Emotional Intelligence & Performance, Keith Lawrence Miller

Emotional Intelligence and Performance 1

A Review of Emotional Intelligence and Performance

Keith Miller

CEO & Professional Coach

Columbia University

© July 2011, Keith Lawrence Miller Million Dollar Enterprises, LLC


Introduction

Emotional intelligence (EQ) is one of the hottest social-psychological topics at this

present time because the accumulative literature spanning over the last twenty-years suggest that

EQ has the potential to be a viable component to predicting overall performance. Personnel

performance in our new economic platform is more important than ever because competition is

at record heights thanks to globalization. The ultimate factor that separates companies from one

another is the human component, and having an ability that raises overall performance is an

added advantage that no organization can overlook. The high-potential status of EQ is the reason

why this study aims to identify the main components of the EQ concept, and to explain the

theories that have formed EQ over the past two decades. This study explores the viability of EQ

as well as the connection it possesses with cognitive intelligence, personality, academic

performance, work performance, and leadership. The eventual research that will post-date this

review intends to manipulate EQ in terms of performance in order to experimentally determine

EQ’s influence on individual ability.

Emotional Intelligence

The concept of emotional intelligence (EQ) involves emotions playing an important role

in our lives, people having different abilities to perceive, understand, use, and manage emotions,

and these differences affect our adaptation in a variety of contexts (Cherniss, 2010 p.111).

According to Cherniss (2000), the concept of emotional intelligence mainly involves knowing

when and how to express emotion more so than it has to do with controlling it. Major theorists

in the field of EQ commonly accept EQ’s definition as “the ability to perceive and express

emotion, assimilate emotion in thought, understand and reason with emotion, and regulate

emotion in the self and others” (Cherniss, 2010; Mayer, Salovey, & Caruso, 2000, p.396).



The theory of emotional intelligence was first articulated by Salovey & Mayer in 1990, in

which they detailed the emotional abilities that are needed to improve individual performance.

The concept of emotional intelligence was popularized by Daniel Goleman through his

bestselling book, Emotional Intelligence in 1995 which claimed that emotional intelligence was a

predictor of success at home, work, and in school (Goleman, 1995; Mayer, Roberts, & Barsade,

in press). The five components of emotional intelligence at work include self-awareness – being

aware of how our behavior is affecting others in a social environment, self-regulation – the

ability to regulate moods to conform to adverse situations, motivation – an inner desire to

achieve a higher level of performance, empathy – the general willingness to feel compassion, and

social skills – which is the ability to interact with various individuals without causing an

emotional disruption in others. These five skills that encompass the concept of emotional

intelligence can be learned and transferred to the workplace (Goleman, 1998; Zeidner, Matthews,

& Roberts, 2009). Additionally, it is believed that the primary focus of emotional intelligence is

concerned with reasoning about emotions and using emotions to enhance thought (Mayer,

Roberts, & Barsade, 2008, p.511).

There has been much debate concerning the validity of Emotional Intelligence being

identified as a form of intelligence. Intelligence is defined as a mental ability that permits

recognition, learning, memory, and the capacity to reason about information (Mayer, et al, in

press). Emotional intelligence fits this formal meaning of intelligence based on the theory

expressed by Salovey & Mayer (1990), because for an individual to express the five traits: self-

awareness, self-regulation, motivation, empathy, & social skills – one needs the mental ability to

show recognition of emotions, learning of situations that contain emotional stimuli, memory of

experiences to regulate behavior, and the capacity to reason about emotionally charged



information. Opponents have argued against the validity of EQ because studies have determined

validity based on correlational evidence and by using unsound measuring procedures (Antonakis,

Ashkanasy, & Dasborough, 2009).

The concentration on multiple intelligences was renewed in the 1980s by Howard

Gardener when he proposed that there are other intelligences besides cognitive intelligence such

as musical, kinesthetic, interpersonal, and intrapersonal intelligence (Gardener, 1983; Zeidner, et

al., 2009). According to Cote & Miners (2006), research has shown that the term emotional

intelligence is consistent with definitions of traditional intelligences, and can be conceptualized

as the ability to reason correctly with emotional abstractions and to solve emotional problems.

Additionally, research has shown that emotional intelligence is correlated with verbal and

cognitive intelligence which is a criteria needed to be identified as an intelligence (Cote &

Miners, 2006).

Emotional Intelligence and Work Performance

The potential impact of emotional intelligence on performance is immense and this

collective belief has spearheaded multifaceted research which has discovered significant

relationships between emotional intelligence and performance in numerous areas of concern.

According to Greenstein (2001), emotional intelligence was the distinguishing factor that

separated the successful American President from the unsuccessful American President.

Presidential success was defined as a leader who was able to clearly communicate values,

behaviors, and actions to the American society which motivated the country to essentially

enhance their overall performance in times of crisis.

This finding suggests that the most important leadership position in the world is

impacted by the individual’s ability to use their emotional intelligence, and a higher level of



emotional intelligence led to greater overall success. According to the research conducted by

Shipley, Jackson, & Segrest (in press), emotional intelligence was positively associated with

work experience (full-time work – 40 or more hours compared to part-time work – 39 hours or

less), and their study suggest that there are certain sub-factors such as self-control, behavioral

dispositions, & self-perceived abilities of emotional intelligence that are related to academic

performance (GPA). Additionally, their study showed that age was not positively correlated

with emotional intelligence. This finding suggests that emotional intelligence is predictive to an

extent by determining a person’s work experience.

According to a meta-analysis of 59 studies conducted by Van Rooy & Viswesvaran

(2004), emotional intelligence was found to be correlated positively with job performance. In a

study conducted by Cote & Miners (2006), they measured emotional intelligence with the

MSCEIT, cognitive ability with the Cattell Culture Fair Intelligence Test (CFIT), and controlled

for personality. Their research found that emotional intelligence is a stronger predictor of task

performance & organizational citizenship behavior when cognitive intelligence decreases (Cote

& Miners, 2006). Lopes, Grewal, Kadis, Gall, & Salovey (2006), suggests that emotional

intelligence may contribute to work performance by enhancing relationships and enhance work

team effectiveness. Lopes, et al (2006), hypothesized that emotional intelligence is related to

indicators of job performance (salary, merit increase, company rank, and ratings of interpersonal

facilitation). Lopes et al (2006), found in their research, evidence to suggest that emotional

intelligence was related to company rank, merit increase, interpersonal ratings, and personal

attitudes which are indicators of work performance.



Emotional Intelligence & Academic Performance

According to Parker, Summerfeldt, Hogan, & Majeski (2004), successful first year

students with an 80% or better grade point average (GPA) scored higher in intrapersonal ability,

stress management, and adaptability when compared to unsuccessful first year students who

scored under 59% on GPA. Marquez, Martin, & Brackett (2006), found that emotional

intelligence measured by the MSCEIT in high school students was correlated with academic

achievement when cognitive ability and personality was controlled. This study suggests that

students with high emotional intelligence tend to display enhanced pro-social behavior and

perform better in school (Marquez, et. al, 2006).

According to Parker, Creque, Harris, Majeski, Wood, & Hogan (in press), in a sample

size of (n = 667) emotional intelligence was found to be a significant predictor of academic

success and EI was measured by the BarOn Emotional Quotient Inventory: Youth Version (EQ-

i:YV) which is a self report test. Furthermore, emotional intelligence was strongly associated

with interpersonal, adaptability, and stress management abilities (Parker, et. al, in press). Mayer,

et. al, (in press), suggests that people with higher emotional intelligence have an ability to spread

their control via emotional contagion thus improving others emotional intelligence and are

perceived more positively by others. Additionally, when emotional intelligence is validly

measured, it is a significant predictor of social relations, work performance, and well-being

(Mayer, et. al, in press).

Cherniss (2000) suggests that having the ability to understand what another person is

feeling enables one to develop the skill of influence on others which is an important tool for

leadership. Barchard (2003) found that measures of emotional intelligence are not as good at

predicting academic success as are cognitive ability measures. Studies have shown that the



predictive ability of EI decreases when controlling for cognitive intelligence and personality

(Mayer, et. al, 2008). Studies seem to indicate that the predictive ability of emotional

intelligence is higher for men than for women (Mayer, et. al, 2008). Future research should

focus on establishing the predictive ability of emotional intelligence in order to determine the

value of using such a measure (Barchard, 2003).

EQ Models

The specific ability model of emotional intelligence focuses on a fundamental trait

associated with emotional intelligence such as non-verbal perception which is an ability to

decipher social information and recognize emotional expression (Mayer, et. al, 2008). The best

measures of specific abilities of emotional intelligence are the Diagnostic Analysis of Nonverbal

Accuracy Scales (DANVA & DANVA-2), the Japanese and Caucasian Brief Affect Recognition

Test (JACBART), and the Levels of Emotional Awareness Scale (LEAS) (Mayer, et. al, 2008).

The mixed model approach focuses on a broader understanding of the attributes that

contribute to emotional intelligence such as adaptability, impulsiveness, creative thinking,

intuition, happiness, motivation, and more (Mayer, et. al, 2008). This mixed model approach

includes the criteria for the work performance traits of self-awareness, self-regulation,

motivation, empathy, and social skills as explained by Daniel Goleman (Zeidner, et. al, 2009).

The basis behind the integrative model of emotional intelligence is to join several

specific abilities together to obtain an overall concept of emotional intelligence (Mayer, et. al,

2008). The four branch model of emotional intelligence incorporates accurately perceiving and

identifying emotion in oneself and others (branch 1), using emotions to facilitate thought, focus

attention, think rationally, logically, and creatively (branch 2), understanding emotion which is

identified as an ability to understand emotional information (branch 3), and managing emotion



which includes regulating moods and emotions (Mayer & Salovey, 1997; Mayer, et. at, 2008;

(Brackett & Salovey, 2006). The best measure of the four branch model of emotional

intelligence is the Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT) (Mayer, et. al,

2008).

MSCEIT

The MSCEIT is an objective test that was created to measure the four branch model of

EQ with 141 items divided into 8 tasks that provide a score for each of the four branches, two

area scores, and an overall emotional intelligence score (Brackett & Salovey, 2006). The scoring

is calculated by consensus (over 5,000 people) and expert scoring (21 members of the

International Society Research on Emotions (ISRE)) (Brackett & Salovey, 2006). The consensus

norms and the expert norms correlate at r= .91(Mayer et. al, 2003). The test-retest reliability of

the full test MSCEIT over a three week period with a sample of 59 college students was .86 and

the split-half reliabilities including 2000 individuals were .93 and .91(Brackett & Mayer, 2003;

Mayer, et. al, 2003). These findings suggest that the MSCEIT is both content and structurally

valid. The MSCEIT is superior to self-report tests such as the Schutte Self Report Emotional

Intelligence Test (SSEIT), because self-report tests correlate highly with measures of well-being

and personality and are susceptible to faking (Brackett & Mayer, 2003). Multiple studies have

shown that the MSCEIT has expected convergent and discriminant validity (Brackett, Rivers, &

Salovey, 2011). Additionally, the MSCEIT has been shown to be statistically independent from

other constructs (Brackett, Rivers, & Salovey, 2011). The construct-weakness in the MSCEIT is

that it does not test emotional intelligence in real-time which relates the results more closely with

crystallized intelligence – involves learning, knowledge, and skills - rather than, fluid

intelligence – involves the ability to reason and the ability to understand abstract concepts



(Brackett, Rivers, & Salovey, 2011). Furthermore, the MSCEIT has a small range of facial

expression and non-verbal questions - which are the primary way humans, communicate

information across cultures (O’Sullivan & Ekman, 2004). According to Brackett & Salovey

(2006), the relation between emotional intelligence and academic performance is not clearly

defined and further research needs to be done.

Emotional Intelligence and Cognitive Intelligence

Cognitive intelligence is the ability to use fluid reasoning, retain and use knowledge, to

display quantitative reasoning, to succinctly use visual-spatial abilities, and process working

memory efficiently. Previous research has shown that cognitive ability tests (CAT) are the

strongest predictors of performance with a mean validity coefficient (shows the strength of the

relationship) of .30 according to meta-analytic research (Outtz, 2002). The predictive ability of

cognitive intelligence (IQ) has been shown to be predictive of the variance in life success at

approximately 20% (Goleman, 1995; Barchard, 2003). In order for emotional intelligence to be

a measure of intelligence, the predictive value has to be above and beyond the overlap associated

with cognitive intelligence. According to Barchard (2003), the concept of emotional intelligence

has to predict individual performance separately from cognitive intelligence in order to be a valid

independent intelligence. As noted by Cote & Miners (2006), previous findings suggest that as

much as 20 percent of emotional intelligence overlaps with other intelligences including

cognitive intelligence which separates 80 percent of EQ from other intelligences and is further

evidence that EQ meets the criteria of intelligence.

Emotional Intelligence and Personality

Researchers developed a hierarchy of personality traits that are categorized into a

taxonomy called the Five Factor Model (FFM). Additionally, this hierarchal personality model



has been developed through extensive research by psychologists such as Guilford, Cattell, Fiske,

Tupes, Christal, Digman, Goldberg, Costa, and McCrae (Barrick & Mount, 1991). The Five

Factor Model (FFM) consists of five dimensions called: Agreeableness – the ability to be

compassionate and cooperative, Conscientiousness – the ability to display self-discipline and aim

for higher achievement, Extraversion – the ability to display positive characteristics while in the

company of others, and to generally enjoy being in the company of others rather than being alone,

Neuroticism – the ability to display negative emotions such as anger and disgust, and Intellect –

openness to experience and the ability to express imagination (Goldberg, 1993).

The International Personality Item Pool (IPIP) is a measure of the Big 5 personality

inventory, and it was created to enhance the presently slow research in the area of personality

(Goldberg, Johnson, Eber, Hogan, Ashton, Cloninger, & Gough, 2005). This personality

measure is comparable to the NEO-PI (McCrae & Costa, 1985), which is considered the most

robust measure of personality. The IPIP measures the five-factor model of agreeableness,

extraversion, neuroticism/emotional stability, conscientiousness, and openness to

experience/intellect similarly to the NEO/PI. The IPIP is highly correlated with the NEO-PI on

all of the big five personality factors and Chronbach’s alpha is > .85 for all 5 personality factors

between the IPIP and the NEO-PI (Goldberg, et. al, 2005; Goldberg, ipip.ori.org/ipip). The

measures of the Big five personality inventory include 204 labels for 269 IPIP scales that cover

the facet levels of personality as well as the Big 5 and each scale provides the correlation with

other well know measures of personality such as the NEO-PI (Goldberg, ipip.ori.org/ipip). EI

measured by the MSCEIT has been found to correlate with the Big Five personality traits of

Openness, r = .17 to .18, and with Agreeableness, r = .21 to .28, but not significantly related with



conscientiousness, neuroticism, and extroversion (Mayer, et al, in press; Mayer, et al, 2008;

Brackett & Salovey, 2006).

In Conclusion

This review identified the components and theories associated with Emotional

Intelligence, and the preceding research has shown promising results that outlined the predictive

nature and the importance of the EQ concept. We need to determine what best constitutes

emotional intelligence, and seek to implement training methods to enhance this innate ability that

can be learned or enhanced. The ability to communicate expertly and effectively hinges on the

level of emotional intelligence that we possess. This necessary component of self has been

shown in correlational studies to strongly impact our ability to perform in a multitude of

situations and areas of great concern. This universal trait is not the sole ingredient in what we

define as success, but rather, a major concept that strongly affects the nature of our interactions

with the world around us.

Self-regulation, empathy, motivation, social skills, & self-awareness are essential tools

that the individual needs to greatly succeed at higher levels of understanding. Our present

environmental landscape is dissimilar because of the political, organizational, educational, &

fundamental changes that have taken place which requires a different intellectual approach – the

emotionally intelligent individual has the ability to interact & communicate effectively in diverse

situations which will greatly benefit the individual and prospective situation. These self-abilities

of emotional intelligence can be learned and enhanced with an open-minded disciplined

approach, and through the assistance of an expert with a deep understanding of the emotional

intelligence phenomenon.



References

Antonakis, J., Ashkanasy, N. M., & Dasborough, M. T. (2009). Does leadership need emotional
intelligence? The Leadership Quarterly, 20, 247-261.

Barchard, K. A. (2003). Does emotional intelligence assist in the prediction of academic
success? Educational and Psychological Measurement, 63, 840-858.

Barrick, M. R., Mount, M. K. (1991). The big five personality dimensions and job performance:
a meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44, 1-26.

Brackett, M. A., Rivers, S. E., & Salovey, P. (2011). Emotional intelligence: implications for
personal, social, academic, and workplace success. Social and Personality Psychology
Compass, 88-103.

Brackett, M. A., Salovey, P. (2006). Measuring emotional intelligence with the mayer-salovery-
caruso emotional intelligence test (msceit). Psicothema. 18, 34-41.

Brackett, M. A., & Mayer, J. D. (2003). Convergent, discriminant, and incremental validity of
competing measures of emotional intelligence. Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin, 29, 1147-1158.

Cherniss, C. (2010). Emotional intelligence: Toward clarification of a concept. Industrial and
Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 3, 110-126.

Cherniss, C. (2000). Emotional intelligence: what it is and why it matters. Consortium for
Research on Emotional Intelligence in Organizations, 1-14.

Cote, S., Miners, T. H. C. (2006). Emotional intelligence, cognitive intelligence, and job
performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 51, 1-26.

Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic Books.

Goldberg, L. R. (1993). The structure of phenotypic personality traits. American Psychologist,
48, 26-34.

Goldberg, L.R., Johnson, J.A., Eber, H.W., Hogan, R., Ashton, M.C., Cloninger, C.R., Gough,
H.G. (2005). The international personality item pool and the future of public-domain
personality measures. Journal of Research in Personality, 40, 84-96.

Goleman, D. (1998). What makes a leader? Harvard Business Review, 76, 93–102.

Greenstein, F. I. (2001). The presidential difference: leadership style from fdr to Clinton.
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.



Lopes, P. N., Grewal, D., Kadis, J., Gall, M., & Salovey, P. (2006). Evidence that emotional
intelligence is related to job performance and affect and attitudes at work. Psicothema, 18,
132-138.

Márquez, P. G. O., Martín, R. P., & Brackett, M. A. (2006). Relating emotional intelligence to
social competence and academic achievement in high school students. Psicothema, 18,
118-123.

Mayer, J. D., Roberts, R. D., & Barsade, S. G. (in press). Emerging research in emotional
intelligence. Annual Review of Psychology, 59.

Mayer, J.D., Salovey, P., & Caruso, D. R. (2000). Models of emotional intelligence.
Handbook of intelligence. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Mayer, J. D., Roberts, R. D., & Barsade, S. G. (2008). Human abilities: Emotional intelligence.
Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 507-536.

McCrae, R.R., Costa, P.T. Jr., (1985). I updating norman’s “adequate taxonomy”: intelligence
and personality dimensions in natural language and in questionnaires. Journal of
Personality & Social Psychology, 49, 710-721.

O’Boyle, E. H. Jr., Humphrey, R. H., Pollack, J. M., Hawver, T. H., & Story, P. A. (2010). The
relation between emotional intelligence and job performance: a meta-analysis. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, Retrieved March 2, 2011,
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.cpm/doi/10.1002/job.714/full.

O’Sullivan, M., & Ekman, P. (2004). Facial expression recognition and emotional intelligence.
emotional intelligence: common ground and controversy. 89-109, Hauppauge, NY: Nova
Science Publishers, Inc.

Outtz, J.L. (2002). The role of cognitive ability tests in employment selection. Human
Performance, 15, 161-171.

Salovey, P., Mayer, J. D. (1990). Emotional intelligence. Imagination, Cognition, and
Personality, 9, 185-211.

Shipley, N. L., Jackson, M. J., & Segrest, S. L. (in press). The effects of emotional intelligence,
age, work experience, and academic performance. Research in Higher Education Journal,
1-18.

Van Rooy, D. L., & Viswesvaran, C. (2004). Emotion intelligence: a meta-analytic investigation
of predictive validity and nomological net. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 65, 71-95.



Zeidner, M., Matthews, G., & Roberts, R. D. (2009). What we know about emotional
intelligence; how it affects learning, work, relationships and our mental health. MIT
Press; Cambridge, MA; London, England.

International Personality Item Pool: A Scientific Collaboratory for the Development of
Advanced Measures of Personality Traits and Other Individual Differences
(http://ipip.ori.org/). Internet Web Site.


Emotional Intelligence & Performance, Keith Lawrence Miller

Recomendados

Recomendados

Más contenido relacionado

La actualidad más candente

La actualidad más candente (19)

Destacado

Destacado (17)

Similar a Emotional Intelligence & Performance, Keith Lawrence Miller

Similar a Emotional Intelligence & Performance, Keith Lawrence Miller (20)

Más de Keith Miller

Más de Keith Miller (6)

Último

Último (20)

Emotional Intelligence & Performance, Keith Lawrence Miller