fyp-research on emotional intelligence in managerial decision making

POOJA jasani

Introduction

What is ‘Emotional Intelligence’ (EI) ?

What is ‘Decision Making’ ?

Where & Between Whom ‘Decision Making’ Takes Place ?

HOME OFFICE BETWEENCOUPLES

AMONGFAMILY MEMBERS

Emotional Intelligence +

Decision Making Knowing that EI is tied to being a successful manager, skills of these managers are as such:

Flexibility- creates a well balanced working environment

Ability to manage conflicts- able to handle stressful situations

Persuasive nature- able to persuade and get the message through

Sociability-able to interact with fellow colleagues

This skills become increasingly important with advancing level in the managerial hierarchy .

EI is an important skill to be acquired by managers for all managerial activities in right decision making forever evolving organization environment and uncertainty in tasks in a job scope.

Research Question(s)

Hypothesis

Methodology

Results : T - Test

Gender and emotional intelligence There was significant difference in the scores

for:

Females(M=229.52, SD=20.86)

Males (M=235.99,SD=23.69)

on emotional intelligence:

t(216)=-2.13, p=.03, d=0.29 ,95%CI (-12.46,-.48)

Gender and decision making There was no significant difference in the scores

for:

Females(M=158.37,SD=22.98)

Males (M=155.15,SD=18.28)

on decision making style:

t(216)=1.14, p=.26, d=0.16, 95%CI (-2.35, 8.79)

Results : T - Test

Male and female have different level of emotional intelligence. Significant difference was found in the score. Thus, this confirms the hypothesis. The study by Chu (2002) revealed that males have high level of emotional intelligence than

that of females.

The probable reason for the present finding might be due to the fact that emotional intelligence primarily deals with managing and expressing once emotions as well as social skills.

Results : T - Test

Male and female have different level of decision making style. No significant difference was found. Therefore, hypothesis #2 is rejected. Chu (2002) showed men and women both carefully process information , they retrieve the

relevant decision-related data from their memories. They then categorize the data if it is very diverse, think logically about the alternatives, predict results, evaluate the consequences, solve the problems posed by the situation, and monitor all decision stages.

To some extent, the equivalence in these intellectual aspects in the sample study shows that gender differences are closer to behavioral styles and to the demands of men and women’s social roles than to the intellectual competences and capacities.

Results : Anova

Four age groups with Emotional Intelligence:

There was no significant difference found on the 4 age groups:

21-30 (M=232.90,SD=26.67)

31-40 (M=232.60,SD=21.54)

41-50 (M=230.69,SD=19.13)

51-60 (M=238.00,SD=28.07)

with emotional intelligence:

F(3, 212) =.53 , p= .66

Four age groups with Decision Making style

There was no significant difference found on the 4 age groups:

21-30 (M=157.80,SD=18.32)

31-40 (M=155.60,SD=20.98)

41-50 (M=159.01,SD=22.42)

51-60 (M=148.38,SD=18.11)

with decision making style:

F(3, 212)=1.29 , p=.28

Results : ANOVA

Hypothesis 3 stated that there were no differences in emotional intelligence in the four age groups. The results showed that there was no significant difference found in emotional intelligence and the four groups and hereby the hypothesis is accepted. Rooy et al (2004) stated that no existing studies have provided this information and

although the results may not have direct relevance to applied industrial-organizational psychologists’, such interactions have important implications for psychologists’ investigating aging and developmental processes.

Results : ANOVA

The four age groups have different decision making styles. Based on the data analysis, no significant difference was found and hereby this hypothesis is also rejected. The study done by Sporten et al (2010) showed that older adults are less willing to take

risks than young adults in certain area of decision making such as financial issues and ambiguity behaviour changes with age.

Results : Pearson’s Correlation

Emotional Intelligence and Decision Making style: - EI and Rational decision making style

There was no significant correlation between variables, Total of emotional intelligence with rational decision making style;

r(216)= .04 , p=.61

EI and Intuitive decision making style There was no significant correlation between variables, Total of emotional intelligence with

intuitive decision making style:

r(216)=.12, p=.08


EI and Dependent decision making style There was no significant, negative correlation between variables, Total of emotional

intelligence with dependent decision making style;

r(216)=-.06, p=.37

EI and Avoidant decision making style There was no significant, negative correlation between variables, Total of emotional

intelligence with avoidant decision making style;

r(216)=-.05, p=.49


EI and Spontaneous decision making style There was no significant, negative correlation between variables, Total of emotional

intelligence with spontaneous decision making style;

r(216)=-.001, p=.99


The hypothesis states that, there is a relationship between emotional intelligence and decision making styles. However, based on the results, no significant difference was found between emotional intelligence and decision making style. Thus, this rejects the hypothesis. Five aspects of decision making style

Rational Decision Making Style

Intuitive Decision Making Style

Dependent Decision Making style

Avoidant Decision Making Style

Spontaneous Decision Making Style

Limitation(s)

Recommendation(s)

Further Research:

Larger scale

Manager in specific companies

Same level of managerial position

Between 2 companies for comparative studies

Be specific on a particular age group

Conclusion(s)

Emotionally intelligent manager make better decisions, improve judgments and visualize facts clearly even when feelings or emotions are overpowering them.

Balancing their thought and their feeling as they have to make decision without allowing strong emotions to blind them is a skill that all managers should have.

Within males and females gender for EI, there were significant difference. It showed males could handle emotions better than females because emotional intelligence score was higher for males than females.

Conclusion(s)

As for decision making style, the research did not show any significant difference between gender.

Where else, across several age group researched in this paper neither EI or decision making styles showed significant difference .

Finally this research promptly indicates, the most used decision making style by managers use intuitive style and this reflect that human refers to history and improve the current situation based on experience.

Reference(s)

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd edition).Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Diggins, Cliona, 2004. Emotional intelligence: The key to effective performance. Human Resource Manage., 12(1): 33-35.

Downey, L.A., V. Papageorgiou and Stough, 2006. Examining the relationship between leadership, emotional intelligence and intuition in senior female managers. Leadership and Organization Development J., 27(4): 255-258.

Goleman,D.(1998).Working with emotional intelligence.New York:Bantam Book .

Patton, John, R., 2003. Intuition in Decisions. J. Management Decision, 41(10): 989-996.

Reference(s)

Scott, S. G., & Bruce, R. A. (1995). Decision-making style: The development and assessment of a new measure. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 55, 818–831.

Spicer, David P. and Sadler-Smith, Eugene. 2005. An examination of the general decision making style. J. 23. or Managerial Psychol., 20(2): 137-149.

Tatum, Charles B., Eberlin, Richard, Kottraba, Crin, Bradberry and Travis, 2003. Leadership, Decision Making and Organization Justice. J. Management Decision, 41(10): 1006-1016.

Tischler, Len, Biberman, Jerry and Mckeage, Robert, 2002. Linking emotional intelligence, spirituality and workplace performance. J. Managerial Psychol., 17(3): 203-218.