Upload
jaimemoralesgarcia
View
919
Download
4
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
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 3
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).
EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE 4
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
EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE 5
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
EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE 6
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
EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE 7
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
EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE 8
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
EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE 9
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
EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE 10
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).
EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE 11
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).
EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE 12
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
EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE 13
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
EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE 14
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
EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE 15
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
EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE 16
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
EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE 17
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
EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE 18
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
EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE 19
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
EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE 20
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
EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE 21
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).