The extant literature on emotional intelligence (EI) is replete with claims that EI is an important antecedent (higher than IQ in many cases) of job performance and success (e.g., Goleman, 1995). Additionally, the EI literature continues to debate its scope and relationship with personality factors (e.g., McCrae, 2000). To clarify these major issues, I drew upon socioanalytic theory (Hogan & Shelton, 1998a) to develop a model predicting the direct effects of both the Big Five personality traits and EI on multiple forms of performance (i.e., task, control, contextual, and innovative performance as well as relationship supportive and disruptive behaviors) and the moderating effects of EI (conceptualized as a social skill) on the relationship between the Big Five and performance. / The proposed model was tested with two on-line instruments completed by 116 Hong Kong managers. One instrument was an abilities test of emotional intelligence (MSCEIT 2.0: Mayer, Salovey, & Caruso, 2002). The other was a survey of self-reported personality and workplace behavioral data. Multiple hierarchical (moderator) regression was used to analyze the data. / Hypotheses in the proposed model were generally supported. Extraversion was a significant positive predictor of relationship supportive behaviors. Agreeableness had a positive influence on contextual performance and relationship supportive behaviors; it was a negative predictor of relationship disruptive behaviors. Conscientiousness was positively associated with task performance, and emotional stability was a negative influence on relationship disruptive behaviors. Except for Branch Three (understanding emotions) of EI, all branches were significant in predicting various forms of performance. Branch One (perceiving emotions) had a negative effect on contextual and relationship disruptive behaviors. Branch Two (facilitating emotions) was a negative predictor of relationship disruptive behaviors. Branch Four (managing emotions) had a negative influence on relationship supportive behaviors. The effects of EI on contextual performance and relationship supportive behaviors were in the opposite direction hypothesized. / Several interactions of EI and personality were significant in predicting all except relationship supportive behaviors. Agreeableness was involved in three influential interactions with EI; for those with high EI scores, relationships between agreeableness and task, contextual, and innovative performance were enhanced. Intellectance interacted with EI to predict innovative performance; in this case, EI had a suppresive effect. For relationship disruptive behaviors, EI interacted with both conscientiousness and emotional stability to counteract the negative effects of those personality traits. / This study has made several important contributions to the literature. First, it has clarified the (joint) roles of EI and personality on performance. Second, it has expanded the performance criterion space beyond the traditional focus on task and contextual performance by including measures of innovative performance as well as relationship supportive and disruptive behaviors. Third, it has provided an explicit test of socioanalytic theory by conceptualizing EI as a social skill that interacts with personality to predict performance. Finally, these findings have significant practical value to the selection and assessment of managers. / Thesis (PhD)--University of South Australia, 2004.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:ADTP/267586 |
| Creators | Shaffer, Reuben Darrell. |
| Source Sets | Australiasian Digital Theses Program |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Rights | copyright under review |
Page generated in 0.0011 seconds