The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

www.emeraldinsight.com/0262-1711.htm

Intelligence and its impact on Managerial

effectiveness
managerial effectiveness and and career
success
career success (evidence from
insurance sector of Pakistan) 505
Received 16 October 2015
Usman Aslam, Muhammad Ilyas, Muhammad Kashif Imran and Revised 16 October 2015
Ubaid Ur Rahman Accepted 17 February 2016

Department of Business Administration, Superior University of Pakistan,

Lahore, Pakistan

Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to investigate the theoretical linear model on intelligence,
i.e. emotional, social, cognitive, and cultural intelligence and its impact on managerial effectiveness and
career success in the perspective of insurance sector of Pakistan.
Design/methodology/approach – Data collected from 202 managers of insurance companies
by using structured questionnaires’ and simple random sampling technique. Multiple regression
analysis has used to check the simultaneous effect of multiple types of intelligence on managerial
job outcomes.
Findings – The results of research revealed that emotional, social, and cognitive intelligence have
positive effect on managerial effectiveness and career success. Emotional intelligence is one of the
strongest predictor that has significant impact of managerial effectiveness compared to other types of
intelligence. Conversely, cultural intelligence has insignificant relation with managerial effectiveness
and career success. There are very rare studies conducted to explore the role of multiple types of
intelligence to improve managerial job outcomes in the context of insurance sector. This study proved
that the transformation of business from production era to relationship-based era increases the
importance of multiple types of intelligence to become an effective manager.
Research limitations/implications – Moreover, this study contributes in theoretical literature and
explores new dimensions for future researchers, practitioners’, and management consultants to recognize
the effectiveness of intelligence especially in services sector organizations. Data collected from one sector
and by using one point of time raised the issue of common method variance and causality.
Originality/value – This study has examined the overarching model on intelligence. Researchers did
not find a single study that has addressed the multiple types of intelligence and its impact on
managerial outcomes in the perspective of insurance sector.
Keywords Intelligence, Competencies skills, Insurance sector, Manager’s career success,
Managerial effectiveness
Paper type Research paper

Introduction
Today business world is more dynamic and growing in uncertain business environment,
working with fewer rules and regulations, more technology oriented, selling
products and services in virtual markets that increase the importance of managerial
effectiveness. The transformation of business from production era to relationship-
based era increases the importance of multiple types of intelligence to become
Journal of Management
effective manager. To become effective professional, leader or manager, an Development
individual need to effective use of knowledge to make certain things occur and Vol. 35 No. 4, 2016
pp. 505-516
this process required certain set of skills that are called competencies (Boyatzis © Emerald Group Publishing Limited
0262-1711
et al., 2008). DOI 10.1108/JMD-10-2015-0153
JMD Now-a-days leading organizations are arranging sessions for their employees to
35,4 evaluate the pre and post training effect of intelligence on their employee’s
effectiveness. Emotional intelligence is skill to understand, recognize, and effectively
use one’s own emotions to increase the effectiveness on workplace. On the other hand,
social intelligence is the skill to understand, recognize, and effectively use others
emotions to achieve common objective. These competencies skills help the managers to
506 communicate smart goals, construct problem solving attitude, delegating, supporting,
and increase the coordination among team players. Furthermore, emotional and social
intelligence (ESI) are the competencies to deal with environmental challenges and lead
to success whether it is personal or professional.
Psychotherapists, educators, psychologists, medical, and management practitioners
are focussing on intrapersonal, interpersonal, and cultural intelligence that have
significant impact on effectiveness, success, and failure of individuals’. Thorndike (1920)
has investigated and found that best productive machine of factory failed because
technical manager has lack of social intelligence. Moreover, Claudio Fernández-Aráoz
(2007) investigated that newly recruited managers based on drive, intellectual, and self-
discipline fired later on due to lack of social and cultural intelligence. Also, Goleman and
Boyatzis (2008) studied the case of Fortune 500 and found that Janice a marketing
manager that was hired on the bases of outstanding record, strategic thinker, good
reputation to achieve tough goals, however failed within six months because of her
aggressive behavior, opinionated, and careless about others. On the other hand, there are
several organizations (i.e. US Air Force, L’Oreal, Egon Zehnder International, Tandem
Computers, Met Life, and American Express) that conducted trainings on the awareness
of emotional, social, and culture intelligence and found positive influence on the
performance of their employees.
In the perspective of Pakistan, there are several organizations (i.e. Pakistan Airline,
steel mills, and railway) that are earning abnormal loss due to mismanagement of
resources as well as political base recruitments of top management. In addition, KASB
and PICIC banks merged into other banks because their management was not capable
to get the desired results. Therefore understanding of cultural element is utmost
important for manager to remain effective in global uncertain business environment
and diversified business market. To get better understanding on culture, it is important
to understand the others behaviors, values that increase the focus on social intelligence.
Moreover, the managers that have optimal mix of intelligence, i.e. emotional, social,
and cultural are successful than others. Likewise, researchers found that emotional
and social intelligent employees performed better in workplace compared to others
(Emmerling et al., 2012; Rahim, 2014).
Crowne (2009) has found no study that explored linkage among emotional, social,
and cultural intelligence with managers job outcomes. Most of the studies are
conducted to investigate empirical linkage in emotional intelligence and leadership
outcomes (Boyatzis et al., 2012, 2013). Therefore, to address the gap and contribute in
literature, this study is conducted to examine the relationship of intelligence with
managerial effectiveness and career success. The results of this study will be beneficial
for the top management of insurance sector to recognize the importance of intelligence
and its role to improve the managerial outcomes. Also, the results of this study will be
beneficial for researchers and practitioners to insight the new dimensions. This study
has aim to investigate empirically the linear model on intelligence, i.e. emotional, social,
cognitive, and cultural intelligence and its impact on managerial effectiveness and
career success in the perspective of insurance sector of Pakistan.
Literature review Managerial
The skills to understand, recognize, and effectively use one’s own emotions at work, build effectiveness
up strong relationship, communicate and interact effectively with others, understand the
behavior, norms, and values are the set of intelligences that required to work effectively for
and career
managers in dynamic organizations (Boyatzis, 1982; Earley and Ang, 2003; Morand, 2001). success
Richard E. Boyatzis (1982) defined the competent manager that has certain set of skills to
perform effectively. Boyatzis et al. (2008) differentiate among cognitive, emotional, and 507
social intelligence. Cognitive means the systems thinking, while emotional means the
intrapersonal ability, i.e. adaptability, whereas social intelligence means the networking.
Furthermore, they argued that these capabilities (i.e. competencies, motivational forces, and
knowledge) can facilitate managers to overcome the business challenges and accomplish
tough goals in team setting.
Thorndike (1920) introduced the concept of social intelligence, while emotional
intelligence introduced by (Salovey and Mayer, 1990) researchers. Goleman et al. (2007)
introduced four dimensions of ESI, i.e. self-awareness, self-management, social
awareness, relationship management. Furthermore, Richard E. Boyatzis (1982) has
made comparision between ESI, emotional intelligence can be described as ability to
understand, recognize, and effectively use one’s own emotions. Whereas social
competencies is the ability to understand, recognize, and effectively use others
emotions at work to perform like effective manager. Earley and Ang (2003) introduced
the concept of cultural intelligence that means the understanding of values, attitudes,
beliefs, and verbal communication of people to work effectively.
Recently, role of social and emotional intelligence is emerging topic for
management, psychological, and educational consultants in the perspective of
performance, career success, and development (Wong and Law, 2002). Self-awareness
and awareness about others are set the foundation for ESI that are prerequisites to
achieve success. Also, researchers have found that ESI have significant impact on
psychological growth, individual, and organizational success (Goleman, 2006;
Goleman and Boyatzis, 2008). Emotional intelligence create a sense of proactive
thinking distinguish between competent manager and ordinary manager (Caruso
and Salovey, 2004; Goleman, 1998). Therefore, emotionally intelligent managers are
more responsive to critical situations of dynamic business environment. Boyatzis
et al. (2009) have highlighted that effective managers focussed on planning and
initiatives’. Conversely, there are several studies that found no linkage between
emotional intelligence and supervisor rating for job performance (Sosik and
Megerian, 1999; Zeidner et al., 2004), and with educational performance (Petrides et al.,
2004). Crowne (2009) has found no study that explored linkage among emotional,
social, and cultural intelligence with managers job outcomes. On the bases of above
curiosity of literature following hypotheses have constructed:
H1a. Emotional intelligence can improve managerial effectiveness in organizations.
H1b. Emotional intelligence can influence positive on manager’s career success.
ESI are the two-thirds of skills that can increase the effectiveness and performance of
managers at workplace (Cherniss, 2000). Dulewicz and Higgs (2000) have argued that
effective use of ESI can increase the career success of general managers. Furthermore,
they argued that the higher competencies skills can increase the chances of career
advancement. Many organizations recognize the importance of ESI, employees are using
these competencies of skills to get desired outcomes at workplace (Fox and Spector, 2000).
Seal et al. (2006) argued that a person can recognize and manage his/her own emotions
JMD and other’s emotions to work effectively at workplace. Boyatzis et al. (2009) have
35,4 found that the effective executives focussing on persuasiveness, oral communication,
networking, self-confidence than the ordinary executives:
H2a. Social intelligence can increase managerial effectiveness in organizations.
H2b. Social intelligence can impact positive on manager’s career success.
508 Cognitive intelligence is psychological ability to construct theory-building and sense
making, learning by experience, problem solving attitude, information gathering and
analysis, and use of technology effectively (Boyatzis et al., 2002). Cote and Miners (2006)
found that cognitive and emotional intelligence influenced on job performance because
both concepts are covered under the umbrella of intelligence. Previous literature explored
that cognitive intelligence linked positively with task performance and organizational
citizenship behavior (Borman and Motowidlo, 1997; Chan and Schmitt, 2002; Schmidt and
Hunter, 1998). Furthermore, other studies found that cognitive intelligence can increase
the task performance on the bases of procedures, rules, and knowledge of reality that are
the technical core for any job (Borman and Motowidlo, 1997):
H3a. Cognitive intelligence can increase managerial effectiveness in organizations.
H3b. Cognitive intelligence can impact positive on manager’s career success.
Cultural intelligence has gotten the importance because of diverse workforce and
interacting with the individuals who have different educations, background, values,
norms, traditions, and languages (Ang et al., 2007). Cultural intelligence is important to
understand the environment of their employees and customers and make strategies to
work effectively in groups and teams. Brislin et al. (2006) described that effective
managers that have high cultural intelligence can adjust quickly in new changing
environment with minimum stress, and socialize easily in new culture. Crowne (2009)
has highlighted the importance of emotional, social, and cultural intelligence,
organizations can better utilize these competencies for their managers and employees
to improve the employees and organizational performance (Figure 1):
H4a. Cultural intelligence can improve managerial effectiveness in organizations.
H4b. Cultural intelligence can influence positive on manager’s career success in
organizations.

Emotional H1a
Intelligence
H1b
Managerial
H2a Effectiveness
Social
Intelligence
H2b

H3a
Cognitive
Intelligence
H3b

H4a Manager’s Career

Success
Cultural
Intelligence H4b
Figure 1.
Research model Note: Theoretical Framework of Intelligence and its impact on
managerial effectiveness and career success
Method Managerial
This study has attempted to investigate the explanatory effect of intelligence on effectiveness
managerial work performance and career success. This study has emphasized to
examine the cause and effect among proposed hypotheses by using quantitative
and career
approach (Burns and Grove, 1993; Robson, 2002). Furthermore, this study has followed success
positivistic approach by using deductive reasoning to construct the multiple hypotheses
based on existing conceptual studies and then design the research strategy to test the 509
proposed hypotheses. Data have collected at once because cross section study has several
benefits, i.e. inexpensive, quick, collected data from large sample (Mann, 2003).

Sample
This study has selected insurance companies in Faisalabad region, i.e. State life, EFU,
Jubilee, Adam jee. Total numbers of employees at managerial positions in Faisalabad
region (including Jhang, Toba, Chinot, Shorkot city, Pir Mahal) are 1,133 that are working
on different positions in insurance sector, i.e. general managers, assistant general
managers, managers, and area managers. Sample size of this study has calculated 300 by
using online calculator and that sample size in line with previous study (Carmeli, 2003), and
minimum acceptable standard of Hair (2010). Sampling frame of these insurance companies
is known therefore data collected from insurance sector by using simple random sampling
technique. Thompson (2012) has highlighted the importance of simple random sampling, in
simple random sampling all units of the population have equal opportunity therefore fair
representation of sample can increase the validity of results.

Measures
Different scales have adopted and that scales found valid and reliable in many studies
around the world. ESI scale has adopted from previous study (Bar-On et al., 2003).
This scale has four sub scales, i.e. intrapersonal, interpersonal, stress management,
adaptability, and general mood. Furthermore, exploratory factory analysis has
conducted on initial 50 responses to examine the construct validity of this scale
(Büyüköztürk, 2007; Churchill, 1979; Tavşancıl, 2002). Out of 15 items, 7 items of
emotional and social intelligence are retained on it factor. Cognitive intelligence scales
is adopted from (Wechsler, 2008) and then adapted to full fill the objective of this study.
Cultural intelligence scale has adopted from well know study (Ang et al., 2007). This
scale has also four sub scales, i.e. meta-cognitive, cognitive, motivational, and
behavioral. Cultural intelligence originally included 20 items, however 11 items have
loaded on factor. Career success scale has adopted (Turban and Dougherty, 1994) and
that scale used in hundreds studies. All items of this scale are loaded significantly on its
factor. Furthermore, managerial effectiveness scale has adopted from earlier study
(Gupta, 1996), and then exploratory factor analysis have summarized and extracted
eight items on its original factor.

Data analysis techniques

There are multiple statistical tests conducted to draw the explanatory results of this
study. First, exploratory factor analysis is performed to examine the construct validity of
these scales. Second, reliability analysis is conducted to examine the internal consistency
of these scales. Third, descriptive analysis is used to extract mean, standard deviation,
and correlation for this study. Fourth, multiple regression analysis is conducted to
investigate the cause and effect among proposed hypotheses of this study.
JMD Procedure
35,4 This study has conducted in Faisalabad region zones, i.e. Jhang, Toba, Jarnawala,
Chionot, Pir Mahal. Structured questionnaires have distributed in the managers of
insurance sector. About 300 questionnaires distributed by hand as well as mail to get
maximum response in short period. Out of 300 questionnaires, 218 are received.
Of these, 16 questionnaires are discarded because that have more than 10 percent
510 missing values (Hair, 2010). In all, 202 questionnaires are valid for data analysis and
resulting response rate is 67 percent for this study.

Results
The leading important feature of randomly selected sample is 84.7 percent males and
15.3 percent females that show the male dominance in insurance sector. Main
respondents of this study are managers’, i.e. 110 area managers, 74 managers/sector
heads, 15 assistant general manager, and three general managers. Furthermore, 119
managers have experience in the range of six-ten years while 39 managers have about
five-year experience. Most of the respondents 119 have masters’ degree and remaining
other employees are bachelor and MS/Mphil degree holders (Table I).

Descriptive facts Frequency Frequency (%)

Gender
Male 171 84.7
Female 31 15.3
202 100
Designation
Area managers 110 54.5
Managers/sector head 74 36.6
Assistant general manager 15 7.4
General manager 3 1.5
202 100
Experience (years)
1-5 39 19.3
6-10 119 58.9
11-15 25 12.4
16-20 19 9.4
Age (years)
20-30 130 64.4
31-40 50 24.8
41-50 14 6.9
51-60 8 4
202 100
Educational level
Bachelor 43 21.3
Table I. Masters 142 70.3
The main MS/Mphil 17 8.4
characteristics Total 202 100
of the sample Note: n ¼ 202
Reliability analysis has performed to find out the Cronbach’s α values for these adopted Managerial
scales. All the α values have ranged between 0.741 and 0.818 that ensure the acceptable effectiveness
standards (George and Mallery, 2003; Hair et al., 2006) of internal consistency for these
scales. In Table II, all the values are reported that are above the acceptable standards
and career
(e.g. 0.70). success
Table III highlighted mean, standard deviation, and correlations values to describe
the general tendency and relationship of intelligence with career success and 511
managerial effectiveness. The averages have reflected that all the responses are ranged
from neutral to agree. Furthermore, intelligence, i.e. emotional, social, and cultural
has found medium relationship with career success and managerial effectiveness.
However, emotional and cultural intelligence have associated strongly with managerial
effectiveness compared to career success (Table IV).

Variables description Total items α

Emotional intelligence 04 0.779

Social intelligence 03 0.774
Cognitive intelligence 09 0.756
Cultural intelligence 11 0.741
Career success 04 0.796
Managerial effectiveness’ 08 0.818
Total 39 0.889 Table II.
Notes: George and Mallery (2003) highlighted the ranges of reliability, e.g., ⩾0.9 excellent, ⩾0.8 good, Reliability coefficient
⩾0.7 acceptable, ⩾0.6 questionable, ⩾0.5 poor, o0.5 unacceptable (Cronbach α)

Variables description Mean SD 1 2 3 4 5 6

(1) Emotional intelligence 3.21 1.06

(2) Social intelligence 3.19 1.12 0.353**
(3) Cognitive intelligence 2.34 0.699 0.264** 0.075
(4) Cultural intelligence 2.69 0.613 0.379** 0.139* 0.158*
(5) Career success 3.31 1.03 0.398** 0.322** 0.274** 0.181*
(6) Managerial effectiveness’ 3.21 0.908 0.742** 0.460** 0.320** 0.339** 0.753** 1 Table III.
Notes: According to Cohen et al. (2013), weak relationship range is 0.10-0.29, medium range is Descriptive statistics
0.30-0.49, and strong rang is 0.50-1. **Significant at 0.01 level (two-tailed) results

Managerial effectiveness’
R2 F-value Std β t-value p-value

0.615 78.755
Emotional intelligence 0.604 11.66 0.000 Table IV.
Social intelligence 0.229 4.85 0.000 Multiple regression
Cognitive intelligence 0.134 2.92 0.004 analysis (intelligence
Cultural intelligence 0.057 1.19 0.234 and managerial
Notes: Hypothesis of cultural intelligence rejected because of insignificant β- and p-values. p o0.05 effectiveness’)
JMD Multiple regressions have used to investigate the simultaneous effect of emotional,
35,4 social, and cultural intelligence on managerial effectiveness. The R2 value is reflecting
that emotional, social, cognitive, and cultural intelligence produce 61.5 percent
variations in managerial effectiveness. Emotional intelligence has explored strong
positive connection with managerial effectiveness ( β ¼ 0.604, t ¼ 11.66, p o 0.001).
Also, social intelligence has associated positively with managerial effectiveness
512 ( β ¼ 0.229, t ¼ 4.85, p o 0.001). Whereas cognitive intelligence found weak but positive
relation with managerial effectiveness ( β ¼ 0.134, t ¼ 2.92, p o 0.01). However, cultural
intelligence has not any significant relationship with managerial effectiveness
( β ¼ 0.134, t ¼ 2.281, p W 0.05) (Table V).
Multiple regressions have used to examine the simultaneous impact of emotional,
social, and cultural intelligence on career success. The R2 value is showing that
emotional, social, cognitive, and cultural intelligence creates 22.9 percent variations in
career success. Emotional intelligence has found positive relation with career success
( β ¼ 0.267, t ¼ 3.647, p o 0.001). Also, social intelligence has associated positively with
career success ( β ¼ 0.211, t ¼ 3.162, p o 0.01). Whereas cognitive intelligence found
weak but positive relation with managerial effectiveness ( β ¼ 0.184, t ¼ 2.825, p o 0.01).
However, cultural intelligence has examined insignificant linkage with career success
( β ¼ −0.021, t ¼ 0.758, p W 0.5).
In Table VI, all the results of hypotheses have illustrated the supported/rejected
relationship of intelligence with managerial effectiveness and career success (Figure 2).

Career success
R2 F-value Std β t-value p-value

0.229 14.608
Emotional intelligence 0.267 3.647 0.000
Table V. Social intelligence 0.211 3.162 0.002
Multiple regression Cognitive intelligence 0.184 2.825 0.005
analysis (intelligence Cultural intelligence 0.021 0.309 0.758
and career success) Notes: Hypothesis of cultural intelligence rejected because of insignificant β- and p-values. p o0.05

Hypotheses Description Support for p o0.05

H1a Emotional intelligence can improve managerial effectiveness Supported

H1b Emotional intelligence can influence positive on manager’s Supported
career success
H2a Social intelligence can increase managerial effectiveness in Supported
organizations
H2b Social intelligence can impact positive on manager’s career success Supported
H3a Cognitive intelligence can increase managerial effectiveness Supported
H3b Cognitive intelligence can impact positive on manager’s Supported
career success
H4a Cultural intelligence can improve managerial effectiveness in Rejected
Table VI. organizations
Summary of H4b Cultural intelligence can influence positive on manager’s Rejected
hypotheses career success
 Emotional
0.604** Managerial
Intelligence
0.267** effectiveness
Managerial
0.229** Effectiveness and career
Social
Intelligence 0.211*
success
0.134*
Cognitive
Intelligence 0.184*
513
0.057 Manager’s Career
Cultural Success
Intelligence 0.021 Figure 2.
Revised research
Notes: Hypotheses are accepted / rejected on the bases of its Std. model
-value. *p0.05; **p0.01

Discussion
This study is conducted to explore the relationship of intelligence, i.e. emotional, social, and
cultural intelligence with managerial effectiveness and career success. Likert scales have
adopted and adapted to accomplish the objectives. Exploratory factory analysis is applied
to examine the construct validity of questionnaire on initial 50 responses. Only those items
have retained that have loading above 0.4 as well as loaded on its original factor.
Pearson correlation test has used to explore the relationship of intelligence with
managerial effectiveness and career success. Correlation results revealed that
emotional intelligence has positively associated with managerial effectiveness and
career success. Furthermore, social and cultural intelligence have also positive relation
with managerial effectiveness and career success. However, the strength of relationship
is more in the relation of emotional intelligence with managerial effectiveness.
Multiple regressions have used to investigate the simultaneous impact of emotional,
social, cognitive, and cultural intelligence on managerial effectiveness (H1a-H4a).
Emotional (H1a) is strongest predictor of managerial effectiveness as compare social
and cognitive intelligence (H2a, H3a). However, cultural intelligence has no impact on
managerial effectiveness as per this study results (H4a). This study has provided the
empirical evidence that emotionally intelligent managers are more responsive to critical
situations of dynamic business environment. Emotional intelligence create a sense of
proactive thinking that distinguish one effective manager to ordinary manager (Caruso
and Salovey, 2004; Goleman, 1998).
Also, ESI (H1b, H2b) are positively associated with career success. While cognitive
intelligence has positive impact on managers’ career success (H3b). Conversely, cultural
intelligence has no impact on managers’ career success as per this study results (H4b).
Previous studies also provided the conceptual positive linkage among emotional, social,
and cognitive intelligence with individual and organizational success (Goleman, 2006;
Goleman and Boyatzis, 2008). Therefore it is proved empirically that organizations
recognize the importance of ESI, employees are using these competencies of skills to get
desired job outcomes at workplace (Fox and Spector, 2000). Cultural intelligence can
predict a managerial outcome where workforce diversity exist.

Conclusion
Organizations are facing dynamic business environment, i.e. merger, global recession,
acquisition, deregulations, technological breakthrough therefore key decision makers
should have more awareness to remain alive in global uncertain business environment.
JMD The study results revealed that intelligence, i.e. emotional, social, cognitive have
35,4 significant impact on managerial effectiveness and career success.
This study is piece of thought for organizations to highlight the importance of
intelligence for their key players especially in services sector. These competencies
skills, i.e. emotional, social, and cognitive intelligence are helpful for managers to
communicate smart goals, construct problem solving attitude, delegating, supporting
514 to fulfill objectives and goals on time.

Implications
This study is a significant contribution in the theory of intelligence, i.e. emotional,
social, and cultural intelligence and its impact on managerial job outcomes. There is no
study found that evaluate the several types of intelligence simultaneously and its
impact on managerial effectiveness and success. Most of the studies are conducted to
explore the empirical linkage between emotional intelligence and leadership outcomes
(Boyatzis et al., 2012, 2013).
Organizations that are continuously interacting with their customers should have
workforce that are intelligent and more effective in this uncertain business
environment. Therefore, this study is piece of thought for organizations and its top
management to recognize the importance of these competencies and to develop their
human capital to gain competitive edge.

Limitations and future direction

First, this study did not representative of whole population insurance sector because it
focussed only on one main city of the province. Therefore, in future representation of
whole population may be more suitable to increase the generalizability of results.
Second, it is more suitable to conduct study in more than one sector and in different
time interval to overcome the common method variance.
Third, this study collected data once therefore issue of causality can also influence
on the author’s claim of cause and effect relationship or generalizability of results.
Therefore longitudinal approach will suitable in future.

References
Ang, S., Van Dyne, L., Koh, C., Ng, K.Y., Templer, K.J., Tay, C. and Chandrasekar, N.A. (2007),
“Cultural intelligence: its measurement and effects on cultural judgment and decision
making, cultural adaptation and task performance”, Management and Organization
Review, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 335-371.
Bar-On, R., Tranel, D., Denburg, N.L. and Bechara, A. (2003), “Exploring the neurological
substrate of emotional and social intelligence”, Brain, Vol. 126 No. 8, pp. 1790-1800.
Borman, W.C. and Motowidlo, S.J. (1997), “Task performance and contextual performance: the
meaning for personnel selection research”, Human Performance, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 99-109.
Boyatzis, R., Boyatzis, R.E. and Ratti, F. (2009), “Emotional, social and cognitive intelligence
competencies distinguishing effective Italian managers and leaders in a private company
and cooperatives”, Journal of Management Development, Vol. 28 No. 9, pp. 821-838.
Boyatzis, R., Boyatzis, R.E. and Saatcioglu, A. (2008), “A 20-year view of trying to develop
emotional, social and cognitive intelligence competencies in graduate management
education”, Journal of Management Development, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 92-108.
Boyatzis, R.E. (1982), The Competent Manager: A Model for Effective Performance, Wiley,
New York, NY.
Boyatzis, R.E., Good, D. and Massa, R. (2012), “Emotional, social, and cognitive intelligence and Managerial
personality as predictors of sales leadership performance”, Journal of Leadership &
Organizational Studies, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 191-201.
effectiveness
Boyatzis, R.E., Stubbs, E.C. and Taylor, S.N. (2002), “Learning cognitive and emotional
and career
intelligence competencies through graduate management education”, Academy of success
Management Learning & Education, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 150-162.
Boyatzis, R.E., Smith, M.L., Van Oosten, E. and Woolford, L. (2013), “Developing resonant leaders 515
through emotional intelligence, vision and coaching”, Organizational Dynamics, Vol. 42
No. 1, pp. 17-24.
Brislin, R., Worthley, R. and Macnab, B. (2006), “Cultural intelligence understanding behaviors
that serve people’s goals”, Group & Organization Management, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 40-55.
Burns, N. and Grove, S.K. (1993), The Practice of Nursing Research, 2nd ed., Elsevier, W.B.
Saunders Co., Philadelphia, PA.
Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2007), Data Analysis Manual for the Social Sciences, Pegem A. Publishing, Ankara.
Carmeli, A. (2003), “The relationship between emotional intelligence and work attitudes, behavior
and outcomes: an examination among senior managers”, Journal of Managerial Psychology,
Vol. 18 No. 8, pp. 788-813.
Caruso, D.R. and Salovey, P. (2004), The Emotionally Intelligent Manager: How to Develop and Use
the Four Key Emotional Skills of Leadership, John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ.
Chan, D. and Schmitt, N. (2002), “Situational judgment and job performance”, Human
Performance, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 233-254.
Cherniss, C. (2000), “Social and emotional competence in the workplace”, ISSN 0787949841.
Churchill, G.A. Jr (1979), “A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs”,
Journal of Marketing Research, ISSN 0022-2437, pp. 64-73.
Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S.G. and Aiken, L.S. (2013), Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation
Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, Routledge.
Cote, S. and Miners, C.T. (2006), “Emotional intelligence, cognitive intelligence, and job
performance”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 51 No. 1, pp. 1-28.
Crowne, K.A. (2009), “The relationships among social intelligence, emotional intelligence and
cultural intelligence”, Organization Management Journal, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 148-163.
Dulewicz, V. and Higgs, M. (2000), “Emotional intelligence-a review and evaluation study”,
Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 341-372.
Earley, P.C. and Ang, S. (2003), Cultural Intelligence: Individual Interactions Across Cultures,
Stanford University Press, Redwood, CA.
Emmerling, R., Boyatzis, R.E. and Emmerling, R.J. (2012), “Emotional and social intelligence
competencies: cross cultural implications”, Cross Cultural Management: An International
Journal, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 4-18.
Fernández-Aráoz, C. (2007), “Making people decisions in the new global environment ”, MIT
Sloan Management Review, Vol. 49 No. 1, p. 17.
Fox, S. and Spector, P.E. (2000), “Relations of emotional intelligence, practical intelligence, general
intelligence, and trait affectivity with interview outcomes: it’s not all just‘G’ ”, Journal of
Organizational Behavior, Vol. 21 p. 203.
George, D. and Mallery, M. (2003), Using SPSS for Windows Step by Step: A Simple Guide and
Reference, Allyn y Bacon, Boston, MA.
Goleman, D. (1998), Working with Emotional Intelligence, Bantam, New York City.
Goleman, D. (2006), Emotional Intelligence, Bantam, New York City.
Goleman, D. and Boyatzis, R. (2008), “Social intelligence and the biology of leadership”, Harvard
Business Review, Vol. 86 No. 9, pp. 74-81.
JMD Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R. and Group, H. (2007), Emotional and Social Competency Inventory,
University edition, HayGroup, San Francisco, CA.
35,4
Gupta, S. (1996), “Managerial effectiveness: conceptual framework and scale development”,
Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, Vol. 31 No. 3, pp. 392-409.
Hair, J.F. (2010), Multivariate Data Analysis, Prentice Hall, Boston, MA.
Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., Anderson, R.E. and Tatham, R.L. (2006), Multivariate Data
516 Analysis, Vol. 6, Pearson Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Mann, C. (2003), “Observational research methods. Research design II: cohort, cross sectional, and
case-control studies”, Emergency Medicine Journal, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 54-60.
Morand, D.A. (2001), “Thfdee emotional intelligence of managers: assessing the construct validity
of a nonverbal measure of ‘people skills’ ”, Journal of Business and Psychology, Vol. 16 No. 1,
pp. 21-33.
Petrides, K.V., Frederickson, N. and Furnham, A. (2004), “The role of trait emotional intelligence
in academic performance and deviant behavior at school”, Personality and Individual
Differences, Vol. 36 No. 2, pp. 277-293.
Rahim, M.A. (2014), “A structural equations model of leaders’ social intelligence and creative
performance”, Creativity and Innovation Management, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 44-56.
Robson, C. (2002), Real World Research, Vol. 2, Blackwell Publishers, Oxford.
Salovey, P. and Mayer, J.D. (1990), “Emotional intelligence”, Imagination, Cognition and Personality,
Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 185-211.
Schmidt, F.L. and Hunter, J.E. (1998), “The validity and utility of selection methods in personnel
psychology: practical and theoretical implications of 85 years of research findings”,
Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 124 No. 2 p. 262.
Seal, C.R., Boyatzis, R.E. and Bailey, J.R. (2006), “Fostering emotional and social intelligence in
organizations”, Organization Management Journal, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 190-209.
Sosik, J.J. and Megerian, L.E. (1999), “Understanding leader emotional intelligence and
performance the role of self-other agreement on transformational leadership perceptions”,
Group & Organization Management, Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 367-390.
Tavşancıl, E. (2002), Measurement of Attitudes and Data Analysis with SPSS, Nobel Press, Ankara.
Thorndike, E.L. (1920), “Intelligence and its uses”, Harper’s Magazine, pp. 227-235.
Thompson, S.K. (2012), “Simple random sampling”, Sampling, 3rd ed., John Wiley & Sons,
Hoboken, NJ, pp. 9-37.
Turban, D.B. and Dougherty, T.W. (1994), “Role of protégé personality in receipt of mentoring
and career success”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 37 No. 3, pp. 688-702.
Wechsler, D. (2008), Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale–Fourth Edition (WAIS–IV), NCS Pearson,
San Antonio, TX.
Wong, C.-S. and Law, K.S. (2002), “The effects of leader and follower emotional intelligence on
performance and attitude: an exploratory study”, The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 13 No. 3,
pp. 243-274.
Zeidner, M., Matthews, G. and Roberts, R.D. (2004), “Emotional intelligence in the workplace:
a critical review”, Applied Psychology, Vol. 53 No. 3, pp. 371-399.
Corresponding author
Usman Aslam can be contacted at: Usmanbest786@gmail.com

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com