An examination of the role of emotional intelligence
in work and family conflict *.
by Lenaghan, Janet A.^Buda, Richard^Eisner, Alan B.
Personality traits and the interaction on work-family conflict have
been studied, including aggressiveness (Lightdale and Prentice, 1994)
and negative affectivity (Carlson, 1999; Bruck and Allen, 2003). In
addition, there have been several studies that found a positive
relationship between Type A behavior and workfamily conflict (Burke et
al., 1979). Neuroticism was also found to have a positive relationship
to work-family conflict (Bruck and Allen, 2003). Further research has
shown that conscientiousness helps reduce the negative impact that work
role ambiguity has on one's well-being (Bruck and Allen, 2003).
Moreover, agreeableness was found to have a negative effect on
work-family conflict: the more agreeable the individual, the greater
reported work-family conflict (Bruck and Allen, 2003). Emotional
Intelligence (EI) was also shown to predict persistence under
frustrating circumstances (Schutte et al., 2000) and has been found to
moderate the effect of work-family conflict on career commitment
(Carmeli, 2003). In a study of senior managers, Carmeli found a
significant interaction of work-family conflict and Emotional
Intelligence in predicting career commitment. Stated differently, the
higher a senior manager is on Emotional Intelligence, the weaker the
negative effect of work-family conflict on career commitment (2003).
Emotional Intelligence
Emotional Intelligence is a profile of self-awareness, of managing
one's emotions, of motivation, of empathy and social competence.
Goleman's (1995) work thrusted the concept into the spotlight,
although the term Emotional Intelligence was first used by Salovey and
Mayer (1990). They defined Emotional Intelligence as "the ability
to monitor one's own feelings and emotions, to discriminate among
them, and to use this information to guide one's thinking and
actions" (1990: 189).
Mayer and Salovey (1997) later identified four components of
Emotional Intelligence: perception, assimilation, understanding and
management. The first component is described as an ability to be
self-aware of emotions and to be able to express one's emotional
needs. Assimilation refers to one's ability to distinguish among
different emotions they may be feeling and to prioritize those that are
influencing their thought processes (Mayer and Salovey, 1997). The third
component is the ability to understand complex emotions such as
simultaneous feelings of loyalty and betrayal (Mayer and Salovey, 1997).
The ability to distinguish the emotions that emerge from perceptions is
important in overcoming negative responses to emotions. It is also in
this component that Mayer and Salovey include the ability to understand
other's emotional expressions and behaviors. Lastly, the management
component is the ability to connect or disconnect from an emotion,
depending on its usefulness in any given situation (Mayer and Salovey,
1997). This component varies from the personality domain because the
regulation of emotions can vary to suit specific personality traits
(Mayer and Salovey, 1997). Caruso et al. (2002) examined the relation of
an ability measure of Emotional Intelligence to personality. This
examination found that Emotional Intelligence was a "measure as
reliable and independent of traditional defined personality traits,
supporting the discriminant validity of the Emotional Intelligence
construct" (2002: 306). Similarly, Saklofske et al. (2003) state
that Emotional Intelligence self-reports measures account for variance
not accounted for by personality. The contribution of Emotional
Intelligence to one's attitude toward change was found to be
significant, indicating the added value of using an Emotional
Intelligence measure above and beyond the effect of personality (Vakola
et al., 2004).
Many scholars have theorized that high Emotional Intelligence
contributes to success in various aspects of life including work and
relationships (e.g., Goleman, 1995; Salovey and Mayer, 1990). Because
Emotional Intelligence theoretically includes the ability to understand
and regulate others' as well as one's own emotions, it may be
related to both characteristics that build relationships and the quality
of those relationships (Schutte et al., 2001).
Furthermore, scholars have theorized that high Emotional
Intelligence would lead to greater feelings of emotional well-being
(Goleman, 1995; Saarni, 1999; Salovey and Mayer, 1990; Salovey et al.,
1995; Schutte et al., 2002). Some empirical evidence that Emotional
Intelligence is associated with emotional well-being comes from research
indicating that higher Emotional Intelligence is associated with less
depression, greater optimism (Schutte et al., 1998) and greater
self-esteem (Schutte et al., 2002). Moreover, research found that
individuals with higher Emotional Intelligence were better able to
maintain a positive mood and self-esteem when faced with a negative
state induction (Schutte et al., 2002). Thus, both theory and prior
research advance a connection between Emotional Intelligence and
well-being.
Hypothesis 1: Emotional Intelligence is positively related to
well-being.
Work-family conflict has been identified as a source of stress that
influences well-being (Greenhaus and Parasuraman, 1986). For example, it
has been shown to be positively related to depression and decreased
satisfaction with life and an intensified depressive affect (Marshall
and Lang, 1990). Even perceived unfairness between work and family
demands leads to psychological distress and depression in both men and
women (Voydanoffand Donnelly, 1999). Thus, if one perceives the
work-family demands as unfairly monopolizing their time and attention,
one experiences more conflict between the two domains. This conflict
leads to reduced feelings of well-being.
Hypothesis 2: Work-family conflict is negatively related to
well-being.
The ability to perceive, understand and manage emotions is an
integral part of Emotional Intelligence; thus, it seems that people with
high Emotional Intelligence should experience lower worker family
conflict. Carmeli (2003) studied the relationship between Emotional
Intelligence and work attitudes and the behavior of senior managers.
Among other findings, his results supported a finding that Emotional
Intelligence moderated the negative influence of work-family conflict on
career commitment. He suggests that this result "indicates that
senior managers who have high Emotional Intelligence may better and more
carefully handle the inherent work-family conflict than those with low
Emotional Intelligence" (2003: 805).
A person with high EI is one that can recognize, and then
effectively deal with their own emotions while at the same time
recognize and empathize with others' feelings. Inherent in the
work-family conflict is a tremendous amount of emotional upheaval.
Inevitably one domain will encroach on the other and it results in more
than just a time issue or energy constraints; it also invokes one's
emotions. The ability to be aware of your emotions, express them and
effectively manage them is a key determinant in whether the conflict
between the two domains negatively impacts one's well-being.
This study suggests that Emotional Intelligence will have an impact
on the relationship between work-family conflict and well-being.
Consistent with Jordan et al. who argued that "Emotional
Intelligence moderates the links between perceptions of job insecurity
and affective reaction, as well as the links between affective reactions
and behavior" (2002: 365), we posit that Emotional Intelligence
interacts with work-family conflict to predict well-being.
Hypothesis 3: There is an interaction effect between Emotional
Intelligence and work-family conflict on well-being.
METHODS
Participants
A total of 205 people participated in this study. For the study,
60.0% were female. Most (81.0%) were married and the most common racial/
ethnic group was Caucasian (77.1%), followed by African-American
(15.1%). The age of the respondents ranged between 19 and 70, with a
mean of 47.48 years, and a standard deviation of 11.14 years. For number
of children, 34.6% reported having no children, with the most any
respondent had was five children (M = 1.27, SD = 1.19). For education,
50.2% had a high school diploma, and the remainder had a college degree
or more education. Years with the organization ranged from 1 to 34 (M =
10.78, SD = 7.32). Hours of work reported ranged from 4 to 82 (M =
38.25, SD = 8.16). For satisfaction and importance of work, the means
and standard deviations, are 5.04 (1.36) and 5.87 (1.19), respectively.
The data collected for use in this study were part of a
"Quality of Work-Family Study" at a university in the
northeast of the U.S. This sample was drawn from a large university
representing a large variety of jobs including unionized trade workers
to executive managers. The survey sample was obtained from the
population of employees at a suburban doctoral-granting university with
a budget of over $242 million with approximately 8,000 full-time and
part-time employees.
Measures
Gender was coded "0" for Male and "1" for
Female. Marital status was coded as "1" for married and
"0" for all other categories (i.e., single, widowed or
divorced). Information on race, age, number of children and number of
children living at home, average number of hours worked/week, number of
hours caring for elderly parent were also collected from the respondent.
COPYRIGHT 2007 Pittsburg State University -
Department of Economics Reproduced with permission of the copyright holder. Further reproduction or distribution is prohibited without permission.
Copyright 2007, Gale Group. All rights
reserved. Gale Group is a Thomson Corporation Company.
NOTE: All illustrations and photos have been removed from this article.