Nowadays, influential leadership is one of the determinatives of development in the worlds system. Using the potentials, applicable and powerful management is able to create an appropriate ground for sustainable and multilateral development. Meanwhile, the groups influential leadership is one of the most important tasks of the educational group managements. In practice and theory, efficacy of educational managers causes improvement in educational quality and makes the ground ready for individual development of the members.
One of the effective factor in increasing the effectiveness, proficiency and
finally in enjoyment is the leadership style of the organization managers and
it is one of the most complex duties of the management. Leadership is an inseparable
part of management and it plays an important role in operations. Leadership
is not an inherited and natural quality, but it is some kind of socio- specialized
interaction and a bilateral, interchangeable and sometimes transformational
process during which, a colleague or a member becomes allowable to motivate
other people and members and influence them for the purpose of gaining his/her
collective and individual aims. If there is only one factor that reveals the
distinctions between successful and unsuccessful organizations, then that factor
will clearly be the influential leadership and we need a new generation of leaders
in order to survive in the 21st century (Bass and Riggio,
2006). According to Antonakis et al. (2003),
leadership is the purposeful change process through which the leader and his
followers join each other through their common purposes and begin to move towards
In the last ones of the researches done about the leadership subject, leaders
have been classified into two groups of transformational and transactional (Robbins
and Coulter, 2008; Bass and Riggio, 2006; Bass,
1998; Bass and Avolio, 1995; Bass,
1990), Meanwhile, laissez faire leadership style and/or transactional leadership
style have also been mentioned in some texts as another leadership style and
in other texts that is not the case (Bass and Riggio, 2006).
Researchers, introduce charismatic and transformer leaders as individuals who,
by expressing their emotions, obligate their inferiors and convince them to
accept the aims and values of the organization and show themselves attempts
far more than it is expected. This causes leaders to gain some kind of emotional
attachment with their inferiors and this, also causes quality of relationships
and effectiveness of the group and organization to be enhanced (Bass
and Avolio, 1995). But, Transactional leaders, are interested in factors
such as controlling the programs and their consistencies and it is not probable
for them to attempt for influencing on changes in opinions, manners, or ways
of thinking and it is also less probable for them to encourage the relationship
among colleagues and their followers also emphasize on personal haggling between
themselves and the leader rather than emphasizing on the common social values
and their performances are mostly based upon the exchanging expense and profit
between the leader and his followers and supervising the employees (Ingram,
1996). Bass and Avolio (2000) believed that this kind
of leadership is not as the two ends of a continuum which are against each other,
but they are backups for each other and a leader may synchronically and differently
display the behaviors of both styles. On the basis of their investigations,
Bass and Avolio (1995) infered that ideal leaders are
individuals who combine the positive and transactional leadership behaviors
with dimensions of transformation-creating leadership and make use of them.
Therefore, in every respect especially from the relational and emotional point
of view, an effective manager should be at an appropriate level. Taking a little
care over different organizations makes it clear that great leaders create great
differences. When describing the reasons for effectiveness of the great leaders
is concerned, the talk is about their strong insights and ideas and/or about
their strategies. But, there is one more important thing: great leaders work
taking the advantages of their emotions (Goleman, 1998).
The role of affections and emotions in leadership process is something that
is not regarded in researches, because researchers believe that the emotions
probably fade effective behaviors. Leadership theories that were influenced
by classic theories, also believed that the leaders must think logically and
free from being influence by their own feelings and then begin to plan (George,
The concept of emotional intelligence has given a new depth to humans intelligence
and has developed it to the ability of an individual for evaluating his/her
own general intelligence (Mayer et al., 1999).
Results from studies show that emotional intelligence has an important role
in life, especially in leading the organizations (Bar-On,
2000; Schutte et al., 2001), so that some
researchers (Goleman, 1998) believe the role of emotional
intelligence and cognitive intelligence up to 80 and 20%, respectively. New
results have shown that the substructure of most of important decisions, the
most active and profitable organizations and the most satisfactory and successful
lives, is emotional intelligence rather than the cognitive one or mind power
(Fambrough and Kaye Hart, 2008). Studies show that managers
or experts who enjoy high levels of emotional intelligence and, technically,
are also experienced, will take necessary actions with more readiness and skill
and more rapidly than others to resolve the newly-established contradictions,
collective and organizational weaknesses, existing vacancies, long-run secret
relations and bilateral darkness that pretends valuable and profitable (Elizabeth
et al., 2005).
According to the new theories about leadership, enjoying emotional intelligence
may be regarded among the main skills of the leaders and studies performed in
this field have pointed out the significant relation between them (Humphrey,
2002). Also, the recent studies have showed that emotional intelligence
may be effective predicative of transformational and charismatic leadership
(Gardner and Stough, 2002; George,
2000; Barling et al., 2000). In a study,
Mortazavi et al. (2005) showed that there is
a positive and significant relationship between emotional intelligence and transformation
giving leadership style and also there is a negative and significant relationship
between emotional intelligence and transactional leadership style. So, in accordance
with this skill, what is expected a group manager is his availing of this skill
in landscape building, creating harmony and integration, empowering and strengthening,
the colleagues, creativity and innovation, giving legitimacy to the laws and
regulations and observing the standards and ethical principles? This skill somehow
agrees and corresponds with leadership styles.
Despite the much importance of the subject of emotional intelligence and the necessity of paying more attention to the transformational leadership style, less research has been done to determine the emotional intelligence of educational group managers and scientific board members of the university and its relation with managers leadership style. Consequently, the present study is to answer to the following hypothesis:
||H1:There is relation between components
of emotional intelligence with transformational leadership style of educational
||H2:There is relation between components
of emotional intelligence with transactional leadership style of educational
||H3:There is relation between components
of emotional intelligence with laissez faire leadership style of educational
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Since, the main purpose of the present study was studying the leadership style
relationship with emotional intelligence among educational group managers of
the university, the correlation design was used. In this design, the researcher
is to determine the relations between the two and/or more variables and cause
and effect relations are not inferred in such studies.
Subjects: Regarding the fact that in case of descriptive researches
the least sample size should be 100 people (Cohen et al.,
2001), in order to increase the external validity of the results, in the
present study the whole statistical community of members of scientific board
of Mohaghegh Ardabili University was selected as the sample for the present
research (n = 165). But, after the final study of questionnaire and correctness
of the answers, from among the whole selected educational group managers (30
people) 27 people were selected to be analyzed. Also, after the final study
of and correctness of the answers and because of lack of participation of some
members of scientific board of the university, finally, 91 people from among
135 selected ones were selected and consequently the number of the selected
sample increased to 118 people. This study was performed in Mohaghegh Ardabili
University in Ardabil Province of Iran within 2008-2009.
In the present study, from among the whole number of participants, 86.4% were male professors, 5.0% female ones and 8.5% were unknown. Regarding the age they belonged to the age range of 27-55 years with the mean and standard deviation of 37.97 and 6.14, respectively. Ninty one people (77.12%) are merely scientific board members and 27 people (22.88%) are members of scientific board and educational group managers. Also, 10 people (8.5%) are single and 106 ones (89.8%) are married. And the answer by two of them (1.7%) was not known. Regarding the education level, 18 people (15.3%) hold Masters degree and 96 ones (81.4%) hold PhD degree. Four people (3.4%) didnt answer this question. 94 people bear the service record within the range of 0-25 years with the mean and standard deviation of 6.94 and 5.98, respectively. Regarding the teaching record, they belong to the range of 1-26 years with the mean and standard deviation of 9.59 and 5.68, respectively.
Regarding the management record at the university, educational group managers of the university consisting of 27 people, belong to the range of 1-7 years with the mean and standard deviation of 2.01, respectively.
Data collection apparatus
Bass and Avolio leadership style questionnaire (2003): The 3rd edition
of Multifactor leadership questionnaire, a copy belonging to the colleagues
which measures themanagers leadership style from the viewpoint of his direct
colleagues, has been edited and developed by Bass and Avolio
(2000-2003). The questionnaire contains 45 questions
in the framework of 5 degree Likert scale to measure the three styles of transformational
leadership, transactional leadership and laissez faire leadership and 9 question
to measure the results and consequents of the leadership.
Antonakis et al. (2003) have signed and repeatedly
certified the authenticity of nine-factor. The different studies such as research
done by Antonakis et al. (2003) and have approved
the construct validity of MLQ scale. Taking the opinions of experts into account,
Zahed-Babelan (2008) in his Ph.D thesis, certified the
validity of formal and conceptual questionnaire after translating it and gained
the synchronic validity of questionnaire of Bass and Avolio leadership style
(2004) with that of Bark transformational and transactional leader style (1994),
r = 0.83. Also, the α coefficient of Cronbachs Alpha in the study made
by Zahed-Babelan (2008) for transformational leadership
style (0.90), transactional leadership style (0.85), laissez faire leadership
style (0.82), respectively.
Emotional intelligence scale: This short self-measurement scale has
been made by Schoutte et al. (1998) and contains 33 items and regarding
its 133-item load (Salovey et al., 2004). Its internal
reliability and validity reported good (Ciarrochi et
al., 2001; Saklofske et al., 2003; Schoutte
et al., 1998; Elizabeth et al., 2005).
Although, Schoutte et al. (2001) believe that their scales provide a
one dimensional measurement of EI (emotional intelligence), in other studies
(for example: Saklofske et al., 2003; Petrides
and Farnham, 2000) it has been expressed that it measures three or four
other micro scales, too. In a study made by Elizabeth et
al. (2005) to validate this instrument on a sample of the Canadian students
including 329 female students and 169 male students, internal reliability of
each one of the three evaluation factors and expressing emotions and applying
them were 0.73, 0.72 and 0.71, respectively and internal reliability coefficient
for the whole scale was 0.84. In the present study, using α coefficient
of Cronbach reliability of the test was calculated as 0.76.
Also, in order to measure the demography characteristics of the subjects scholar made questionnaire was used which tests the sex and age, marriage state, level and field of studies, educational group, management and scientific record and other individual variables.
Data analysis techniques: Data processing method at descriptive level
was in the form of indexes of central tendency, dispersion and percent. At the
inferential level because of studying the simple and multiple relationship of
the variables, Pearson correlation and multiple regression analysis were used
using the enter method.
Also, in answering the question how much are you pleased with the management style of educational group manager? most of the participants i.e., 52 people (44.1%) answered much and very much. 33 people (28%) were satisfied at mean level and 11 people (9.3%) at less and more less level were satisfied with management style of the group manager.
The status of managers leadership style using the single-sample t-test was compared with the conceptual mean (probable mean).
Regarding the t = 5.2 and p<0.01 and according to data from Table 1, in comparison with the conceptual mean (40), the mean of transformational leadership style (48.91) is significant at 99% confidence level. The mean score of leadership (48.8) and conceptual mean (40) show that the mean of transformational leadership style is more than the conceptual mean. Also, regarding the p<0.01 at 99% confidence level, the mean of all dimensions of transformational leadership style is higher than the mean level.
Regarding the t = 2.1 and p<0.01, in comparison with the conceptual mean (24), the mean of transactional leadership style (26.14) is significant at 95% confidence level. The conceptual mean show that the mean of transactional leadership style is higher than the conceptual mean at 99% confidence level. It should be described that regarding the p<0.01 at 99% confidence level, the means of two dimensions of transactional leadership style, i.e., contingent reward (8.8) and management by exception (active) (8.9) are higher than the mean level (8). And finally, regarding the t = -4.3 and p<0.01 at 99% confidence level, in comparison with conceptual mean (8), the mean of laissez faire leadership style (6.52) is significant. In other words, the mean of laissez faire leadership style is lower than the mean.
Among the leadership styles and according to the means at 4 scales, transformational
leadership style is more than transactional and laissez faire leadership style,
though on the basis of Kruskal-Wallis H test, the difference between these three
leadership styles is not significant at inferential level.
||Status of managers leadership style
|N = 118, p<0.05, aNumbers in brackets are the
amounts of considered index with scale 4. By conceptual mean it is meant
the number of considered questions for measuring the index multiplied by
||Predicting the transformational leadership style on the basis
of emotional intelligence
|aDependent variable: Transformational leadership
style. R2 = 0.43, R2 = 0.19, R Adj = 0.17
In order to determine the influential components of emotional intelligence in predicting the transformational leadership style among the managers, taking the advantages of the enter method, multiple regression analysis was used. As, it can be seen from the results of Table 2, adjusted R is 0.17 and F = 8.97 is significant (p<0.0001). So, dimensions of emotional intelligence may predict transformational leadership style. Regarding the results, only dimension of utilization of the emotion can predict transformational leadership style.
||Predicting the transactional leadership style on the basis
of emotional intelligence
|aDependent Variable: Transactional leadership style.
Note. R = 0.54, R2 = 0.29, R Adj = 0.27
||predicting the laissez faire leadership style on the basis
of emotional intelligence
|aDependent Variable: aissez faire leadership style.
R = 0.47, R2 = 0.22, R Adj = 0.20
Results from Table 3 show that justified R is 0.27 and F = 15.74 is significant (p<0.0001). So, dimensions of emotional intelligence may predict transactional leadership style. Regarding the results it can be said that dimension of utilization of emotion (p<0.001) and regulation of emotion (p<0.01) can predict the transactional leadership style according to priority.
Results from Table 4 shows that justified R is 0.20 and F = 10.95 is significant (p<0.05). So, dimensions of emotional intelligence may predict laissez faire leadership style. Regarding the results, from among the dimensionsof emotional intelligence, dimension of utilization (p<0.001) and evaluation and expressing of emotion (p<0.01) can significantly predict laissez faire leadership style.
||Pierson correlation Test for studying the relationship of
leadership styles with emotional intelligence
|**Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)
Results from Table 5 show that there is a positive and significant
correlation between transformational leadership style and emotional intelligence
(p<0.01), but there is a negative and significant correlation between transactional
leadership style and emotional intelligence (p<0.05). In this study, there
wasnt any significant correlation between laissez faire leadership style and
In studying the leadership styles of managers of educational groups, the results showed that the mean of transformational leadership style (48.91) in comparison with conceptual mean (40) and regarding the t = 5.2 and p<0.01) is significant at confidence level of 99%. Amounts of mean of leadership style (48.8) and conceptual mean (40) show that the mean of transformational leadership style is higher than the mean level. Also, regarding p<0.01 at 99% confidence level, the mean of all dimensions of transformational leadership style was higher than the mean level.
The mean of transactional leadership style (26.14) in comparison with conceptual mean (24) and regarding the t = 2.1 and p<0.01) at 95% confidence level is significant. Amounts of conceptual means showed that mean of transactional leadership style at 99% confidence level was higher than the conceptual mean (mean level). It should be explained that regarding p<0.01 at 95% confidence level, the mean of two dimensions of transactional leadership style, that is, contingent reward (8.8) and management by exception (active) 98.9) is higher than the mean level (8). And finally, the mean of laissez faire leadership style (6.52) in comparison with conceptual mean (8) and regarding t = -4.3 and p<0.01, is significant at 99% confidence level, that is, the mean of laissez faire leadership style was lower than the mean level.
Compare of leadership styles showed that on the basis of means at scale 4,
the mean of transformational leadership style (2.4) was more than transactional
leadership style (2.2) and laissez faire leadership style (1.6), though difference
between these three leadership styles at inferential level was not significant
according to Kruskal-Wallis H test.
This finding is close to the study of Zahed-Babelan (2008).
In his study, according to the means at scale 4, transformational leadership
style (2.4) was higher than the transactional (1.6) and laissez faire (1.5)
leadership styles. Also Noorshahi and Yamani Doozisorkhabi
(2006) have reported the advantage of most of the understudy heads in transformational
leadership style to be low and mean and in case of transactional leadership
style to be low.
Results relating to prediction of leadership style using multiple regression analysis showed that emotional intelligence is able to predict transformational leadership style and from among its dimensions, only the dimension of utilization of the emotion (p<0.001) may predict the transformational leadership style.
An increasing number of investigations have studied the relation between capabilities
of emotional intelligence and some important criteria of the life and have also
provided strong evidences to approve the emotional intelligence as a main predictor
for real outputs of the life (Ciarrochi et al., 2001).
This finding is closer to the finding of Gardner and Stough
(2002), Barling et al .(2000), Sosik
and Magerian (1999) and Mortazavi et al. (2005)
who found the positive and significant relation between emotional intelligence
and transformational leadership style.
As, Goleman (1998) has expressed emotional intelligence
is some other kind of intelligence which contains cognition of self-feelings
and using them to make appropriate decisions in life, ability to manage ones
own behavior and mental status and controlling the impulsions. On the other
hand, according to Bass and Avolio (2000) and Bass
and Riggio (2006) transformational leadership is attributed to the function
of leader who attempts to cause his followers to move in a direction beyond
the personal and transient benefits through ideal influence (charisma), inspiration,
intellectual motivation and individual consideration. Such a leader enhances
his followers in a way that they reach at higher levels of ideals, utilize more
attempts to gain the better fruitions and think for the purpose of loftiness.
One of the dimensions of transformational leadership is its individual consideration
dimension. Individual consideration contains complete compassion and attempts
of the leader in his crucial to his followers and his attempts to develop and
blossom them as far as possible. This concept of the leaders behavior is clearly
cognition of the followers need in its complete manner and educating them in
order to reach at super needs and also proving several chances to blossom the
followers abilities and enhancing them to higher levels of characteristic development.
In transformational leadership people are helped by leaders and the leaders
are worries about caring their individual feelings and needs. Or, as it has
been forward, leaders pay special attentions to the needs of each one of their
followers as the behavior of the trainer and teacher to gain the success or
development (Bass and Avolio, 1993; Podsakoff
et al., 1996; Yukl, 1999). Individual care
and consideration include spending time for the purpose of education and training,
behavior with people not merely as group members and help others for the development
in their abilities, listening with care and consideration to the interests and
demands of others (Podsakoff et al., 1996).
Generally, regarding the similarity of some characteristics of transformational leader with those of individuals with high level of emotional intelligence such as ability to recognize and be unanimous to others, establish effective relations, listen to others intimately, be inquirer, cooperate, coach, guide like a preceptor, motivate others and negotiate with them, the relation between these two variable seems reasonable.
The next finding showed that emotional intelligence predicts transactional
leadership style negatively. And its dimensions, that is, utilization of the
emotion (p<0.01) and regulation of the emotion (p<0.05) according to priority
and negatively can predict transaction leadership style. This finding is closer
to the finding of Barling et al. (2000), Sosik
and Magerian (1999) and Mortazavi et al. (2005),
who found the negative and significant relation between emotional intelligence
and transactional leadership style.
In expressing this finding it can be said that according to Judge
and Piccolo (2004), transactional leadership is the leadership based on
the exchange between leader and his follower, so that individual inclinations
of the two parties are provided. In other words, he believes that in this school
every think is looked from the viewpoint of the amount of income of individuals
and the relation between the leader and his followers is in a trade manner and
on the basis of exchanging one thing with another. Also, Liontos
(1992) believed that transactional leadership is sometimes called leadership
of the kind of transaction which is based on exchanging services to receive
different kinds of rewards which the leader at least controls over some part
of it. So, it is seen that characteristics of transactional leadership are opposite
points of characteristics of individuals with high levels of emotional intelligence
and perhaps this very factor causes negative relation between these two variables.
Other results relating to prediction of leadership style of managers of educational groups showed that dimension of utilization of emotion (p<0.001) and evaluation and expressing (p<0.01) can predict laissez faire leadership style.
By laissez faire or non-transactional leadership style, it is meant letting the followers free at time when the leader is not present or avoiding leading that, in fact, is the most inactive kind of leadership in leadership spectrum.
In versus the transactional leadership, laissez faire leader clears a complete
non-transactional and indifferent state. In this case, the leader avoids decision
making and donates the responsibilities and motivation and satisfaction of the
followers reach to the least level of existent amount. And prudence of the leader
disappears (Bass and Riggio, 2006).
Therefore, it can be seen that taking the advantages of non-transactional characteristic of this style has caused it to take place for itself on leadership continuum and in the middle of the continuum. Interestingly, dimensions of emotional intelligence also enjoyed less prediction power in predicting the leadership style in comparison with other leadership styles.
In studying the simple relations between leadership styles with emotional intelligence,
results showed that there was positive and significant correlation between transformational
leadership style and emotional intelligence (p<0.01), But there is negative
relation between transactional leadership style and emotional intelligence significantly
(p<0.05). In the present study, there wasnt any significant correlation
between laissez faire leadership style and emotional intelligence. Existence
of positive relation between transformational leadership style and emotional
intelligence in this study is close to the results from Palmer
et al. (2001), Sosik and Magerian (1999)
and Mortazavi et al. (2005) researches.
The next finding about the existence of negative relation between transactional
leadership styles with emotional intelligence is close to results from researches
done by Mortazavi et al. (2005).
In expressing these findings it is necessary to study the differences between
transformation leadership and transactional one. As quoted by Kiss
(2000), a transactional leader is a manager in its most possible amount
and he may not be considered as a real leader (Bennis et
al. 1994; Silins, 1994).
The management of transactional leadership performs the tasks righteously and
the leadership performs them properly. In correspondence with attractive characteristic
of transformational leaders, transactional leaders enjoy demanding reward. These
leaders only exchange the rewards against good performances and determine the
amount of gaining the purposes. Therefore, transactional leaders guide their
followers by expressing the necessities of function and task in order to attain
the purposes. Transformational leaders grant responsibilities and in most cases
avoid decision makings, so they pay less attention to work with employees and
to have relation with them, while transformational leaders even pay attention
to individual differences. These kinds of leaders have relations with each one
of their employees and guide them and take care of them and cause them to be
growing persons. They develop their potency (Bass and Riggio,
2006). According to Hersey et al. (2001), transactional
leaders make use of management by exception, that is, they investigate and control
the actions, standard deviations and laws and regulations and on this basis
they take necessary corrective steps. But, transformational leaders, bearing
the ability to be inspiring, have more expectations of their employees. Studies
have shown that there is a positive relation between leader and high performance
and that, the more the leader expects his follower, the more will follower answer
to his expectations.
Thus, regarding the differences said about the two transformational and transactional leadership styles, difference, concerning the correlation between these two styles, with emotional intelligence is understandable.
The next result in studying correlation between variables showed that there
wasnt any significant correlation between laissez faire leadership style and
emotional intelligence. This finding is close to results from research made
by Barling et al. (2000). In their studies, they
showed that is not significant correlation between emotional intelligence and
laissez faire leadership style.
As it was said earlier, by laissez faire or non-transactional leadership style
it is meant give followers freedom at the time when leader is not present or
it is avoiding leading that, in fact, is the most inactive kind of leadership
in leadership spectrum. In this case, the leader avoids decision making and
donates the responsibilities and motivation and satisfaction of the followers
reach to the least level of existent amount. And prudence of the leader disappears
(Bass and Riggio, 2006). Therefore, as it is clear from
characteristics of laissez faire leadership style, this kind of leadership cannot
have significant relation with emotional intelligence because people with high
levels of emotional intelligence bear characteristics such as ability to recognize
and be unanimous to others, establish effective relations, listen to others
intimately, etc., while laissez faire leadership style is a neutral state which
moves neither in the same direction with positive interaction nor in the same
direction with negative interaction.
In sum, this study enhances our understanding of the essential components of
transformational leadership and points to the emotional intelligence framework
as a useful classification of the traits, dispositions and abilities associated
with transformational leaders. It is our hope that this study will serve to
stimulate future research on the linkages between emotional intelligence and
aspects of leaderships.