Emotional Intelligence
in relation to
Authentic Leadership
Tamara van Dijk (0145653) Kortenhoef, 31 Januari 2015
Emotional Intelligence in
Abstract
In a study of 41 leaders and their 205 employees, I examine the role of Emotional Intelligence of the Leader in Authentic Leadership and subsequent employee empowerment and Organizational Citizenship Behavior. I investigate three forms of emotional intelligence, namely self-reported emotional intelligence, perceived emotional intelligence (by employees) and Emotional Management (measured as an ability). As expected, self-reported as well as perceived emotional intelligence of the leaders was positively related to authentic leadership. The results also show that when the leader scores high on Authentic leadership employees feel more empowered and show more OCB. Authentic leadership mediates the relation of self-reported emotional intelligence of the leader and employee empowerment as well as the relationship of perceived leader emotional intelligence rated by employees and OCB.
Keywords:
Authentic Leadership, Emotional intelligence, Empowerment, Organizational Citizenship behavior (OCB)
Table of contents
1. Introduction
4
2. Theory and hypotheses
7
1. Authentic Leadership 7
2. Emotional intelligence 8
3. Empowerment 13
4. Organizational Citizenship Behavior 15
3. Method
18
Sample
Measures Leaders 18
Emotional Intelligence 18
Emotional Intelligence as an ability 19
Orginizational Citizenship behavior 19 Measures Employees 20 Authentic leadership 20 Emotional Intelligence 20
EmpowermentError! Bookmark not defined. 21
Control Variables 21 Analytic strategy 21
4. Results
23
Correlation Analyses 23 Direct effects 24 Mediation effects 25
Regression analysis 25
Mediation analysis 27
5. Discussion
30
6.Limitations and suggestions for future research
35
List of references
Appendix A: Questionnaire items
List of figures and tables
Figures
Figure 1 Theoretical Model 6
Figure 2 PROCESS Model Empowerment 27
Figure 3 PROCESS Model Organizational Citizenship Behavior 27
Tables
Table 1 Means, standard deviations, correlations, reliabilities. 23 Table 2 Hierarchical regression analyses for the relation of Emotional intelligence
rated by Employee and leaders with Authentic leadership
26
Table 3 Hierarchical regression analyses for the relation of Authentic leadership with Empowerment and Organizational Citizenship behavior
26
Table 4 Bootstrap results for Authentic leadership as mediator of the relation between emotional intelligence and empowerment and Organizational Citizenship Behavior
Introduction
What is wrong with our leaders? Since 2001, the business environment is not as stable as it was in the 00’s and different scandals in business, government, sports, non-profit and religious organizations, occurred. People are asking, what is wrong with our leaders? These scandals contributed to less trust in leaders and organizations by society and ask for a new type of leadership. Ethical, genuine, value based and moral behavior are now seen as important by society. Costumers focus more on socially responsible companies, and employees look for companies that fit with their own values. This shift in attitudes by society also contributed to the development of leadership theory. Popular leadership authors and leadership consultants called for a new type of genuine and values-based leadership- authentic leadership (Gardner, Cogliser, Davis, Dickens 2011). Authentic leaders are those who know and act upon their true values, beliefs, integrity and strengths (Avolio and Gardner, 2005; Walumbwa, Avolio, Gardner, Wernsing, Peterson, 2008) Authentic leadership is characterized by an internal moral perspective, relational transparency, self-awareness and balance processing (Walumbwa et al. 2008). This type of leadership seems to be the answer to the call by society for a new type of leader.
Gardner, Avolio, Luthans, Douglas, Walumbwa (2005) showed the importance of authentic, ethical behavior of leaders in companies. Inauthentic actions of leaders could result in catastrophic loss of reputation. It takes a shorter amount of time to develop a complex product or learn new market intelligence, than to restore the reputation of a company (Gardner et al. 2011). WorldCom, Enron or Martha Steward are some example of companies who lost billions because of loss of reputation (Gardner et al. 2005). So it is important for different business to focus on authentic leaders. Research show positive relations of Authentic leadership on followers attitude and behavior. Walumbwa, Wang, Wang, Schaubroeck, Avolio, (2010) for example found that Authentic leadership is positively related to organizational citizenship behavior and empowerment. It is obvious that it is important to understand more about antecedents of authentic leadership. Walumbwa et al. (2010) also stress that given the assumed importance and prominence of authentic leadership behavior in organizations, further research is needed to identify potential antecedents of authentic leadership. This will help organizations in developing and selecting Authentic Leaders in response to the call for a new type of leader by society.
Many researchers consider the core component of authentic leadership as being true to oneself (George & Sims, 2007; Shamir & Eilam, 2005) and believe that an authentic leader can “be who he or she wants to be”, as long as it fits with his or her true self (Whitehead 2009; Begley 2004; Bhindi & Duignan 1997 PAG). So it is important that leaders are aware of who they are and, what their true self is. They need to be aware of themselves and why they react in certain ways. Self-emotion appraisal, is an important aspect of Emotional intelligence, tells us if a person is aware of his or her emotions and if he or she understands these emotions. Thus, scoring high on this aspect of emotional intelligence seems a prerequisite for being able to show authentic leadership.
Other authors emphasize that authentic leaders also need to be aware of the context they act in and need to be aware of the emotions of others (Avolio, Gardner, Walumbwa, Luthans, May, 2004, Begley 2004). Indeed, according to Gardner et al., (2005) emotion management by the leader is crucial for being able to engage in authentic leadership. According to Gardner et al. (2011) the importance of emotions to the experience, perception and expression of authenticity is essential to explore.
Emotional Intelligence tells us how a person deals with his own feelings and feelings of others. Salovey and Mayer (1990) defined EI as “the subset of social intelligence that involves 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” (p. 189). When looking at the theory of Authentic leadership, including emotional intelligence can contribute to the literature in a way that it will make clear if this is an important prerequisite for Authentic leadership.
Using a sample of 36 leaders and 152 employees, I investigate Emotional intelligence in the relation to Authentic leadership and subsequent employee empowerment and OCB. As there is considerable debate in the literature about operationalization’s and measurement of emotional intelligence (Mayer, Salovey 1997, Joseph, Jin, Newman and Boyle 2014, Roberts, Schultze, MacCann 2008, Wong and Law 2002, Mayer, Caruso, Salovey 2000, Newman, Joseph, MacCann, 2010), I investigate three types of emotional intelligence, namely self-reported emotional intelligence, perceived emotional intelligence (by employees) and Emotion Management (measured as an ability). Furthermore I investigate Authentic leadership as mediator in the relation between emotional intelligence and OCB and empowerment of
followers. The purpose of this paper is to extend current literature of Authentic leadership by demonstrating the relationship of emotional intelligence of the leader with authentic leadership, OCB and empowerment. (see Figure 1 for the research model). This will increase the knowledge we have about authentic leadership and will help in developing strategies to select and develop authentic leaders
+ + + ~ + +
Figure 1. Theoretical Model. Emotional Intelligence rated by Employee EQ leader rated by Employee Emotion management Authentic Leadership Empowerment Organizational Citizenship Behavior
Theory and hypotheses
Authentic leadershipThe concept of Authenticity is generally recognized to have its roots in ancient Greek philosophy ( To thine own self be true). The modern conception of authenticity emerged within the past 80 years (Erickson, 1995). Drawing from the psychology literature, authenticity can be defined as owning one’s personal experience, be they thoughts, emotions, needs, wants, preferences or believes, processes captured by the injunction to know oneself (Harter, Schmidt, Hayes, 2002). Thus authenticity involves both owning one’s personal experience and acting in according with one’s true self (Gardner, Bruce, Avolio, Luthans, May, Walumbwa, 2005).
Based on the description in the dictionary as, original, genuine, not fake Shamir and Eilam (2005) identifies four characteristics of authentic leadership. First, “authentic leaders do not fake their leadership”(p. 396), they lead as an expression of their true and real self. This means leaders have to be aware of “their true self”. Second, they lead from conviction in pursuit of a value-based mission or cause. Third “authentic leaders are originals not copies” (p.397), who are driven by deeply rooted values that they experience to be true, not values imposed by others. Fourth, they take action based on their values and convictions, there is consistency between what they say and do.
Other authors include “social values” (Whitehead 2009, p. 850), “sensitivity to the orientation of others” (Begley 2004, p. 5), “sensibility to the feelings, aspiration and feelings of others” (Bhindi and Duignan 1997, p 119). Here we see that values of the leader and a focus on the environment and feelings of others, is seen as an important aspect of being authentic.
Ladkin and Taylor (2010) argue that although authentic leadership may be rooted in the notion of a true self, it is through the embodiment of that true self, that leaders are perceived as authentic or not. Authentic leaders may be experiencing fear and anxiety and in other situations excitement and hope. Followers who are looking for guidance may not see these emotions as “leaderly”. Finding the balance in being one self and expressing these emotions, being aware off those emotions and the effect when showing them on followers, seems imperative.
Walumbwa et al. (2008) refer to authentic leadership as `a pattern of leader behavior that draws upon and promotes both positive psychological capacities and a positive ethical climate, to foster greater self-awareness, an internalized moral perspective, balanced processing of information, and relational transparency on the part of leaders working with followers, fostering
positive self-development’ (p. 94). In other words, authentic leadership represents the extent to which a leader is aware of and exhibits patterns of openness and clarity in his/her behavior toward others. This by sharing the information needed to make decisions, accepting others’ inputs, and disclosing his/her personal values, motives and sentiments, in a manner that enables followers to more accurately assess the competence and morality of the leader’s actions (Walumbwa et al, 2010).
Walumbwa et al. (2008) assimilated research from social psychological, moral and ethical philosophy and proposed a four-factor authentic leadership questionnaire (ALQ) and presented psychometric evidence for its future usage. Their higher order, multi-dimensional authentic leadership construct consists of the following four factors:
Balanced processing with involves objectively analysing all relevant information before making a decision, they solicit views from others that challenges their existing view. Internal moral perspective which refers to the leaders behaviors that are guided by internal moral standards and values rather than being based on external pressure. Relational Transparency involves personal disclosure such as openly showing and expressing personal thoughts and feelings. Self-awareness refers to the extent leaders understand their own strengths and weaknesses and motives and whether they are aware of how others view their leadership. Each of these four dimensions represents an aspect of leader authenticity, especially with respect to how leaders monitor and self-regulate their behavior (Walumbwa et al. 2010). In this study the ALQ is used to measure authentic leadership.
Emotional intelligence
E.I. has its roots in the concept of social intelligence that was first defined by Thorndike in 1920. He defined social intelligence as “the ability to understand and manage men and women, boys and girls-to act wisely in human relations” (p. 228). Following Thorndike’s idea, Gardner (1993) included interpersonal and intrapersonal in his theory of multiple intelligence. According to Gardner, social intelligence is one of the seven intelligence domains in his theory of multiple intelligence. Intrapersonal intelligence relates to one’s ability to deal with oneself and to “symbolize complex and highly differentiated set of feelings” (p. 239) within the self. Interpersonal intelligence relates to one’s ability to deal with others and to “notice and make distinctions among other individuals and in particular, among their moods, temperaments,
motivations and intentions” (p. 239). So E.I can be viewed as a combination of the intrapersonal and interpersonal intelligence of an individual (Law, Wong, Song, 2004).
Salovey and Mayer (1990) were among the earliest to suggest the name emotional intelligence to refer to the ability of a person to deal with his or her emotions. They defined EI as ‘the subset of social intelligence that involves 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’(p. 189).
Some studies have begun to show that the different facets of EI are somewhat dependent, certain abilities (i.e., emotional understanding) are predicated on the existence of other abilities (Hartman 2011). In other words, the ability to perceive emotions is required for the ability to assimilate emotion in thought, which is required to understand emotion which is in turn required for emotional management. In this vein, emotional management has been suggested as the “foundational” ingredient in emotional intelligence (Newman et al. 2010). The Situational Test of Emotional Management (STEM; MacCann, Roberts, 2008), is designed to measure emotional management as a separate construct in an organizational setting and assesses wether people know what to do when emotional situations occur.
Roberts et al. (2008) mentioned that emotional intelligence traditionally has been measured both as a set of personality traits and behavioural tendencies and as a set of cognitive abilities. There is considerable debate in the literature if E.I. is related to personality. When developing the multi factor intelligence scale, Mayer and Salovey (1997) provided data that shows that E.I. was different from personality traits. Wong and Law (2002) also showed that E.I. as measured under Davies, Stankov and Roberts (1998) four- dimensional definition was distinct from the Big Five personality dimension. Mayer et al. (2000) and Wong and Law (2002) empirically showed that the dimensions of E.I. were moderately correlated among themselves but only mildly correlated with general mental abilities. Meaning E.I. meets the correlation criterion of an intelligence facet.
Joseph, Jin, Newman, O’Boyle (2014) looked at the relation of self-reported mixed E.I. on supervisor-rated job performance. Mixed E.I. consists of: Conscientiousness, extraversion, general self-efficacy, self-rated performance, ability E.I., emotional stability and cognitive ability. These 7 constructs explain the relationship between mixed E.I. and job performance. It seems that individuals how possess the traits named above, should have motivational tendencies
and goals characterized by high status striving and accomplishment striving, as well as elevated performance expectations (Joseph et al. 2014). These individuals should further be equipped to attain these goals via their heightened emotional coping skills, emotional regulation skills, and emotional understanding. It could mean that the individuals who possess the traits of mixed E.I rate themselves high on mixed E.I? In this study I look at rated E.I. and perceived E.I. of the Leader. Leaders rated themselves on E.I., their employees also rated their leader on Emotional intelligence. OCB ratings of the employees was done by the Leader and employees rated themselves on empowerment. It is interesting to see if these different ratings show different relationships with the variables included in this study.
Interest in Emotional intelligence and Leadership has been an topic of interest among many researchers. Wong and Law (2002) mentioned that leadership concerns the interaction of leaders with other individuals. In the social context, leaders are working in, emotional awareness and emotional regulation are important factors affecting the quality of interactions. Leadership researchers have argued that effective leadership behavior depends upon the leaders ability to solve complex social problems that arise in organizations (Mumford, Zaccaro, Harding, Jacobs & Fleishman, 2000; Zaccaro, Mumford, Conelly, Marks & Gilbert, 2002). Hooijberg, Hunt and Dodge (1997) mention that good leaders need to understand their own emotions as well as those of others and need to be able to regulate emotions able to regulate their own emotions when interacting with others.
Wong and Law (2002) mentioned that intrapersonal emotional recognition and management helps an individual deal with his or her emotions. A person with high E.I. should be able to recognize his or her emotions, to regulate those emotions, and to use them to facilitate performance. They did find evidence that on top of general mental abilities, E.I. was a good predictor of job performance.
A person with high E.I. would be less affected by his or her emotions, be able to direct emotions in a positive direction, and have lower chances of feeling depressed. E.I. also includes a dimension of understanding others’ emotions. A person with high E.I. would also be able to interpret others’ moods correctly and therefore have a higher chance of forming close relationships and getting social support in general. As a result, this person should be less likely to feel powerless (Law et al.2004).
Song, Wong and Law (2004) also mentioned that understanding and regulation of one’s emotions as well as understanding of others’ emotions are the core factors affecting intrapersonal well-being and interpersonal relations. In a negative sense, a person who is not sensitive to his or her own emotions and who is unable to regulate his or her emotions would have problems interacting with others. Because interpersonal interactions are a basic component of many jobs, it is reasonable to hypothesize that E.I. would affect job performance in general. On the positive side, the use of the emotion dimension of E.I. describes one’s ability to direct emotions to performance. A person with high E.I. would be able to direct positive emotions to high performance and redirect negative emotions to generate constructive performance goals (Law et al. 2004). As we argued above, emotional understanding, regulation, and utilization would help to cultivate positive social interactions and exchanges in an organization and, as a result, facilitate employee performance. Wong and Law (2002) found evidence that emotional intelligence of supervisors is positively related to job satisfaction and extra role behavior of subordinates. Dulewicz and Higgs (2000) showed that EI was predictive of the career success of 100 managers.
Leadership and Emotional intelligence has gained a great amount of public popularity and business attention in the last two decades. It seems clear that it is important for different organizations to know with type of leader will enhance performance of employees and will positively contribute to the results of the organization. In this study I investigate the relation of emotional intelligence on authentic leadership and subsequent empowerment and OCB.
Of the various academics who have contributed to the development of the E.I. construct, two groups of scholars have been of prime importance, namely Davies et al. (1998) and Salovey and Mayor (1990). In 1998 Davies et al. (1998) summarized the E.I. literature and developed on the basis of it a four-dimensional definition of E.I. In this study I use this four dimensional definition of E.I developed by Davies et al (1998). In the following part I will describe these four dimensions and how they relate to the described literature of authentic leadership.
The four E.I. dimensions are: 1. Appraisal and expression of emotion in oneself. This relates to an individual’s ability to understand his or her deep emotions and to be able to express emotions naturally. As we have seen in the literature on authentic leadership, authentic leaders lead as an expression of their true and real self (Shamir and Eilam, 2005). People who have good ability in this area will sense and acknowledge their emotions better than most people.
This also means they are better in being “true to themselves” (Ladkin and Taylor, 2010) and show more self-awareness (Walumbwa et al., 2008) which are important aspects of authentic leadership. 2. Appraisal and recognition of emotion in others. This relates to an individual’s ability to perceive and understand the emotions of the people around them. People who rate high on this ability will be very sensitive to the emotions of others as well as able to predict others’ emotional responses. Authentic Leaders need to be sensitive to the orientation of others (Begley 2004), and feelings of others (Bhindi, Duignan 1997) This implies that to be an Authentic Leader one needs to be high on others emotion appraisal. 3. Regulation of emotion in oneself. This relates to the ability of a person to regulate his or her emotions, enabling a more rapid recovery from psychological distress. A person with high ability in this area would be able to return quickly to normal psychological states after rejoicing or being upset. Such a person would also have better control of his or her emotions and would be less likely to lose his or her temper. For Authentic Leaders it is important to find a balance in expressing and directing emotions to facilitate performance, (Ladkin, Taylor, 2010) meaning they have to be aware of their emotions and be able to regulate them. Walumbwa et al. (2010) also mentioned that how leaders monitor and self-regulate their behavior is an important aspect of Authentic Leadership. 4. Use of emotion to facilitate performance. This relates to the ability of a person to make use of his or her emotions by directing them toward constructive activities and personal performance. A person who is highly capable in this dimension would be able to encourage him- or herself to do better continuously. He or she would also be able to direct his or her emotions in positive and productive directions. Authentic Leaders also need to understand their own strengths and weaknesses (Gardner 2005, Ilies, Morgeson, Nahrgang 2005, Walumbwa et al. 2008)
In response to the findings by Davies et al. (1998) Wong and Law (2002) developed a new E.I. scale labelled as the Wong and Law E.I. Scale, following the four-dimensional definition of E.I. as introduced by Davies et al. (1998). In this study I use this scale to measure the emotional intelligence of the Leader.
When reviewing the literature on authentic leadership and emotional intelligence it seems imperative to add emotional intelligence as a prerequisite for authentic leadership. It seems that authentic leaders have to be emotional intelligent to be perceived as authentic. Different aspects that are perceived as essential for authentic leadership, can be measured by emotional
intelligence. In this Study I investigated if emotional intelligence is a prerequisite for authentic leadership
As there is considerable debate in the literature about operationalization’s and measurement of emotional intelligence (Joseph et. al 2014, Mayer and Salovey 1997, Wong and Law 2002, Roberts et al. 2008). I investigate three types of emotional intelligence, namely self-reported emotional intelligence, perceived emotional intelligence (by employees) and Emotion Management (measured as an ability) and expect:
H1 : Emotional Intelligence (a perceived by employees b. self-reported by Leader, c. emotion management as an ability) is positively related to Authentic Leadership (rated by employees)
Authentic Leadership is important because of the positive results on followers behavior. Walumbwa et al. (2010) found positive relations of authentic leadership on work empowerment and OCB. Employees who have an authentic leader feel more empowered and show more OCB. Feelings of empowerment and employees who show OCB have positive effects on the results of an organization. So it is important to know which type of leadership can contribute to these feelings of empowerment and OCB.
Empowerment
According to Drucker (1988) the interest in empowerment came at a time when global competition and change require employee initiative and innovation. Organizational change have stimulated a need for employees who can take initiative, embrace risk, stimulate innovation and cope with high uncertainty. Thomas and Velthouse (1990) argue that empowerment will increase concentration, initiative and resiliency and thus heighten managerial effectiveness. Because empowered individuals believe they are autonomous and have impact, they are likely to be creative; they feel less constrained than others by rule-bound aspects of work (Amabile, 1988) and empowered people feel self-efficacious, they are likely to be innovative in their work and to expect success (Amabile 1988, Redmond, Mumford, Teach 1993). Conger and Kanungo (1988) suggest that empowerment is important for stimulating and manage change in organizations. Spreitzer (1995) found evidence that empowerment is positively related to managerial
effectiveness. It seems clear that it is important to investigate what contributes to empowerment of employees.
Empowerment has been posited as a mechanism through which authentic leadership influences followers (George, 2003, Ilies et al. 2005). Spreitzer (1995) conceptualized empowerment as a psychological state that encompasses four cognitions: competence, an individual’s believe in his or her capability to perform activities with skill: impact, the degree to which an individual can influence strategic, administrative, or operating outcomes at work: meaningfulness, the value of a work goal or purpose, judged in relation to an individual’s ideals or standards: self-determination, an individual’s sense of having choice in initiating and regulating actions. Leaders create organizational culture and climate that determine whether employees are more or less involved in the decision making process.
Empowerment is not an enduring personality trait generalizable across situations, but rather a set of cognitions shaped by a work environment (Thomas, Veldhouse, 1990). Spreitzer (1995) also mentioned that empowerment is a set of cognitions influenced by the work context. Leaders have influence on this work environment, it is important to look at factors who contribute to empowerment of employees
Authentic leaders are described as understanding followers needs for meaning in their work and the confidence that comes with being trusted to act with initiative and autonomy(Illies et al. 2005), thus they will have a positive effect on empowerment of employees.
Spreitzer (1996) found that followers of managers who promote a more inclusive unit climate and who readily share information, which are characteristics of authentic leaders, reported higher levels of psychological empowerment. Such empowered individuals believe that they have greater autonomy and impact on work processes and performance, they are likely to be more intrinsically motivated and in turn engaged in their respective work roles. Walumbwa et al. (2010) did found a positive relation of Authentic leadership on empowerment. When employees have an authentic leader they feel more empowered.
In line with this we expect a positive relation of authentic leadership and empowerment. This leads us to the following hypothesis:
Organizational Citizenship Behavior
In the competitive business environment, with competition from international economies, businesses flatten their organizational structures. This has increased the importance of individual initiative and cooperation. Employees autonomy and responsibilities have increased and discretionary work behaviors are essential to effective organizational functioning. The main reason for the interest in Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) is that they are expected to be positive related to measures of organizational effectiveness, so it makes senses to identify those variables that will positively affect OCB (Podsakoff, Podsakoff, Withing 2009). In this study I try to identify if authentic leadership has a positive relation with OCB.
Dennis Organ is generally considered the father of OCB. Organ expanded upon Katz's (1964) original work. Organ (1988) defines OCB as “individual behavior that is discretionary, not directly or explicitly recognized by the formal reward system, and that in the aggregate promotes the effective functioning of the organization" (p. 4). More recently he modified this definition to say that OCB is performance that supports the social and psychological environment in which task performance takes place (Podsakoff et al. 2009). Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Moorman, Fetter (1990) were the first researches to operationalize Organ’s five dimensions. This resulting OCB scale has served as the basis for OCB measurement in a large numbers of empirical studies (LePine, Johnson 2002) and is also used in this study.
Podsakoff et al. (2009) found relations between organizational-level outcomes and OCB. They found a negative relation between turn over intentions and actual turnover and employee absenteeism. Employees who exhibit higher level of OCB are less likely than employees who exhibit lower levels of OCB to think about leaving the organization or be absent from work. They also found support for a positive relation between OCB and unit/organizational level outcomes (productivity, efficiency, profitability, reduction of costs) turn over and customers satisfaction. When organizational units have higher levels of OCB they experience lower levels of turnover, have more satisfied customers and perform better on the organizational outcome. These findings support the idea that OCB is expected to be positively related to measures of organizational effectiveness and that it is important for managers to encourage employees to exhibit OCB.
Organ, Podsakoff, MacKenzie (2006) reviewed research on OCB and found that the relationship between leadership behavior and OCB produce significant results. Followers are
likely to enact what a leader emphasizes by his or her behavior (Schneider, Erhart, Mayer, Saltz, Niles-Jolly, 2005). This means it is important to look at the type of leader that will positively affect OCB. Authentic Leaders behavior support a fair and open work environment, and this is helpful to employees being more willing to engage in behavior that will help the organization (Avolio and Gardner, 2005). Authentic leaders play a central role in facilitating employee helping behavior by making employees more aware of the importance of helping each other and demonstrating the value of and safety of openly sharing information (Walumbwa et al. 2010). Walumbwa et. al (2010) found a positive relation of authentic leadership on organizational citizenship (OCB). Thus, the higher employees rate their leader on authentic leadership, the more they are perceived to show OCB.
Mayer and Gavin (2005) and Organ et al. (2006) also show in their research that employees who experience more honest and trusting relationships with their supervisors, display higher levels of OCB. We expect authentic leaders to promote more pro-social behavior among their employees. This forms the basis of the following Hypothesis.
H3: Authentic Leadership is positively related to Organizational Citizenship Behavior.
When reviewing the literature we see that in current business environment it is important for a company to have employees who feel empowered and show Organizational Citizenship Behavior. Global competition, change and flattened organizational structure require initiative, innovative, autonomous and responsible employees. Authentic leadership seems to have a positive effect on empowerment and OCB (Walumbwa et al. 2010). In this study I also investigate the relationship of emotional intelligence with authentic leadership subsequent feelings of empowerment and OCB of followers. It is interesting for organizations to know, what kind of abilities or personal characteristics leaders should possess in order to be perceived as an authentic Leader. Such a leader is expected to have a positive effect on empowerment and OCB of employees which in turn will have a positive effect on the company’s results.
Taken together we expect emotional intelligence to be positively related to employee empowerment and OCB through its relationship with authentic leadership.
Leaders high on E.I. will understand his or her deep emotions and be able to express emotions naturally. They understand the emotions of the people around them, regulate and make use of
his or her own emotions and therefore show more authentic leadership. Authentic leaders will stimulate employees positive self-development, pro-social behavior, create a fair open work environment and therefore employees of authentic leaders will show more OCB and feel more empowered. Thus we expect:
H4: The positive relationship between Emotional intelligence of the leader a)-rated by employees b) self-reported by the leader, c) Emotion management measured as an ability on empowerment and OCB is mediated by Authentic leadership.
Method
Sample and Procedures
The total sample consists of 246 sets of questionnaires completed by the employees of Intermetzo. Intermetzo is an organization who provides intensive, specialized care for children and their families throughout the Netherlands. In total 41 Leaders and 205 employees received the questionnaire. The total amount of employees working for Intermetzo is 2000, divided all over the Netherlands. 48 Employees fulfill the role of leader. The questionnaire where personally delivered to the Leaders. The Employees received the questionnaire from their leaders with a letter explaining the study and a return envelope. Only questionnaires for which a matching leader-employee (at least 3) evaluation was obtained and that were completely filled out were included in the analyses. All survey measures I used were validated measures from the literature that I translated and back-translated to ensure correct meaning, all items were administrated in Dutch. 36 Leaders and 152 employees completed the questionnaire, total of 188.
Among the employees there were 78 (51.3%) females and 74 (48.7%) males. They were on average 39.88 years old with a standard deviation of 10.58 years. The youngest respondent was 22 years old and the oldest was 62 years old. Respectively 1 employees (0.7%) had secondary school diploma, 38 employees (25%) had an MBO diploma, 76 employees (50%) had an HBO diploma and 37 employees (24.3%) had a WO diploma. They worked on average 7.9 years within the organization with a standard deviation of 5.8 years, were the minimum was 1 and the maximum was 30 years. The average time they worked under their leader was 2.2 with a standard deviation of 12 months.
Measures
Leaders
Emotional Intelligence
Emotional intelligence was assessed by ‘‘Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire’’ developed by Wong and Law (2002). Cronbach’s Alpha .86. The 16-item ‘‘Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire’’ was grouped into 4 of 4 questions to measure the different dimensions of emotional intelligence: Self-Emotion Appraisal, Others-Emotion appraisal, Use of Emotion and Regulation of Emotion. This scale was anchored with a response format ranging
from 1 (disagree) to 5 (agree). Sample items for measuring Self-Emotions Appraisal include the following: “I really understand what I feel, I have a good sense of why I have certain feelings most of the time. Sample items for Others emotions Appraisal are: “I am sensitive to the feelings and emotions of others, I am a good observer of others emotions. The sample items of Use of Emotions consist of: “ I always tell myself I am a competent person, I am a self-motivating person. Items for Regulation of emotions are: ”I am quite capable of controlling my own emotions, I can always calm down quickly when I am very angry.
Emotional intelligence as an ability
To measure emotion management the situational test of emotion management was used (McCann & Roberts, 2008). Adhering to the suggestions of MacCann and Roberts (2008) fourteen of the least reliable items were removed so I used a version of 30 items. Cronbach’s alpha .34. In this test the leader was presented with a few brief details about an emotional situation and was asked to choose from four responses the most effective course of action to manage both the emotion the person is feeling and the problems they face in that situation. The respondent’s choice is assigned a numerical value based on the expert weights previously calculated. Therefore, this instrument does not use a standard Likert scale format, but instead a weighted, forced-choice format that is also not strictly ordinal.
Examples questions are: Lee’s workmate fails to deliver an important piece of information on time, causing Lee to fall behind schedule also. What action would be the most effective for Lee? (a) Work harder to compensate. (b) Get angry with the workmate.(c) Explain the urgency of the situation to the workmate. (d) Never rely on that workmate again. Rhea has left her job to be a full-time mother, which she loves, but she misses the company and companionship of her workmates. What action would be the most effective for Rhea?(a) Enjoy being a full-time mom. (b) Try to see her old workmates socially, inviting them out.(c) Join a playgroup or social group of new mothers. (d) See if she can find part time work.
Organizational Citizenship Behaviour.
Leaders rated 5 of their employees on Organizational Citizenship Behavior. A twelve-item scale was used to measure OCB. Cronbach’s alpha .88. They were related to Challenging OCB (5 items) based on Van Dyne and Le Pine (1998) and related to Affiliative OCB (7 items)
based on MacKenzie, Podsakoff, Fetter (1991), Morrison (2011) and Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Paine, Bachrach (2000). Examples of sample questions for this item are: “Employee encourages colleagues regarding issues that are important for the organization, Employee takes the impact of his or her actions towards their colleagues into account, Employee tries to avoid creating problems for others, Employee always makes time available to help his or her colleagues, Employee supremes new ideas regarding a new way of working or procedures”. Ratings were completed on a five-point scale (1: strongly disagree to 5: strongly agree).
Employees
Authentic leadership:
Employees filled out the ALQ with their leader in mind. They rated their leader on authenticity. Authentic leadership was measured using the 16-item Authentic Leadership Questionnaire (ALQ) recently validated by Walumbwa et al. (2008). Cronbach’s Alpha .90. Walumbwa et al. showed that the scale has both convergent and discriminant validity with respect to other leadership constructs such as transformational and ethical leadership. Walumbwa et al. (2008) confirmed four theoretically related substantive factors including balanced processing (3 items), internalized moral perspective (4 items), relational transparency (5 items), and self-awareness (4 items) that formed a core higher order authentic leadership construct. This scale was anchored with a response format ranging from 1 (Not at all) to 5 (Frequently, if not always). Sample items include the following: “Solicits views that challenge his or her deeply held positions” (balanced processing), “Makes decisions based on his/her core beliefs” (internalized moral perspective), “Is willing to admit mistakes when they are made” (relational transparency), and “Is eager to receive feedback to improve interactions with others (self-awareness)
Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire
Employees scored their leader on the following Items of the Wong and Law EI Scale (WLEIS) Cronbach’s alpha .86.
Regulations of Emotions: ”My leader is quite capable of controlling his or her own emotions, My leader can always calm down quickly when he or she is very angry. Sample items for
My leader is a good observer of others emotions.Response scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).
Empowerment
To measure empowerment, we used a 12-item scale developed by Spreitzer (1995). Cronbach’s alpha .82. The scale has four dimensions including competence (3 items), impact (3 items), meaningfulness (3 items), and self-determination (3 items), these four empowerment dimensions were collapsed into a composite empowerment scale. A sample item is, “I have significant autonomy in determining how I do my job,” with a response scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).
Control Variables
In line with the literature (Keyes, Shmotkin, Ryff 2002, Meal, Ashford 1992, Martin, Epitropaki 2001, Rooy, Dilchert, Viswesvaran 2006), age and gender of employees and leaders were added as control variables. In addition organizational tenure and level of education were added as control variable. To control for the possibility that employees who worked longer for their leader feel more empowered, I also included tenure with Leader.
Analytic Strategy
The software package SPSS Statistics was used to conduct the statistical analyses of the study. The hypotheses were tested on a data base of 36 leaders and 152 employees total of 188. Descriptive statistics of the respondent was calculated and a scale reliability test was carried out to ensure reliability of the constructs. Except for the STEM (.34) all other items appeared internally consistent and had an excellent (>.80) reliability. Hereafter scale means were computed for each construct. Prior to test the hypotheses, normality test were performed by means of a histogram of frequencies distribution and skewness. The data used in this study was normally distributed and appropriate to conduct the regression analyses.
The survey used in this study was conducted to test a mediation model. The mediator (authentic leadership) measured the indirect effect between emotional intelligence and 1) Empowerment and 2) Organizational Citizenship Behavior. Direct relations were examined by linear regression. A mediation (model 4) of the PROCESS SPSS macro of Hayes (2012) with authentic leadership
as the mediator in the model, was conducted to estimate the indirect effects. The model is visualized in Figure 2 and 3. A non-parametric resampling procedure- bootstrapping was conducted to test the indirect effects. The study made use of a bootstrap confidence interval for the indirect effect using 1,000 bootstrap samples. An alpha level of .01 and .05 was used in all statistical procedures and all results have been rounded to two decimal places.
Results
The results section first provides an overview of the outcome of the correlation analysis. Hereafter, a hierarchical regression analyses is conducted to test the hypotheses of the study. The direct and indirect effects are tested by means of a mediation model.
Correlation Analyses
Table 1 provides descriptive statistics and correlations of all studied variables.
Authentic leadership correlates significant positively with empowerment (r=.41; p=<.01), organizational citizenship behavior (r=.18: p=<.05), emotional intelligence of the leader rated by employees (r=.64; p=<.01)and emotional intelligence rated by the Leader (r=.26; p=<.01). The situational test of emotional management shows no significant correlation with authentic leadership (r=-.09; p=>.05).
Emotional intelligence of the leader rated by the employees correlates positively with empowerment (r=.39; p=<.01). There is no significant correlation with OCB (r=.14; p=>.05). Emotional intelligence of the leader rated by the leader show a positive correlation with OCB (r=.36 ; p=<.01). The results show no significant correlation with empowerment (r=-.06; p=>.05).
As we can see in the correlation table there is no significant correlation of the STEM with the other variables.
Table 1 Means, standard deviations, correlation, reliabilities.
Mean SD 1 2 3 4 5 6
1. Authentic leadership 3.76 0,6 (.90)
2. E.I leader rated by employee 3.98 0,6 .64** (.90)
3. Empowerment 4.07 0,47 .41** .39** (.82)
4. OCB 3.82 0,58 .18* .14 .06 (.88)
5. E.I. Leader rated by leader 4.05 0,36 .26** .21* -.06 .36** (.86)
6. STEM 4.64 0,14 -.09 -.06 -.01 .03 -.08 (.34)
Note: N=188
**Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed) *Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed)
Control variables: Age, gender, education, tenure with organization, tenure with leader.
E.I. emotional intelligence, OCB organizational Citizenship Behavior, STEM situational test of emotion management.
Direct Effects
A number of significant correlations implied direct relationships. The direct relationships were further examined by hierarchical regression. The results of the direct effects are presented in Table 2 and 3. The regression analyses was conducted for 6 dependent variables, authentic leadership, emotional intelligence, perceived emotional intelligence, emotional intelligence as an ability, empowerment and organizational citizenship behavior. In the first step we entered the dependent variable and the control variables, in the second step we entered the independent variable.
Hypotheses 1 expects that emotional intelligence is positively related to authentic
leadership. When we look at emotional intelligence of the leader rated by employees and the direct relation with authentic leadership, we see that there is a significant relation (B=.63 p=.00, p=<.01 Rsq=0.45) In total 45% of the variation in authentic leadership is explained by emotional intelligence. Employees perceive their leader as more authentic when he or she also receives high scores on emotional intelligence. H1a is supported.
Emotional intelligence rated by the leader also has a significant relation with authentic leadership (B=.38 p=.00 p=<0.01 Rsq=0.13) In total 13% of the variation in authentic leadership is explained by emotional intelligence rated by the leader. When leaders score high on emotional intelligence they also receive a higher score for authentic leadership by their employees, they are perceived as more authentic leaders. Hypotheses 1b supported
The STEM shows no significant relationship with authentic leadership (B=-.21 p=.58 p=>0.05 Rsq=.09) A high score on emotion management does not have a significant relation with ratings on authentic leadership perceived by employees. We found no support for Hypotheses 1c.
Hypothesis 2 states that authentic leadership is positively related to empowerment. The
result of the linear regression show that authentic leadership is significantly positively related to empowerment of followers (B=.30, p=.00, p=<0.01, Rsq 0.26). Authentic leadership explains 26 % of the variation in Empowerment. Thus H2 is supported. When employees perceive their leader as more authentic they feel more empowered.
Hypothesis 3 expects that authentic leadership would be positively related to rated OCB.
The results show that authentic leadership is positively related to OCB (B=.20, p=.01, p=<.01 ,Rsq=0.19). In total 19 % of the variation in OCB is explained by authentic leadership. H3 is there for supported. Employees receive high scores of OCB from their leader, when they rated
their leader high on authentic leadership. Employees show more OCB when they perceive their leader as authentic.
Mediation effects
A regression analysis was conducted to examine whether emotional intelligence has a positive relation with authentic leadership. We also examined the relation of authentic leadership with empowerment and OCB. The indirect effects of the mediator (authentic leadership) are then tested by means of mediation analysis.
Regression analysis
In this study employees rated their leader on emotional intelligence the leader rate themselves on Emotional intelligence, the leader also filled out the STEM. We investigate the different relationship of these ratings with authentic leadership. The results in Table 2 show positive significant relationship’s a positive significant effect of emotional intelligence rated by Employees (.63 p=.00 p=<.01) as well as rated by Leader (.38 p=.01 p=<.01) with authentic leadership. The STEM does not have a significant relation with on authentic Leadership (-.12 p=.58 p=>.05).
The results show (H2, H3) a positive significant relation of authentic leadership with OCB (.20 p=.01 p=<.01) and Empowerment (.30 p=.00 p=<.01).
In sum, the hierarchical regression analysis show that authentic leadership has a significant positive relation with empowerment and OCB. Furthermore when employees score their leader high on emotional intelligence they also score their leader high on authentic leadership. Emotional intelligence rated by the leader is also significantly related to authentic leadership. When leaders score themselves high on emotional intelligence they also receive a high score on authentic by employees. For the STEM we found no significant relation with the different variables used in this study.
Table 2. Hierarchical regression analyses for the relation of Emotional intelligence rated by Employee
and leaders on Authentic leadership
Note: N=252. Unstandardized regression coefficients are reported.
**. Coefficient is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). *. Coefficient is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
Control variables: Age, gender, education, tenure with organization, tenure with leader
Table 3. Hierarchical regression analyses for the relation between Authentic leadership and Empowerment and Organizational Citizenship behavior.
Note: N=188. Unstandardized regression coefficients are reported.
**. Coefficient is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). *. Coefficient is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
Control variables: Age, gender, education, tenure with organization, tenure with leader
E.I. Emotional Intelligence, OCB Organizational Citizenship Behavior, STEM situational test of emotion management.
Dependent Variable Authentic Leadership Independent variable
E.I. rated by Employee .63**
R² .45
Adjusted R² .41
Change in adjusted R² .36
F 11.59**
E.I. rated by Leader .38**
R² .13 Adjusted R² .07 Change in adjusted R² .04 F 2.18* STEM -.21 R² .09 Adjusted R² .03 Change in adjusted R² .00 F 1.42 Dependent variable
Independent variable Empowerment OCB Authentic leadership .30** .20**
R² .26 .19
Adjusted R² .21 .13 Change in adjusted R² .14 .04
Mediation analysis.
A parallel mediation by means of the PROCESS file of Hayes (model 4) was conducted to estimate the indirect effects of emotional intelligence rated by employees, emotional intelligence rated by the leader and the STEM on empowerment and OCB, trough authentic leadership. The model is visualized in Figure 2 and 3. A bootstrap confidence interval for the indirect effect using 1,000 bootstrap samples is used for this study. The result are presented in Table 4.
A1
A2 B1
A3
Figure 2. PROCESS model 4 Empowerment
A1
A2 B1
A3
Figure 3. PROCESS model 4 Organizational Citizenship Behavior E.I leader rated
by Employee
EI. leader rated by leader Emotion management
Authentic
Leadership Empowerment
E.I. leader rated by Employee
E.I leader rated by leader Emotion management
Authentic
Hypothesis 4a proposed that the relationship between emotional intelligence of the leader rated by employee and empowerment and OCB is mediated by authentic leadership. The bias-corrected and bootstrap confidence interval for emotional intelligence rated by employees on empowerment, includes zero (BC95=[0.00, 0.23]) which indicates that authentic leadership does
not mediates the relationship of emotional intelligence rated by employee, on empowerment. The direct effects of E.I. rated by employees on empowerment are significant (B=.20 ; p<.01).
The bias-corrected bootstrap interval for emotional intelligence rated by employees on OCB, excluded zero (B95=[0.01 0.24]) which indicates that authentic leadership mediates the
relationship of E.I. rated by employees and OCB rated by Leaders. The direct effect of E.I rated by employees on OCB is not significant (B=.01; p=>.05) Here we see a complete mediation of authentic leadership of emotional intelligence rated by employees on OCB (rated by leaders).
We found partial support for H4a. Authentic leadership fully mediates the relationship of emotional intelligence rated by employees on OCB
Hypothesis 4b proposed that the relationship between E.I rated by leader and empowerment and OCB is mediated by authentic leadership. The bias-corrected bootstrap interval for emotional intelligence rated by the leader on empowerment excluded zero (BC95=[0.04 0.24]) which indicates that authentic leadership mediated the effect of E.I. rated by
the leader on empowerment. The direct effects of E.I rated by the leader on empowerment are not significant (B=-.16 ; p=>.05) This means that the relationship between E.I rated by leader and empowerment of employees is fully mediated by authentic leadership.
The bias-corrected bootstrap interval for emotional intelligence rated by the leader on OCB includes zero (B95=[0.00, 0.13] which indicates that authentic leadership does not mediates
the relationship of E.I. rated by leader and OCB rated by leaders. The direct effects of E.I rated by leader and OCB rated by Leaders are significant (B=.52 ; p=<.01).
We found partial support for H4b. Authentic leadership fully mediates the relationship of emotional intelligence rated by the leader on empowerment
Hypothesis 4c proposed that the relationship of emotional management and empowerment and OCB is mediated by authentic leadership. The bias-corrected bootstrap
interval for empowerment includes zero (B95=[-0.35 0.13]) which indicates that authentic
leadership does not mediates the relationship between emotional management and empowerment. The direct effects of emotion management on empowerment are also not significant (B=.02 ; p=.95 ; p>0.05).
The bias-corrected bootstrap interval for emotional management on OCB, includes zero (B95=[-0.22, 0.10]) which indicates that authentic leadership does not mediate the relationship of
emotion management and OCB. The direct effects of emotion management on OCB are also not significant (B=.20 ; p=.57; p>.05).
We found no support for H4c. Authentic leadership does not mediate the relationship of emotion management and empowerment and OCB.
Table 4: Bootstrap results for Authentic leadership as mediator of the relation between
emotional intelligence and empowerment and Organizational Citizenship Behavior Bootstrapping
Dependent variable: Empowerment Effect Boot SE LLCI ULCI
Indirect effect of AL (a1,b1) .12 .06 .00 .23
Indirect effect of AL (a2,b1) .12 .05 .04 .24
Indirect effect of AL (a3, b1) -.06 .12 -.35 .13
Bootstrapping
Dependent variable: OCB Effect Boot SE LLCI ULCI
Indirect effect of AL (a1,b1) .12 .06 .01 .24
Indirect effect of AL (a2,b1) .05 .03 .00 .13
Indirect effect of AL (a3, b1) -.04 .08 -.22 .10
Note: N=252. Unstandardized regression coefficients are reported.
**. Coefficient is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). *. Coefficient is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
Control variables: Age, gender, education, tenure with organization, tenure with leader
Discussion
In this study I investigated the relation of Authentic Leadership with Empowerment and OCB. I also looked at the mediating role of Authentic Leadership in the relation of emotional intelligence and empowerment and OCB. Results provide new insides for the role emotional intelligence has in Authentic leadership and its effect on Empowerment and OCB.
Authentic Leadership and Emotional intelligence, emotion management.
When looking at the authentic leadership literature we see authors include different values which should be part of authenticity, “social values” (Whitehead 2009, p 850), “sensitivity to the orientation of others” (Begley 2004, p 5), “sensibility to the feelings, aspiration and feelings of others” (Bhindi and Duignan 1997, p 119). They argue that values of the leader and a focus on the environment and on others, are important aspects of being authentic. Ladkin and Taylor (2010) mentioned that finding the balance in being one self and expressing emotions, being aware of your emotions and the effect when showing your emotions , seems imperative. Walumbwa et al. (2010) also mentioned the importance of how leaders monitor and self-regulate their behavior. Looking at the results of this study we see that these are important aspects of authentic leaders. The Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire measures these aspects and as we have seen in the results this does have a positive effect on followers. When leaders are perceived by their employees as emotional intelligent, they also receive a high score on authentic leadership. Meaning that leaders are seen as more authentic when they are also perceived as emotional intelligent. When leaders score themselves high on emotional intelligence, they also receive a high score by their employees on authentic leadership. Looking at these results we can conclude that emotional intelligence is an important aspect of authentic leadership and is in line with the literature described above.
When we look at the mediation results we see when leaders score themselves high on emotional intelligence they also receive a high score on authentic leadership from their employees which has a significant positive relation with empowerment of employees. The direct effects of E.I. rated by leader with empowerment is not significant. Authentic leadership completely mediates the relation of emotional intelligence of the leader and empowerment. This means that emotional intelligent authentic leaders have a positive effect on the empowerment of their employees. When we look at direct effects of E.I. of the leader rated by employees on
empowerment we see that this relation is significant. Authentic leadership does not mediates this relation. When leaders are perceived as emotional intelligent by their employees this also has a positive effect on empowerment.
Other mediation results show that, when employees score their leader high on emotional intelligence they also rate their leader high on authentic leadership which has a positive relation with OCB. The direct effects of perceived E.I and OCB are not significant. Authentic leadership completely mediates the relation of emotional intelligence rated by employees and OCB. Employees show more OCB when they perceive their leader as emotional intelligent and authentic.. It seems that the emotional intelligent authentic leader is a role model for employees through their authenticity! They create a fair open work environment and stimulate pro-social behavior which will contribute to the OCB of employees. Schneider et al. (2005) also mentioned that followers are likely to enact what a leader emphasizes by his or her behavior.
When we look at the emotional intelligence rated by the leader in relation with OCB, we see that the direct effects are significant. Wong and Law (2002) found evidence that emotional intelligence of supervisors is positively related to extra role behavior of subordinates. Since authentic leadership does not mediates this relationship, this could mean that perceived E.I. is more important that rated E.I. by the leader! In order to be authentic, employees have to perceive their leader as emotional intelligent and authentic to have a positive relation with OCB.
The self-report ratings and the received ratings on emotional intelligence is a plus in this study. It is very interesting to see the different results of the different ratings. Self-ratings by the leader and ratings from employees show different relations with the variables in this study. When employees rate their leader high on emotional intelligence this has a positive effect on the relation with authentic leadership. When employees see their leaders as emotional intelligent he or she also see their leader as more authentic. In total 45% of the variation in authentic leadership is explained by emotional intelligence rated by their employees. When we look at the rating of the leader we see that the relationship with authentic leadership is also significant. But here we see that 13% of the variation in authentic leadership is explained by emotional intelligence rated by the leader. Meaning that perceived E.I by employees of the leader is very important!
The direct effects of E.I. rated by employees on empowerment is significant. Employees who perceive their leader as emotional intelligent feel more empowered. The direct effects of E.I. ratings by the leader on empowerment is not significant, but when the leaders scores high on
E.I. and authentic leadership this does have a positive relation with empowerment. Emotional intelligent authentic leaders do have a positive effect on feelings of empowerment of the employees.
The direct effects of E.I. rated by employees on OCB are not significant. When employees perceive their leader as emotional intelligence this does not have an significant relationship with OCB. When the leader receives high scores on emotional intelligence and is also perceived as authentic, this does have a positive relation with OCB. Meaning when leaders are perceived as emotional intelligent and authentic, employees show more OCB. When we look at the E.I. of the leader rated by the leader we see a direct effect on OCB. When the leaders scores himself or herself high on E.I. he or she also rates their employees high on OCB. Authentic leadership does not mediates this relationship.
Looking at the literature of Joseph et al. (2014) leaders who possess traits of mixed E.I. might score themselves high on emotional intelligence and exhibit behavior that positively influence followers. When we look at the results of this study we see that perceived emotional intelligence and perceived authenticity is very important. High ratings of the leader does not always have a positive relation with the outcome variables. But when employees perceive their leader as emotional intelligence and authentic the relation with the different variables is significant.
Taken together is seem that: to have a significant relation with both empowerment and OCB of employees authentic leaders have to be emotional intelligent.
We found no support for the predictive validity of the STEM (situational test of emotion management) Results show no significant correlations. The results of the hierarchical regression and the mediation analyses also show no significant effects. The reliability of the STEM in this study, is low (.34). Issues with internal reliability of the STEM and indications that the STEM may need further development work have been noted by different researchers (Ferguson, Austin 2010, Austin 2010, Hartman, 2011 ). A logical next step for the STEM would be to address the issue concerning the variance in item response options. Following this, research should focus on developing evidence for construct validity, and then, assess the predictive value of the STEM against work related outcomes.
Emotional management tells us if a leader is able to manage both the emotion the person is feeling and the problems they face in that situation. An aspect of the emotional intelligence
questionnaire, others-emotional appraisal, might relate to this part. This tells us if a person is able to perceive and understand the emotions of the people around them. When looking at those results we see that this does have an significant relation with the other variables meaning it is an important aspect in Authentic Leadership, Empowerment and OCB.
Authentic leadership and empowerment
First as predicted authentic leadership was found to be positively related to Empowerment, thus providing evidence that authentic leaders are likely to exert their influence on followers. The results show that when employees rated their leader high on Authentic leadership they also rate themselves high on empowerment. Drucker (1998) already mentioned that in a time when global competition and change require employees who are innovative and initiative, empowerment of employees becomes more important. Thomas and Velthouse (1990) argued that employees who feel empowered will increase managerial effectiveness of the company. Spreitzer (1995) found evidence that empowerment is positively related to managerial effectiveness. For different companies it is important to have employees who feel empowered so they can make a positive contribution to the company. This means it is important to know which type of Leader can contribute to empowerment of employees.
More authentic leaders are expected to provide higher levels of constructive feedback to their followers (a key component of empowerment), through their more internalized moral perspective and balanced processing (Walumbwa et al. 2010). Illies et al. (2005) mentioned that authentic leaders are described as understanding followers needs for meaning in their work and the confidence that comes with being trusted to act with initiative and autonomy. This means that authentic leaders will have a positive effect on empowerment of employees. Sharing information and promoting an inclusive unit climate as mentioned by Spreitzer (1996) which are characteristics of authentic leadership, does have a positive effect on Empowerment.
Our findings support the previous suggestions that authentic leadership positively relates to empowerment of followers. We did found a positive relation of authentic leadership on empowerment. So authentic leadership can contribute to empowered employees in companies which will have an positive effect on managerial effectiveness of the company.
