This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers.
This chapter will attempt to gather and critically analyse current research, whilst stating the relevance of it to the work of this thesis. By bridging gaps in the literature on both studies of Events Management and Emotional Intelligence amalgamating various relevant sections from existing work, the feasibility of EI and events management as concepts will aim to flourish. The literature gathered in this section varies from contemporary research and older sources as the author found them to be particularly seminal. This section will look into the study of events management and then apply the applicable sections to EI in order to cover relevant areas for the research. The themes explored in this literature review have evolved from the research questions of this thesis, combining research relating to the studies focus.
2.1 Event Management
According to Getz (2009) as a field of study; management is very broad with economic, psychology and sociology connections. He points out that there are four management spheres that are applicable to events, which are profit, no-for-profit, governmental and tourist destination, each of these will be kept in consideration in this research. Management applies to every field of human endeavour, which can also be said for EI (Goleman, 1995).
Getz (2009) states that the terms 'event studies' and 'events management' are seen as two separate areas, which do not necessarily have to be intertwined with each other. Event Production, Event Management and Event Studies are the three fundamental levels which have been identified in event education. As a discipline Events Management has been taken from various other areas in effort to create its own practice, therefore it is currently growing and attempting to find its own recognition globally. Those studying Events Management must take in some fundamental theories and knowledge which derived from other professional fields, as it is multi-disciplinary in nature (Getz, 2009). The Events Management Body of Knowledge or EMBOK (Silvers et al, 2006) show events management to be a practise that has five other well known and already established knowledge domains associated with it, as seen in Figure (1). Due to this, there has been much debate over whether Events is actually a discipline or a field of study.
Figure 1: Events Management Knowledge Domains
Source: Adapted Getz (2009)
Echtner and Jamal (1997) study tourism and its main disciplinary contributions, they conclude from these investigations that the study of tourism is in a pre-pragmatic stage. In gaining disciplinary status, event studies are still behind tourism studies. "Event studies is not yet at this stage. Events management as a an applied field is still very young, and no institutions that I know have yet formally recognized Event Studies" (Getz, 2009 p.8) however much of the arguments for and against Tourism Studies as a discipline can still be applied to events studies (Tribe, 2002). Including the argument whether the professional event manager has to have more than academic or practise skills alone, linked with EI being part of both areas. This paper will attempt to help bring new research to this young area, in order for it to get closer to gaining disciplinary status.
2.1.1 'Successful Management' and Characteristics
This paper is attempting to find out whether EI attributes, competencies and characteristics can be associated with Event Managers. Aspects of characteristics associated with successful management have been look into in previous research however it has gone considerably unnoticed within the events industry. Elmuti (2004) discussed the issue of which qualities should a modern manager possess and what characteristics must be possessed by effective managers. He found that educating managers in "soft skills" such as interpersonal and intrapersonal skills, rather than solely analytical skills or "hard skills" are necessary to achieve this managerial efficiency. Doing so creates 'collaborative managers' who have perspectives on both business and on general life. These types' managers possess characteristics of Mintzberg & Gosling's (2002) Five Dimensions Model which include; managing self, managing relationships, managing organisations, managing context and managing change. The idea of these Five Dimension characteristics and "soft and hard skills" can be strongly linked to the notion of EI collaborating with traditional intelligence in an organisational context. Elmuti's (2004) study has connections to this paper however he focuses on whether management can be taught, management education and a different model of characteristic possession whereas here will focus on linking EI characteristics to successful events management. Another area which will be looked into throughout this study is the idea of how to be a 'good events manager', previous work on this area suggests that "one of the keys to successful management is the ability to understand and apply modern management principles and techniques effectively" (Elmuti, 2004 p 439). One way to look at this is through Buckler (1998) who argues that the interaction of management as teachers and workers as students is crucial for effective organisational learning. This will break down barriers between them; encourage innovation and collective ideas developing a shared vision. Elmuti (2004) agrees with this way of thinking and approach to achieve successful management. The author feels that these suggestions can be upheld with the integration of EI into management practices. It has already been suggested that EI personalities have better management skills and success in their jobs, seen in Dulewicz & Higgs (1998) study, where in their research of organisations and management they found those with higher EI generally experience more career success, however again this has been over looked in an events management context.
2.2 Structures in an Events Organisation
Much attention has been given to the structure and management forms of organisations, yet little for temporary organisation types, such as event organisations. Deery and Jago, (2005) suggest the use of the flexible firm model along side of a pulsating organisation concept. This is where managers and implementers of events, hire staff on a needs basis, whereas the core workforce are highly-skilled and permanent. The argument for this is that the core work force will have higher productivity, the cost for excess staff will be reduced and it will allow the ability to tailor employment levels. When the staffing for the event is expanded then reduced down to the original size in a short space of time like this, it has been described as a highly formulized, flat, decentralized and flexible. This structure also means that event managers need to learn how to manage various types of people in different job roles and teams, which will be an issue to be looked at during this study.
There are many different types of structures which can be adopted by an organisation, although some are more successful at allowing change if and when needed. Event managers may want their teams to take on a functional grouping structure, which is commonly used in the service industry because of its simplicity and ability to bring employees together, encouraging efficient use of resources and facilitating easier communication (Bowdin et al. 2005; Getz 2007; Van der Wagen 2007; Rollinson 2008). This structure groups activities by functional similarities for example marketing, finance and human resources etc. Along side of this it is suggested that event industries should take on a form of matrix structure allowing flexibility and crossover of work roles if necessary to achieve the organisations event objectives. Aside from the simplicity of these structures, they do also have downfalls. For example they could lead to narrow viewpoints outside the employees department and functional goals being pursued by all groups leading to reduced production (Bowdin et al. 2005; Van der Wagen 2007; Rollinson 2008). Taking on multi-skilling strategies and work rotation in various roles increasing communication, which could then in turn help to rectify these issues (Bowdin et al. 2005). Effective communication throughout all levels of events is vital in order for successful management to be carried out and is also an important attribute for managers to possess, linking to EI traits of being able to accurately identify their own and others emotions then work and problem-solve upon these (Mayer & Salovey, 1997).
As stated there is a harsh limitation on the amount of access to the study of events management, therefore the work based around EI will be hopefully linked to it in the next sections and this paper as a whole will help bridge this large gap in the research.
2.3 Emotional Intelligence - History
Psychometric researchers such as Thorndike (1920) historically used the idea of Emotional Intelligence in his early works, however it was not until the more recent work of Drs J.D. Mayer and P. Saarni (1990) that the concept was theoretically sharpened, defined and the demonstration of how measure of it was shown, however despite this the theory was made most popular by Goleman (1995) where he applied the concept in a practical sense to businesses. These founding researchers and authors explain that those who have emotionally intelligent attributes are able to effectively monitor and control their own internal emotions as well as situations where others are involved, to produce positive and mutually productive outcomes. Looking from a practical view point, EI is the ability to use emotions in rational manner in situations which both reason and emotions need to exist (Kunnanatt, 2008).
In summary Emotional intelligence is the ability to distinguish relationships and meaning of emotions, then to be able to problem-solve and reason on their basis's to perceive, assimilate, understand and then manage emotions (Mayer & Salovey, 1997; Salovey & Mayer, 1990). Mayer et al (2004) advises that to be able to address the concept of EI, the concepts of Intelligence and Emotion must first be understood then interconnected.
Intelligence primarily represents the ability to think abstractly and to generally learn and adapt to the environment (Sternberg & Detterman, 1986; Terman, 1921). In order to qualify as an actual intelligence which is scientifically legitimate, Mayer et al (2000) states that certain criteria must first be met; to begin, rather than an intelligence reflecting self esteem, behaviour patterns or other constructs more appropriately labelled traits, it should reflect actual mental performance (Carroll, 1993; Mayer & Salovey, 1993). Secondly the intelligence needs to describe a set of related abilities which can be shown conceptually distinct however similar to other already-established intelligences (Carroll, 1993). Finally, the proposed intelligence should develop with experience and age. Primarily, intelligence represents the capacity to carry out abstract thought, alongside being able to learn and adapt to the environment, however intelligences can be distinguished by the types of information on which they operate (Terman, 1921).
Traditional intelligence is expressed by the term Intelligent Quotient (IQ) likewise Emotional Intelligence is expressed as the term Emotional Quotient (EQ) coined by Bar-On (1998). EQ is the measurement of a person's emotional competencies but it is not the same as EI as such, it is the measurement of the amount that a person applies EI to their everyday social and personal lives (Kunnanatt, 2008). EQ measures the rate of a person's social and personal awareness as well as the skills used to manage interactions with others (Mayer et al, 1997b). In summary, EQ is the summative score of the emotion and rational capabilities when dealing with interpersonal realities of life. Research suggests that those with higher EQ scores are more likely to show higher performance of work outcomes, however there is still the acknowledgement that theorists need to better establish the link between EQ and general work outcomes (Carmeli & Josman, 2006) this can be included in the link between EI and the events industry.
According to Mayer et al (2000) "Emotions are internal events that coordinate many psychological subsystems including psychological responses, cognitions, and conscious awareness." They continue to state that emotions are a response to changing relationships, when a person's relationship to a memory or to family for example, typically that person's emotions will also change. Such as when a person recalls a happy childhood memory they then may appear happier of more joyous. Mayer et al (2004) indicates that when looking into emotion, each one communicates a unique set of identifiable signals; this is emotional information (Izard, 1993; Scherer et al, 2001). Emotional information can be expressed through individual communication channels and through a unique pattern of associated signals from cognitive and affective channels. An individual's motivated reactions to their vicissitudes and relationships can be identified and communicated through such emotional signals (Izard, 1993, 2001; Scherer, 1993).
2.3.3 EI and IQ
Increasingly the use of EI is bringing a balanced view of intertwining the role of emotion and cognition in influencing life outcomes. This is a contrast from the traditional conceptualisations that both emotion and cognition are independent and the previous thought that cognitive intelligence was the only way to predict work success (Cherniss, 2001). The rising interest in EI in business and psychology adds to the realisation that IQ can no longer be considered as the only effective predictor of success and performance at work (Dulewicz & Higgs, 2000; Mandell & Pherwant, 2003). Fatt & Howe (2003) also discovered from their study that worker success in organisations could not be explained through IQ measures alone. The literature and research is not stating that the use of EI is a replacement for the traditional Intelligence of IQ, but as a supplement to it when involving augmentation of job performance (Aydin et al, 2005; Cote & Miners, 2006; Sayegh et al, 2004) which then here can be applied to the job performance of event managers. Van Rooy and Viswesvararan (2003) point out that recently there has been a shift from linear and narrow intelligence conceptions, emphasizing purely cognitive abilities to multifaceted conceptions, with EI integrated as a key component. "EI has thus become increasing popular in recent years dues to the belief that the benefits of intellectual intelligence have been over stated and that there is a need to probe the broader spectrum of the psychological mechanisms that allow individuals to flourish in their lives and in their jobs" (Jamali et al, 2006 p349).
EI theory is useful to this study in order to explain the way in which adults within the workplace react and develop as people. According to Goleman (1998) our amount of EI is not set genetically and does not develop in early childhood alone. Unlike IQ, which alters a small amount after our teenage years, EI carries on to develop as we progress through life and learn through our experiences. Every day modern science is coming closer to the notion that emotional antecedence, and not raw brain power or IQ alone underpins the best decision making, the most dynamic organizations and the most satisfying lives (Cooper and Sawaf, 1997). As research progresses and expands, organisations are coming to realise that the traditional intelligence of IQ is necessary, however alone not sufficient enough for explanations on human performance and advancements in careers (Diggins, 2004; Rosete & Ciarrochi, 2005). This paper will hopefully add to existing theory that EI can intertwine and improve with IQ for areas in management, focusing on events management.
2.4 Alternative Theories to Measuring Emotional Intelligence
The increasing interest into EI has meant that it has become a powerful force within psychology, business organisations and life. Due to this the literature shows there to be multiple theoretical models of EI. Table (1) shows a competent element overview of EI developed from a moderately simple content analysis some of the literature (Dulwicz & Higgs, 2000). Although showing this, the author feels from studying the literature that there are three main theories currently within EI research which have generated the most interest, these being; Bar-On (1988, 2000) not shown here in Dulwicz and Higgs 2000 work, Mayer and Salovey (1997, 2004) and Goleman (1995, 1998). Although these are all separate theorists and models with different viewpoints, they have factors that significantly overlap with one another, illustrated in Figure 2 which shows the classification that with minor variation, the building blocks of EI is increasingly grounded in the literature. (Fiest & Barron, 1996; Goleman, 1995; Jamali et al, 2006; Sternberg, 1996; Van Rooy and Viswesvaren, 2004).
Bar-On's (1997) model had five main social and emotional abilities. These included intrapersonal and interpersonal skills, adaptability, mood and stress management, which together influence the effectiveness of a person's ability to cope with the demands of the environment. This model framed EI as a general psychology model, in the context of personality theory (Goleman, 2001). On the other hand, Goleman (1998b) grounded his EI theory on performance that is based on competencies, encompassing a set of abilities that integrate affective and cognitive skills. The early framework by Goleman (1998b) acknowledged five dimensions of EI, these being self-awareness, self- management, self-motivation, social awareness and social skills, shown in Table 2. Split into the two categories seen in Figure 2 of social and personal competencies. Alternatively Salovey and Mayer (1997) based their EI theory on intelligence and the realisation that traditional measures (IQ) failed to measure differences in people's ability to effectively perceive, process and manage emotions. As demonstrated by Figure (3) a four-branch model of the skills from basic to complex, involved in EI. This frame work starts at the basic emotion- related abilities to the more complex. Branch 1 and 2 the perception and expression of emotion and the capacity of emotion to enhance thought are relatively detached regions of information processing. In contrast Branch 4, emotional management has to be intertwined with a person's over all goals. "Within each branch there also is a developmental progression of skills from the more basic to the more sophisticated" (Mayer et al, 2004 p.199). At the most basic level perceiving and expressing emotions for example registering whether someone is happy or sad or detecting an emotional tone from someone when associated with music or art. It involves non verbal perception by identifying emotion expressed in the face, posture, voice and related channels of communication (Nowicki & Mitchell, 1998; Scherer et al. 2001). Emotional perception is necessary for EI to manifest (Emmerling & Cherniss, 2003). The second branch assimilating emotion in thought, involves the capacity of emotions to assist thinking and emotional experiences into mental life. Many emotion theories include a feeling component (Schwarz, 1990) as well as discussing physiological signs of emotions. This knowledge of linking emotions to thinking can be used for planning or problem solving (Izard, 2001). For example when a problem has an upsetting aspect, problem solving efforts on that aspect can be given attention measure differences in people's ability to effectively perceive, process and manage emotions. As demonstrated by Figure (3) a four-branch model of the skills from basic to complex, involved in EI. This frame work starts at the basic emotion- related abilities to the more complex. Branch 1 and 2 the perception and expression of emotion and the capacity of emotion to enhance thought are relatively detached regions of information processing. In contrast Branch 4, emotional management has to be intertwined with a person's over all goals. "Within each branch there also is a developmental progression of skills from the more basic to the more sophisticated" (Mayer et al, 2004 p.199). At the most basic level perceiving and expressing
Salovey and Mayer (1990)
Cooper and Swarf (1997)
Know own feelings
In touch with feelings
Use feelings to make decisions with confidence
Ability to relate inner and outer world
Knowing one's emotions
Recognising a feeling as it happens
Ability to understand own emotions
Identify, value and make the most of own strengths
Not reflecting on own moods
Focus on results (what needs to be done)
Express feelings (not passive)
Ability to form an accurate and truthful model of oneself and use model to work effectively
Handling feelings so that they are appropriate
Express own emotions productively
Manage and control own emotions
Do not use impulse in pursuing goals
Use anxiety to help perform well
Do not give up in the face of setbacks.
Marshalling emotions in search of a goal
Effectiveness under pressure
Initiative, focus and drive
Balancing compassion and caring
Persuading others to work to a common goal
Helping others to learn
Promoting social harmony
Networking: building rapport with a key network
Promoting and exhibiting cooperation with others
Effective team working
Managing emotions in others
Salovey and Mayer (1990)
Cooper and Swarf (1997)
Sense what others are feeling
Feel rapport with others
Interactions go smoothly
Good at handling conflict
Good at handling emotional upsets
Can sense pulse of relationship in groups
Can articulate unstated feelings
Naturally takes lead in organising groups
People appreciate leadership
Talent for Settling disputes
Talent for negotiating
Talent for deal making
Ability to understand others, what motivates them and how they work.
Discern and respond appropriately to the moods, temperaments and motivations of others.
Recognising emotions in others
Empathy built on self-awareness
Empathising with emotions of others
Turning divergent views into creative energy
Identify, value and make most of strengths of others
Speaking one's mind
Listening to others
Express own emotion productively
Balance "hard/soft" in decisions
Accept personal responsibility
Little need for control
Repairing emotional damage
Table 1 - Elements of emotional intelligence
Source: Adapted Dulewicz & Higgs (2000)
Figure 2: Social and Personal Competencies of emotional intelligence
Source Adaped: (Jamali et al 2006)
emotions for example registering whether someone is happy or sad or detecting an emotional tone from someone when associated with music or art. It involves non verbal perception by identifying emotion expressed in the face, posture, voice and related channels of communication (Nowicki & Mitchell, 1998; Scherer et al. 2001).
Emotional perception is necessary for EI to manifest (Emmerling & Cherniss, 2003). The second branch assimilating emotion in thought, involves the capacity of emotions to assist thinking and emotional experiences into mental life. Many emotion theories include a feeling component (Schwarz, 1990) as well as discussing physiological signs of emotions. This knowledge of linking emotions to thinking can be used for planning or problem solving (Izard, 2001). For example when a problem has an upsetting aspect, problem solving efforts on that aspect can be given attention to find an acceptable resolution. Some types of problem solving techniques are facilitated by emotions however some are not (Isen, 2001; Palfai & Salovey, 1993). The third branch of understanding emotions encompasses the ability to understand and reason with emotion, to analyse them and understand their outcomes (Walker & Zeitlin, 1990; Roseman, 1984). Those with high understanding of emotions comprehend how they can blend together and the transition of emotion states over time. For example the feeling of fear is followed by relief when the feared situation or object is no longer present. The final and highest level, branch 4 reflects the
Figure 3 - A four-branch model of the skills involved in emotional intelligence
Source: Adapted Mayer et al (1999)
EI Competency Cluster
The ability to detect/trace/label an emotion as it occurs
Openness to candid feedback
The ability to keep emotions under check and manage disturbing emotions effectively
The ability to remain hopeful and optimistic despite setbacks and failures
The ability to understand the emotional make-up of other people and getting the true feel of their thought process
Motivation of others
Proficiency in managing relationships and building rapport and networks.
Table 2 - Goleman (1998b) Components of Emotional Intelligence Source: Adapted Bar-On and Parker (2000)
management of emotions. This is the ability to regulate and manage emotions effectively. This is achieved in the context of a person's social awareness, self-awareness, self-knowledge and goals (Gross, 1998; Parrott, 2002). "The ability to manage emotions effectively does not imply that one is always able to keep distressing emotions from entering consciousness but more correctly implies an openness to emotional experience" (Emmerling & Cherniss, 2003 p156).
Goleman's work (1998b) differs from Bar-On (1988) and Salovey and Mayer (1997) by attempting to base his theory specifically on the competencies of people linked with work performance, however for the purpose of this thesis as a result of the relevance of Mayer and Salovey's (1997) work, this study will focus upon them to encompass findings of EI links with event managerial work. Goleman (1998b) and Bar-On (1988) depict EI as a diverse construct with aspects associated traditionally with motivation, personality and affective dispositions alongside the capacity for processing emotional information. Mayer and Salovey's mental ability model of EI exclusively focuses on managing emotions and the propensity to process emotional information.
2.4.1 Validity and Reliability of the MSCEIT
2.5 A Profile Description of an 'Emotional Intelligence Personality' and its Characteristics
Many characteristics contribute to what may be referred to as an EI personality, suggested by research on those in business with high EI levels (Mayer et al 2004; Kunnanatt, 2008). Prominent amongst them is the aptitude for "emotional literacy" this is a person's competence in identifying and correctly reading their rational-emotional processes (Park, 2005; Salovey et al 1999). Mayer et al (2004) states that with an EI personality "Solving emotional problems likely requires less cognitive effort for this individual. The person also tends to be somewhat higher in verbal, social and other intelligences" (Mayer et al, 2004 p 210). Research suggests that emotionally intelligent managers are more equip with handling their own emotions, better at calming themselves when upset and get distressed less often (Abraham, 1999, 2004). Due to this ability for 'self regulation', biologically these types of people are also more relaxed with lower stress hormone levels (Tischler et al, 2002). Chernisse (1997) found that those with EI personalities show high levels of empathy in their approach towards making others feel empowered, supported, trusted, involved, listened to and understood. They are also noticeable and credible amongst peers as being compassionate who see others points of views. Theorists suggest that in organisations, EI personalities act as powerful catalytic agents, who are able to transform the performance and character of said organisations 9Mayer et al; Mc Garvey, 1997). This study will look into how these characteristics from the profile description could be applied to event managers in organisations.
2.6. EI and Decision making processes
Events manager individuals need to be able to make fast and sound decision in order to carry out successful events (Elmuti, 2004). Many managers need to think on their feet and constantly make the 'right' decisions at events as the reputation of the event is on the line with the service and experience which people receive (Bowdin et al, 2005). This ability is a core subject integrated with EI competencies as emotional processing can at times determine a person's decision making (Isen, 2001). Laybourn (2004) explored theory on decision-making and applied it to the events sector. Her findings suggested that the generic literature supports the contention that decision makers are not naturally rational. This is in conjunction with the previous notion and intelligence and management cannot be run by rational theories alone, therefore emotion and EI come into play. Research indicates that EI personalities and those who possess personal competence can think clearly and make sound decisions despite changes in their life (Slaski & Cartwright, 2002). Those with low EI who have difficulty indentifying feelings, their ability for decision-making processes are greatly diminished. Getz (2009) suggests that another factor could affect a decision maker is that the current decisions of a person are strongly influenced by previous decisions of that individual.
There has been increasing recognition that rational modals of career decision making cannot grasp the complexity of the decision-making process (Kidd, 1998; Krieshok, 1998). Neuroscience research has begun to highlight the relationship between emotions and decision making. Emmerling and Cherniss (2003) highlight an experiment that studied participants with normal brain function, against participants who had bilateral damage to the ventro-medial prefrontal cortices, which have normal cognitive functions however have associations with low levels of emotional responding. It was discovered that the participants with damaged prefrontal cortices, could not notice and incorporate subtle emotional cues during a made up gambling task, in order to simulate real life decision making processes. This study has conflicts with Mayer et al (1999) four-branch model of the skills involved in emotional intelligence, as the first branch includes perceiving emotions, which involves individuals to identify emotion expressed without words but through means such as in the face expressions or posture, also where emotional perception is necessary for EI to be evident. The participants with bilateral damage to the brain could not pick up on these emotional cues, however still had normal brain function on all other levels.
2.6.1 EI with Performance and Management
The level of EI has been associated with performance at work within previous studies (Longhorn, 2004; Watkin, 2000). It has been defined as a group of skills connected to the emotional aspects of life, such as the capability to monitor a person's own and others emotions associated with the way in which people interact with one another (Goleman, 1998). A common thought and question pondered by researchers of EI has been, "Do careers of individuals with high levels of EI differ from those who have a lower EI?" However the question in this study will be more based on whether career manager individuals with higher EI levels in the events industry, differ from those with lower levels of EI. Previous research has shown that in general organisations, those who possess elevated EI better perform and develop steadier career paths in organisational life (Druskat & Wolf, 2001; Mandell & Pherwant, 2003). This concurs with Watkin (2000) research that portrays EI as the singular most important factor in superior performance at all levels of the work spectrum.
Realisation is increasing that EI facilitates organisations to improve performance multi-national corporations are realigning their HR development in order to have an emotionally intelligent workplace (Dries & Pepermans, 2007). Managers who are aware and have an understanding of others and their own emotions, then use that understanding to successfully inspire, motivate and connect with others, are more effective than managers with traditional intelligence alone. These traditional managers actively disconnect emotions from the workplace, promoting detached and methodical styles of management (Goleman et al, 2002; Wheatley, 1999). Goleman (1998) argues from his studies that EI attributes are twice as crucial for performance excellence, than traditional cognitive abilities. Recent evidence on job performance profiles in organisations also suggests EI is a vital element for excellent in job roles (Morehouse, 2007).
According to Fineman (2007) people with high EQ have skills in regulating one's own emotions and moods; they have the ability to monitor others emotions and have an interest in motivating themselves. They have highly developed social skills and can handle relationships well. EI is the skill to sense, recognise and successfully apply the awareness of emotions as information, influence and connection to themselves and others. The hindrance with this is that none of the existing literature has directly associated EI with work performance and management within the events sector, however it can be seen that the traits stated here such as mood and emotion regulation, self motivation and handling relationships with others well, are a large influence on managing events as they expect high service based interactions, working with and for other people and to a very specific time limit (Getz 2009). According to Carmeli and Josman (2006) individuals who have higher EQ are also more likely to have elevated performance outcomes. Research shows that people with high self confidence which are more likely to be successful; those who are self-controlled workers stay focused under pressure and innovative people tend to generate new ideas, these are all attributes associated with EI (Goleman, 1998). "Employees who are high in emotional intelligence are expected to attain higher achievements in both workplace and their personal life, and to contribute significantly to the performance of their organisation." (Carmeli & Josman, 2006, p.403) Therefore this study wishes to see how these positive traits could be associated with those in the events industry for successful event management.
2.6.2 Team work in Events and Emotional Intelligence
Management where people are involved, like in the events industry have a need for successful team work, in order to efficiently carry out the work required. EI has been suggested to raise the level of team performance within an organisation, this could be due to the enhanced ability to effectively perceive and manage emotions, as well as having skills that connect to team task performance skills (Morehouse, 2007). Clarke (2009) studied EI abilities and their relationships with team processes and found that EI explained variance in interpersonal team processes.
EI is also an aspect of importance relating to individual differences that influence team effectiveness, teams that include members with high EI levels tend to present advanced task performance skills when compared to teams who have members with lower EI (Jordan & Troth, 2004). Goleman (1998) had found in his organisational studies that those with a lack of EI may lead to a diminished cognitive performance and the inability to successfully carry out tasks with others.
It has been recognised that many EI abilities and behaviour types underpin high-quality team processes such as cooperation and conflict management. Also team behavioural such as trust, commitment and loyalty are also recognised as strongly linking with major emotional components (Wolff et al., 2006). Awareness of the emotions of another team member should help with the understanding of one another's needs and support team bonding. This close interpersonal tie can help facilitate conflict resolution and trust building (Clarke, 2009). Understanding that team events, can prompt emotional responses that impact performance and behaviour can also help members in teams plan task work (Jordan et al., 2002). Those in teams who are more successful at managing and influencing their own and others are thought to be better at motivating others and improving conflict management (Prati et al., 2003; Van Rooy & Viswesvaran, 2004).
Team work is inherently a social activity as emotions play an imperative role in team effectiveness. A model of EI in a group context was proposed by Druskat and Wolff (1999,2001a,2001b) in this they identified that a group develops behavioural norms they labelled 'emotionally component group norms' (ECGN) that guide emotional experiences that occur in groups. The degree the group develops these 'norms' has a relationship to team performance (Druskat et al., 2003) from this, Koman and Wolff (2007) discovered that the EI of team leaders is significantly related to the presence of ECGN on the teams they lead, also ECGN are related to team performance. If this type of behaviour is presented to occur during this study, the author will take ECGN into consideration.
Team work is imperative in managing events, as seen from the previous discussion on the events industry, shown to be a subject that crosses with several various other work knowledge domains (Getz, 2009) therefore working with many other people and teams.
2.6.3 Emotional Intelligence in a Social Setting
Mayer et al (2004) states that those with high EI are pulled towards work which allows social interactions, rather than occupations encompassing administrative work. Events management is a career that fits into this social occupation area, it needs the interaction of people to create and carry out successful events. Studies highlight that people with high EI and who interact in a social environment are more likely to create 'win-win' outcomes and relationships with others and themselves (Abraham, 2004; Carmeli & Josman, 2006). Those with low EI however take on emotional behaviour with others that are counterproductive and produce win-lose or lose-lose type outcomes. Their neutral or negative emotions in social transactions, constructs a wall of emotional repulsion around them, this is often unknowingly. These types of people can prove detrimental to themselves and others in organisations. Therefore a scale of emotional attractiveness-repulsiveness has been created, (Figure: 4) which ties in with the social and personal competencies of emotional intelligence shown in Figure 2.
Linking social settings to the previous discussion on the differences between EI and IQ, Matthews et al (2003) discovered that EQ is more likely to be equally distributed across social-cultural groups rather than IQ. Its competencies can be learned, with some scholars contracting the supposed malleability of EI with the relative permanency of IQ, therefore EI competencies are not genetically fixed however can be improved and nurtured over time.
2.6.4 Hindrances of Emotions at work
Kunnanatt (2008) has taken into consideration that EI could be a handicap for some individuals. He suggests that there may be situations that when people have high EI it could be used to the detriment of others. He recommends print media that are available to educate people on topics such as 'emotional abuse' and 'emotional blackmail' (Evans, 2002; Forward and Frazier, 1997) advising people on how to proceed with situations when others use fear or guilt to manipulate others. However a contrary argument is that those who are at risk of these topics, do not therefore fall
Low E I
High E I
Figure 4: Emotional Intelligence and social interaction.
Source: Adapted Kunnanatt 2008
under an EI personality type, as they are unable to successfully monitor and influence others for win-win outcomes (Abraham, 2004)
Although this subject of negative EI has not have much research to support or dismiss it, other negative consequences from having emotions involved in work situations have been highlighted in the literature. Such as when organisations use emotions as part of a strategy to create hostile work environment in order to succeed and as a catalyst for heightened work production (Perrone & Vickers' 2004). The use of EI may be in vein if each person is not looking to work together or made to succeed as a group, but against each other to create fear for workers to be loyal.
Emotional negativity could lead to the worker experiencing emotional dissonance (Fineman, 2007) this is where whilst people are under stress presents themselves in a certain way to others, causing conflict of their actual feelings, because of its inconsistency to the emotions which they are required to express within their job. Eventually this may take a toll on the individuals' mental well-being (Cullinane, 2006). This term links with the occurrence of emotional labour, a term coined by Hochschild (1983) is where a worker is expected to display certain emotions, as part of their job to promote organisational goals. It is advised that people are aware of these occurrences and are well educated in order to save themselves from them. Aspects of having a high EI personality, could be a way to counteract any negativity, supporting happier work environments and workers, avoiding harm to a person's well-being.
2.7. Empirical Studies and controversies of Emotional Intelligence at Work
A growing body of empirical studied points to the importance of emotions at work, evidence suggests that EI has associations of a heightened capability to deal with stress, a more successful change orientation and more resilient organisation commitment (Carmeli 2003; Vakola et al, 2004). McCelland (1998) looked into more than 30 different organisations to review the data on top performers from average ones and found that a large range of EI competencies linking self motivation, social awareness and social skills. Goleman (1998b) found that 67 percent of the competencies regarded as essential for efficient performance were emotional competencies. However, Dulewicz and Higgs' (1998) discovered in their work that IQ accounted for 27 percent and EI accounted for 36 percent of the variants of organisational achievements. Both Bennis (2001) and Chen et al (1998) found from their data collection that EI accounts for 85-90 percent of organisational leader's success.
The relationship between gender and EI has gained the attention of researchers such as Mayer et al (2000) who identified females to achieve higher scores on different EI measures. Mandell and Pherwani (2003) also found that females scored significantly higher than males. On the other hand, Goleman (1998a) implied that males and females would not score differently on EI scales. Findings suggest that even if both males and females do have the same EI levels, they tend to differ on EI competencies. It has been suggested that males self-regulate more whereas females score higher on empathy and self-awareness (Bar-On 1997b). Morand (2001) indicates that women are more like to perceive different emotions. Whereas Fatt (2002) found men to score higher on measures such as identifying emotions, yet there were no differences found on understanding and regulating emotional measures between the genders. It was found that there were no overwhelming differences between genders of overall measured EI (Nikolaou & Tsaousis, 2002). Supporting this Petrides and Furnham (2000) discovered in their work no significant differences between overall scores for both genders also. However, males were more likely to report self-serving biases, with females falling into self-derogatory biases.
There also has been conflicting findings regarding the association between EI and age. Cakan and Altun (2005) suggest that age does not have an effect on EI, however others found that EI is developed during life experiences and those who are older score higher in EI measurements (Bar-On, 2000). Click (2002) discovered higher EI scores among older students to younger ones in her study. Punia (2002) agreed with this argument finding that EI levels increase by age. However, it was added that EI reaches a peak then decreases with age.
Research predominantly indicated that levels of EI increases with managerial experience (Bennis, 2001; Chen et al, 1998). Van Der Zee (2004) found that managers of a higher level scored higher on an EI scale than a reference group on a majority of dimensions. Research also found that cognitive abilities alone, account for only approximately 25 percent of the variance in work performance. This work posits that EI is an important predictor of job performance and overall predictive validity of EI in work, group and academic performance (Van Rooy and Viswesvaren 2003).
In accordance with Jamali et al (2006) this study will address the issues of managerial position, gender and age alongside the competencies that link EI to events management.
2.7.1 Brain Theory behind Emotional Intelligence
"Careful and intelligent use of emotions and reason is an art." (Kunnanatt, 2008 p 619). Brain theory research suggests that there is an ongoing relationship between the rational and emotional domains of the brain and competitive inter-dominance between them (Bear et al, 1996; Edelman, 1987). In the majority of people the emotion-regulating areas of the brain (i.e. the amygdale along with other limbic structures) usually dominate the rational part of the brain (the neocortex) suppressing or controlling rational actions and thoughts of humans, this is due to human biological equipments genetic programming and the types of social conditioning the individual has received (Thompson, 1988). When critical situations or emergencies need careful, intelligent decisions by the rational neocortex, the emotional mind may hinder the rational processes, suppressing a person of their reasoning power to cognitively test the situation (Davidson et al, 2000).
The role of EI and managing interactions come into play when "emotional games" are played by the amygdale which happens within a flicker of a moment. This is where the emotional mind interprets or exaggerates events and advises the body to prepare for a fight or flight situation. The person sees the situation as threatening due to this and engages defensive behaviour, operating in an emotionally less intelligent mode, becoming emotionally excited with the body increasing blood pressure, palpitations and other biological reactions (Kunnanatt, 2008). In EI personalities, this emotional game played in the mind is better detected so the person carries out controlled emotional involvement. This ability of recognising what is happening inside the mind is called the meta-regulation of mood (Mayer et al 1997a). EI in its mature form allows the person to constructively channel emotions and use them as motivational support for the rational brains actions (Tischler et al, 2002).