Abstract

In the contemporary world of stress and insecurity in developing countries like Pakistan, emotional intelligence has earned critical importance as an effective tool for organizational leadership. Literature suggests that when human devotion, motivation and commitment are the keys to organizational success, transformational leadership with sufficient command over emotional intelligence is the only package that can help successful operations of the organization. This study tests the same model of positive relations between EI & TRFLS and negative links of EI with TRSLS in the ‘local government’ work environment using local government leaders as the unit of analysis. Literature and field surveys for data collection and statistical tools for data analysis have been applied to serve the purposes of this study. The results confirm the hypothesized relationships between predictor and criterion variables with specific ‘statistics’ warranting further work on strengthening the interactions between TRFLS and EI.

Key Words

Emotional Intelligence (EI), Transformational Leadership Style (TRFLS), Transactional       Leadership Styles (TRSLS)

Introduction

Current emotionally disturbed work environments demand emotional intelligence from every single employee working, particularly in Pakistani public or private organizations. Emotional intelligence is a critical issue in management and organization studies for the last couple of decades, thereby catching the attention of researchers, academia, and practitioners (Taylor, 1990; Kunnanatt, 2004). Human has a set of emotions, including joy, surprise, anger, fear, sorrow, and disgust (Mayer et al., 2008). Emotions are the integrated feelings containing physiological, cognitive and psychological contents. Emotional intelligence is divided into personal and social-emotional intelligence, which collectively forms the emotional capabilities of an individual or employee (Obradovic et al., 2013). Given the contemporary international and national conditions of insecurity and turmoil, the role of emotional intelligence becomes indispensable and decisive in defining the work environments (Coetzee & Harry, 2014). In this study, the researchers have computed the impacts or relations of EI with transactional and transformational leadership styles in the workplace of the Local government in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan.

Transactional (TRS) leadership is the traditional style for developing countries like Pakistan. It is closer to the legacy models of past leadership of Mughal kings and then British colonial powers. Hard and fast rules and regulations characterize the TRS where managers/leaders have to work as per documented guidelines for every possibly identifiable piece of work in the organization. Formal work environment, formal relations and formal performance are leading attributes of working under a TRS type of leadership. Contingent-rewards, active and passive management by exception are the major tools for employee motivation. The focus is on the group and organizational performance at the cost of individual consideration for each and every employee. The relations between leaders and subordinates are robotic and rigid, which is defined by rules and regulations first and then anything else (Odumeru&Ifeanyi. 2013).

Transformational (TRF) leaders also follow the rules but keep humans on the top. They depend more on collective intelligence than on established rules and regulations. The leader works as a part of the team but plays the part of a role model, motivator, stimulator and friend/mentor of every single employee individually(Bass &Riggio 2006). As a role model, a leader exhibits a quality before the subordinates first and then inspires them to command it, like, creativity, innovation, doing old things in new ways, and always coming up with the new idea to add to the collective knowledge (Bass 1985: 22). The leader makes all-out efforts to create such a work environment that excites the workforce to play their organizational roles with full devotion and in the direction specified by their inspiring, cooperative and encouraging role model or leader (Uusi-Kakkuri, Paii, 2017).

EI is a human capability that makes his/her stronger in managing personal behavior (personal-EI) as well as group behavior (social-EI). Likewise, TRF is obviously more oriented to capitalize on the human attributes in the organizational interest rather than the non-human resources; therefore, there seem greater connections between EI and transformational leadership style (assumption-1). Further, the TRS is more task-oriented and uses rules and regulation as the only guide to perform organizational work and reward or punishment as the only tool for motivation; therefore, the role of EI in such situations seems downplayed or discouraged (assumption-2). This study verifies these assumptions through first-hand data collected through a field survey.  

Literature Review

Emotional Intelligence

EI has become a widely researched area of study in the background of the organizational behavior in almost every type of organizations as well as everywhere on the planet, particularly in developing countries like Pakistan, which has recently come out of anti-terrorism war. EI is the ability of an individual to understand and manage his/her emotions and that of others in social interactions or work environments (Salovey & Mayer, 1990; Karimi, 2012). Researchers are working on the emotions, their nature and types, control and management in organizational behavior (Alavi et al., 2013). Researchers are also investigating the impact of EI on the decision making processes and dynamics in the work environment (Kashif, M. et al., 2016). Emotional intelligence is characterized (Goleman (1998:317) by the following two groups of attributes/abilities:




Personal Emotional Intelligence

1. Self-awareness: Awareness of experiencing emotions, moods, impulses, and Why and their effects on others(Srivastava, 2013).

2. Self-regulation: Keep emotions and impulses in check, remain calm in a crisis, and maintain composure irrespective of emotional experiences(Baesu & Bejinaru, 2013).

3. Motivation: Remain focused on goals despite setbacks, Operate from the hope of success, not fear of failure, delaying gratification, and accepting change to attain goals (Taylor, 1990).




Social-Emotional Intelligence

? Empathy: Understand feelings transmitted through verbal and nonverbal messages, Emotional support to people when needed. Understand links between others’ emotions and behavior (Ayranci, 2011).

? Social skills: Deal problems without co-workers, don’t allow own or others’ negative feelings to inhibit collaboration, Handle affective conflict with tact & diplomacy (Thorndike, E.L. (1920). 




Transactional Leadership Style

As the title shows, transactional leadership is based on ‘transactions’ between the leaders and followers. Transaction characterizes ‘exchange’ behavior between the leaders and subordinates where codes and modes of interrelationships are already well-explained and documented in the form of rules and regulations and modus-operandi. Transactional leaders work on the basis of existing patterns of work, and there is no desire to change or innovate the work culture or environment. Everybody has to play his/her role as per cook-book which assigns duties to every single employee. Such leadership keeps focus on the performance of the workforce and pays them as per their output. Workers performing as per rules are rewarded, while those who fall short of the required standards of work, earn punishment and penalties. The only way to motivate the employees is the ‘contingent rewards meaning that one is paid according to his/her performance. Transactional Leaders are characterized by:

1. Contingent Rewards and Punishments: Reward for good performance and penalty or punishment for unwanted output. It is reciprocal and a kind of exchange between the leader and followers.

2. Passive management by exception: When employees are rewarded or given punishment for bad performance, the leader stays passive during the performance and depends on contingent rewards or penalties at the end of the task or job.

3. Active management by exception: When the manager observes subordinates when they are on the job and suggests them corrections during the process to incorporate in performance, this management is called active management by exception. By exception means managing not continuously rather as and when required. 




Transformational Leadership Style

Transformational leaders are more human-oriented than organizational rules and regulations. They trust more in employees as human beings than just a spare part of a big machine called an organization. These leaders connected with all individuals and groups of employees or followers (Kouzes & Posner 2002; Posner & Kouzes 1988). Obviously, this kind of leader has several distinctive qualities in his/her personality, which are then tried to be communicated or injected into the followers or subordinate (Arnold & Loughlin 2013). The leader works as a role model, motivator, intellectual stimulator and mentor for every single employee through contact with every individual employee(Uusi-Kakkuri, Piia, 2017).

Unlike transactional leaders who stick with the cookbook to run the organization, including human resources, transformational leaders rather invest in the human resource of the organization by depending on their energies of creativity and innovations (Kouzes & Posner, 1988; 2002). The leader plays his/her role as one of the members in decision making and choosing strategies to undertake a specific task or assignment. Employees are listened to by the leader, and genuine ideas are respected and uploaded into the decision making process and outputs. In general, transformational leaders use the following tools (Bass&Riggio, 2006) to manage their employees/subordinates in favor of the organization:

1. Idealized influence: The leader is capable enough to play a role model for the subordinates. The followers get inspired by the confidence, determination, rigorousness, sharing of their role model and thereby try their best to perform (Northhouse, 2013).

2. Inspirational motivation: Transformational leaders do not motivate by contingent rewards rather inspire the subordinates by believing in them and taking care of their needs beyond the rules and regulations. They are inspired to get motivated by being given the opportunity to participate in decision making. They motivated by getting separate and individual attention and care from the leader (Uusi-Kakkuri, Piia, 2017).

3. Intellectual stimulation: The employees are encouraged to participate at every level of work by thinking creatively and innovating new methods for doing old things. Employees are not used as followers rather empowered to feel ownership of the organization (Arnold & Loughlin 2013).

4. Individual consideration: The leader tries to keep in contact with every single employee individually for listening to his/her concerns as well as motivating the employees to work with internal and external energies. There is a relation of trust between the leader and every employee (Rehman, &Waheed, 2012).

Figure 1

Theoretical Framework




Research Design

Philosophy of Research

Positivism has been used as the philosophy behind the research design of this study. In positivism, knowledge is considered as something which can be verified through observations (Ontology), and it can be recorded and expressed through observable terminologies or concepts (Epistemology). For this purpose, tools and techniques of the ‘scientific method’ have been applied to fulfil the requirements of positivism, thereby qualifying for scientific data collection, analysis and output.

Data Collection & Analysis

As per the guidelines of positivism, data was collected from literature as well as the field. The research model has been extracted from literature through the application of ‘thematic-analysis.’ This model has then been used as a guide to conduct a field survey to collect first-hand data, which was used to ‘verify the hypothesis emerging from the literature-based research model extracted from the literature. Correlation and regression procedures were applied to undertake the verification of hypotheses.




 

Table 1. Reliability & Validity Analysis

Reliability Statistics on Research variables
	Variables	Items	Cronbach Alpha
1	Emotional Intelligence	11	0.833
2	Transformational Leadership Style	10	0.907
3	Transactional Leadership Style	10	0.940
4	Questionnaire	31	0.826

Table 2. Validity Statistics on Emotional Intelligence

KMO (Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin) and Bartlett's Test			Component Matrix
			Qs	Score
Measure of Sampling Adequacy.		.818	EI1	.698
Bartlett's Test of Sphericity	Approx. Chi-Square	708.354	EI2	.685
	Df	55	EI3	.484
	Sig.	.000	EI4	.548
Required Statistics KMO Bartlett’sTest Factor Loading Cutoff	0.6 0.05 0.4	Computed Scores 0.818 0.000 0.481 to 0.795	EI5	.617
			EI6	.652
			EI7	.795
			EI8	.761
			EI9	.492
			EI10	.542
			EI11	.481

 

Table 3. Validity Statistics on Transformational Leadership Style

KMO (Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin) and Bartlett's Test					Component Matrix
					Qs	Score
Measure of Sampling Adequacy.				.893	TRS1	.948
Bartlett's Test of Sphericity	Approx. Chi-Square			2132.068	TRS2	.750
	Df			45	TRS3	.674
	Sig.			.000	TRS4	.867
Required Statistics   KMO Bartlett’s Test Factor Loading Cutoff		0.6 0.05 0.4	Computed Scores   0.946 0.000 0.575 to 0.903		TRS5	.883
					TRS6	.786
					TRS7	.775
					TRS8	.681
					TRS9	.849
					TRS10	.862

 

Table 4. Validity Statistics on Transformational Leadership Style

KMO (Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin) and Bartlett's Test					Component Matrix
					Qs	Score
Measure of Sampling Adequacy.				.946	TRF1	.947
Bartlett's Test of Sphericity	Approx. Chi-Square			1235.984	TRF2	.850
	Df			45	TRF3	.737
	Sig.			.000	TRF4	.852
Required Statistics   KMO Bartlett’s Test Factor Loading Cutoff		0.6 0.05 0.4	Computed Scores   0.946 0.000 0.575 to 0.903		TRF5	.800
					TRF6	.822
					TRF7	.903
					TRF8	.723
					TRF9	.122
					TRF10	.575

 

Empirical Evidence

Descriptive Results

Table 5.

Qualification/Experience Cross-tabulation
		Experience		Total
		<15	>15
Qualification	Postgraduate	74	23	97
	Graduate	27	59	86
Total		101	82	183

 

Table 6.

Descriptive Statistics
	N	Min	Max	Mean	Std. Deviation
Emotional Intelligence	183	3.00	7.00	5.9861	.64634
Transformational Leadership Style	183	3.20	5.10	4.3557	.49642
Transactional Leadership Style	183	2.00	6.60	2.8508	.79758

 

Testing of Hypotheses

Association Analysis

H1. Predictor is Significantly Associated with Criterion Variables

 

Table 7.

Correlations (n=183)
		EI	TRF
Transformational Leadership Style	Pearson Correlation	.445**	1
	Sig. (2-tailed)	.000
Transactional Leadership Style	Pearson Correlation	-.406**	.105
	Sig. (2-tailed)	.000	.159

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Analysis

1.        EI is significantly and ‘positively’ associated with TRF

2.        TRS has significant and ‘negative’ relation with EI.

3.        TRS and TRF are ‘insignificantly’ linked with unacceptable R-value = 0.105

4.        Hypothesis # 1 is, therefore, significantly accepted established on hypothesized associations between the variables in the research model.




 

Prediction Analysis

H2: EI supports TRF

 

Table 8.

Model Summary
R		R Square	Adjusted R Square		Std. The error of the Estimate			F		Sig.
.445a		.198	.193		.44586			44.620		.000b
Coefficients
Model				Unstandardized Coefficients			Standardized Coefficients		t		Sig.
				B		Std. Error	Beta
1	(Constant)			2.311		.308			7.507		.000
	Emotional Intelligence			.342		.051	.445		6.680		.000

a. Predictors: (Constant), EI; b. Dependent Variable: TRF

 




Analysis

EI is responsible for 20% (R2=0.198) variation in Transformational leadership style (TRF) with a Beta-weight of 0.342 and a p-value of 0.000, meaning that an increase in EI increases the popularity of TRF. Hypothesis # 2 is therefore accepted as true with significant results.

H3: TRS is negatively explained by EI




 

Table 9.

Model Summary
R		R Square	Adjusted R Square			Std. The error of the Estimate		F		Sig.
.406a		.165	.160			.73098		35.676		.000b
Coefficients
Model				Unstandardized Coefficients			Standardized Coefficients		t		Sig.
				B	Std. Error		Beta
1	(Constant)			5.848	.505				11.587		.000
	Emotional Intelligence			-.501	.084		-.406		-5.973		.000

a. Predictors: (Constant), EI; b. Dependent Variable: TRS

 




Analysis

EI is significantly and ‘negatively’, explaining the 17% variation (R2 = 0.165) in Transactional leadership style (TRS). It shows that an increase in EI decreases the role of acceptance of TRS (Beta-weight = -0.501). The relationship is significant with a p-value of 0.000.

Discussion

Given the fact that transformational leaders are those who are more ‘human or person’ oriented rather than the ‘organization or task’ orientation. To successfully create a team workforce, transformational leaders use all possible tools and techniques to motivate their team members. Emotional intelligence is the best and most powerful weapon in the hands of such leaders who can apply different methods based on the components of emotional intelligence and thereby prepare their teams to take maximum interest in their work and thus give the best possible performance. On the contrary, transactional leadership capitalizes on the formal methods and use rules and regulations to prepare their workforce to behave as per organizational requirements. They are less inclined to use human methods like emotional intelligence as a weapon to motivate their team members. Formal methods are more task-oriented; therefore, transactional leaders make maximum use of documented procedures to manage task through managing the employees.

The hypotheses regarding the role of emotional intelligence for a transactional and transformational leader have been verified with strong statistics in the current study. There is a significant positive relationship between EI and transformational leadership, and there is a negative link between EI and transactional leadership practices. Further, transformational and transactional leadership styles have an insignificant association with each other showing their isolated roles in the organizational work environments.

Conclusion

After verifying the hypotheses emerging from the model extracted from the analysis of existing research on the relations of EI with TRF and TRS, the following conclusions can be drawn:

1. An increase in EI capabilities is supportive of the transformational leadership style.

2. Transactional leadership is negatively connected with EI showing that transactional leaders cannot use EI more effectively as compared to transformational leaders.

3. The insignificant connection between transformational and transactional leadership modes also suggests that both styles are good for different work environments.  They cannot be used at the same time. Both leadership styles are good in altogether different work environments. When human management is more critical than transformational leadership, tools are effective, but transactional leaders are needed when task orientation is demanded.

References

• Alavi, S. Z., Mojtahedzadeh, H., Amin, F., &Savoji, A. P. (2013). Relationship between Emotional Intelligence and Organizational Commitment in Iran's Ramin Thermal Power Plant. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences. 84, 815-819
• Arnold, K. A., & Loughlin, C. (2013). Integrating transformational and participative versus directive leadership theories: Examining intellectual stimulation in male and female leaders across three contexts. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 34(1), 67- 84.
• Ayranci, E. (2011). Effects of Top Turkish Managers' Emotional and Spiritual Intelligences on Their Organizations' Financial Performance. Business Intelligence Journal, 4(1), 9-36
• Baesu, C. & Bejinaru, R. (2013) Leadership approaches regarding the organizational change. The USV annals of economics and public administration, vol. 13.
• Bass, B. M., & Riggio, R. E. (2006). Transformational leadership. Psychology Press.
• Bass, B.M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. NY. The Free Press.
• Burns, J.M. (1978). Leadership. New York. Harper & Row.
• Coetzee, M., & Harry, N. (2014). Emotional intelligence as a predictor of employees' career adaptability. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 84(1), 90-97.
• Gibson, D. E., & Barsade, S. G. (2003). Managing organizational culture change: The case of long-term care. Journal of Social Work in Long-Term Care, 2(1-2), 11-34.
• Goleman, D. (1998). Working with emotional intelligence. New York: Bantam
• Karimi, N. L. (2012). The role of emotional intelligence in influencing leadership effectiveness: survey of senior management in banking sector in Mombasa County. Elixir Leadership Management, 48, 9222-9229.
• Kashif, M. Khurshid, MK. & Zahid, I. (2016). Relationship betweenemotional intelligence and entrepreneurship.Research on Humanities and Social Sciences, 6(5), 2016
• Kouzes, JM. & Posner, BJ. (2002). Leadership challenge (3rded.). San Francisco: Jossey- Bass.
• Kunnanatt, J. T. (2004). Emotional intelligence: The new science of interpersonal effectiveness. Human resource development quarterly, 15(4), 489.
• Leeper, R. W (1948). A motivational theory of emotion to replace
• Mayer, J. D., Roberts, R. D., & Barsade, S. G. (2008). Human abilities: Emotional intelligence. Annu. Rev. Psychol., 59, 507- 536.
• Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P., & Caruso, D. R. (2008). Emotional intelligence: new ability or eclectic traits?American psychologist, 63(6), 503.
• Northouse, P.G. (2010). Leadership: Theory and practice (5thed). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
• Obradovic, V., Jovanovic, P., Petrovic, D., Mihic, M., &Mitrovic, Z. (2013). Project managers' emotional intelligence-a ticket to success. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 74, 274-284.
• Odumeru, J. & Ifeanyi, G. O. (2013). Transformational vs. Transactional Leadership Theories: Evidence in Literature. International Review of Management and Business Research, Vol: 2. Issue: 2.
• Posner, B. Z., & Kouzes, J. M. (1988). Relating leadership and credibility. Psychological reports, 63(2), 527-530.
• Rehman, R. R. &Waheed, A. (2012). Transformational Leadership Style as Predictor of Decision Making Styles: Moderating Role of Emotional Intelligence. Pak. J. Commer. Soc. Sci., 2012 Vol. 6 (2), 257-268.
• Salovey, P. & Mayer, J. D. (1990). Emotional intelligence. Imagination, cognition and personality 9, 185-211.
• Srivastava, K. (2013). Emotional intelligence and organizational effectiveness. Industrial Psychiatry Journal, 22(2), 97-99. doi:10.4103/0972-6748.132912.
• Taylor, E.H. (1990). The assessment of social intelligence. Psychotherapy, 27, 445-457.
• Thorndike, E.L. (1920). Intelligence and its use. Harper's Magazine 140, 227-235
• Uusi-Kakkuri, Piia. (August 2017). Transformational leadership and leading creativity. Academic Dissertation: To be presented (with the permission of the Board of the Faculty of Business Studies of the University of Vaasa) for public dissertation in Auditorium Kurtén (C203) on the 4th of August, 2017, at 1 p.m.