1
M. Afzalur Rahim
Center for Advanced Studies in Management
1574 Mallory Court
Bowling Green, KY 42103, USA
Phone/Fax: 270–782–2898/2601, Email: mgt2000@aol.com
Clement Psenicka
Management Department
Youngstown State University
Youngstown, OH 44555
Phone: 330–757–8188, Email: cpsenick@cc.ysu.edu
Sae-Yoon Oh
Department of Public Administration
Honam University
59-1 Seobong-Dong
Gwangsan-Gu, Gwangiu-City, South Korea
Phone/Fax: + 82-62-940-5243/5227, Email: syoh@honam.ac.kr
Panagiotis Polychroniou
University of Ioannina
2, G. Seferi St.
Agrinio, Greece
Phone/Fax: 0030-26410-39523/39579, ppolychr@cc.uoi.gr
Joao Ferreira Dias
ISCTE - Portugal
Edificio ISCTE (cacifo 238-B)
Av. das Foras Armadas, 1649-026
LISBOA, Portugal
Phone: +(351)938450825, Email: fdias@iscte.pt
Md. Sahidur Rahman
Shameema Ferdausy
University of Chittagong
Department of Management
Chittagong, Bangladesh
Phone/Fax: 880-31-716552/726310, Email: sahidur_cu@yahoo.com, s_ferdausy@yahoo.com
Running head: Social Competence, Emotional Intelligence, Transformational Leadership

2
This study investigated the relationship between emotional intelligence—empathy and social skills—and transformational leadership. Questionnaire data on emotional intelligence and transformational leadership for this study were collected in five countries (U.S., Greece,
Portugal, South Korea, and Bangladesh) from observers (an MBA student and two of his/her colleagues who had the same supervisor, N = 685 triads). In other words, three observers rated their common supervisor on the independent and criterion variables and the scale for each variable was created by averaging responses to its items for each group (triad). Empathy was positively associated with transformational leadership in all the five countries. Social skills was positively associated with transformational leadership in the U.S., Greece, South Korea, and
Bangladesh, but not in Portugal. Overall, there were similarities in the results between the individualistic (U.S., Portugal, and Greece) and collectivistic (South Korea and Bangladesh) cultures.

3
Literature in organizational behavior and industrial and organizational psychology generally acknowledge the inadequacy of intelligence as a predictor of leadership effectiveness. In reviewing the literature on intelligence and transformational leadership, Bass (2002) concluded that traditional conceptualization of intelligence is generally concerned with the analytical or academic aspect of intelligence, but an adequate conceptualization of this construct comprises other aspects, such as emotional and social intelligences, as well. Sternberg (2002) suggests, "the predictive value of intelligence may have been flagged in various studies because these studies examined and measured aspects of intelligence that, however effective they may be in predicting academic and certain other kinds of performance, are not effective predictors of leadership performance" (p. 9). He suggests that there are other dimensions of intelligence
 social intelligence, emotional intelligence, or practical intelligence or what scholars refer to as "street smarts"
 which indicates that an individual is not limited simply because he or she has a below average academic intelligence or IQ.
Over the years many studies on intelligence focused mainly on the adaptive use of cognition, but in recent years theorists such as Gardner (1983, 1999) and Sternberg (1985, 2002) have suggested more encompassing approaches to conceptualizing intelligence. Although Gardner did not use the term emotional intelligence, his concepts of intra- and inter-personal intelligences provided the basis for the conceptualization of EQ. Whereas, intrapersonal intelligence is the ability to be aware of and regulate one's own emotions (feelings, moods, and desires), interpersonal intelligence is associated with one's ability to understand others’ emotions and to induce desirable responses in them. The present study used Gardner’s conceptualization of interpersonal intelligence. Goleman (2001) suggested that this intelligence is associated with social competencies, such as empathy and social skills. We selected empathy and social skills

4 components of EQ for the present study because we believed that (a) manifestations of empathy and social skills in an organizational context will have a significant influence on employees’ perceptions of their supervisor's transformational leadership and (b) no studies to our knowledge investigated the relationships between the two constructs in domestic or cross-cultural context.
In his role as a consultant in organizations, Goleman (1998; see also Goleman, Boyatzis, &
McKee, 2002) found that emotional intelligence is twice more important than technical skills and
IQ for jobs at all levels. He also reported that emotional intelligence plays an increasingly important role at the highest levels of a company. When he compared "Star performers with average ones in senior leadership positions, nearly 90% of the difference in their profiles was attributable to emotional intelligence factors rather than cognitive abilities" (Goleman, 1998, p.
108). We acknowledge that some social scientists may not consider this claim as scientific evidence.
Studies on EQ in an organizational context are limited, but scholars and writers in management are beginning to emphasize the importance EQ on leadership effectiveness (Bass,
2002; Goleman, 1998; Hesselbein, Goldsmith, & Beckhard, 1996; Megerian & Sosik, 1996;
Morris & Feldman, 1996). These theoretical contributions suggest that some aspects of EQ may be associated with effective leadership. Sosik and Megerian (1999) suggest that an intrapersonal aspect of EQ, such as self-awareness, which involves a strong leader–follower emotional relationship, is positively associated with transformational leadership. Taking lead from these contributions, we hypothesize that interpersonal dimensions of EQ, such as empathy and social skills are associated with transformational leadership. In other words, leaders who possess empathy and social skills aspects of EQ are likely to exhibit behaviors associated with transformational leadership.

5
Emotional intelligence refers to one's ability to be aware of one's own feelings, be aware of others' feelings, to differentiate among them, and to use the information to guide one's thinking and behavior (Salovey & Mayer, 1990). This definition consists of three categories of abilities: evaluation and expression of emotion, regulation of emotion, and using emotions in decisionmaking. Goleman (1998) provided a similar definition: "the capacity for organizing our own feelings and those of others, for motivating ourselves, and for managing emotions well in ourselves and in our relationships" (p. 317). These and other definitions by Bar-On (1997),
Boyatzi (2001), and others are complimentary. It appears that EQ relates to a number of noncognitive skills, abilities, or competencies that influence an individual's capacity to deal with environmental demands and pressures. The EQ construct was first discussed by Salovey and
Mayer (1990) and had its roots in Gardner’s (1983) concepts of intra- and inter-personal intelligences, and in Thorndike's (1920) concept of social intelligence.
Emotional Intelligence
Several scholars use the term EQ to include almost everything but IQ: emotional awareness, accurate self-assessment, self-confidence, trustworthiness, conscientiousness, adaptability, innovation, and so on (Bar-On & Parker, 2000; Goleman, 1998), but this framework stretches the conceptualization of intelligence way beyond acceptable limits (Hedlund & Sternberg, 2000).
As suggested by Salovey and Mayer (1994) and Mayer, Caruso, and Salovey (2000) there should be a more restrictive model of EQ based on ability and distinguished from personality. We do this by defining the two dimensions of interpersonal intelligence selected for the present study as follows:
1. Empathy refers to one's ability of understanding others and taking active interest in them, recognizing and responding to changes in their emotional states, understanding their

6 feelings transmitted through verbal and nonverbal messages, to provide emotional support to people when needed, and to understand the links between their emotions and behavior.
2. Social Skills is associated with one's ability of inducing desirable responses in others, dealing with problems without demeaning those who work with him or her, to not allow own or others' negative feelings to inhibit collaboration, and to negotiate and manage affective conflict with tack and diplomacy.
Transformational Leadership
Following Burns (1978), Bass (1985; see also Bass & Avolino, 1993) proposed that transformational leadership is associated with distinct dimensions of intellectual stimulation
(encouraging followers to question their own way of doing things and become innovative), individualized consideration (providing personal attention, empathy, and encouragement for selfdevelopment of followers), charisma or idealized influence (trust, respect, and pride stimulated by and emotional identification with the leader), and inspirational motivation (encouraging followers to improve their contribution by articulating a compelling vision). Leaders who possess interpersonal intelligence may be associated with transformational leadership for several reasons. Leaders who possess empathy aspect of EQ are likely to recognize followers' need, take active interest in them, and respond to changes in their emotional states. Empathy is likely to be associated with individualized consideration. Social skills aspect of EQ, which is associated with enabling followers to engage in desirable behaviors, is likely to be associated with intellectual stimulation. Employees are likely to respect and emotionally identify with a leader who is considerate and is willing to help employees to be effective and improve their job performance.
Therefore, the social competence dimension of EQ is likely to be associated with leaders' charisma or idealized influence.

7
Developed by Bass (1985), the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) is a widely used instrument to assess the three aspects of transformational leadership—charisma, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration. However, there has been lack of evidence of construct validity of the instrument (Tejeda, 2001). Carlessa's (1998) study indicated that there is little evidence to support that the MLQ measures three distinct transformational leader behaviors.
In the present study, we conceptualize transformational leadership as a unidimensional construct consisting of the three types of interrelated behaviors. (As will be seen later, in the present study a factor analysis of the MLQ items resulted in a single factor.).
On the basis of our theoretical discussion, we formulate the following hypotheses for the study:
Hypothesis 1: Empathy is positively associated with transformational leadership.
Hypothesis 2: Social skills is positively associated with transformational leadership.
We also wanted to explore how these relationships differ between individualistic (U.S.,
Greece, and Portugal) and collectivistic (China and Bangladesh) cultures?
Davis, Stankov, and Roberts’ (1998, p. 1013) study indicates the potential dark side of popularizing a construct before it is carefully conceptualized and operationalized and rigorous empirical studies are completed. Self-report measures of EQ (e.g., Bar-On, 1997; Boyatzis &
Goleman, 2001; Bernet, 1996; Cooper & Sawaf, 1997; Law, Wong, & Song, 2004; Mayer et al.,
2000; Schutte et al., 1998) and criterion variables may have resulted in common method variance. This occurs when data are collected from the same respondents, with the same measures, and at the same time. The EQ instruments developed by Law, Wong, and Song and by
Mayer, Caruso, and Salovey are psychometrically sound which are likely to be resistant to common method variance (cf. Spector, 1987). Another issue is that in organizational studies,

8 supervisors are often asked to assess their own managerial skills, but studies by Kruger and
Dunning (1999) and Shipper and Dillard (2000) reported that unsuccessful supervisors overestimate their skills compared to successful supervisors. Also three studies reported that under-estimators of their managerial skills are likely to be more effective than over-estimators
(Atwater & Yammarino, 1992; Church, 1997; Van Velsor, Taylor, & Leslie, 1993). As a result, if the supervisors are asked to self-assess their EQ, some of them will probably provide misleading information.
The objective of the present study was to investigate the relationships of two dimensions of social competencies of EQ—empathy and social skills—to transformational leadership in a cross-cultural context. An attempt was made to overcome some of the limitations of the existing self-report measures of EQ by using a new measure which involved asking observers (e.g., MBA students and their colleagues) to assess their supervisor's EQ and transformational leadership.
Cultural Differences Among the Five Countries
Since our study investigated the relationship between EQ and transformational leadership in five countries, it is appropriate to discuss cultural differences among these countries. Hofstede's study (1980) shows that the five countries differ greatly on the cultural dimension of individualism–collectivism . In individualistic cultures, individuals primarily look after their own and immediate family's interests (husband, wife, and children), but in collectivist cultures, individuals belong to one or more close groups created by birth and later events, from which they cannot separate themselves. "Overall, individualistic cultures (such as Australia and the United
States) value individual goals over group goals, individual concerns over group concerns, and individual rights and needs over collective responsibilities and obligations. Collectivistic cultures
(such as China, Japan, and Korea), in contrast, value group goals over individual goals, group

9 concerns over individual concerns, and collective needs over individual needs" (Ting-Toomey et al., 1991, p. 277). On the individualism–collectivism dimension, the United States is extremely individualistic among the 50 countries studied by Hofstede and Bond (1988). Greece and
Portugal are moderately individualistic countries and the remaining two countries are collectivistic nations. Given this cultural difference among these countries, a central issue is whether managers in these countries significantly differ on the relationships between emotional intelligence and transformational leadership.
Hofstede's other cultural dimensions are power distance (i.e., the extent to which the less powerful members of an organization believe and accept that power is unevenly distributed), uncertainty avoidance (i.e., the extent to which people avoid unclear or unpredictable situations), and masculinity (i.e., the extent to which there is sex role differentiation). The differences on these dimensions among the five countries were not very high.
Method
Sample and Procedure
Data for this study were collected from 685 dyads (MBA students and their colleagues) in the U.S. ( n = 128), Greece ( n = 86), Portugal ( n = 74), South Korea ( n = 263), and Bangladesh ( n
= 134). The EQ data were collected from MBA students and their colleagues in order to make the samples from the five countries as comparable as possible.
Average chronological age of the respondents in the five countries ranged between
27.31

35.19 ( SD = 4.75–10.19). Their average full-time work experience with the present supervisors ranged between 2.73–4.74 ( SD = 3.04–4.87) years. The percentage of male respondents in the five countries ranged between 68%–89%.

10
Measurement
Emotional Intelligence. The two dimensions of supervisory EQ were measured with 12 items adopted from the EQ Index (EQI) (Rahim et al., 2002). These items were designed to measure subordinates' perceptions of their respective supervisors' empathy and social skills. The
EQI was designed on the basis of repeated feedback from respondents and faculty and an iterative process of exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses of various sets of items.
Considerable attention was devoted to the study of published instruments on EQ. Initially an instrument was designed and filled out by MBA and undergraduate students ( N = 90). After the students completed the questionnaire, the instructor initiated an item-by-item discussion.
Critiques of the instrument were also received from four management professors. The items that were reported to be difficult, ambiguous, or inconsistent were either dropped or revised. A new item was added to compensate for the elimination of an item. Special attempts were made to make the items free from social desirability contamination. Four successive factor analyses were performed to select items for the EQI ( N s: organizational members = 65; employed management students = 365; Chamber of Commerce members = 220, MBA and employed management students = 423). After each factor analysis, the items that loaded less than .50 and/or loaded on an uninterpretable factor were dropped or rephrased. As a result of the above analysis, the EQI was developed that uses a 7–point Likert scale (7 = Strongly Agree . . . 1 = Strongly Disagree) for ranking each of the items and a higher score indicates a greater emotional intelligence of a supervisor. Sample items for the two dimensions are: “My supervisor understands the feelings transmitted through nonverbal messages,” “My supervisor understands the links between employees' emotions and what they do” (empathy) and “My supervisor confronts problems without demeaning those who work with him or her,” “My supervisor handles emotional

11 conflicts with tact and diplomacy” (social skills). The two subscales consisted of 6 items each.
Transformational Leadership.
This was measured with 12 items adapted from the
Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) (Bass, 1985). The respondents were asked to rank each item on a 7–point box scale (7 = Strongly Agree . . . 1 = Strongly Disagree). The scale was computed by averaging the responses to the items. A higher score indicates greater transformational leadership. Sample items for this scale are: "In my mind, he/she is a symbol of success and accomplishment," (charisma) “My supervisor doesn't let rules stand in the way of solutions,” (intellectual stimulation) “My supervisor gives me reasons to believe in what I can do" (individualized consideration).
Translation.
Bilingual professors from the four countries outside the U.S. translated the two instruments first. Suggestions on the translated version were requested from a group of bilingual experts who translated these scales back to English. The final version was developed after accommodating their feedback. As a result of this translation
 back translation, the scales achieved the kind of linguistic equivalence suggested by Bhagat and McQuid (1982).
Sample and Procedure
Data on EQ and transformational leadership were collected with the EQI and MLQ from triads in each of the five countries. Each triad consisted of an MBA student and two of colleagues who had the same supervisor. The data for each triad were averaged. It is expected that this procedure will overcome the problems of common method biases (i.e., variance due to the measurement method rather than the constructs the measures represent) voiced by Podsakoff,
Mackenzie, Lee, and Podsakoff (2003).

12
Analysis and Results
The first part of the analysis was designed to test the psychometric properties of the EQI and
MLQ. The second part of the analysis was designed to test the two study hypotheses.
Factor Analysis
EQI. Exploratory factor analysis (principal component analysis and varimax rotation) on the
EQI items supported the two independent dimensions of emotional intelligence. The internal consistency reliability coefficients of the two subscales of the EQI, as assessed with Cronbach

, ranged between .56 and .95 (see Table 1). These coefficients in Bangladesh were relatively lower than other countries.
Since the EQI is a new scale, we checked its test–retest reliability coefficients with an
American collegiate sample of 163 management students who had jobs, which were .87 and .91 for empathy and social skills, respectively. Items for the measurement of emotional intelligence may be susceptible to social desirability response bias. To check this, we computed correlations between the two subscales of EQI and Marlowe-Crown Social Desirability scale (Crown &
Marlowe, 1990) in an American collegiate sample of 76 management students. The correlations were .06 and .08 for empathy and social skills, respectively, which were nonsignificant. So we concluded that the data from observers for the two subscales were not associated with social desirability responding.
Table 1 presents the means, standard deviations, internal consistency reliability coefficients, and Pearson correlations between the subscales of EQI and MLQ.
______________________
Insert Table 1 about here
______________________

13
MLQ. We computed an exploratory factor analysis (principal component analysis and varimax rotation) on the 12 items of MLQ. Results confirmed a significant factor representing transformational leadership. The Cronbach
 s for this scale ranged between .63 and .95 in the five countries.
Regression Analyses
We computed five multiple regression analyses, one for each country. Each regression analysis was computed with the two subscales of the EQI as the independent variables and transformational leadership as the dependent variable. Table 2 shows the results.
______________________
Insert Table 2 about here
______________________
Empathy was positively associated with transformational leadership in all the five countries that provided full support to Hypothesis 1. Social skills was positively associated with transformational leadership in the U.S., Greece, South Korea, and Bangladesh, but not in
Portugal, which provided partial support to Hypothesis 2. Overall, we conclude that there are similarities in the relationships of empathy and social skills to transformational leadership between the individualistic and collectivistic cultures. The exception was the relationship between social skills and transformational leadership in Portugal where the triads did not perceive any association between their leaders’ social skills and transformational leadership. It is possible that a larger sample size would make this relationship significant.
Discussion
This was a preliminary attempt to investigate the relationship between emotional intelligence and transformational leadership in a cross-cultural context. The challenge was translating the measurement instruments in four languages and collecting data from 685 triads in

14 five countries.
Results provided some evidence of convergent and criterion validities and reliabilities of the measure of emotional intelligence and transformational leadership. Results indicated how subordinates' perceptions of leader EQ are associated with transformational leadership behaviors in the five countries. The results were somewhat consistent across the five countries that provided partial support to Spector et al.’s (2002) conclusions that the findings from field studies in the U.S. are generalizable across cultures.
Implications for Management
The implications of the study are that supervisors need to acquire and use their empathy and social skills competencies to enhance their own transformational leadership. Therefore, the challenge for a contemporary organization is to enhance the emotional intelligence of their managers. Appropriate interventions may be needed to enhance their social competencies that would involve education and specific job-related training (Cherniss & Adler, 2000; Goleman,
1998). Managers should also be encouraged to enhance their skills through continuous selflearning. Goleman (1998) suggests that they need emotional competence training which should
"focus on the competencies needed most for excellence in a given job or role" (p. 251)
Organizations should provide positive reinforcements for learning and improving managers' essential emotional competencies needed for specific jobs. Recent literature shows that learning organizations are providing ample opportunities to managers for continuous learning that should help to improve their EQ.
Education and training may be of limited value when it comes to improving supervisors' EQ.
Organizations may have to adapt the policy of recruiting managers with vision and charisma who are likely to be high on EQ. There should also be appropriate changes in the organization design

15 that would require creating flatter, decentralized, and less complex structures. Also there should be appropriate changes in organizational culture that provides rewards for learning new competence—empathy and social skills—and continuous questioning and inquiry. These changes in the organization design, culture, and positive reinforcements will encourage managers to acquire emotional competencies needed for improving their job performance and effectiveness.
Directions for Future Research
Further research is needed to enhance our understanding of the relationships of EQ to effectiveness of leader behaviors. Other criterion variables for future research include subordinates' learning and effectiveness, intent to leave a job, and organizational commitment.
An important area of future research concerns carefully designing and evaluating the effects of training in EQ in enhancing the aforementioned criterion variables. Field experiments are particularly useful in evaluating the effects of EQ training on individual and organizational outcomes. There is also need for scenario-based and laboratory studies that control some of the extraneous variables to better understand the effects of supervisors' EQ. Also it will be useful to investigate the differences in the perceptions of subordinates regarding the performance of transformational leaders with low and high EQ.
Strengths and Limitations
One of the strengths of this study is that the independent and dependent variables were collected from separate respondents, which will overcome the problem of common method variance. The presence of common method variance may inflate correlations between independent and criterion variables. Limitations of this field study should be noted. Data were collected from convenience samples that might limit generalizability of the results. The analysis

16 suffers from the small sample sizes for the individual countries, but the results seem to support a somewhat consistent cross-country analysis.
References
Atwater, L. E., & Yammarino, E. J. (1992). Does self
 other agreement on leadership perceptions moderate the validity of leadership and performance predictions? Personnel Psychology, 45,
141

164.
Bar-On, R. (1997). BarOn Emotional Quotient Inventory (EQ–i): Technical manual . Toronto:
Multi-Health System.
Bar-On, R., & Parker, J. D. A. (2000). (Eds.). The handbook of emotional intelligence: Theory, development, assessment, and application at home, school, and in the workplace . San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Bass, B. M. 1985. Leadership and performance beyond expectations.
New York: Free Press.
Bass, B. M. 2002. Cognitive, social, and emotional intelligence. In R. E. Riggio, S. E. Murphy,
& F. J. Pirozzolo (Eds.), Multiple intelligences and leadershi : (pp. 105–118). Mahwah, NJ:
Erlbaum.
Bass, B. M., & Avolino, B. J. 1993. Transformational leadership: A response to critiques. In M.
M. Chamers & R. Ayman (Eds.), Leadership theory and research (pp. 49–80). San Diego:
Academic Press.
Bernet, M. (1996, August) . Emotional intelligence: Components and correlates. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, Toronto.
Bhagat, R. S., & McQuid, S. J. (1982). Role of subjective culture in organizations: A review and directions for future research. Journal of Applied Psychology Monograph, 67, 653

685.
Boyatzis, R. E. 2001. How and why individuals are able to develop emotional intelligence. In C.

17
Cherniss & D. Goleman (Eds.), The emotionally intelligent workplace (pp. 234

253). San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Boyatzis, R. E., & Goleman, D. (2001). The Emotional Competence Inventory: University edition . Boston, MA: HayGroup.
Burns, J. M. 1978. Leadership.
New York: Harper & Row.
Carlessa, S. A. (1998). Assessing the discriminant validity of trsnsformational leader behaviour as measured by the MLQ. Journal of Occupational & Organizational Psychology, 71 , 353–
358.
Cherniss, C., & Adler, M. (2000). Promoting emotional intelligence in organizations: Making training in emotional intelligence effective.
Alexandria, VA: ASTD
Church, A. H. 1997. Managerial self-awareness in high-performing individuals in organizations.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 281

292.
Cooper, R. K., & Sawaf, A. 1997. Executive EQ: Emotional intelligence in leadership and organizations.
New York: Grosset/Putnam.
Crowne,D. P., & Marlowe, D. (1960). A new scale of social desirability independent of psychopathology. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 24, 349–354.
Davis, M., Stankov, L., & Roberts, R. D. (1998). Emotional intelligence: In search of an elusive construct. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 989–1015.
Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic
Books.
Gardner, H. (1999). Intelligence reframed. New York: Basic Books.
Goleman, D. (1998). Working with emotional intelligence. New York: Bantum Books.
Goleman, D. (2001). Emotional intelligence: Issues in paradigm building. In C. Cherniss & D.

18
Goleman (Eds.), The emotionally intelligent workplace (pp. 13

26). San Francisco: Jossey-
Bass.
Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R., & McKee, A. (2002). Primal leadership.
Boston: Harvard Business
School Press.
Hasselbin, F., Goldsmith, M., & Beckhard, R. (1996). The leader of the future.
San Francisco,
CA: Jossey-Bass.
Hedlund, J., & Sternberg, R. J. (2000). Too many intelligences? Integrating social, emotional, and practical intelligence. In R. Bar-On & J. D. A. Parker (Eds.), The handbook of emotional intelligence: Theory, development, assessment, and application at home, school, and in the workplace (pp. 136–167). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Hofstede, G. (1980).
Culture’s consequences: International differences in work-related values.
Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Hofstede, G., & Bond, M. H. (1988). The Confucious connection: From cultural roots to economic growth. Organizational Dynamics, 16 (4), 5–21.
Kruger, J., & Dunning, D. (1999). Unskilled and unaware of it: How difficulties in recognizing one's own incompetence lead to inflated self-assessments. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 77, 1121

1134.
Law, K. S., Wong, C. S., & Song, L. J. (2004). The construct and criterion validity of emotional intelligence and its potential utility for management studies. Journal of Applied Psychology,
89, 483–496.
Mayer, J. D., Caruso, D. R., & Salovey, P. (2000). Emotional intelligence meets traditional standards for an intelligence. Intelligence, 24, 267

298.

19
Megerian, L. E., & Sosik, J. J. (1996). An affair of the heart: Emotional intelligence and transformational leadership. Journal of Leadership Studies, 3, 31–48.
Morris, J. A., & Feldman, D. C. (1996). The dimensions, antecedents, and consequences of emotional labor. Academy of Management Review, 21, 986–1010.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879–903.
Rahim, M. A., Psenicka, C., Polychroniou, P., Zhao, J. H., Yu, C. S., Chan, K. A., Yee, K. W.,
Alves. M. G., Lee, C. W., Rahman, M. S., Ferdausy, S., & Wyk, R. V. (2002). A model of emotional intelligence and conflict management strategies: A study in seven countries.
International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 10, 302–326.
Salovey, P., & Mayer, J. D. (1990). Emotional intelligence. Imagination, Cognition and
Personality , 9, 85–211.
Salovey, P., & Mayer, J. D. (1994). Some final thoughts about personality and intelligence. In R.
J. Sternberg & P. Ruzgis (Eds.), Personality and intelligence (pp. 303–318). Cambridge,
UK: Cambridge University Press.
Schutte, N. S., Malouff, J. M., Hall, L. E., Haggerty, D. J., Cooper, J. T., Golden, C. J., &
Dornheim, L. (1998). Development and validation of a measure of emotional intelligence.
Personality and Individual Differences, 25, 167–177.
Shipper, F., & Dillard, J. E. (2000). A study of impending derailment and recovery of middle managers across career stages. Human Resource Management, 39 , 331

345.
Sosik, J. J., & Megerian, L. E. (1999). Understanding leader emotional intelligence and performance. Group & Organization Management, 24, 367–390.

20
Spector, P. E. (1987). Method variance as an artifact in self-reported affect and perceptions at work: Myth or significant problem. Journal of Applied Psychology, 61, 438

443.
Spector, P. E. et al. (2002). Locus of control and well-being at work: How generalizable are
Western findings? Academy of Management Journal, 45, 453

466.
Sternberg, R. J. (1985). The triarchic mind: A new theory of human intelligence. New York:
Viking.
Sternberg, R. J. (2002). Successful intelligence: A new approach to leadership. In R. E. Riggio,
S. E. Murphy, & F. J. Pirozzolo (Eds.), Multiple intelligenecs and leadership (pp. 9–28).
Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Tajeda, M. J. (2001). The MLQ revisited: Psychometric properties and recommendations.
Leadership Quarterly, 12, 31–52.
Thorndike, R. L. (1920). Intelligence and its uses. Harper's Magazine, 140, 227

235.
Ting-Toomey, S., Gao, G., Trubisky, P., Yang, Z., Kim, H. S., Lin, S.-L., & Nishida, T. (1991).
Culture, face maintenance, and conflict styles of handling interpersonal conflict: A study in five cultures. International Journal of Conflict Management, 2, 275–296.
Tsui, A. S. (1984). A role set analysis of managerial reputation. Organizational Behavior and
Human Performance, 34, 64–96.
Van Velson, E., Taylor, S., & Leslie, J. B. (1993). An examination of the relationships among self perception, accuracy, self-awareness, gender and leader effectiveness. Human Resource
Management, 32, 249

263.

Table 1
Descriptive Statistics, Correlations Between EQ and Transformational Leadership, and Cronbach
α s for Variables
Predictor variable U.S. Greece Portugal S. Korea Bangladesh
Empathy r
Cronbach
α
Mean
SD
Social skills r
Cronbach
α
Mean
SD
.94*** .65*** .90*** .77*** .72***
.88 .81 .92
4.00 3.13 3.46
1.68 .74 1.43
.86
3.28
.60
4.39
1.13 .62
.89*** .64*** .84*** .77*** .70***
.93 .84 .89
4.01 3.07 3.49
1.80 .77 1.40
Transformational leadership r
Cronbach
α
1.00 1.00 1.00
.92 .84 .95
Mean
SD
3.99 2.92 3.45
1.59 .57 1.32
.82 .56
3.26 4.48
1.12 .60
1.00 1.00
.91 .63
3.30 4.32
1.06 .48
Age (triad)
Mean
SD
Work experience with
present supervisor
27.31 32.48 34.11 35.19
8.67 6.38 10.19 8.52
(in years) (triad)
Mean 3.00 4.74 3.48
SD 4.56 3.04 3.40
N (triad) 52 86 74
2.75
5.87
263
33.05
4.75
2.73
3.72
134
** p < .01. *** p < .001. (two-tailed)
21

Table 2
Summary of Regression Analysis with the two EQI Subscales and Transformational Leadership in Each of the Five Countries
Predictor
variable
Empathy
R 2
Transformational leadership
All U.S Greece Portugal S. Korea Bangladesh
β
1
β
1
β
2
β
3
β
4
β
5
.50*** .58*** .37** .82*** .41***
Social skills .32** .16* .34* .09 .41***
N (triads) 685 128 86
.62*** .52*** .46*** .81*** .63***
74 263 134
.47***
.37***
.60***
* p < .05. ** p < .01. *** p < .001.
22

23
Dr. Rahim is the Founding Editor of the International Journal of Organizational Analysis and
International Journal of Conflict Management . He is the founder of the International Association for Conflict Management and International Conference on Advances in Management. He is a
Distinguished University Professor at Western Kentucky University. Dr. Rahim is the author/coauthor of 20 books and 170 articles, book chapters, case studies, and research instruments. His articles have been published, among others, in Academy of Management Journal, Human
Relations, International Journal of Conflict Management, International Journal of
Organizational Analysis, Journal of Applied Psychology, Journal of Business Ethics, Journal of
Health and Human Services Administration, Journal of Management, Journal of Small Business
Management, Journal of Social Psychology, Multivariate Behavioral Research, and Perceptual and Motor Skills.
His current research interests are in the areas of cross-cultural emotional and social intelligence and creativity, organizational learning and innovation, conflict management, and organizational justice (afzal.rahim@aol.com)

24
Clement Psenicka is Professor of Management at Youngstown State University where his teaching duties include Operations Management, Management Science, and Quality Control. He received his DBA from Kent State University. His research interest includes the analysis of organizational conflict, power, and emotional intelligence as well as applications in operations management and management sciences. (cpsenick@cc.ysu.edu)

25
Sae-Yoon Oh (Ph.D., Jeonnam National University, Korea) is Professor and Chair of the
Department of Public Administration, Honam University, South Korea. His teaching and research interests are in employees’ and regulatory compliance to public policies, public policy evaluation, government regulation, research methodology, and public marketing. He has published studies in Current Topics in Management and in Korean periodicals. He is serving as chair of the Regulatory Commission of Gwangju Metropolitan City and the Advisory Committee of Gwangsan District Office, Gwangju-City, Korea. (syoh@honam.ac.kr)

26
Panagiotis Polychroniou has received a Ph.D. from the Athens University of
Economics and Business. He is now working as Visiting Lecturer at University of
Ioannina. His research interests include organizational behavior, general management and human resources. He has special research interest in conflict management and emotional intelligence. (ppolychr@cc.uoi.gr).

27
João Ferreira Dias
(PhD., ISCTE School of Management) is presently an Asociate Pofessor of
Strategic Management at ISCTE. He is director of the MSc in Management offered jointly by
ISCTE (Portugal) and Fundação Getúlio Vargas (Brasil) and member of the board of the
Department of Management. He is also research coordinator at ADETTI where he works in management simulators, system dynamics and strategic learning. fdias@iscte.pt)

28
Md. Sahidur Rahman is an Assistant Professor of Management at the University of Chittagong,
Bangladesh. His research interests are in the areas of cross-cultural organizational justice, emotional intelligence, knowledge management, and consumerism in Bangladesh. His publications have appeared in the International Journal of Conflict Management, International Journal of Organizational Analysis,
South Asian Journal of Management, Journal of Business Administration, and Journal of the Institute of
Bangladesh Studies . ( sahidur_cu@yahoo.com
)

29
Shameema Ferdausy is an Assistant Professor of Management at the University of Chittagong,
Bangladesh. Her research interests are in the areas of emotional intelligence, knowledge
Management, leasing, and consumerism in Bangladesh. Her publications have appeared in the
International Journal of Organizational Analysis , South Asian Journal of Management, Journal of Business Administration, and Journal of the Institute of Bangladesh Studies .
(s_ferdausy@yahoo.com)