked considerable debate over its denition and factor structure (Livingstone and Day, 2005: 757; Rosete and Ciarrochi, 2005: 390; Zeng and Miller, 2003: 46). Mayer and Salovey presented the rst conceptualization of emotional intelligence in 1990 (Hedlund and Sternberg, 2000: 148; Mayer et al., 2000a: 92; Vitello-Cicciu, 2003: 29). Since then, several contemporary mainstream models of emotional intelligence have emerged (Bar-On, 2007a). The various models of emotional intelligence are generally divided into two categories. The rst is referred to as the ability models (Charbonneau and Nichol, 2002: 1102; Mandell and Pherwani, 2003: 389; Van Rooy et al., 2005: 690) and the second as the so-called mixed models (Brackett et al., 2004: 1389; Cobb and Mayer, 2000; 15; Hedlund and Sternberg, 2000: 146; Rosete and Ciarrochi, 2005: 389). The ability-based models view emotional intelligence in terms of ability, much like other types of mental performance measures such as IQ (Mayer et al., 2000a: 107). The mixed models, on the other hand, blend emotional intelligence as an ability with certain traits, competencies, and behaviour (Cobb and Mayer, 2000: 15; Zeng and Miller, 2003: 38), and generally include broad arrays of non-cognitive factors such as personality and motivation
Kotze and Venter
401
(Brackett et al., 2004: 1389; Van Rooy et al., 2005: 690). In this regard, many authors are convinced that emotional competence can be learned (Goleman et al., 2003: 132; Latour and Hosmer, 2002: 29). Salovey and Mayer (1990: 189) dene emotional intelligence as the subset of social intelligences that involve the ability to monitor ones own feelings and emotions, to discriminate among them, and to use this information to guide ones thinking. This conceptualization and subsequent assessment instrument is generally referred to as the ability model of emotional intelligence, although initial emotional intelligence writing by Salovey and Mayer included personality traits, such as warmth and outgoingness (Hedlund and Sternberg, 2000: 148). The Bar-On model of emotional intelligence (Bar-On, 2000: 363), as well as the emotional competence model of emotional intelligence proposed by Goleman (1995), are frequently viewed as mainstream mixed models of emotional intelligence. The basic approach to the Bar-One model is that emotional intelligence is a multi-factorial array of interrelated emotional, personal, and social abilities that inuence ones overall ability to cope actively and eectively with daily demands and pressures (Bar-On, 2000: 373, 385; 2005: 3). Bar-On (2005: 3) denes emotional intelligence as a cross-section of interrelated emotional and social competencies, skills, and facilitators that determine how eectively we understand and express ourselves, understand others and relate to them, and cope with daily demands. These components of emotional functioning allow for individuals to feel and express positive emotions and remain optimistic. Similar to the Bar-On model, Golemans (1998) model also emphasizes noncognitive factors such as motivation and personality traits (Goleman et al., 2003: 47, 327332). Goleman (1998) dened emotional intelligence as the capacity to recognize ones own feelings and those of others, and to motivate and to manage emotions in oneself and ones relationships. A very important aspect of Golemans approach is his emphasis on emotional competence. The author adapted Salovey and Mayers model (1990) into a version he believed would enable an understanding of those talents that matter in work life (Goleman, 1998: 317). The adaptation included ve basic clusters of emotional and social competencies including aspects such as self-awareness, self-regulation, motivation, empathy and the way individuals handle emotions in relationships and interact with others. The ve clusters were later reduced (Boyatzis et al., 2000: 346) to four clusters of competencies necessary for proper functioning, namely (a) self-awareness, (b) self-management, (c) social awareness, and (d) relationship management (Boyatzis et al., 2000: 355; Goleman et al., 2003: 326). Despite certain dierences, it seems from the literature that all mainstream emotional intelligence models manifest certain commonalities. First, all of these models have both an intrapersonal component as well as a social or interpersonal component (Bar-On, 2006: 21; Goleman et al., 2003: 102, 326). Second, they all address the issue of being able to perceive and understand ones own emotions (Bar-On, 2000: 365; 2006: 21; Boyatzis et al., 2000: 344; Livingstone et al., 2002: 9, 19; Mayer et al., 2000a: 109). Third, the emphasis in all models is placed on emotional
402
self-management or regulating ones emotions (Bar-On, 2006: 21; Bar-On et al., 2003: 1790; Mayer et al., 2000b: 322). Fourth, most models of emotional intelligence also include a component related to empathy, or the ability to understand the feelings that others experience (Bar-On, 2000: 365, 2006: 21; Goleman et al., 2003: 47; Mayer et al., 2000a: 110; Salovey and Mayer, 1990: 194). The fth basic component addressed by most conceptualizations of emotional intelligence is the ability to handle personal and interpersonal problems, and to cope with situational demands and changes (Bar-On, 2006: 21; Goleman, 2004: 328; Mayer et al., 2000a: 110). A sixth component common to most descriptions of emotional intelligence is the ability to generate positive eects, and to be self-motivated (Bar-On, 2000: 383, 2005: 4; Lane, 2000: 172). Apart from eorts to conceptualize emotional intelligence, substantial research has been undertaken to study emotional intelligence as both a criterion variable (Bar-On et al., 2003: 1791; Bechara et al., 2000: 192; Saarni, 2000: 69; Topping et al., 2000: 33), as well as a predictor variable (Austin et al., 2005: 547; Bar-On, 2000: 373, 2005: 1214; Brackett et al., 2004: 1387). As a criterion variable researchers have attempted to explain factors that aect the development of various aspects of emotional intelligence, and as a predictor variable they have attempted to relate emotional intelligence to many domains of human experiential life and personal attributes. Dierent studies highlight the role of demographic factors on emotional intelligence. A study by Bar-On et al. (2000) showed that there seems to be statistically signicant dierences regarding certain emotional intelligence composite scales and sub-scales and culture, gender, age, and education levels. Van Rooy et al. (2005) examined the dierences between various ethnic groups and emotional intelligence, and found that among Hispanic, Black, and White groups, Hispanics scored highest on emotional intelligence, followed by Blacks, with Whites scoring the lowest. A South African study, that included 9892 respondents, found that the ethnicity eects were not strong enough to merit the inclusion of separate South African ethnicity norms for the measurement of emotional intelligence (Gallant, 2005). Although several authors state that there are no signicant dierences between males and females on overall emotional intelligence (Bar-On, 2006; Bar-On et al., 2000: 1111; Van Rooy et al., 2005), it was found that, in terms of gender, women tend to report higher scores on Interpersonal Relationships, while men obtained higher scores on sub-scales such as Stress Tolerance and Impulse Control, but lower scores on Empathy (Bar-On et al., 2000: 1111; 2006; Reissner and Geiger, 1984: 317; Van Rooy et al., 2005). Age appears the most discriminating demographic variable relating to emotional intelligence. It seems from various studies that participants obtained the highest scores on the EQ-i around their late 40s (Bar-On, 2006; Lee, 2003; Van Rooy et al., 2005). Older subjects in particular are better than younger subjects at Reality Testing, Stress Tolerance, and Impulse Control; and older subjects also appear to be more socially responsible than younger ones.
Kotze and Venter
403
Leadership effectiveness
The importance of leadership and, in particular, eective leadership is evident in the voluminous amount of literature and research on the subject (Burke et al., 2006: 288; Muldoon, 2004: 2). Spangenberg and Theron (2001: 9) state that the construct of leadership can be dened as a broader inuencing process which also includes management. House et al. (2002: 5) emphasize that organizational leadership focuses on the process of inuencing individuals or groups towards the achievement of goals. Leadership eectiveness, on the other hand, refers to the extent to which the leadership process brings about group or organizational success. In other words, it refers to how successful an individual, already in a leadership position, is in inuencing, motivating, and enabling others towards achieving group or organizational success, a view supported by Bass (1995: 469). Thus, in essence, leadership represents a process, whereas leadership eectiveness signies a result (McColl-Kennedy and Anderson, 2002: 555). Research on leadership eectiveness focuses on eorts to explain factors aecting leadership in one way or another. While some researchers focus mainly on the leaders individual traits, value system, morality, and authenticity (Avolio and Gardner, 2005: 334; Carey, 1992: 217; Illies et al., 2005: 373; Sosik, 2005: 221), others prefer to focus on leadership behaviours and styles, such as taskversus-people orientation (Kellet et al., 2006: 146), transformational, transactional, laissez-faire, or servant-leadership behaviour and style (Benjamin and Flynn, 2006: 216; Berson et al., 2001: 53; Ehrlich et al., 1990: 229; Halverson et al., 2004: 263; Klein and House, 1995: 183; OConnor et al., 1995: 529; Sternberg and Zhang, 2005: 7). Leadership eectiveness as a dependent variable has also been linked to a vast number of situational variables, including the role of culture, the attributes of followers, and followers perceptions (Avolio and Bass, 1995: 199; Avolio and Yammarino, 1990: 193; Hersey and Blanchard, 1982: 194; House et al., 2002: 3; Silverthorne, 2001: 303; Yammarino and Bass, 1993: 121). Eorts to link leadership eectiveness to specic behavioural patterns such as punishment and reward, communication styles, decision-making styles, distribution of power, and destructive behaviour have also been undertaken (Atwater et al., 1997: 133; Field and Read, 1990: 165; OConnor et al., 1995: 529; Puer, 1990: 177; Shamir et al., 1994: 25; Winter, 1991: 67). While leadership eectiveness represents the standards by which leaders are judged (Hogan et al., 1994: 494), how leaders eectiveness is determined is not straightforward. Various factors cause complexities in the evaluation of leaders eectiveness. Often, factors outside the organization or beyond the control of the leader may aect the group or organizations performance (House et al., 2002: 8). According to the literature, leadership eectiveness is determined at various levels of analysis (Hogan et al., 1994: 495), such as at the individual level (i.e. employee satisfaction; productivity), the team level (i.e. team performance) or the organizational level (i.e. organization culture and climate, and nancial success).
404
Evaluating leadership eectiveness is further complicated by the variety of approaches employed. These evaluation methods can be placed into ve broad categories (Hogan et al., 1994: 495). The rst focuses on performance measures, which, as was mentioned, can concentrate on dierent units of analysis. The second category of leadership research utilizes ratings by others: subordinates, peers, and superiors, for example. The third category of leadership studies focuses on leadership potential as a measure of anticipated leader eectiveness (i.e. interviews, simulations, and assessment centres) (Hogan et al., 1994: 496). A fourth category of the evaluation of leadership eectiveness is that of leader self-rating (Dulewicz and Higgs, 2005; Fleenor et al., 1996; Spangenberg and Theron, 2002) while a fth category of leadership eectiveness research concentrates on the downside or ineectiveness of leaders; for instance, leaders whose careers are in jeopardy or who have been derailed. Indicators hereof are typically negative performance feedback, being passed over for promotion, demotions, or dismissal (Hogan et al., 1994: 496).
Aim of study
In the light of the literature review and the arguments outlined above, the aim of this study was to determine whether there are statistically signicant dierences between eective and ineective leaders in a South African public sector institution, with regard to their scores on emotional intelligence.
Methodology Hypotheses
For the purpose of the study, the following hypotheses were set:
Null hypothesis: There are no statistically signicant dierences between eective and ineective leaders in a South African public sector institution with regard to their scores on emotional intelligence. Alternative hypothesis: There are statistically signicant dierences between eective and ineective leaders in a South African public sector institution with regard to their scores on emotional intelligence.
Sample and selection of the sample

The research group consisted of 114 leaders at middle management level in a public sector institution, situated in six dierent geographical areas throughout South Africa. Each leaders eectiveness was rated by themselves (self-rating), as well as by four subordinates, thus involving 570 participants. All leaders at this level
Kotze and Venter
405
were invited to take part in the study, and no leader was excluded unless the leader had been appointed less than six months prior to the study. The rationale for this exclusion was that followers had to have known a leader well enough to rate him or her. Most leaders were male (94.7 percent), in the age group of 4150 years (56.1 percent), and had between three and ten years leadership experience (53.5 percent). In terms of ethnicity, 63.2 percent were Afrikaans, 16.7 percent English, and the rest of the sample included Coloureds (6.1 percent), Xhosas (4.4 percent), Tswanas (4.4 percent), Sothos (2.6 percent), Indians (1.8 percent), and Sepedis (0.9 percent). The majority (63.2 percent) had formal educational qualications to the equivalent of Grade 12, while only 1.8 percent had obtained a degree.
Measuring instruments
For the purposes of the present study, Bar-Ons (2006: 21) model of emotional intelligence was used. Emotional Intelligence was measured by the Emotional Quotient Inventory (EQ-i ) (Bar-On, 2000: 364, 2006: 21) and leadership eectiveness by means of Spangenberg and Therons Leadership Behaviour Inventory (LBI) (Spangenberg and Theron, 2001: 122).
Bar-On Emotional Quotient Inventory (EQ-i ). The Bar-On model of emotional

intelligence (Bar-On, 2007a), and the subsequent EQ-i measuring instrument (Bar-On, 2000: 364) include ve key components which are (a) the ability to be aware of and understanding ones emotions, feelings, and ideas, (b) awareness of and understanding of others emotions and feelings, (c) the ability to cope with stress, (d) the ability to be exible and alter ones feelings with changing situations, and (e) the ability to control emotions. These key components form the ve composite scales of the EQ-i , namely: (a) Intra-personal EQ, (b) Interpersonal EQ, (c) Stress Management EQ, (d) Adaptability EQ, and (e) General Mood EQ (Bar-On, 2006: 21). Underlying these ve composite scales are 15 sub-scales. The EQ-i consists of 133 items. These items are statements to which the respondent responds on a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (very seldom or not true of me) to 5 (very often true of me or true of me) (Bar-On, 2006: 21). Table 1 summarizes the composite scales and subscales measured by the EQ-i . With regard to ethnicity, age and gender dierences, Gallant (2005) found that the ethnicity eects were not strong enough to merit the inclusion of separate South African ethnicity norms for the EQ-i , but separate age and gender South African norms were used. Reliability of the EQ-i . Two types of reliability tests were conducted on the EQ-i , which included retest reliability and internal consistency. Retest reliability was 0.72 for males and 0.8 for females over a 6-month interval (Bar-On, 2006: 17). The internal consistency was found to be 0.95 for total EQ and the Cronbach alpha coecients varied across the sub-scales from 0.69 to 0.92 (Gallant, 2005: 11).
406
Table 1. Composite scales and sub-scales measured by the EQ-i (Bar-On, 2006: 21) Composite scales and sub-scales Definition of composite scales and sub-scales Intra-personal EQ Emotional self-awareness Assertiveness Self-regard Self-actualization Independence Interpersonal EQ Empathy Interpersonal relationships Social responsibility Aware of and understanding ones emotions, feelings, and ideas Recognizing and understanding ones emotions Expressing feeling, beliefs, and thoughts openly Awareness of and respect for oneself Realization of ones potential and engaging in activities that one enjoys Self-direction and self-control in thinking and actions Aware of and understanding others emotions and feelings Awareness of and appreciation for the feelings of others Establishing mutually satisfying relationships that demonstrate closeness Demonstrating that one is a cooperative member of a group who contributes in a constructive manner to the well-being of the group Being flexible and altering ones feelings with changing situations Identifying and generating solutions for personal and social problems Assessing correspondence between ones perception and reality Adjusting ones feelings, thoughts, and behaviours to changing situations Coping with stress and controlling emotions Withstanding adverse events and stressful situations Resisting or delaying impulses and controlling ones emotions Feeling and expressing positive emotions and remaining optimistic Feeling satisfied with ones life and expressing positive emotions Looking on the bright side of life and maintaining a positive attitude in the face of adversity
Adaptability EQ Problem-solving Reality testing Flexibility Stress Management EQ Stress tolerance Impulse control General Mood EQ Happiness Optimism
Standard deviation and mean for total scale: Mean score 100, Standard deviation 15.
Validity of the EQ-i . The EQ-i had, by 2005, already been subjected to 20 predictive validity studies, across seven countries, on 22,971 subjects. Its predictive validity in terms of various aspects of human behaviour related to social and emotional functioning was conrmed (Bar-On, 2006: 17; Gallant, 2005: 1418).
Leadership Behaviour Inventory (LBI). The LBI was used in order to measure
leadership eectiveness (Spangenberg and Theron, 2001: 5, 2002: 13). The LBI has
Kotze and Venter
407
been developed specically for the South African context and accommodates the diversity within the South African work environment. It also addresses the issue of most people in South Africa not speaking English as rst language, as was evident in the sample (Spangenberg and Theron, 2001: 10, 2002). It comprises of four phases or stages of leadership eectiveness, namely: (a) Environmental Orientation, (b) Vision Formulation and Sharing, (c) Preparing the Organization for Implementing the Vision, and (d) Implementing the Vision (Spangenberg and Theron, 2002: 16). These phases are summarized in Table 2. The total structure of the LBI, reecting the four phases, captures 24 dimensions and 96 items (Spangenberg and Theron, 2002: 17). Four items capture each of the 24 dimensions. Responses to specic items are measured on a 5-point Likert-scale with response options being (a) rarely, (b) once in a while, (c) sometimes, (d) fairly often, and (e) very frequently. Each leaders eectiveness was rated by themselves (self-rating), as well as by four subordinates. The leaders self-rating accounted for 20 percent of his or her leadership eectiveness score, while the subordinates scores accounted for 80 percent of the score. Reliability of the LBI. Cronbach alpha values, varying between 0.69 and 0.93 across the 24 sub-scales, were obtained from studies done by Spangenberg and Theron (2001: 18). In the present study, each of the four dimensions reliability coecients was determined. The alpha values found for the four meta-scales in the present study varied between 0.92 and 0.99. Validity of the LBI. A conrmatory factor analysis by means of structural equation modelling (SEM) assessed a series of goodness-of-t indices to determine the absolute and comparative t of the model. Values of less than 0.033 on the standardized root mean square residual (RMR) were indicative that the data t the model well. The root mean squared error of approximation (RMSEA) was determined at 0.059, which led to the conclusion that a good or acceptable t had been achieved. This conclusion was supported by the standardized RMR value of 0.033 (Spangenberg and Theron, 2002: 19).
Statistical analysis
Multivariate analysis of variance was used by means of the SPSS programme in order to determine the dierences between eective and ineective leaders with regard to emotional intelligence and its composite scales and sub-scales. Participants were divided into two groups based on their scores on the LBI. Fifty-one participants with the lowest leadership eectiveness scores were assigned to the ineective leadership category and 50 respondents with the highest leadership eectiveness scores were assigned to the eective leader group. The 13 most central scores were excluded in order to ensure that those in either of the eectiveness categories were included in the specic category by a safe margin. The eective
408
Table 2. Phases of leadership effectiveness measured by the Leadership Behaviour Inventory (LBI) (Spangenberg and Theron, 2001: 17) Code Phases and dimensions Definition Identifies and interprets external environments that may affect unit performance. Understands the business and position of the organization Interprets internal dynamics and identifies weaknesses that may affect unit performance.
ENVIRONMENTAL ORIENTATION AWEX Awareness of external environment Awareness of internal environment VISION FORMULATING AND SHARING VISI Developing a challenging vision AWIN
Develops a vision that gives people a sense of purpose, is customer-focused, and advances diversity of people TRUS Building trust Builds confidence in the unit and visibly supports the mission and the values of the unit ARTI Articulating vision and Articulates a vision for the future that provides enlisting followers direction, excites followers, and inspires commitment in followers STRA Conceptualizing strategy Builds strategy and plans based on thorough problem analysis and broad-based fact-finding. Considers consequences of decisions PREPARING THE ORGANIZATION FOR IMPLEMENTING THE VISION RISK Enabling the leader: perIdentifies challenging opportunities for selfsonal growth development and is committed to continuous learning. Risks new ways of doing things Has good insight into own capabilities, weakLEAD Enabling the leader: selfnesses, and behaviour, and manages him/herself discovery and well management FOLL Empowering followers Facilitates personal growth of followers and creates a hassle-free environment that provides ownership of work SYST Optimizing structures and Adapts structures, processes, and procedures to systems support implementation of strategy in a changing environment CULT Building culture Develops a culture of openness that facilitates employee diversity and participation and is directed to high performance IMPLEMENTING THE VISION INFL Influencing the external Builds the image of the organization and practises environment good citizenship HONO Honesty and integrity Considers ethical implications of decisions, assures agreed-upon values are adhered to, and deals honestly with all stakeholders
(continued)
Kotze and Venter
409
Table 2. Continued Code DECI Phases and dimensions Decisiveness and hardiness Challenging current reality Facilitating learning Definition Acts decisively and makes hard decisions. Performs effectively under stress, and reacts positively to change and uncertainty Challenges current thinking, reconsiders current practices, and improves work methods Encourages followers to express ideas and feelings, and develops a full understanding for their problems. Promotes continuous learning Effectively handles interpersonal and group relations Shows concern for the aspirations, needs, and feelings of others Raises the aspirations, confidence, and motivation of followers. Conveys the message convincingly Facilitates interdepartmental cooperation, and helps people see the big picture Develops new ideas, seizes opportunities, and initiates projects for the benefit of the unit Ensures that the employees and unit goals and plans support the organizational strategy, and that employees know what is expected of them Provides followers with feedback about unit performance as well as specific feedback about their own performance Acknowledges positive employee performance and behaviour, celebrates success
VALU LEAR
MANA TREA INSP COOR ACTI PLAN
Interpersonal skills Showing concern for others Inspiring people Facilitates interdepartmental cooperation Acting entrepreneurially Develops and implements performance plans Reviewing performance
REVI
REWA
Rewarding performance
and ineective leadership groups were subsequently compared in terms of their scores obtained on emotional intelligence.
Results
First, the eective and ineective leader groups were compared in terms of their mean scores on emotional intelligence (total score). Subsequently, the two groups were compared with regard to their performance on the ve emotional intelligence composite scales and then in terms of their sample means on all 15 emotional intelligence sub-scales. The dierences between eective and ineective leaders regarding their total emotional intelligence and its scores on the ve composite scales are presented in Table 3.
410
Table 3. Differences between effective and ineffective leaders regarding their scores on total emotional intelligence and its five dimensions Effective leaders Total Emotional Intelligence and Composite scales Emotional intelligence (total score) Intra-personal EQ Interpersonal EQ Stress Management EQ Adaptability EQ General Mood EQ
*p < .05.
Ineffective leaders Mean Std Dev F-value p-value
Mean
Std Dev
98.74 97.38 97.20 101.28 99.22 97.82
14.23 14.73 13.92 13.42 14.14 14.75
90.63 92.78 90.86 95.47 93.01 92.88
19.52 17.76 18.35 15.41 17.95 15.02
5.59 2 3.81 4.07 3.62 2.78
.02* .16 .05* .05* .06 .1
100 98.74 98 96 94 92 90.63 90 88 86 Effective leaders Ineffective leaders
Figure 1. Graphical representation of significant differences between effective and ineffective leaders in terms of emotional intelligence
From Table 3, it is evident that the eective and ineective leaders demonstrated signicant dierences in their scores on total emotional intelligence. The means for the overall emotional intelligence scores of the high and low eective leaders were 98.74 and 90.63 respectively (p .02). These dierences are represented graphically in Figure 1.
Mean EQ score
Kotze and Venter
411
98 97.2 97 96 Inter-personal EQ 95 94 93 92 91 90 89 88 87 Effective leaders Ineffective leaders 90.86
Figure 2. Graphic representation of the significant differences between effective and ineffective leaders in terms of their scores on Interpersonal EQ
The eective and ineective leader groups were also compared in terms of their sample means on the ve emotional intelligence composite scales, namely: (a) Intrapersonal EQ, (b) Interpersonal EQ, (c) Stress Management EQ, (d) Adaptability EQ, and (e) General Mood EQ (Table 3). Two composite scales emerged that diered signicantly between eective and ineective leaders. These dimensions are Interpersonal EQ and Stress Management EQ. The eective leaders scores for Interpersonal EQ had a mean of 97.20, whereas the low leadership eectiveness group scored an average of 90.86 on the Interpersonal EQ dimension. The dierence between eective and ineective leaders in terms of their scores on the emotional intelligence dimension Interpersonal EQ was signicant at p .05. The eective leaders had a mean of 101.28 compared to the mean score of 95.47 for ineective leaders on the Stress Management EQ composite scales dimension. The dierence between eective and ineective leaders in terms of their scores on the emotional intelligence composite scale Stress Management EQ was signicant at p .05. These dierences regarding Interpersonal EQ and Stress Management EQ are graphically displayed in Figure 2 and Figure 3, respectively. The eective and ineective leaders were further compared in terms of their scores on the 15 emotional intelligence sub-scales. These results are illustrated in Table 4. Six sub-scales emerged on which eective and ineective leaders diered significantly. The eective leaders scored higher on all 15 sub-scales, although the differences between the eective and ineective leaders were signicant on only six of
412
102 101.28 101 Stress Management EQ 100 99 98 97 96 95 94
95.47
Effective leaders
Ineffective leaders
Figure 3. Graphic representation of the significant differences between effective and ineffective leaders in terms of their scores on Stress Management EQ
these sub-scales. A signicant dierence between the eective and ineective leaders emerged regarding Self-actualization (p .01). The group of eective leaders scored signicantly higher on Empathy (p .001), as well as on Social Responsibility with mean scores of 100.06 and 92, respectively (p .01). The eective leaders signicantly outperformed the ineective leaders on the Stress Tolerance and Optimism sub-subscales (p < .01). Eective and ineective leaders also showed a signicant dierence in terms of Problem-solving (p < .01). These results are graphically displayed in Figure 4.
Discussion of results
The null hypothesis, which states that there are no signicant dierences between eective and ineective leaders in a South African public sector institution with regard to their scores on emotional intelligence, was rejected. As reported in Table 3, a signicant dierence between eective and ineective leaders emerged with regard to their overall emotional intelligence scores (p .02). These results supported evidence from prior research in the private sector (Bar-On, 2006: 22; Bono and Ilies, 2006: 330; Charbonneau and Nicol, 2002: 1111; Dasborough, 2006: 175; Goleman et al., 2003: 325; Humphrey, 2002: 494; Mandel and Pherwani, 2003: 400; Rosete and Ciarrochi, 2005: 388; Sy et al., 2006: 471; Wong and Law, 2002: 269), and shows that leader emotional intelligence can also be an important variable related to leadership eectiveness within a public sector institution.
Kotze and Venter
413
Table 4. Differences in scores between effective and ineffective leaders on the 15 emotional intelligence sub-scales Effective leaders Dimension Intra-personal EQ Self-regard Self-awareness Assertiveness Independence Self-actualization Interpersonal EQ Empathy Social responsibility Interpersonal relations Stress Management EQ Stress tolerance Impulse control Adaptability EQ Reality testing Flexibility Problem-solving General Mood EQ Optimism Happiness
**p < .05; **p < .01.
Ineffective leaders Mean Std Dev F-value p-value
Mean
Std Dev
101 99.96 95.35 95.47 98.94 99.45 100.06 96.25 102.65 100.14 99.37 97.35 102.96 97.82 99.49
13.86 15.38 16.03 15.01 13.38 14.33 13.58 14.22 13.94 14.93 15.6 14.14 12.86 13.8 13.62
97.24 99.47 92.33 91.94 91.73 87.73 92 93.75 93 98.31 97.04 92.47 93.69 90.04 96.53
15.16 16.85 16.29 16.97 15.14 20.12 17.15 16.96 16.78 13.62 18.64 18.56 16.74 14.17 16.64
1.68 0.02 0.87 1.2 6.35 11.18 6.75 0.64 9.75 0.41 0.46 2.17 9.6 7.73 0.94
.2 .88 .35 .28 .01* .001** .01* .43 .002** .52 .5 .14 .003** .007** .33
Although the eective leaders scored higher on all the emotional intelligence composite scales, these dierences were not signicant in all cases. Eective leaders scored signicantly higher on the Interpersonal EQ and Stress Management EQ composite scales, as well as on six sub-scales namely, Self-actualization, Empathy, Social responsibility, Stress tolerance, Problem-solving, and Optimism. Within the Intra-personal EQ composite scale, Self-awareness reected the smallest dierence between eective and ineective leaders, while a signicant dierence between the eective and ineective leaders emerged with regard to Self-actualization, with the eective leaders scoring higher (p .01). This was unforeseen due to the large body of literature advocating a strong relationship between self-awareness and leadership eectiveness (Illies et al., 2005; Sosik and Megerian, 1999; Van Sickle, 2004), while no research could be found relating self-actualization to leadership eectiveness. Self-actualization refers to the individuals ability to realize his
414
105
102.65 99.45 100.06 97.82
Effective leaders Ineffective leaders
102.96
100
98.94
95
93 91.73 92
93.69
90.04
90
87.73
85
80 Selfactualisation Empathy Social Responsibility Stress Tolerance Problemsolving Optimism
Figure 4. Significant differences between the effective and ineffective leader groups on the emotional intelligence sub-scales
or her potential, and is associated with feelings of self-satisfaction and eorts to improve competencies, skills, and talents (Bar-On, 2007b). The Interpersonal EQ scale focuses on social awareness and interpersonal relationships (Bar-On, 2006), and relates to the ability to maintain healthy, satisfying relationships (Bar-On, 2007b). It includes the sub-scales Empathy, referring to the awareness of and appreciation for the feelings of others, and Social Responsibility, demonstrating that one is a cooperative member of a group who contributes in a constructive manner to the well-being of the group. Both these sub-scales contributed signicantly to the overall dierence between eective and ineective leaders in terms of Interpersonal EQ. Various studies found that leaders who are more attentive and understanding of their followers emotions, and who have the capacity to identify with their work groups and cooperate with others performed better, were more successful in completing complex projects, and received higher leadership eectiveness ratings (Avolio and Gardner, 2005; Bar-On, 2000; Byron, 2003; Leban, 2003). Trusting relationships are regarded as the foundation of leadership (Robbins et al., 2003), and are central to many theoretical leadership frameworks, such as servant leadership, and neo-charismatic leadership (Bolden et al., 2003; Cascio and Shurygailo, 2003; Fiol et al., 1999; House, 1999; Russel, 2001). Bar-On (2000, 2005) states that ones group and cooperation orientation specically ones cognisance of others feelings, needs, and concerns is one of the primary factors associated with work eectiveness. Prior research across 36 countries found social responsibility to be one of the most important predictors of work eectiveness (Bar-On, 2000). The present study supports these ndings, as those leaders rated
Kotze and Venter
415
as more eective scored higher on Interpersonal EQ, as well as on the Empathy and Social Responsibility sub-scales. As discussed previously, it is often suggested that the need for managers and leaders who are highly skilled in interpersonal relationships, is much lower in highly formalized, command-and-control organizations than in organizations with atter structures and more informal organizational cultures, where employees are more often inuenced by means of informal relationships than by position power. Despite the fact that this public sector institution can be described as a command-and-control organization with a high level of formalization, where authority and control are given via precisely dened chains of command, the role of Interpersonal EQ and specically Empathy and Social Responsibility in leadership eectiveness is evident. Additionally, the sample of leaders consisted mostly of males (97.4 percent), and this is indicative of a strong male-oriented and more masculine institutional environment. Some authors (Fambrough and Hart, 2008: 743, 744) suggest that the emotions associated with organizations with a masculine-oriented environment have traditionally been more masculine in nature, such as anger, contempt, and aggression, while personal emotions such as empathy are considered more feminine, and are often not seen as appropriate to the public male workplace. Yet these results show that despite these organizational characteristics, eective leaders in this institution are regarded as being able to maintain healthy, satisfying relations, as being sensitive to, and interested in what, how, and why people feel the way they do, and as demonstrating their contribution to the well-being of the group. With regard to the Stress Management EQ composite scale and its sub-scale Stress Tolerance, as well as the sub-scales Optimism and Problem-solving, the eective leaders signicantly outperformed the ineective leaders. Several authors have linked eective leadership to the ability to handle stress and to solve problems eectively (Bar-On, 2007b; Conelli et al., 2000; Lopes, 2004; Morris, 1996; Snyder, 1979). These authors state that individuals who are skilful in managing stress and who have a high level of stress tolerance are rarely impulsive, and work well under pressure. Such individuals are able to perform successfully in stressful, anxiety-provoking, and even dangerous work settings, and have the capacity to face crises and problems rather than surrendering to feelings of helplessness and hopelessness. These individuals also perceive problems as manageable and approach them in a methodical and systematic manner with perseverance. With regard to Optimism, previous research also suggests that eective leaders tend to maintain a positive attitude in the face of adversity. Bass (1995, 1999) described how leaders energize followers by viewing the future with optimism. Optimism also surfaced in trait theory as a predictor of leadership eectiveness (Muchinsky, 2000). The institution that was included in the sample for the purposes of this research often requires its personnel to work longer or more irregular hours than what is usually expected from public sector institutions. Furthermore, due to the specic nature of the work, quick problem-solving, often under high levels of pressure within a team context, as well as precision in the execution of tasks is essential.
416
According to House and Howell (1992), the challenge for leaders within a demanding work environment is to be able to maintain a positive work environment by means of empathy, optimism, enthusiasm, and condence levels. This may explain the results of the study, indicating that eective leaders are more able to manage their stress eectively (Stress Management EQ and Stress Tolerance), are more Optimistic, and have higher scores on Problem-solving, Empathy and Social Responsibility. From the aforementioned, it seems that the results of this study are similar to those of studies conducted in the private sector and other institutions, supporting a relationship between dimensions of emotional intelligence and leadership eectiveness (Bono and Ilies, 2006; Dasborough, 2006; Hopkins, 2005; Stubbs, 2005; Sy et al., 2006).
Conclusion and recommendations

Although the importance of emotional intelligence in the workplace has been repeatedly proven by research in the private sector, it has become evident that there is a need for the promotion of understanding regarding emotional intelligence in public sector institutions (Vigoda-Gadot and Meisler, 2010: 84). The aim of this study was to determine whether there are statistically signicant dierences between eective and ineective leaders in a South African public sector institution, with regard to their scores on emotional intelligence. Eective leaders scored signicantly higher on Interpersonal EQ (including the sub-scales Empathy and Social Responsibility) and Stress Management EQ (including the sub-scale Stress Tolerance), as well as on three other sub-scales, namely, Self-actualization, Problem-solving, and Optimism. Although the results of the study cannot be generalized to other public sector institutions due to the specic nature and characteristics of the institution as well as the sample, the results should not be ignored. From the very few studies relating to emotional intelligence conducted in the public sector, it can be concluded that there seems to be a lack of certain emotional intelligence competencies at both managerial and entry level, including typical emotional intelligence skills such as self-awareness, stress management, the ability to work in diverse groups (social responsibility), exibility and adaptability, as well as empathy and the regulation of ones own emotions (Berman and West, 2008; Bester and Bosho, 2009; Vigoda-Gadot and Meisler, 2010: 84). Various authors (Borins, 2002: 467; Price, 1996: 98) question the conventional wisdom that public sector institutions are usually large bureaucracies structured to perform their core tasks with stability and consistency, often resisting change or disruption of these tasks. They maintain that the public sector has been facing greater numbers of challenges, forcing it to become more innovative; and increasingly focused on cost and quality control. They also often need to deliver services to societies and communities characterized by an increased level of diversity in terms of culture, language, religion and educational level. Subsequently, leaders would be
Kotze and Venter
417
required to develop into more gifted generalists with a broad range of leadership capabilities. Functional skills alone appear less likely to guarantee leadership eectiveness as such a work environment requires leaders who are socially and emotionally competent and who have the ability to regulate their own and others behaviour according to situational changes (Spannenberg and Theron, 2002). Many questions regarding emotional intelligence in the public sector still remain unanswered, but it appears from the results of this study, as well as previous studies, that the role of emotional intelligence in leadership eectiveness in the public sector should not be ignored. With an increased awareness of higher customer focus and eorts undertaken by public sector institutions in this regard, recruiting emotionally intelligent people could assist these institutions in creating a greater focus on customer satisfaction levels. Specically, the relationship between emotional intelligence and leadership eectiveness seems to warrant organizational consideration of the possible inclusion of emotional intelligence, among other competencies, as a selection and promotion criterion for future leaders. Job analyses and the subsequent identication of job competencies can be used in order to determine, among others, the emotional intelligence requirements of specic leadership tasks, duties, and behaviours at dierent managerial levels within the specic context of the organization, including its characteristics and nature of work. Based on such predetermined criteria, valid measures of emotional intelligence could be included as part of the selection and promotion process, along with other desirable individual attributes, such as verbal and numerical abilities, personality attributes, and specic managerial and leadership competencies required for eective leadership specically within public sector institutions. Leadership development courses may also include programmes to develop emotional intelligence competencies. Potential candidates nominated to attend these courses could be equipped with a vital understanding of their own emotional functioning, as well as an awareness of their inuence on their followers. The continuous provision of feedback, mentoring, and modelling is also a key consideration in the development of emotional intelligence.
References
Antonakis J, Avolio BJ and Sivasubramaniam N (2003) Context and leadership: An examination of the nine-factor full-range leadership theory using the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire. Leadership Quarterly 14: 261295. Atwater LE, Comobreco JF, Dionne SD, Avolio BJ and Lau AN (1997) Effects of rewards and punishments on leader charisma, leader effectiveness and follower reactions. Leadership Quarterly 8(2): 133152. Austin EJ, Saklofske DH and Egan V (2005) Personality, well-being and health correlates of trait emotional intelligence. Personality and Individual Difference 38: 547558.
418
Avery DR, Tonidandel S, Griffith KH and Quinones MA (2003) The impact of multiple measures of leader experience on leader effectiveness: New insights for leader selection. Journal of Business Research 56: 673679. Avolio BJ and Bass BM (1995) Individual consideration viewed at multiple levels of analysis: A multi-level framework for examining the diffusion of transformational leadership. Leadership Quarterly 6(2): 199218. Avolio BJ and Gardner WL (2005) Authentic leadership development: Getting to the roots of positive forms of leadership. Leadership Quarterly 16: 315338. Avolio BJ and Yammarino FJ (1990) Operationalizing charismatic leadership using a levelof-analysis framework. Leadership Quarterly 1(3): 193208. Avolio BJ, Howell JM and Sosik JJ (1999) A funny thing happened on the way to the bottom line: Humor as moderator of leadership style effects. Academy of Management Journal 42(2): 219227. Bar-On R (2000) Emotional and social intelligence: Insights from the emotional quotient inventory. In: Bar-On R and Parker JDA (eds) Handbook of Emotional Intelligence: Theory, Development, Assessment, and Application at Home, School and in the Workplace. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 363388. Bar-On R (2005) The Bar-On model of emotional-social intelligence. Psicothema 17 (Special Issue). Bar-On R (2006) The Bar-On model of emotional-social intelligence. Psicothema 18(Suppl): 1325. Bar-On R (2007a) The conceptual aspect of the Bar-On model (the theory). Available at: http://www.reuvenbaron.org/bar-on-model/conceptual-aspects.php (accessed 4 August 2009). Bar-On R (2007b) The 5 meta-factors and 15 sub-factors of the Bar-On model. Available at: http://www.reuvenbaron.org/bar-on-model/essay.php?i3 (accessed 4 August 2009). Bar-On R (2007c) Theoretical foundations, background and development of the Bar-On model of emotional intelligence. Available at: http://www.reuvenbaron.org/bar-onmodel/essay.php?i1 (accessed on 4 August 2009). Bar-On F, Brown JM, Kirkcaldy B and Thome E (2000) Emotional expression and implications for occupational stress: An application of the Emotional Quotient Inventory (EQ-i). Personality and Individual Differences 28: 11071118. Bar-On R, Tranel D, Denburg NL and Bechara A (2003) Exploring the neurological substrate of emotional and social intelligence. Brain 126(8): 17901800. Bass BM (1985) Leadership and Performance beyond Expectations. New York: Free Press. Bass BM (1995) Theory of transformational leadership redux. Leadership Quarterly 6(4): 463478. Bass BM (1999) Two decades of research and development in transformational leadership. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology 8(1): 932. Bechara A, Tranel D and Damasio AR (2000) Poor judgement in spite of high intellect: Neurological evidence of emotional intelligence. In: Bar-On R and Parker JDA (eds) Handbook of Emotional Intelligence: Theory, Development, Assessment, and Application at Home, School and in the Workplace. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 192214. Benjamin L and Flynn FJ (2006) Leadership style and regulatory mode: Value from fit? Organisational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 100: 216230. Berdahl JL (1996) Gender and leadership in work groups. Leadership Quarterly 7(1): 2140. Berman EM and West JP (2008) Managing emotional intelligence in US cities: A study of social skills among public managers. Public Administration Review 68(4): 742758.
Kotze and Venter
419
Berson Y, Shamir B, Avolio BJ and Popper M (2001) The relationship between vision strength, leadership style, and context. Leadership Quarterly 12: 5373. Bester CL and Boshoff E (2009) Perceptions of managers in the public sector regarding the relevance of training and education of entrants to the labour market. Journal for Humanities 49(4): 728739. Bettin PJ and Kennedy JK Jnr (1990) Leadership experience and leader performance: Some empirical support at last. Leadership Quarterly 1(4): 219228. Bolden R, Gosling J, Marturano A and Dennison P (2003) A review of leadership theory and competency frameworks: Edited version of a report for Chase Consulting and the Management Standards Centre. Available at: http://www.leadership-studies.com/documents/mgmt_standards.pdf (accessed 2 November 2008). Bono JE and Ilies R (2006) Charisma, positive emotion and mood contagion. Leadership Quarterly 17(4): 317334. Borins S (2002) Leadership and innovation in the public sector. Leadership and Organization Development Journal 23(8): 467476. Boyatzis ER, Goleman D and Rhee KS (2000) Clustering competence in emotional intelligence. In: Bar-On R and Parker JDA (eds) Handbook of Emotional Intelligence: Theory, Development, Assessment, and Application at Home, School and in the Workplace. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 343362. Brackett MA, Mayer JD and Warner RM (2004) Emotional intelligence and its relation to everyday behaviour. Personality and Individual Difference 36: 13871402. Burke CS, Stagl KC, Klein C, Goodwin GF, Salas E and Halpin SM (2006) What type of leadership behaviors are functional in teams? A meta-analysis. Leadership Quarterly 17: 288307. Byron KL (2003) Are better managers better at reading others? Testing the claim that emotional intelligence predicts managerial performance. PhD dissertation, Georgia State University, Atlanta. Available at: Emotional Intelligence Consortium database: www. eiconsortium.org/ references/dissertation_abstractshtml (accessed 9 November 2009). Carey MR (1992) Transformational leadership and the fundamental option for self-transcendence. Leadership Quarterly 3(3): 217236. Cascio WF and Shurygailo S (2003) E-leadership and virtual teams. Organisational Dynamics 31(4): 362376. Charbonneau D and Nicol AAM (2002) Emotional intelligence and leadership in adolescents. Personality and Individual Difference 33: 11011113. Cherniss C (2000) Social and emotional competence in the workplace. In: Bar-On R and Parker JDA (eds) Handbook of Emotional Intelligence: Theory, Development, Assessment, and Application at Home, School and in the Workplace. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 433458. Cobb CD and Mayer JD (2000) Emotional intelligence. Educational Leadership 58(3): 1418. Conelli MS, Gilbert JA, Zaccaro SJ, Threlfall KV, Marks MA and Mumford MD (2000) Exploring the relationship of leadership skills and knowledge to leadership performance. Leadership Quarterly 11(1): 6586. Dasborough MT (2006) Cognitive asymmetry in employee emotional reactions to leadership behaviour. Leadership Quarterly 17: 163178. Dulewicz V and Higgs M (2005) Assessing leadership styles and organisational context. Journal of Managerial Psychology 5(2): 105123.
420
Ehrlich SB, Meindl JR and Viellieu B (1990) The charismatic appeal of a transformational leader: An empirical case study of a small, high-technology contractor. Leadership Quarterly 1(4): 229247. Fambrough MJ and Hart RK (2008) Emotions in leadership development: A critique of emotional intelligence. Advances in Developing Human Resources 10(5): 740758. Field RHG and Read PC (1990) The effect of situation attributes on decision method choice in the Vroom-Jago model of participation in decision making. Leadership Quarterly 1(3): 165176. Fiol CM, Harris D and House R (1999) Charismatic Leadership: Strategies for Effecting Social Change. Available at: http://leadership.wharton.upenn.edu/l_change/publications/ House/Charismatic%20Leadership%20-%20House%20.doc (accessed 28 July 2006). Fleenor JW, McCauley CD and Brutus S (1996) Selfother rating agreement and leader effectiveness. Leadership Quarterly 7(4): 487506. Gallant S (2005) EQ-i South African Norms. MHS Technical Report No. 0035, Research and Development, Jopie van Rooyen and Partners SA, Johannesburg, South Africa. Goleman D (1995) Emotional Intelligence. London: Bloomsbury Publishing. Goleman D (1998) Working with Emotional Intelligence. London: Bloomsbury Publishing. Goleman D (2004) Emotional Intelligence and Working with Emotional Intelligence. London: Bloomsbury Publishing. Goleman D, Boyatzis R and McKee A (2003) The New Leaders: Transforming the Art of Leadership into the Science of Results. London: Time Warner Paperbacks. Halverson SK, Holladay CL, Kazama SM and Quinones MA (2004) Self-sacrificial behav ior in crisis situations: The competing roles of behavioral and situational factors. Leadership Quarterly 15: 263275. Hedlund J and Sternberg RJ (2000) Too many intelligences? Integrating social, emotional and public intelligence. In: Bar-On R and Parker JDA (eds) Handbook of Emotional Intelligence: Theory, Development, Assessment, and Application at Home, School and in the Workplace. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 136167. Hersey P and Blanchard K (1982) Management of Organisational Behavior: Utilizing Human Resources, 4th edn. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Hogan R, Curphy GJ and Hogan J (1994) What we know about leadership: Effectiveness and personality. American Psychologist 49(6): 493504. Hopkins MM (2005) The impact of gender, emotional intelligence competencies, and styles on leadership success. PhD dissertation, Cleveland, Case Western Reserve University. Available at: Emotional Intelligence Consortium database: www.eiconsortium.org/refer ences/dissertation_ abstracts.html (Abstract accessed 9 November 2009). House RJ (1999) Weber and neo-charismatic leadership paradigm: A response to Beyer. Leadership Quarterly 10(4): 563574. House RJ and Howell JM (1992) Personality and charismatic leadership. Leadership Quarterly 3(2): 81108. House R, Javidan M, Hanges P and Dorfman P (2002) Understanding cultures and implicit leadership theories across the globe: An introduction to project GLOBE. Journal of World Business 37: 310. Humphrey RH (2002) The many faces of emotional leadership. Leadership Quarterly 13: 493504. Illies R, Morgenson FP and Nahrgang JD (2005) Authentic leadership and eudaemonic well-being: Understanding leaderfollower outcomes. Leadership Quarterly 16: 373394.
Kotze and Venter
421
Jewell LN (1998) Contemporary Industrial/organisational Psychology, 3rd edn. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company. Judge TA and Bono JE (2000) Five-factor model of personality and transformational leadership style. Journal of Applied Psychology 85(5): 715730. Kalma AP and Visser L (1993) Social and aggressive dominance: Personality differences in leadership style. Leadership Quarterly 4(1): 4564. Kellet JB, Humphrey RH and Sleeth RG (2006) Empathy and the emergence of task and relations leaders. Leadership Quarterly 17: 146162. Klein KJ and House RJ (1995) On fire: Charismatic leadership and levels of analysis. Leadership Quarterly 6(2): 183198. Lane RD (2000) Levels of emotional awareness: Neurological, psychological and social perspectives. In: Bar-On R and Parker JDA (eds) Handbook of Emotional Intelligence: Theory, Development, Assessment, and Application at Home, School and in the Workplace. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 171191. Latour SM and Hosmer BC (2002) Emotional intelligence. Air and Space Power Journal 16(4): 2736. Leban WV (2003) The relationship between leader behavior and emotional intelligence of the project manager and the success of complex projects. PhD dissertation, Benedictine University, Chicago, IL. Available at: Emotional Intelligence Consortium database: www. eiconsortium.org/references/dissertation_ abstracts.html (accessed 9 November 2009). Lee FM (2003) Conflict management styles and emotional intelligence of faculty staff at a selected college in southern Taiwan (China). EdD dissertation, University of South Florida, St Petersburg. Available at: Emotional Intelligence Consortium database: www.eiconsortiu.org/references /dissertation_abstracts.html (Abstract accessed 9 November 2009). Livingstone H, Nadjiwon-Foster M and Smithers S (2002) Emotional Intelligence and Military Leadership. Prepared for: Canadian Forces Leadership. Copyright: Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada as Represented by the Minister of National Defence. Livingstone HA and Day AL (2005) Comparing the construct and criterion-related validity of ability-based and mixed-model measures of emotional intelligence. Educational and Psychological Measurement 65(5): 757779. Lopes PN (2004) Emotional abilities and the quality of interpersonal interaction. PhD thesis, Yale University, New Haven, CT. Available at: Emotional Intelligence Consortium database: www.eiconsortium.org/ references/dissertation_ abstractshtml (accessed 9 November 2009). Mandell B and Pherwani S (2003) Relationship between emotional intelligence and transformational leadership style: A gender comparison. Journal of Business and Psychology 17(3): 387404. Marshall-Mies JC, Fleishman EA, Martin JA, Zaccaro SJ, Baughman WA and McGee ML (2000) Development and evaluation of cognitive and acognitive measures for predicting leadership potential. Leadership Quarterly 11(1): 135153. Mayer JD, Salovey P and Caruso DR (2000a) Emotional intelligence as zeitgeist, as personality, and as mental ability. In: Bar-On R and Parker JDA (eds) Handbook of Emotional Intelligence: Theory, Development, Assessment, and Application at Home, School and in the Workplace. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 92117. Mayer JD, Salovey P and Caruso DR (2000b) Selecting a measure of emotional intelligence: The case for the ability scales. In: Bar-On R and Parker JDA (eds) Handbook of
422
Emotional Intelligence: Theory, Development, Assessment, and Application at Home, School and in the Workplace. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 320342. McColl-Kennedy JR and Anderson RD (2002) Impact of leadership style and emotions on subordinate performance. Leadership Quarterly 13: 545559. Morris CG (1996) Psychology: An Introduction, 9th edn. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Moss SA and Ngu S (2005) The relationship between personality and leadership preferences. Current Research in Social Psychology 11(6): 7091. Muchinsky PM (2000) Psychology Applied to Work, 6th edn. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/ Thomson Learning. Muldoon SD (2004) Is symbolic interactionism the fifth paradigm of leadership? Working Paper Series. Victoria University of Technology. Melbourne. Available at: http://eprints. vu.edu.au/view/year/2004.html (accessed 11 November 2009). Mumford MD, Marks MA, Conelli MS, Zaccaro SJ and Reiter-Palmon R (2000a) Development of leadership skills: Experience and timing. Leadership Quarterly 11(1): 87114. Mumford MD, Zaccaro SJ, Conelli MS and Marks MA (2000b) Leadership skills: Conclusions and future directions. Leadership Quarterly 11(1): 155170. Mumford MD, Zaccaro SJ, Harding FD and Fleishman EA (2000c) Leadership skills for a changing world: Solving complex social problems. Leadership Quarterly 11(1): 1135. Mumford MD, Zaccaro SJ, Johnson JF, Diana M, Gilbert JA and Threlfall KV (2000d) Patterns of leadership characteristics: Implications for performance and development. Leadership Quarterly 11(1): 115133. Neal JA (2008) Integral learning: A new look at management development in public administration. International Journal of Public Administration 31: 372395. OConnor JA, Mumford MD, Clifton TC and Gessner TL (1995) Charismatic leaders and destructiveness: A historiometric study. Leadership Quarterly 6(4): 529555. Peters TJ and Austin NK (1990) A Passion for Excellence: The Leadership Difference. Glasgow: William Collins Sons & Co. Podsakoff PM, MacKenzie SB and Bommer WH (1996) Transformational leader behaviors and substitutes for leadership as determinants of employee satisfaction, commitment, trust, and organizational citizenship behaviours. Journal of Management 22: 259298. Price DE (1996) Some thoughts on the military circa 2025. Joint Force Quarterly 13: 9799. Priest RF and Swain JE (2002) Humor and its implications for leadership effectiveness. Humor 15(2): 169189. Puffer SM (1990) Attributions of charismatic leadership: The impact of decision style, outcome, and observer characteristics. Leadership Quarterly 1(3): 177192. Rainey H, Pandey S and Bozeman B (1995) Research note: Public and private managers perceptions of red tape. Public Administration Review 55: 567574. Reissner M and Geiger SP (1984) Police officer as victim. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice 15: 315323. Ring PS and Perry JL (1985) Strategic management in public and private organizations: Implications of distinctive contexts and constraints. Academy of Management Review 10: 276286. Robbins SP (2001) Organisational Behaviour, 9th edn. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Robbins SP, Odendaal A and Roodt G (2003) Organisational Behaviour: Global and Southern African Perspectives. Cape Town: Pearson Education South Africa.
Kotze and Venter
423
Rosete D and Ciarrochi J (2005) Emotional intelligence and its relationship to workplace performance outcomes of leadership effectiveness. Leadership and Organization Development Journal 26(5): 388399. Russel RF (2001) The role of values in servant leadership. Leadership and Organization Development Journal 22(2): 7683. Saarni C (2000) Emotional competence: A developmental perspective. In: Bar-On R and Parker JDA (eds) Handbook of Emotional Intelligence: Theory, Development, Assessment, and Application at Home, School and in the Workplace. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 6891. Salovey P and Mayer JD (1990) Emotional intelligence. Imagination, Cognition and Personality 9: 185211. Shamir B, Arthur MB and House RJ (1994) The rhetoric of charismatic leadership: A theoretical extension, a case study, and implications for research. Leadership Quarterly 5(1): 2542. Silverthorne C (2001) Leadership effectiveness and personality: A cross cultural evaluation. Personality and Individual Differences 30: 303309. Snyder M (1979) Self-monitoring processes. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 12(30): 85125. Sosik JJ (2005) The role of personal values in the charismatic leadership of corporate managers: A model and preliminary field study. Leadership Quarterly 16: 221244. Sosik JJ and Megerian LE (1999) Understanding leader emotional intelligence and performance: The role of selfother agreement on transformational leadership perceptions. Group and Organisation Management 24(3): 367390. Spangenberg HH and Theron CC (2001) Manual for the Leadership Behaviour Inventory: Guidelines for Administration, Scoring and Interpretation. Stellenbosch: University of Stellenbosch. Spangenberg HH and Theron CC (2002) Development of a uniquely South African leadership questionnaire. South African Journal of Psychology 32(2): 925. Sternberg RJ and Zhang L (2005) Developing the leaders of tomorrow: The wrong direction is the wrong way to the right direction. Korean Journal of Thinking and Problem Solving 15(2): 712. Stubbs EC (2005) Emotional intelligence competencies in team and team leader: A multi-level examination of the impact of emotional intelligence on group performance. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Cleveland, Case Western Reserve University. Available at: Emotional Intelligence Consortium database: www.eiconsortium.org/references/dissertation_ abstracts.html (accessed 9 November 2009). Sy T, Tram S and OHara LA (2006) Relation of employee and manager emotional intelligence to job satisfaction and performance. Journal of Vocational Behavior 68: 461473. Topping K, Bremner W and Holmes EA (2000) Social competence: The social construction of the concept. In: Bar-On R and Parker JDA (eds) Handbook of Emotional Intelligence: Theory, Development, Assessment, and Application at Home, School and in the Workplace. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2839. Van Rooy DL, Alonso A and Viswesvaran C (2005) Group difference in emotional intelligence scores: Theoretical and practical implications. Personality and Individual Difference 38: 689700. Van Sickle J (2004) The relationship between emotional intelligence and coaching effectiveness in Division 1 head softball coaches. PhD dissertation, University of Kentucky, Lexington.
424
Available at: Emotional Intelligence Consortium database: www.eiconsortium.org/references/ dissertation_abstracts.html (accessed 9 November 2009). Vigoda-Gadot E and Meisler G (2010) Emotions in management and the management of emotions: The impact of emotional intelligence and organisational politics on public sector employees. Public Administration Review 70: 7286. Vitello-Cicciu JM (2003) Innovative leadership through emotional intelligence. Nursing Management 34(10): 2834. Winter DG (1991) A motivational model of leadership: Predicting long-term management success from TAT measures of power motivation and responsibility. Leadership Quarterly 2(2): 6780. Wolff SB, Pescosolido AT and Druskat VU (2002) Emotional intelligence as the basis of leadership emergence in self-managing teams. Leadership Quarterly 13: 505522. Wong C and Law KS (2002) The effects of leader and follower emotional intelligence on performance and attitude: An exploratory analysis. Leadership Quarterly 13: 243274. Yammarino FJ (2000) Leadership skills: Introduction and overview. Leadership Quarterly 11(1): 59. Yammarino FJ and Bass BM (1993) Person and situation views of leadership: A multiple levels of analysis approach. Leadership Quarterly 2(2): 121139. Zaccaro SJ, Mumford MD, Conelli MS, Marks MA and Gilbert JA (2000) Assessment on leader problem-solving capabilities. Leadership Quarterly 11(1): 3764. Zeng X and Miller CE (2003) Examination of measurements of emotional intelligence. Ergometrika 3: 3849.
Appendix Tables
Table 1. Relationships between the four phases of leadership effectiveness and emotional intelligence composite scales regarding leaders in a public sector institution Phases of leadership effectiveness (Lb1) Environmental orientation Emotional Intelligence Composite Scales Vision formulating and sharing Preparing organisation
Implementing
r-value
p-value .018* .086 .049* .002** .042*
r-value p-value r-value p-value r-value p-value .227 .224 .232 .311 .225 .015* .017* .013* .001** .016* .193 .151 .209 .274 .186 .040* .110 .026* .003** .047* .191 .173 .224 .271 .195 .042* .066 .017* .004** .038*
Intra-personal EQ .221 Inter-personal EQ .161 Stress Management EQ .185 Adaptability EQ .290 General Mood EQ .191
*p .05; **p .01.
Table 2. Relationships between the dimensions of leadership effectiveness and the emotional intelligence sub-scales regarding leaders in a public sector institution
Dimension of leadership effectiveness Vision formulations VISI rprprpvalue value value value value value .113 .167 .178 .13 .239 .238 .224 .131 .259 .107 .109 .238 .371 .248 .124 .349 .042* .028* .033* .005** .019* .059 .135 .001** .089 .194 0** 0** .003** .152 .089 .191 .206 .2 .260 .220 .177 .141 .319 .160 .122 .328 .389 .273 .135 .570 .023* .064 .035* .012* .021* .057 .304 .004** .307 .316 .015* 0** .004** .251 .054 .213 .174 .198 .233 .216 .179 .097 .270 .096 .095 .228 .428 .267 .108 .932 .045* .055 .006** .004** .031* .072 .503 .001** .540 .236 .01** 0** .004** .270 .008 .188 .180 .256 .270 .202 .169 .063 .313 .058 .112 .240 .417 .270 .104 TRUS ARTI STRA RISK LEAD Preparing the organization for implementing the vision FOLL
Kotze and Venter
El
Environment orientation
AWEX
AWIN
Sub-scales .542 .129 .074 .242 .022* .005** .022* .080 .005** .331 .303 .024* 0** .013* .069 .058 .143 .168 .11 .214 .260 .214 .165 .260 .092 .097 .211 .327 .232 .171 .232 .075 .058 .167 0.01** .011* .016* .164 .005** .257 .248 .011* 0** .008** .189
pvalue
rprprpvalue value value value value value
rprprvalue value value value value .827 .112 .156 .038* .039* .126 .183 .732 .009** .280 .328 .011* .001** .135 .321 .021 .150 .134 .194 .194 .144 .126 .032 .245 .102 .092 .236 .303 .141 .094 .983 .124 .072 .230 .013* .011* .095 .184 .002** .284 .269 .01** 0** .043* .109 .002 .145 .165 .113 .233 .236 .157 .125 .282 .101 .104 .240 .340 .190 .151
Self-awareness Assertiveness Self-regard Independence Self actualization Empathy Social responsibility Interpersonal Stress tolerance Impulse control Reality testing Flexibility Problem solving Optimism Happiness
.525 .033* .072 .116 .002** .076 .139 .366 .004** .536 .095 .014* 0** .006** .296
.06 .2 .169 .148 .288 .167 .139 .086 .266 .058 .157 .229 .363 .255 .099
.721 .025* .115 .076 .006** .039* .103 .334 .002** .710 .316 .049* 0** .019* .252
.034 .21 .148 .167 .256 .194 .153 .091 .284 .035 .095 .185 .366 .220 .108
*p
.05; **p
.01.
425
426
Table 2. Continued Dimensions of leadership effectiveness EI Implementing the vision COOR Sub-scales Sell-awareness Assertiveness Self-regard Independence Self-actualization Empathy Social responsibility Interpersonal Stress tolerance Impulse control Reality testing Flexibility Problem solving Optimism Happiness
*p .05; **p .01.
ACTI rpvalue value .034 .133 .182 .118 .211 .195 .167 .123 .271 .087 .066 .250 .342 .209 .138 .628 .186 .048* .085 .042* .146 .41v0 .656 .002** .391 .790 .002** .001** .034* .178 rvalue .046 .125 .186 .162 .191 .137 .078 .042 .287 .081 .025 .293 .301 .198 .127
PLAN pvalue .637 .031* .028* .025* .002** .110 .165 .446 .001** .383 .188 .01** 0** .025* .110
REVI rpvalue value .045 .203 .205 .211 .284 .150 .131 .072 .313 .082 .124 .239 .360 .210 .150 .509 .042* .054 .101 .060 .098 .078 .309 .005** .124 .333 .003** .006** .071 .212
REWA rpvalue value .062 .191 .181 .154 .177 .156 .165 .096 .260 .145 .091 .272 .257 .170 .118 .315 .167 .128 .111 .023* .008** .054 .085 .004** .369 .363 .016* .001** .047* .104 rvalue .095 .130 .144 .150 .212 .245 .181 .162 .269 .085 .086 .225 .305 .186 .153
pvalue .718 .158 .053 .212 .024* .037* .076 .194 .004** .355 .488 .007** 0** .026* .142
Table 2. Continued
Dimensions of leadership effectiveness
Kotze and Venter
El Implementing the vision INFL HONO DECI VALU LEAR MANA TREA INSP
Preparing the organisation for implementing the vision
SYST
CULT
Sub-scales .031 .793 .110 .051 .166 .037* .196 .130 .018* .222 .011* .237 .084 .163 .051 .183 .026* .209 .214 .245 .303 .212 .117 .137 .110 .356 .097 .402 .118 .535 .140 .087 .079 .059 .001** .307 .032* .201 0** .368 .001** .295 .027* .207 .070 .170 .146 .081 .164 .168 .130 .053 .182 .417 .077 .05* .184 .166 .131 .142 .177 .053 .027* .145 .243 .100 .654 .014* .184 .054* .199 .168 .130 .349 .218 .078 .157 .169 .025 .959 .005 .812 .023 .980 .002 .708
prprprprprprprpvalue value value value value value value value value value value value value value value .035 .591 .089 .641 .138 .205 .127 .290
rprprvalue value value value value .051 .965 .044 .393 .120 .207 .100 .232 .004 .081 .119 .113 .182 .107 .152 .121 .146 .207 .006** .257 .043* .196 .137 .053 .110 .166 .155 .142 .042 .582 .181 .081 .131 .390 .138 .395 .052 .819 .230 .014* .230 .09 .164 .081
Self-awareness
.884
.014 .854
.017 .747
Assertiveness
.066
.173
.418
.077 .021* .215 .244
Self-regard
.033* .200
.175
.128 .02*
Independence
.124
.145
.225
.115 .096
Self actualization Empathy .112 .075 .103 .555 .329 .080 .066 .050 .732 .109 .442 .073 .486 .032 .399 .056 .376 .084 .167 .183 .126
.008** .246 .203 .120
.071 .076
.170 .012* .235 .013* .232 .016* .224 .167 .077 .166 .105 .135 .05* .184
Social responsibility .284
.101
.135
.135 .236
Interpersonal
.398
.080
.415
.077 .275
Stress tolerance
.003** .276
.005** .261 .002** .287 .005** .262 0**
.001** .307 .013* .233
.001 ** .298 .009** .243 .011* .237 .080 .022 .178 .006** .254 .01* .062 .176 .059 .273 .104 .416 .210 .003** .276 .177 .027* .207 .077 .395 .080
Impulse control
.802
.024* .376
.084 .595
Reality testing
.359
.057
.447
.072 .248
Flexibility
.068
.171
.026* .209 .002** .282 .023* .214 .004** .267
Problem solving Optimism .150 .311 .096 .122
0** .347 .016* .225
.003** .274 0** .343 0** .354 0** .368 .119 .147 .025* .210 .016* .225 .005** .263
Happiness
.213
.117
.138
.140 .111
*p
.05; **p
.01.
427

International Review of Administrative Sciences-2011-Kotzé-397-427

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

International Review of Administrative Sciences-2011-Kotzé-397-427

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

International Review of Administrative Sciences

International Institute of Administrative Sciences

>> Version of Record - Jun 13, 2011 What is This?

Downloaded from ras.sagepub.com at University of Nottingham on October 16, 2011