developed by Boyatzis and associates integrates individual and cultural factors
with .... The competent manager: A model for effective performance, John Wiley &
.
1
VISION AS AN AMPLIFIER OF EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE IN ORGANIZATIONAL ENGAGEMENT Ed Mahon, D.M. Organizational and individual drivers of employee engagement can define the interaction of individual characteristics with cultural and job related factors in order to determine their joint effect on employee level of engagement. Applying survey data and causal modeling using SEM techniques underscored the impact of individual, structural and cultural characteristics on employee engagement. Overall, these findings are new in that they show that when individual emotional intelligence and culture characteristics (such as an employee’s perception of the corporate vision) interact, the results are intensifying. Drawing upon lenses such as social exchange theory, prior research has found that jobrelated factors such as job characteristics and organizational support positively influence employee engagement (Kahn, 1990; Saks, 2006; Kular, Gatenby, Rees, Soane, & Truss, 2008). While this work represents a significant initial step toward understanding the drivers of employee engagement, it provides an incomplete explanation for such a complex sociopsychological phenomenon. Alternatively, the contingency theory of action and job performance (Boyatzis, Goleman et al. 2000) provides an integrated approach for analyzing employee effectiveness of which job-related factors are but one component. The contingency model developed by Boyatzis and associates integrates individual and cultural factors with job-related ones. The theory suggests that the degree to which all three areas represented overlap for an individual result in a more effective employee or organizational member. Defining Emotional Intelligence (EI) and PNEA & NEA EI allows for the description and study of variety specific competencies that can causally
relate to engagement. Boyatzis (1982) defines emotional intelligence as those competences that help one understand how to influence others. He suggests to use emotional intelligence effectively is to acquire an awareness of both yourself and the environment around you. As a means of defining emotions (Boyatzis and Sala 2004) define a positive emotional attractor (PEA) as the personal hopes, dreams, possibilities, optimism and self-directed learning goals that make up our ideal self, and the negative emotional attractor (NEA) as the present reality, fears, problems, shortfalls, pessimism, and improvement goals that constitute our real self (Boyatzis and Sala 2004). Further, (Akrivou, Boyatzis et al. 2006) and (Boyatzis and McKee 2005) contend that dimensions of Hope/Vision, Compassion/Caring, and Overall Positive Mood are the essential components of a positive versus negative emotional climate. This study observed these personal characteristics had a sensitizing or amplifying effect on the structural/cultural characteristics on engagement. I found that Emotional Intelligence will increase the effects of structural/cultural characteristics on Organizational Engagement. In an effort to extend the social exchange approach with this contingency perspective, we examined the extent to which engagement is linked to individual and cultural characteristics, such as emotional intelligence and attitudes toward organizational culture and work climate. We investigate how employee attitudes about their work environment and their individual characteristics may contribute to their level of engagement. The exploration assesses the way that individual characteristics and attitudes toward the work climate interact with job-related factors to determine whether these relationships are sensitizing The Contingency Theory of Action and Job Performance The Contingency theory of action and Job performance (Boyatzis, Goleman et al. 2000) offered an integrated system approach to analyzing employee effectiveness. This model
2
integrates individual, cultural, and structural factors with three concentric circles consisting of 1) individual vision, values, philosophy and knowledge 2) Job demands of tasks, functions and roles and 3) Organizational environment consisting of culture or climate. The theory suggests that the degree to which all three areas represented overlap for an individual result in a more effective employee or organizational member. I argue that this same combination of drivers will likely hold for employee engagement, and our adaptation of the model is shown in Figure 1. FIGURE 1: Adapted Contingency Model
Individual Emotional & Social Intelligence -Seven cluster competencies
Job Demands -tasks -Functions -Roles Employee Engagement Best Fit
Organizational Environment -Vision -Compassion -Overall Mood
I tested this model using a variety of instruments. To test for individual factors I used the well-established emotional intelligence (EI; Boyatzis, 1982) measure. To test for cultural variables I used measures for positive and negative emotional attractors (Boyatzis & Sala, 2004). To test for employee engagement, I used Saks’s established measures for employee engagement, attitudes toward work climate, and established drivers of engagement such as job characteristics and organizational engagement (Saks, 2006). Figure 2 diagrams the sensitizing pattern. These factors increase the relationship between structural and cultural characteristics and engagement. In sum, the analyses that follow are designed to determine the role that individual characteristics play in determining employee and emotional engagement.
3
FIGURE 2: Conceptual Diagram of Sensitizing Pattern Structural/Cultural Factors
Individual Characteristics
+
Engagement
+
Structural elements and individual characteristics amplify their effect on organizational engagement Existing literature emphasizes how job-related, structural characteristics drive engagement. I argue that individual characteristics drive engagement as well. Further, I argue that individual characteristics interact with contextual factors (structural and cultural). For organizational engagement, all significant interactions suggest a sensitizing pattern in which personal characteristics (EI) amplify the effects of structural and cultural factors. This research supports this assertion as I found an interaction. This interaction indicates that EI are important moderators in amplifying the effect of structural and cultural factors on engagement. More specifically, vision is amplified by organizational engagement. In reviewing the structural interactions, I find that when individuals have high EI job characteristics have a sensitizing or amplifying affect on the level of organizational engagement. I find structural elements of the organization affect employee perceptions of the organizational climate and they effect organizational engagement. For example, job characteristics and EI have a positive effect on an employee’s level of organizational engagement. EI*Vision has a significant positive effect on organizational engagement (b=.291, p
