Emotional intelligence (investigating the impact of project managers' emotional intelligence on their interpersonal competence)

Running head: EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE 1

Emotional Intelligence

Jaime Morales

Interamerican University of Puerto Rico

Organizational Behavior and Theory

BADM 5100

Dra. Rosa J. Martínez

January 17, 2012

EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE 2

Abstract


Emotional Intelligence

International economic figures indicate a significant and growing use of project

management in the global economy (Davis, 2011). In order to achieve a sustainable competitive

advantage, an organization's chosen strategy must be reinforced (Davis, 2011). A common

method of reinforcement is projects (Davis, 2011). Projects need to integrate and align with

business strategy to help achieve organizational goals (Davis, 2011). Organizations that excel

with the use of projects may be more capable of responding to risk or opportunities (Davis,

2011). Annual spending on projects is now in the billions (Davis, 2011). This figure continues to

grow year after year (Davis, 2011). It is difficult to overlook the increasing demand for better,

faster, and more cost-effective projects (Davis, 2011). The growing use of project management

creates a growing importance for the role of project manager (Davis, 2011).

Researchers have long debated the skills and competencies are beneficial in the project

manager role that may reduce project failures (Davis, 2011). Researchers have also debated the

value and applicability of emotional intelligence (EI) in organizations and the value of the

various assessment tools available (Davis, 2011). Few studies have proposed research questions

investigating the relationship that may exist between these two domains or between factors of EI

assessment instruments and interpersonal competence with project managers (Davis, 2011). The

present research emphasized individual project managers as the unit of analysis and offers

empirical data that may benefit researchers and practitioners of both fields by clarifying any

relationship that may exist between different models of EI and interpersonal competence

constructs in the role of project manager (Davis, 2011). The findings here hope to contribute to

existing EI theory, EI model development, the training and development of project managers,

and the interpersonal competencies of those who manage change through projects (Davis, 2011).


In one recent study, across 15 nations and 21 industries, 83% of chief executive officers (CEOs)

reported an increasing gap between their expectations for substantial change and

their organizations' ability to execute this change (Davis, 2011). New research on EI and the

interpersonal competencies of project managers is relevant because both domains may offer

avenues that fuel the effectiveness of organizational adaptability (Davis, 2011). High project

failure rates and inept abilities to change must bring attention to those ultimately responsible for

the success of a project (Davis, 2011).

The need for projects and project success is placing a renewed emphasis on one very unique

role: the project manager (Davis, 2011). In 1999, the largest credential-certifying organization of

project managers in the world, the Project Management Institute (PMI), had 43,000 members

(Davis, 2011). This organization now has over 340,000 members, an increase of 790% in 12

years. One can only speculate about the growth of the project management profession in 5 or 10

more years, but the trend is clear: this number is going up rapidly (Davis, 2011).

The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) does not classify project managers as an

occupation. This is one of many signals suggesting an increasing gap between investment and

demand on the one hand and knowledge and expertise on the other (Davis, 2011). Compared to

general management or leadership literature, the field of project management is very young. It

has been criticized for a scanty theoretical basis, and only 41% of projects were recently found to

meet their objectives on time, on budget, and on quality (Davis, 2011). These trends suggest

research with project managers is needed (Davis, 2011). Improved knowledge and awareness

appear to be beneficial (Davis, 2011).

Ironically or not, another concept has gained momentum along a very similar timeline: a

concept called emotional intelligence (Davis, 2011). New books and periodicals appear year after


year (Davis, 2011). Most organizations seem to appreciate that EI has some relationship to

performance, but the understanding of how, where, and why is unclear (Davis, 2011). The

concepts and tools of EI are used in organizations, but the validity and application of the

construct remain a major concern (Davis, 2011). The very definition of the concept remains

unclear (Davis, 2011). This lack of clarity is reflected in contemporary business, where polls of

human resource professionals found most feel incompetent on the subject, despite claims of

massive applicability in organizations (Davis, 2011).

Most published research on EI and performance is conducted in laboratory settings or with

student populations (Davis, 2011). These results may not be applicable to organizations or

projects (Davis, 2011). As a result, researchers have called for further studies that clarify the

value and applicability of EI in organizations (Davis, 2011). The exact magnitude and predictive

validity of EI continue to vary by situation (Davis, 2011). The investigation here is in response to

these trends and calls for research (Davis, 2011).

The primary goal of the research was to determine if the ability model of EI, as measured by

the Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT), shows a correlation across

four interpersonal competencies common in project manager performance models (Davis, 2011).

These four domains are communication, motivation, conflict management, and problem solving

(Davis, 2011). The first four research questions asked whether project manager scores on the

MSCEIT show a statistically significant relationship with the ratings they receive from those

they work with for each domain (Davis, 2011).

The secondary goal of the research was to determine which components of the ability model

of EI show a relationship with a popular mixed model, the Bar-On Emotional Quotient Inventory

(Davis, 2011). The ability model and mixed model were also explored to see which had a


stronger and more consistent relationship to interpersonal competency ratings across the same

four domains. The two research questions for this second focus of the study were exploratory in

nature and emphasized the similarities and differences of the two EI tools regarding their

relevance to each other and the interpersonal competency domains (Davis, 2011).

THEORY AND HYPOTHESES

The ontological perspective for this research is that emotional awareness and emotional

knowledge have relevance in organizations because firms must utilize human capital, and

humans inherently express emotions individually and when interacting (Davis, 2011). The

epistemological perspective in this study views emotional intelligence and interpersonal

competency factors as constructs difficult to measure but sufficiently defined for evaluations of

relevance, relationships between each other, and comparison to each other (Davis, 2011). The

following theories provide a foundation for these perspectives and are followed by the new

hypotheses for this study (Davis, 2011).

Personal Construct Theory predicts that proposed changes in opposition to esteemed core

values will elicit intense negative behaviors (Davis, 2011). Project managers must integrate

project requirements from diverse groups (Davis, 2011). Stakeholders may protect the status quo

if they are emotionally invested or reliant on it for stability (Davis, 2011). Emotional intelligence

models often have a branch measuring an awareness of emotions in others. Perhaps emotional

intelligence signifies individuals with an understanding of these relationships (Davis, 2011).

The Theory of Multiple Intelligences proposes a framework of cognitive intelligence one that

proposes segregation into multiple "kinds" of intelligence (Davis, 2011). These subsets include

musical, bodily kinesthetic, logical-mathematical, linguistic, spatial, interpersonal, and


intrapersonal intelligence (Davis, 2011). Most modern EI scholars point to what this author

called "interpersonal" and "intrapersonal" intelligences (Davis, 2011).

Emotional Intelligence Theory, which is also called Primal Leadership Theory, predicts that

the EI of leaders is tied to their performance (Davis, 2011). Project managers may assume

leadership roles, or need to lead at certain points in the project life cycle (Davis, 2011). This may

imply that the EI construct would help predict project manager performance, especially if they

lead or assume leadership roles during a project (Davis, 2011).

Transformational Leadership Theory predicts that one's ability to create transformational

change is predicted by the ability to create idealized influence, individual consideration,

inspirational motivation, and intellectual stimulation (Davis, 2011). Using the Trait Meta Mood

Scale (TMMS) found a strong correlation between the TMMS and inspirational motivation

(Davis, 2011). These same authors hypothesized that the El construct would be found to predict

change agent performance (Davis, 2011). Perhaps there is a unique correlation between EI and

certain types of change not just leadership, with transformational leadership explicitly noting

"transformational" change (Davis, 2011).

Basic Emotions Theory predicts that universal patterns of individual facial and vocal

expressions exist across cultures (Davis, 2011). Emotions are seen here as intra-individual states

rather than processes unfolding in a social context (Davis, 2011). Since some patterns of

emotions exist across cultures, according to the theory, it may be plausible that these

fundamental similarities in emotional information are understood and utilized by some

individuals more than others, and this ability impacts performance (Davis, 2011).

The theoretical basis for the construct of an EI is grounded in the Theory of Multiple

Intelligences and Basic Emotions Theory perspectives (Davis, 2011). The ability model and


mixed models of emotional intelligence emphasize the factors and concepts of these two theories

differently (Davis, 2011). The ability model is primarily concerned with intelligence or the

interplay of cognition and emotion, and defines emotional intelligence as the ability to identify,

use, understand, and manage emotions (Davis, 2011). This model may be viewed as an

individual's potential for utilizing emotional information (Davis, 2011). The mixed trait model of

emotional intelligence views the concept more broadly (Davis, 2011). The mixed trait model

does not claim to directly measure cognitive aptitude but instead noncognitive competencies

(Davis, 2011). Theoretically, there is less emphasis on the Theory of Multiple Intelligences and

Basic Emotions Theory because the focus is on the clusters of interrelated emotional and social

competencies, skills, and facilitators that impact intelligent behavior (Davis, 2011).

The four primary research questions for this study were presented as formal hypotheses and

are parsimonious, repeatable, and measurable (Davis, 2011). Each primary research question

asked whether project manager scores on the MSCEIT have a statistically significant relationship

with the ratings they receive from others on each of the four interpersonal competencies

(communication, motivation, conflict management, and problem solving) (Davis, 2011). The

secondary research questions focused on two areas (Davis, 2011). The first question asked if

there was a relationship between MSCEIT and EQ-i scores of project managers (Davis, 2011).

The second question asked if the EQ-i always outperforms the MSCEIT when measuring

correlation to project manager interpersonal competency ratings (Davis, 2011). The secondary

research questions were not expressed as hypotheses because they are exploratory and

supplemental in nature (Davis, 2011). Each formal hypothesis for the primary research questions

used the MSCEIT, which utilizes the ability model of EI, to measure the independent variables

(Davis, 2011). Each overall MSCEIT score was utilized for the primary research questions and


successive formal hypotheses (Davis, 2011). A questionnaire measuring four factors of project

manager interpersonal competence was then utilized to measure the dependent variables

(motivation, communication, conflict management, and problem solving (Davis, 2011). Each of

these dependent variables is strongly supported as interpersonal competencies needed in project

managers (Davis, 2011).

EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE

In the early 20th century, Darwin began reporting that emotional expression was a key

component of survival and adaptation (Davis, 2011). This was followed by studies of social

intelligence by Thorndike (1920), Wechsler (1939), Wedeck (1947), and Hemphill (1959)

establish by Davis, 2011. Themes began to emerge suggesting many forms of intelligence

(Davis, 2011), and studies began to support the notion that certain individuals had higher skills

and abilities with emotions (Davis, 2011). The origination of the term emotional intelligence

came from a 1985 unpublished dissertation by Wayne L. Payne, a PhD student from The Union

Institute used the term EI in the first published coining of the term, and Bar-On (1992) expanded

upon their ability-based model to argue at the time that EI is in fact a nomenclature of multiple

capabilities (Davis, 2011). This is the genesis of what became the ability model and later the first

mixed model -- the mixed model of EI being the broader of the two (Davis, 2011). This was

where many of the first debates began to take place, as scholars maneuvered on the real

definition of an EI construct (Davis, 2011).

After years of debate and energized by the work of New York University neurobiologist

Joseph LeDoux and University of Iowa neurobiologist Antonio Damasio, Daniel Goleman wrote

a book (Davis, 2011). This book is commonly noted as the key event responsible for the


proliferation of the EI construct (Davis, 2011). This book was Goleman's 1995 publication,

Emotional Intelligence: Why It Can Matter More Than IQ (Davis, 2011). In the following years,

various publications (Gibbs, 1995) and new or updated models (Bar-On, 1997; Cooper & Sawaf,

1997; Goleman, 1998b) began to emerge (Davis, 2011). Some scholars posited that the construct

is really a form or component of social intelligence (Davis, 2011). Others proposed that the

construct is actually a form of practical intelligence (Davis, 2011). The central premise in each of

these interpretations is that the ability to integrate cognition with emotion is important and

valuable, it varies by individual, and there are beneficial applications (Davis, 2011).

The strongest research stream supporting the applicability of EI in organizations is that of

leadership, where high correlations have been found between EI and performance (Davis, 2011).

Studies using EI tools have found relationships with an individual's ability to handle stress

(Davis, 2011), create sales growth or recruit effectively, reduce turnover in their teams or

themselves, and build effective or productive relationships at work, among others. The tools used

in these studies generally fall into one of two groups: ability models and mixed models (Davis,

2011).

The ability model is skill-based and focuses exclusively on cognitive aptitudes, much like an

IQ test; has right and wrong answers; and comes from a long line of social psychology (Davis,

2011). Today this is usually measured by the Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence

Test, which is an individual assessment and has four clusters: perceiving emotions,

understanding emotions, managing emotions, and using emotions (Davis, 2011). Each of these

individual clusters was examined in the secondary or exploratory part of this study as variables

(Davis, 2011). The ability model is primarily concerned with cognitive aptitude and the

intellectualization of emotional information (Davis, 2011).


The mixed model is a broader interpretation and definition of emotional intelligence (Davis,

2011). Mixed models view EI as a set of noncognitive competencies including personal, social,

and emotional factors (Davis, 2011). The most common instruments used today to measure this

model are the Emotional Competency Inventory (ECI) (Hay Group, 1999) and the Emotional

Quotient Inventory (EQ-i) (Davis, 2011). The ECI (or mixed competency model) includes four

clusters of factors, including self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, and

relationship management (Davis, 2011). The EQ-i (mixed trait model) uses a five-part definition

for emotional intelligence, including clusters on intrapersonal EQ, interpersonal EQ, adaptability,

stress management, and general mood (Davis, 2011). Each cluster of the EQ-i is a variable in this

study examined in the secondary or exploratory research questions (Davis, 2011).

Proponents of the ability model argue that correlations have been found between the mixed

model and personality, while the ability model shows discriminate validity from personality

(Davis, 2011). The clarification that needs to be made is that authors of the mixed models do not

claim to measure emotional intelligence, despite any generalizations made from their titles

(Davis, 2011). The ability model focuses on cognitive aptitude (Davis, 2011). The mixed models

focus on emotionally and socially competent behaviors or behaviors important to performance at

work (Davis, 2011). While earlier mixed model proposals were offered as an "interpretation" of

emotional intelligence (Davis, 2011), these have later been clarified as distinct concepts separate

from emotional intelligence while still retaining similarities (Davis, 2011). For these reasons, the

(Davis, 2011)operational definition for emotional intelligence used here is the seminal definition

offered by Salovey and Mayer (1990) stating that emotional intelligence is the ability to monitor

one's own and others' feelings and emotions, to discriminate among them and to use this

information to guide one's thinking and actions (Davis, 2011).


The ECI was not used for this study as an alternative mixed model because the ECI often has

very strong results, some so overwhelming that researchers have called for an examination of the

tool's real predictive validity (Davis, 2011). The ECI is not offered in a self-assessment version,

opening an evaluation of the tool up to new reliability and validity concerns (Davis, 2011). Some

factors of the ECI may even measure high performance directly, such as service, developing

others, organizational awareness, achievement, change catalyst, and transparency (Davis, 2011).

Comparing the ECI factors to interpersonal competency factors may be a duplication of factors.

Since little is known about the predictive validity of the EQ-i in organizations and the tool is

widely used, it seems reasonable to explore this interpretation of the mixed model in the business

setting in the interest of new empirical data (Davis, 2011).

The psychometric aspect of the Bar-On model of emotional intelligence is the measure of the

construct, which was designed to measure the model, the Emotional Quotient Inventory (Davis,

2011). Since 1980, over one million people have taken the EQ-i (Davis, 2011). The instrument

has been refined using factor analysis and normative samples in North America, Asia, Europe,

South America, and Africa. Some correlations to personality tests have been found, and this is

due to the broader nature of the model and measure (Davis, 2011). The EQ-i was used for this

study to measure the mixed model (Davis, 2011).

The psychometric aspect of the Mayer-Salovey-Caruso model of emotional intelligence is the

measure of the construct that was designed to measure their model, the Mayer-Salovey-Caruso

Emotional Intelligence Test (Davis, 2011). The internal validity and reliability of the MSCEIT

have been found to be high even while correlations to personality remain low (Davis, 2011). The

instrument has been refined multiple times since 1990 using normative samples and factor


analysis (Davis, 2011). The MSCEIT was used for this study to measure the ability model

(Davis, 2011).

PROJECT MANAGER COMPETENCIES

Managerial competence is typically described across four skill areas: conceptual skills,

diagnostic skills, technical skills, and interpersonal skills (Davis, 2011). For a manager to be

effective, competence must be demonstrated while fulfilling interpersonal, informational, and

decisional roles (Davis, 2011). Managers require competence across these standard dimensions

because the role has a variety of demands, resources, and requirements (Davis, 2011).

The performance of managers who work on projects is an important factor in the successful

completion of a project (Davis, 2011). Dedicated project managers increase the success rates of

their projects, and project managers are held accountable for the project results (Davis,

2011). Organizations that utilize project managers are thus responsible for having some

understanding of the competencies that the role requires if they wish to observe high

performance levels (Davis, 2011). Most researchers agree that project managers must be

technically, interpersonally, and administratively skilled, as is the case with most managers

(Davis, 2011). Project managers need competencies in planning, monitoring, staffing, and

executing the project (Davis, 2011). A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge

states that a competent project manager must be able to manage scope, schedule, cost, quality,

staffing, communication, risk, and procurement -- all components of a project management plan

(p. 75) (Davis, 2011). PMI has offered a model of project performance that includes four

clusters: application area knowledge, general management knowledge, understanding the project

environment, and interpersonal skills (Davis, 2011). Here, each cluster is seen as important and

influential enough to impact the other clusters, improving the success or increasing the failure of


a project (Davis, 2011).

The interpersonal skills cluster from the PMBOK(R) Guide model includes effective

communication, influencing, leadership, motivation, problem solving, and negotiation and

conflict management (Davis, 2011). Four of the skills from the interpersonal cluster

(communication, motivation, problem solving, and conflict management) were used in this study

due to the acceptance of the PMBOK(R) Guide in the project management community and the

high validity of these factors (Davis, 2011). Numerous standards identify these factors as

relevant in the project management profession, even outside of PMI. Motivation, conflict

management, problem resolution, and communication are listed as competencies in the

International Project Management Association (IPMA) competency baseline (ICB) (Davis,

2011). Communication, motivation, problem solving, and conflict management are frequent

themes in studies and models of project manager performance (Davis, 2011).

Interpersonal skills are a common factor in project manager performance models because they

are vital to success. It is difficult to manage risk, resolve stakeholder conflict, or motivate a

project team while overlooking the importance of interpersonal skills (Davis, 2011). The most

significant challenges when implementing a project are often people-related -- factors such as

changing mind-sets, motivating employees, creating honest and timely communication, building

commitment, and navigating corporate culture (Davis, 2011). This should not be overlooked too

quickly (Davis, 2011). Gillard and Price (2005) found that interpersonal adaptability, including

the appropriate use of social power, is essential for building relationships in project settings

(Davis, 2011). Unless project managers are working by themselves, interpersonal skills appear

quite beneficial, if not flatly required (Davis, 2011).

One study of 1,400 chief financial officers (CFOs) found that innovations in technology are


increasing the speed of interpersonal interactions, showcasing employees who have interpersonal

skills and exposing those who lack these skills to wider audiences (Davis, 2011). The

interpersonal skills of communication, motivation, conflict management, and problem solving

are themes in the project management literature (Davis, 2011). These are the factors used in the

Project Manager Interpersonal Competency Inventory (PMICI) for this study, and the measures

were created by coding themes in the prominent models and theories of each domain. For

communication competence, for example, scales were based on encoding, decoding,

interference, and medium criteria (Davis, 2011). Ancillary evidence suggests that EI may have a

unique relationship with these interpersonal domains, providing an avenue for development and

utilization (Davis, 2011). New data describing the relationship between emotional intelligence

and project manager interpersonal competencies is important in the advancement of both

constructs because it illuminates the potential exchange (Davis, 2011).

EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE AND INTERPERSONAL COMPETENCE

The case for a potential relationship between EI and interpersonal competence is supported by

previous studies reporting meaningful and even significant relationships between EI and the

individual competency domains of communication, motivation, conflict management, and

problem solving (Davis, 2011). Competent communicators, for example, were observed to utilize

empathy more frequently (Davis, 2011). Empathy is a standard behavior or factor in mixed

models of EI (Davis, 2011). Individuals with high EI demonstrate empathy more (Davis, 2011).

This creates a link between EI and communication (Davis, 2011). Henderson (2008) expanded

this connection by reporting that EI and the encoding and decoding concepts of communication

are actually quite similar (Davis, 2011). If the Basic Emotions Theory is correct, it is plausible to


suggest certain individuals have abilities or tendencies that enhance their ability to communicate,

based on their level of emotional and procedural comprehension (Davis, 2011).

Leban (2003) found that overall EI scores were correlated significantly with the inspirational

motivation component of transformational leadership (Davis, 2011). The ability model was used

in this study (Davis, 2011). This suggests that EI is related to motivation within the context of

transformation. Since EI is based on the interpersonal and intrapersonal components of Multiple

Intelligence Theory, it is reasonable to conclude that some individuals have a higher ability in

these areas, and this impacts their ability to motivate (Davis, 2011). The very root of the word

emotion is motere, the Latin verb, which means to move, suggesting emotions trigger an impulse

to act (Davis, 2011). Some individuals, even project managers, may have an enhanced

understanding of these triggers (Davis, 2011). Emotions are powerful motivational forces (Davis,

2011).

Malek (2000) found that individuals with higher EI are more likely to resolve conflict

effectively, using more collaborative styles of conflict resolution (Davis, 2011). Sy and Cote

(2004) suggested that individuals with high EI are better at managing conflicting paradigms,

managing their own emotions, and aligning the goals of groups (Davis, 2011). Goleman (1998a)

lists conflict management as a measure within his EI tool, the ECI. While these examples do not

explicitly look at project managers or, specifically, EI, a case exists that a relationship of some

kind may be present (Davis, 2011).

The EI of an individual has been reported to have some correlations

with organizational learning, executive intuition, and performance on time-pressured, decision

making tests (Davis, 2011). Emotions appear to influence decision-making processes (Davis,

2011). These studies provide a cluster of findings suggesting that higher EI assessment scores


may result in higher problem-solving competence (Davis, 2011).

Through anxiety and uncertainty, change and emotions are interlinked (Davis, 2011). Caruso

and Wolfe (2002) found that individuals with high EI are typically more comfortable with

ambiguity and change in the workplace (Davis, 2011). Project management is a type of change

management (Davis, 2011). Emotions may be utilized or understood in better ways by certain

individuals, increasing the likelihood of competence (Davis, 2011). Mayer and Salovey (2004)

verified this in an earlier study when they found that EI influences the effectiveness of the

individual when engaging in change management behaviors (Davis, 2011). This study narrows to

see if this conclusion holds true when narrowing to the project management domain and

interpersonal competence (Davis, 2011).

DISCISSION

The study uncovered several themes that appear to be worthy of future consideration in

organizations, in research, and in the field of project management (Davis, 2011). Davis (2011)

indicates that the first theme found in this study had a week and mixed relationship between

Emotional Intelligence (ability model) and interpersonal competency ratings. While the

MSCEIT branches of managing emotions and understanding emotions did show singular

relevant relationships worthy of consideration, the relationships appear to be influenced by other

variables, submissive to other variables, or inadequate to suggest a meaningful relationship or

direct unsupported application in the business setting (Davis, 2011). This means that the ability

model of EI may not have a strong relationship with interpersonal competencies in project

managers (Davis, 2011). Davis (2011) also establish that in the second theme in this study is that

the managing emotions branch of the MSCEIT is the most viable scale within the tool for


predicting probabilities across all four of the PM interpersonal competency domains. This theme

does not suggest that the managing emotions branch has a strong relationship with PM

interpersonal competence, but it does suggest that this branch appears to retain some relevance in

organizations and the project manager role (Davis, 2011). The third theme was that project

manager interpersonal competencies have a significant relationship with EQ-i scores (Davis,

2011). Davis 2011, indicates that this is seen as a plausible conclusion because the EQ-i

measures adaptability, impulse control, stress management, optimism, and general mood. The

EQ-i appears to have measures that are related to these competencies (Davis, 2011). It is

difficult to ignore the EQ-i because 14 statistically significant relationships were found with

interpersonal competencies named in PM literature (Davis, 2011). A more frequent and

deliberate use of the EQ-i in the project setting and in organizations is a valid implication for

modern business because the EQ-i has consistent and strong correlations with PM interpersonal

competency ratings (Davis, 2011). If leaders and managers see effective project managers with

high levels of interpersonal competence desirable, it is reasonable to consider the EQ-I (Davis,

2011). The use of the EQ-i in the project management office can be very valuable because it

measures variables such as stress management and adaptability (Davis, 2011). A fourth theme

here is that the MSCEIT and EQ-i scores were highly correlated for project managers in the

continental United States (David, 2011). With the exception of the understanding emotions

branch of the MSCEIT, this study found multiple large correlations between every branch of the

MSCEIT to every branch of the EQ-i(David, 2011). This implies that the MSCEIT and EQ-i

measure overlapping or related clusters of variables(David, 2011). The conclusion here is not

suggesting the MSCEIT and EQ-i measure the same concept, but they do appear to have a very

valid relationship to each other (David, 2011). The fifth theme identified here was that the EQ-i


has stronger and more consistent relationships (than the MSCEIT) with project manager

interpersonal competence (David, 2011). This suggests that tools measuring adaptation, stress

tolerance, optimism, flexibility, impulse control, and coping (Bar-On, 2000) are more valuable in

the project setting and with project managers (than EI alone) (David, 2011). This cross-section of

interrelated emotional and social competencies, skills, and facilitators (Bar-On, 2008) appears to

be more relevant than the cognitive ability to process emotions in the role of project manager

because the correlations between the broader measures are consistent (David, 2011). Emotional

intelligence increases the likelihood of moderating variables relating to interpersonal competence

in the role of project manager; it is not strongly related to interpersonal competence alone

(David, 2011). This is true in the dynamic world of organizations because they differ greatly

from the classroom setting or a written test (David, 2011). The variety and intensity of

environmental stimuli require consideration for more than knowledge or intelligence because

there are many activities and processes that influence behavior (David, 2011). The sixth theme

found as an implication in this study is the consistent relationship between the ability model and

the EQ-i version of the mixed model with conflict management and problem solving competence

in project managers (Davis, 2011). Not only did conflict management and problem solving

competence show the only two statistically significant relationships with the MSCEIT, but these

two competencies also had the highest correlations with the EQ-I (Davis, 2011). Conflict

management and problem solving competence clearly have a relationship with both theoretical

lenses of EI (Davis, 2011). Organizations and project offices may benefit from this finding

because it gives them a criterion and framework for improving these two domains (Davis, 2011).

The tools could be used to guide resource allocation or training strategies when conflict and

problem solving competence are anticipated (or weak) in the organization (Davis, 2011). One


pattern that is found frequently in this study and with each statistical test is the undeniable

influence of many mental processes that appear inadequate and exposed in the absence of each

other (Davis, 2011). Contextually defined behavioral tendencies and proficiencies in dynamic

social environments attributed solely to a causal relationship with the ability model of EI may be

frankly incomplete or even misleading (Davis, 2011). Multiple brain functions mitigate and

combine prior to actual behavior (Davis, 2011). The ability model appears to primarily increase

the likelihood of emotionally laden moderating variables, reasonably represented by the EQ-i,

which in turn show relationships to interpersonal competence equal to or greater than personality

alone (Davis, 2011). The ability model does not strongly correlate with interpersonal competency

ratings itself in the role of project manager (Davis, 2011). This is an important finding in this

study because of three reasons: the ability model (MSCEIT) had weak and inconsistent

correlations with interpersonal competency ratings (PMICI), the moderating variables of the

mixed model (EQ-i) had strong and consistent correlations with interpersonal competency

ratings (PMICI), and the ability model (MSCEIT) and mixed model (EQ-i) had strong consistent

correlations (Davis, 2011).

Behavior and social competence is a function of multiple conscious and subconscious

cognitive and noncognitive processes, including general personality (extroversion,

conscientiousness, self-control, independence, anxiety) and contextual disposition (values,

optimism, self-confidence, temperamental composition, happiness). Individuals must not only

have EI, but they must also be motivated to act on this insight (Davis, 2011). These three

processes overlap and combine with emotional and social factors to produce moderating

variables correlated with interpersonal competence (Davis, 2011). The moderating variables of

the EQ-i are designed to measure effective adaptation and coping, which appears to have face


validity in the project management realm (Davis, 2011). The EQ-i clearly describes some of the

variables moderating the relationship between ability model EI, as measured by the MSCEIT,

and the interpersonal competency ratings project managers receive, as measured by the PMICI

(Davis, 2011). There was not one MSCEIT factor that added predictive validity above and

beyond the strongest factor of the EQ-i for any of the interpersonal competency domains (Davis,

2011). There were only two significant relationships found between the MSCEIT and

interpersonal competency domains (Davis, 2011). These results suggest that the mixed model of

emotional intelligence is able to amplify the significance of the ability model to interpersonal

competence by combining the ability model factors with complementary factors that only

together demonstrate consistent relationships in the business setting (Davis, 2011).


References

Davis, S. A. (2011). Investigating the Impact of Project Managers’ Emotional Intelligence on

Their Interpersonal Competence. Project Management Journal, 4(42), 37-57.

Emotional intelligence (investigating the impact of project managers' emotional intelligence on their interpersonal competence)

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Similaire à Emotional intelligence (investigating the impact of project managers' emotional intelligence on their interpersonal competence)

Similaire à Emotional intelligence (investigating the impact of project managers' emotional intelligence on their interpersonal competence) (20)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

Emotional intelligence (investigating the impact of project managers' emotional intelligence on their interpersonal competence)