Lindebaum, D (2008) Trait emotional intelligence, transformational leadership and performance in the UK construction industry. PhD thesis, University of Manchester, UK.
Abstract
Emotional intelligence (EI) and transformational leadership (TFL) are widely researched topics in organisational behaviour studies, both amongst themselves and in relation to outcomes at work. Several studies appear to have substantiated the link between EI and TFL. However, the relationship between EI and outcomes (i.e. performance and effectiveness) at work is somewhat less demonstrated than the relationship between TFL and outcomes. Hitherto, only few suggestive studies have found positive relationships among these variables within the context of the construction industry. Despite recognised difficulties in terms of interpersonal relationships in the construction industry, a mounting number of commentators argue that improved relationships are likely to result in improved performance of construction projects. Importantly, EI has been described as vital for functioning interpersonal relationships, whilst TFL often entails emotion-laden relationships in leader-follower dyads. Since social encounters are saturated with emotions, the relationship between El and TFL may be worthy of investigation in the context of construction. Thus, the aim of this study is to investigate the relationship between EI (specifically, trait EI), TFL and their impact upon performance and effectiveness in the context of construction project management. A mixed-method approach is employed for the purpose of data collection. The quantitative part (i.e. questionnaire survey) comprised a multi-rater assessment (n=227 individuals, 47 completed clusters), including same-source and non same-source data. The qualitative part (i.e. semi-structured interviews (n=19) and feedback sessions (n=5)) involved project managers who participated in the questionnaire survey as well. Contrary to previous studies, results of this study do not suggest a significant relationship between trait EI and TFL when strict methodological standards are applied. Likewise, both trait El and TFL scores do not significantly correlate with the performance and effectiveness criteria. Most importantly, the data analysis strongly suggests that common method variance significantly influences the results found among same-source ratings, especially in relation to trait EI and TFL. The analysis of the qualitative data suggests that the industrial culture in construction moderates the relationship between non same-source ratings relative to trait EI and TFL, as well as their relationships with the outcome criteria.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction project; feedback; leadership; performance; project manager; culture; effectiveness; organisational behaviour; interview; questionnaire survey |
| Index terms: | organizational behaviour, project manager, variance, transformational leadership, construction industry, investigation, construction project management, emotional intelligence, interpersonal relationship, effectiveness, survey, data analysis, culture in construction, interview, questionnaire, construction project |
| Subjects: | psychology, data analysis and analytics, business, profession, data collection methods, sociology, measurement and scaling, behavioral psychology, industry analysis, performance management, management, project management theory and practice, production management |
| Topics: | Quality Management, Project Management, Human Resources, Organizational Design, Research Practice, Roles and Professions |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here