Emotional Intelligence as the moderator in the...

Emotional Intelligence as the Moderator in the relationship between Negative Emotions and Counterproductive Work Behaviours

0

Emotional Intelligence as a Moderator in the relationship between Negative

Emotions and Counterproductive Work Behaviours

by

LAU CHO YIN

07016379

Human Resources Management Option

An Honors Degree Project submitted to the School of Business

in Partial Fulfillment of the Graduation Requirement for the

Degree of Bachelor of Business Administration (Honors)

Hong Kong Baptist University

Hong Kong

May 2010


0

TABLE OF CONTENT

CONTENT

PAGE

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

1

ABSTRACT

2

I. INTRODUCTION 3-4

1.1. STATEMENT OF PROBLEM 4

1.2. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

4

II. LITERATURE REVIEW AND HYPOTHESES DEVELOPMENT 5-9

2.1. NEGATIVE EMOTIONS 5

2.2. COUNTERPRODUCTIVE WORK BEHAVIOURS 5-6

2.3. EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE AS A MODERATOR 6-9

2.4 CONCEPTUAL MODEL AND SUMMARY OF THE HYPOTHESES

9

III. METHODOLOGY 10-13

3.1. SAMPLE 10

3.2. MEASUREMENT 10-13

3.3. DATA ANALYSIS

13

IV. RESULTS 14-15

4.1 FACTOR ANALYSIS 14

4.2 CRONBACH ALPHA RELIABILITY TEST 14

4.3 ZERO-ORDER CORRELATION 14-15

4.4 HIERARCHICAL REGRESSION ANALYSIS

15

V. DISCUSSIONS 15-23

5.1. THEORETICAL IMPLICATIONS 15-18

5.2. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

5.3. LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH

18-20

21-23

VI. CONCLUSION

23

VII. REFERENCES

TABLES

APPENDIX

24-25

26-30

31-39


1

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

First of all, I would like to express my sincere thankfulness to Dr. Wei Li-Qun, the supervisor of

my Honor Project. Dr. Wei has been very helpful indeed and she always offers professional advices

and generous guidance for my project. When I encounter difficulties and problems, she is always

there to help me and give me encouragement. Though I always trouble her and seek her advice, she

never shows impatience and is willing to answer all my questions.

Also, I would like to give thanks to my friends who had helped me to distribute and collect the

questionnaires. Without their helps, the project could not be done in such a smooth way.

Last but never the least, I would like to express my gratitude to all of the respondents in this

study, thanking them very much for their sharing and information on the issues being studied which

are the core of this project.


2

ABSTRACT

Many researches before have confirmed that the level of Counterproductive Work Behaviours

(CWB) is determined by negative emotions posed by employees. Based on this foundation, the

predictive relationship between negative emotions and CWB and the moderating effect of Emotional

Intelligence (EI) are analyzed in the report.

This is a cross-sectional survey study and the quantitative data were collected in three months,

from January 2010 to March 2010. The sample size of the study is 170, coming from employees

working in a wide range of industries in Hong Kong. The respondents’ scores on EI, negative

emotions in experience with their jobs and CWB engaged were collected and analyzed.

From the results obtained, it is shown that there is a positive relationship between negative

emotions and CWB, confirming the emotion-centred model of CWB, that CWB is erected by the

negative emotions generated by employees. Moreover, it is indicated that EI is moderating the

relationship between negative emotions and CWB. Given the same situation and same level of

negative emotions experienced, the people with high EI engage less CWB compared to those with

low EI, confirming the influences of EI on the predictive relationship.

Based on the results and findings, actions can be taken by organizations to reduce CWB in the

organizations, minimizing the losses caused by CWB. Last but not the least, practical implications

with suggestions are discussed as well.


3

I. INTRODUCTION

Being the extra-role behaviour in the workplace, Counterproductive Work Behaviours (CWB) is

one of the key factors determining the performance of the organizations (Fox, Spector, & Miles,

2001). CWB is not only non productive, but also counter-productive, severely reversing the

organizations’ operations and harming the profits. Being identified as the serious problem in the

organizations and creating huge losses every year, CWB has become the hot topic and many

researchers have interest in exploring. More investigations and studies are needed in order to better

understand it and further suggest some ways to minimize its harm.

To combat CWB, many researchers looked into the causes and the generating process of it.

From the previous researches, it is clear that the process of generating CWB is the emotion-centred

model. First, the external stressors generate employees’ negative emotions. When employees feel

they are treated unfairly, they are likely to revenge by engaging in CWB, because engaging in CWB

can reduce the dissatisfaction experienced (Fox, Spector, & Miles, 2001; Haaland, 2002). CWB can

help them to balance the inequity felt and decrease the negative feelings experienced (Fox, Spector,

& Miles, 2001; Spector & Fox, 2002, 2005).

It is widely known that the external factors which are regarded as the stressors generate negative

emotions, but not many researchers look into the internal factors of individuals. A recent research

suggests that Emotional Intelligence (EI) is positively related to Organizational Citizenship

Behaviours (OCB) (Carmeli and Josman, 2006). Because both OCB and CWB are voluntary

activities in the organizations done by individuals (Baker, 2005), it is likely that EI may also affect

the process of generating CWB, which is the relationship between negative emotions and CWB.


4

1.1 STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Given the negative impacts of CWB in organizations, there is a need to further investigate the

internal factors which affect the engagement of CWB in the individual level. From the literature, it is

shown that negative emotions lead to the engagement of CWB. So, in the study, we will first study

the predictive relationship between negative emotions and CWB.

Moreover, the pervious researches also indicated the possibility of EI serving as a moderator in

the relationship between negative emotions and CWB. So, an interest is raised in the following

question:

“Does EI of individual affect the relationship between negative emotions and CWB in

organizations?”

Therefore, the study will also look at the moderating effect of the EI in the relationship.

This project is built on the efforts of previous studies which proved that negative emotions are

the causes of CWB in organizations. In this report, we will study how EI affects the relationship

between negative emotions and CWB engaged.

1.2 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

This project will focus on how EI influences the relationship of negative emotions and CWB.

The objectives of the research are:

To explore the relationship of negative emotions and CWB

To investigate how EI will moderate the relationship of negative emotions and CWB

To suggest some ways of alleviating CWB in the workplace


5

II. LITERATURE REVIEW AND HYPOTHESES

DEVELOPMENT

2.1 NEGATIVE EMOTIONS

By definition, negative emotions are the bad feelings triggered by the situation (Herzberg,

Mausner, and Snyderman, 1959). Although there have been great controversial arguments over the

nature and definitions of emotions, the most popular definitions for emotions are illustrating

emotions as the systems that have many components, including cognitive, behavioural, expressive,

and physiological changes, which all of the elements affect the others (Schulze, Roberts, 2005; Van

Katwyk, Fox, Spector, & Kelloway, 2000). Because negative emotions make people feel uneasy and

not comfortable, people will behave in certain ways to decrease the negative emotions experienced

(Patton, 1997).

According to the studies, bad feelings in the workplace can be caused by “work overload, lack

of rewards, and social relations” (Oginska-Bulik, 2005). From the theory of the social exchange and

the norm of reciprocity, people behave based on the contexts (Haaland, 2002). When experiencing

negative emotions in the workplace, employees will engage in Counterproductive Work Behaviours

(CWB), certain behaviours which are harmful to the organizations or the people in the organizations

to rebalance their feelings (Fox, Spector, & Miles, 2001; Spector & Fox, 2002, 2005).

2.2 COUNTERPRODUCTIVE WORK BEHAVIOURS (CWB)

Counterproductive Work Behaviours (CWB) is also named as Workplace Deviance Behaviour.

Counterproductive Work Behaviours are the behaviours that are intended to have a detrimental effect

on organizations and their members (Fox, Spector, and Miles, 2001). Being recognized as the

behavioural reactions to working experiences (Bennett & Robinson, 2003), CWB are the volitional


6

acts that harm or are intended to harm organizations or people in the organizations (Spector & Fox,

2005). According to Spector & Fox (2002), engaging in CWB can be described as an

emotion-centred model: the external factors elicit negative emotions in individuals, who then engage

in CWB to re-balance their negative feelings (Fox, Spector, & Miles, 2001; Spector & Fox, 2002,

2005). Many previous studies clearly supported the emotion-centred model of CWB: the situational

stressors first erect the negative emotions of employees, who then engage in CWB to reduce the

dissatisfaction (Fox, Spector, & Miles, 2001; Haaland, 2002; Spector & Fox, 2002, 2005; Yang &

Diefendorff, 2009). If employees perceive that they are being treated unfairly, they are likely to

engage in CWB in order to balance the inequity perceived and reduce the negative feelings (Fox,

Spector, & Miles, 2001; Spector & Fox, 2002, 2005). Given the researches, it is suggested that

negative emotions lead to the engagement of CWB.

H1: Negative emotions significantly influence the Counterproductive Work Behaviours (CWB)

2.3 EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE (EI) AS A MODERATOR

Emotional Intelligence (EI) or Emotional Maturity comprises the capabilities and skills that

individuals possess and that influence their abilities to cope with environmental demands (Ashkanasy,

Hartel and Zerbe, 2000). EI is defined as “the ability to perceive emotions, to access and generate

emotions so as to assist thought, to understand emotions and emotional knowledge, and to

reflectively regulate emotions so as to promote emotional and intellectual growth’’ (Mayer and

Salovey, 1997:5).

The concept of EI was popularized by Daniel Goleman, who published a book in 1995 titled

“Emotional Intelligence”. Goleman’s theory of EI is a mixed model, which has five dimensions:

self-awareness, self-regulation, motivation, empathy and social skills. Though his book “Emotional

Intelligence” became one of the best-selling books, some disagreed with his definition of EI, saying

that the social skills should not be included.


7

Different from Goleman’s model, the other leading professionals in EI, Mayer and Salovey

proposed their definitions of Emotional Intelligence in 1997. There are four dimensions in their

concepts, namely, emotional awareness of oneself, emotional awareness of others, emotional

management and emotional facilitation. The details of four dimensions are presented in the

following:

Dimensions of

Emotional Intelligence

Explanation

i. Emotional awareness of oneself The appraisal and expression of self-emotions

The awareness of own emotions is about understanding our

moment-to-moment feelings and the ways that emotions are

expressed verbally and nonverbally.

ii. Emotional awareness of others The appraisal and expression of emotions in the others

It is the capability to perceive the emotions of others and the

ability for empathy, which is to comprehend another’s feelings

and to re-experience them oneself (Salovey & Mayer, 1990). The

appraisal of feelings is very vital in making the appropriate and

substantial response.

iii. Emotional management The regulation of self-emotions

Regulation of our own emotions is the attempts or acts to

manage emotions by expressing our feelings and ideas

appropriately during the communication process.

iv. Emotional facilitation The use of emotions to facilitate performance

Aiming at improving the outcomes and the performance, the

talents in emotional facilitation are good at encouraging positive

emotions, motivation, enthusiasm and other things which could

help in building a good relationship and creating satisfaction.

Previous studies in EI clearly show that an emotion or a feeling would influence thinking, feeling

and acting; on the other hand, an action would influence thinking, feeling and acting (Ashkanasy,

Table 1: A Summary of the Emotional Intelligence model proposed by Mayer and Salovey (1997)


8

Hartel and Zerbe, 2000). Over the years, many researchers have clearly indicated that EI affects their

feelings as well as behaviours (Patton, 1997). If people have high EI, they will find it easier to

overcome the obstacles and feel happier than those with low EI. It is likely that EI also contributes to

the engagement of CWB by moderating the relationship between negative emotions and CWB.

The possible relationships between the four dimensions of EI and the relationship between

negative emotions and the engagement of CWB: are

i. Emotional awareness of oneself

People who are aware of their own feelings can identify their emotions easily (Goleman, 1995).

This ability can let them be able to cope with negative emotions quickly (Tjiong, 2006). Given

the same level of negative emotions, people with high EI can handle their moodiness and

decrease the possibility of engaging in CWB while people with low EI get trapped by negative

emotions and increase the likelihood of engaging in CWB.

ii. Emotional awareness of others

Employees who can understand others better will have more empathy for people around.

Therefore, they can understand the limitations and weaknesses of the others and definitely find

it easily to forgive the wrong doings of people and be more tolerant to the flaws. Even though

people with high and low EI face the same level of negative emotions, employees with high EI

are less likely to revenge the organizations and the colleagues by engaging in CWB, but the

opposite for people with low EI.

iii. Emotional management

For those who are good at self-management, they are able to control their feelings as well as

emotions. As a result, they can control themselves for not doing misbehaviors which will harm

the organizations and their colleagues (Khalid et al, 2009). So, in the same level of negative

emotions, high EI can stop employees from engaging in CWB but low EI will even increase the

likelihood of having CWB because people cannot control themselves well.

iv. Emotional facilitation

People who can use the emotions to facilitate the performance and outcome usually have good

and high quality interpersonal relationships with others (Tjiong, 2006). High EI will stop them

from just focusing on own negative emotions while low EI will be another way round. Because


9

they understand that negative emotions will harm the productivity of organizations and have

better relationships with others (Goleman, 1995), they have less CWB compared to the people

with low EI in the same level of negative emotions.

To sum up, it is possible that employees with high EI will engage less CWB than those with low

EI in the same level of negative emotions because of the moderating effect of EI in the relationship

between negative emotions and CWB. Thus, it is likely EI serves as a moderator in this relationship.

H2: Given the same level of negative emotions, the relationship between negative emotions

and Counterproductive Work Behaviors (CWB) is stronger for people with low Emotional

Intelligence (EI) than high Emotional Intelligence (EI)

2.4 CONCEPTUAL MODEL AND SUMMARY OF THE HYPOTHESES

Given the above literature review, the conceptual model of the hypotheses and the summary of

them are suggested as the following:

Figure 1: A Conceptual framework of the hypotheses

Independent variable (IV): Negative Emotions

Dependent variable (DV): Counterproductive Work Behaviours (CWB)

Moderator (MV): Emotional Intelligence (EI)

Hypothesis

H1: Negative emotions significantly influence the Counterproductive Work Behaviours (CWB)

H2: Given the same level of negative emotions, the relationship between negative emotions and

Counterproductive Work Behaviors (CWB) is stronger for people with low Emotional Intelligence (EI)

than high Emotional Intelligence (EI)

Table 2: A Summary of hypotheses

Emotional

Intelligence (EI)

Negative

Emotions

Counterproductive Work

Behaviours (CWB)

+ IV DV

MV


10

III. METHODOLOGY

3.1 SAMPLE

This is a cross-sectional survey design, and a pool of participants was chosen on a voluntary

basis. A quantitative survey was used and questionnaires were structured and disturbed to people

who are working in organizations.

The cover letter was attached with the questionnaires as well, in order to clearly show the

objectives of the project and to protect the privacy of the information returned, increasing the

confidentiality. 200 questionnaires were sent and 170 questionnaires were collected, the response

rate is about 85%.

44.1% of the participants are female and the rest are male. Half of the people are aged from 26

to 35 years and the second large group is the young people from 16 to 25 years old. About 44.1% are

secondary school graduates and 38.8% are university graduates. 68.8% and 78.8% of the respondents

have worked in their organizations from 1 to 5 years. For the job level, 17.6% of the people are

supervisors and the rest, about 82.4%, are subordinates. The study has covered a wide range of

people with different backgrounds.

-----------------------------

Insert Table 3 here

-----------------------------

3.2 MEASUREMENT

To increase the reliability and validity of the study, the set-up of the survey is based on the past

studies and researches. The major variables of the study were measured by the following

measurement:


11

3.2.1 Emotional Intelligence (EI)

The self-rated Emotional Intelligence (EI) test used was developed by Schutte et al (1998), built

on the theoretical model of EI proposed by Salovey and Mayer in 1990. Based on the availability of

the EI tests, it is chosen because of the easy administration, the adequate reliability (Cronbach’s

alpha 0.9 and 0.87) and the validity (0.78).

Originally, this measurement contains 62 items. In this study, the participants were asked to

answer all 33 questions on five-point scales, from 1 (Strongly disagree) to 5 (Strongly agree). The

interviewees should, based on their past experience and feelings, answer all questions honestly.

Moreover, the EI score would be obtained by taking the average score of the answers.

3.2.2 Negative Emotions

The job-related affective well-being scale (JAWS) short version (Van Katwyk, Fox, Spector, &

Kelloway, 2000) was used as the measurement of negative emotions. There are totally 11 negative

emotions, namely: anger, annoyance, anxious, bored, depressed, discouraged, disgusted, fatigued,

frightened, frustrated and miserable.

For the categories of Job Events for negative emotions experienced, they were adopted from

negative event emotion matrix from the book: “Emotions in the Workplace: Research, Theory, and

Practice”. In chapter 3 of the book, the researchers conducted a survey about the negative emotions

experienced by hotel employees. There are totally 13 events in job causing negative emotions,

namely: acts of colleagues, acts of management, lack of goal achievement, lack of receiving

recognition, acts of customers, task problems, making mistakes, lack of influence or control,

company policies, external environment, physical situations, workload and personal problems.

All participants were asked to indicate how often they felt in those 13 job events and rated on a

five-point scale, from 1 (Not at all) to 5 (Always). The average internal consistency reliability

was .93 for this measure.


12

3.2.3 Counterproductive Work Behaviours (CWB)

The items of CWB were adopted from the research conducted by Yang and Diefendorff (Yang &

Diefendorff, 2009), which is a study conducted in Hong Kong last year. The researchers conducted a

few interviews and researches before the experiment in order to have the most accurate CWB items

which suited Hong Kong people most. The reasons for choosing this study are the same experiment

location and the updated CWB items. The average internal consistency reliabilities for

Counterproductive Work Behaviours was .92. Overall, there were 24 items selected from the list and

were rated on five-point scales.

The items of CWB were listed in the questionnaire, and participants were asked to identify what

level they were engaged in such activities before in the scale from 1 (Not at all) to 5 (Always). The

score of CWB was processed by obtaining the average marks of those items.

3.2.4 Control Variables

In the study, 10 different control variables were also included in the questionnaire. These

variables are gender, age, marital status, number of children, educational level, tenure in the

organization, tenure in the position, monthly salary, job level and working class. They were

controlled to test the impact of the hypotheses.

From the previous studies, many suggested that CWB engaged is affected by different factors.

Some suggested that gender difference may exist because women tend to conform more to norm

compared to men (Eagly, 1987; Eagly & Chrvala, 1986). Also, older people might have less CWB

because of the organizational commitment (Burke, 2006). Regarding to the marital status, married

people might be engaged in less CWB since they are afraid of being fired. The number of children

may also decrease the tendency of engaging in CWB because of the increasing family burden.

(Yang & Diefendorff, 2009). People have higher education may think CWB is unethical. Tenure in

the organization, tenure in the position and monthly salary may affect employees’ organizational


13

commitment (Burke, 2006), which then influences the tendency of engaging CWB. For the job level

and working class, they may influence the CWB engaged as the difference of job nature and norm

(Fox, Spector, & Miles, 2001; Spector & Fox, 2002, 2005).

3.3 DATA ANALYSIS

To test the correlation between variables, the zero correlation was conducted in the study. A

hierarchical regression was also used to process the data collected, aiming to test the relationship

between the negative emotions and CWB, as well as the moderating effect of the EI in the

relationship.


14

IV. RESULTS

4.1 FACTOR ANALYSIS

The principle component factor analysis with varimax was deployed in the study. The results for

all three dimensions were satisfactory and there is no cross loading. For the negative emotions, 11

out of 13 questions in the negative emotions were retained and the result of Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin

(KMO) Measure of Sampling Adequacy is .86. For the CWB, 21 out of 24 questions were retained and

the result of KMO is .90. For the EI, 13 out of 14 questions in the EI were retained and the result of

KMO is .88.

----------------------------

Insert Table 4 here

----------------------------

4.2 CRONBACH ALPHA RELIABLITY TEST

Cronbach alpha coefficient was examined to test the reliability of the three sections. All of the

scales adopted are above 0.80 and passed the reliability test.

---------------------------

Insert Table 5 here

---------------------------

4.3 ZERO-ORDER CORRELATION

First, as predicted before, there is a significant positive correlation between negative emotions

and CWB (r = .38, p<.01). Moreover, there is a significant negative relationship between EI and

CWB (r = -.32, p<.01). The results shown give a solid foundation for further studies.


15

For control variables, only one control variable, working class, is negatively related to CWB (r =

-.29, p<.01).

----------------------------

Insert Table 6 here

----------------------------

4.4 HIERARCHICAL REGRESSION ANALYSIS

The hierarchical regression analysis was deployed in the study to test the relationships between

the independent variable negative emotions and the dependent variables CWB.

Step 1: Controlled variables

Step 2: Negative emotions (Independent Variable)

Step 3: Emotional Intelligence (Moderator)

Step 4: Interaction of Negative Emotions and Emotional Intelligence

In step 1, when only control variables were put, the significant positive relationship was found in

working class (β = .39, p<.01, ∆R2

= .06).

In step 2, when negative emotions were put, the results were consistent with H1. A significant

positive relationship was found (β = .27, p<.01, ∆R2

= .12). So, H1 is supported.

When the moderator, EI, was added in step 3, the results were significant as well. There is a

significant negative relationship found (β = -.27, p<.01, ∆R2 = .09).

In step 4, when the z score of the interaction was added into the regression, the results were

significant as well. The interaction has a negative moderating effect on CWB (β = -.13, p<.01, ∆R2

= .10). So, H2 is supported as well.

-----------------------------

Insert Table 7 here

-----------------------------


16

V. DISCUSSIONS

5.1 THEORETICAL IMPLICATIONS

From the correlation table, working class (1 = Blue–collar; 2 = White–collar) is negatively

correlated with CWB (r = -.29, p<.01). It is clear that employees who come from blue–collar may

engage more in CWB compared to white-collar. From the regression table, working class is also

negatively correlated to CWB, where a significant positive relationship is found (β = .39, p<.01, ∆R2

= .06).

The reason might be the differences in job natures. The job content of blue –collar may create the

availability and easiness for CWB. Because the situation and the norm also affect the likelihood of

CWB engaged (Spector & Fox, 2002, 2005), CWB may be engaged easily by blue–collar workers

who can move around and perform a wide range of tasks. For example, the workers who are

responsible for cleaning streets usually work without the supervisor around and move around in a

district assigned. Thus, they might have more opportunities to take a longer break or skip the tasks

because no one monitors and evaluates their behaviours. As the monitor of the supervisor is closer

for white–collar, where the supervisor is right around them, they will have less chance to engage

CWB.

5.1.1 Positive relationship between negative emotions and Counterproductive Work Behaviours

(CWB)

Although CWB has been a hot topic, many researchers just focused on the external causes.

From the literature, most of the researchers examined the effects of causes, job insecurity,

organizational justice and other outside stressors. In frequently testing the relationships between

causes, most of them ignored the important mediator in the middle of the emotion-centred model of

CWB: negative emotions. Negative emotions are the vital parts of erecting the CWB, without them,

stressors can do nothing in creating the CWB (Martinko, Douglas, and Harvey, 2002). Based on the


17

proposed emotion-centred model, the external causes generate negative emotions and then

employees will engage in CWB to rebalance their negative feelings (Fox, Spector, & Miles, 2001;

Spector & Fox, 2002, 2005). To fill in the gap of the studies of CWB, this project focused on the

linkage between negative emotions and CWB, testing the relationship between the two variables.

This study examined the importance of the negative emotions in the engagement of CWB. From

the study, it is suggested that CWB has positive relationships with the negative emotions, confirming

the emotion-centred model of the CWB proposed by the academics.

The emotion-centred theory is supported by the affective events theory (AET, Weiss &

Cropanzano, 1996), which said people tend to react emotionally to work events and these affective

experiences directly influence individual behaviours and attitudes (Tjiong, 2000). When employees

feel they are treated unfairly, no matter from the organizations or the colleagues, they will engage in

CWB, doing something harmful to the organizations or the colleagues to re-balance their negative

feelings. And, the relationship is positive, suggesting that more negative emotions people have, the

more possibility of them engage in CWB.

5.1.2 EI is the moderator between negative emotions and CWB

From the previous studies, most of the professionals put too much emphasis on the external

factors of causing CWB but neglected another important source of the CWB, which is the person.

Given the same level of external stressors, like the similar working environment and compensation

package, some may engage in CWB, some may not. The reasons behind may not be the external

factors, the cues might be the mind of people. A study (Yang & Diefendorff, 2009) conducted before

also agreed this idea, agreeing internal factors might also affect the tendency of engaging in CWB.

EI, which is about the capability of monitoring and managing emotions of your own and the others,

might be the next factor.

From the result of the study, the assumption was supported. EI was proven to be a moderator in


18

the relationship of negative emotions and CWB, having significant effects in the emotion-centred

model of CWB. The negative relationship found suggested that people with high EI tend to have less

CWB compared to people with low EI in the same level of negative emotions. Because EI can let

people be able to understand and control their feelings as well as behaviours, given the same level of

negative emotions, it can strengthen or weaken the linkage between negative emotions and CWB.

Therefore, people with high EI engage less CWB but people with low EI engage more CWB.

The results obtained in the research, which EI was proved to serve as a moderator in the

relationship between negative emotions and CWB, echo the research conducted by Deshpande et al.

in 2005, which also concluded that people with high EI believe that CWB are more unethical than

those with low EI (Deshpande et al, 2005). Furthermore, the result is also consistent with the

research in 2009 which suggested that employees with high level of EI are able to control and avoid

themselves from doing such misbehaviors that will harm the organizations they work with (Khalid et

al, 2009).

EI of individuals contributes to the engagement of CWB and, most importantly, people who are

high in EI are less likely to engage in CWB and people with low EI are more likely to have CWB.

For those with high EI, they can identify their own and people’s immediate feelings, and be able to

manage their moods and deploy the emotions to facilitate daily life. This gifted ability will let them

handle their negative emotions better than the people with low EI, decreasing their tendency of

engaging in CWB to balance their negative emotions.

5.2 PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

Undoubtedly, CWB is a nightmare for all managers of the organizations because these

behaviors are not only non productive, but also counter-productive, severely reversing the

organizations’ operation and harming the profit. Because CWB results in huge organizational losses,


19

management must think of some ways to minimize the negative emotions in order to alleviate the

CWB engaged.

Although some companies might choose to set up strict policies and monitoring systems to

prevent the engagement of CWB, these ways will not have a significant effect. In most circumstances,

CWB is the small acts, like petty theft, but not stealing a huge amount of money. Having rules and

monitoring systems cannot tackle the problems, because CWB is comparatively invisible and hard to

observe.

Previous researches have clearly pointed out the emotion-centred model of CWB. From the

result of the study, it is confirmed that negative emotions are the causes of CWB in the organizations.

Therefore, there are ways to reduce CWB, by weakening the link between external stressors and

negative emotions or between negative emotions and CWB.

For the former one, the relationship between the external stressors and negative emotions,

two-way communication is the key decreasing the accumulation of negative feelings among workers.

The management should explain clearly to employees about the organization structure, job

nature, job evaluation, etc, especially the common external stressors that can easily erect negative

emotions of employees (Yang & Diefendorff, 2009). Moreover, they should also pay more attention

to the organization settings, creating a better working environment for employees and seek advice

and feedback from employees regularly (Spector & Fox, 2002, 2005), especially those who are

blue-collar workers, because they tend to have high possibility of engaging in CWB from this study.

Managers should also sincerely build the friendship with staff and use more informal channels to

communicate, because these will ease the tension and doubt from employees and let them feel the

sincerity of the management.

Furthermore, management should create a harmonious atmosphere in the organization,

encouraging mutual understanding, positive communications and helping behaviours among workers.


20

By creating a friendly culture and the norm of cooperation, employees can be inoculated from having

too much negative feelings (Yang & Diefendorff, 2009).

For the latter one, the relationship between negative emotions and CWB, negative emotions is

the crux of the problem. Some suggested that despite the presence of external stressors, unless

employees feel negatively, CWB may not be engaged (Martinko, Douglas, and Harvey, 2002). To

alleviate negative emotions, staff can undergo some workshops to better manage their negative

feelings and dissatisfaction. Also, the culture of the organization is very vital in influencing the mood

of employees (Spector & Fox, 2002, 2005). The management should encourage the positive

affectivity and even put it in the Vision, Missions and Values of the organization to educate the

employees and decrease the CWB.

Because EI also plays a moderating role in the relationship between negative emotions and CWB,

and high EI is well known to be the key of career success. Organizations may take it into account for

the selection criteria or training objectives. To select new bloods for the organization, EI Test can be

deployed in the selection process (Yang & Diefendorff, 2009). For the current employees, training

and workshop can be organized for them (Patton, 1997). According to Goleman, EI can be learnt

regardless of age and increase as one matures (Goleman, 1995). To increase the productivity of the

employees, it is worthwhile to invest in increasing the EI of employees, like training employees’

competence in expressing their feelings and managing their emotions (Khalid et al, 2009). The

improvement of EI does not only create a harmonious working environment, it also helps employees

to have a better life and most importantly, the organization to achieve its business objectives.


21

5.3 LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH

5.3.1 Limitations

The scale of the report is rather small. For only about 170 participants included in the research,

the statistic might not be able to generalize the common phenomenon in the society. For the accuracy

of the further research, it is better to extend the sample pool.

Moreover, the result obtained from the self-evaluation might not be accurate because of the

self-bias (Glenn, 2004). Individuals tend to rate themselves much higher than do the others

unconsciously. This is because participants tend to have higher opinion of themselves than others;

thus, they may not give accurate answers in the questionnaire. To increase the accuracy of the future

research, it is suggested to invite respondents, their immediate superiors as well as their colleagues to

fill in the questionnaire. By analysing the information from multiple sources, the results obtained will

be more objective compared to the participants’ subjective evaluation. To eliminate the

embarrassment and the confidential information, it is also recommended that they should return the

questionnaires by confidential mail.

The inaccurate result might also be the outcome of the social desire behaviours. It is especially

true in this research because the CWB is regarded as unethical and improper, people rarely mention

about these acts publicly. In order to look smart and loyal to the organizations, participants may

inflate the actual rating in the questions. Because of the lack of confidence in the confidentiality of

the survey, they might not reveal their actual behaviours in the questionnaires. To increase the faith

of participants and the confidential level of the research, it is suggested to provide the questionnaires

as well as self-addressed and stamped envelops for participants. They can send the questionnaires by

mail once they finish the questionnaires, avoiding the leakage of the information to the participants

who are being rated.

Furthermore, there is no agreement on the definition of EI until now. There are two models of


22

Emotional Intelligence suggested: the ability model and the trait, or the mix model. The former

model defines EI as a set of different abilities while the others define emotional intelligence as a set

of non-cognitive personal traits which affect the ways of responding to situations (Goleman 1995).

Thus, there is no agreement on the measurement of EI based on the diversified opinion (Schulze,

Roberts, 2005). This can result in the inconsistence between different EI evaluation tools.

5.3.2 Future Research

Based on the results found in the research, some suggestions are given for the further research

related to this area. Firstly, the relationships between the perceived sources of negative emotions and

the types of CWB are suggested. It is advised to investigate the linkages between the sources of

negative emotions and the types of CWB engaged. According to social exchange theory, people react

based on the given situation and stressors. It is possible that the sources of negative emotions

indicate the types of CWB engaged. If employees identify the negative emotions coming from the

organizations, they will revenge on the organizations. It is widely known that CWB is erected by

negative emotions generated, but not many researches have proved the hypothesizing relationships

between contextual factors, such as perceived justices and organizational culture and

Counterproductive Work Behaviours targeted at organizations (CWB-O). In 2004, researchers Vardi

and Weitz proposed that all factors, including individual, group and organizational reasons generally

contribute to all kinds of CWB (Vardi & Weitz, 2004). But, the others confirm their specific linkages

(Suzy et al, 2001). So, further researches about the relationships between the perceived sources of

negative emotions and the types of CWB engaged are suggested.

Secondly, the other internal factors affecting the engagement of CWB are recommended as well.

The researches before put too much focus on identifying the external factors of the CWB, like the

perceived justice and the working environment which can influence the negative emotions of

employees. Not many of them have looked at the internal factors which can explain the different


23

levels of CWB engaged by employees in the same working environment. This research has

successfully proved that EI served as the moderator the relationship and some researches before also

identify the roles of personality in the role of CWB (Yang & Diefendorff, 2009). Other than the

external situations, these results suggest that internal side of people also contributes to the CWB.

More factors can be proved, more actions can be taken to reduce the CWB.

VI. CONCLUSION

The project has attempted to look at the relationship between negative emotions and

Counterproductive Work Behaviours (CWB). The moderating effect of Emotional Intelligence (EI)

on the relationship between negative emotions and CWB has also been examined.

From the result of the study, it is shown that there is a significant positive relationship between

the negative emotions and CWB. Moreover, the result has also suggested that EI is the moderator in

the two relationships between the independent variable negative emotions and the dependent variable,

CWB, suggesting that given the same level of negative emotions, people with high EI are less likely

to engage in CWB compared to the people with low EI.


24

VII. REFERENCES

Ashkanasy, N. M., Hartel, C. E. J., & Zerbe, W. J. (Eds.). (2000). Emotions in the workplace,

research, theory, and practice. London: Quorum Books.

Baker, B.A. (2005). The Good, The Bad And The Ugly: The Mediating Role of Attributional Style In

The Relationship Between Personality and Performance. North Carolina State University

Burke, W. Scott (2006). Exploratory study of organizational loyalty: Comparison between senior

executives and employee views. Ed.D. dissertation, Pepperdine University, United States --

California. Retrieved April 26, 2010, from ABI/INFORM Global.(Publication No. AAT

3213225).

Carmeli, A., & Josman, Z. E. (2006). The Relationship Among Emotional Intelligence, Task

Performance, and Organizational Citizenship Behaviors. HUMAN PERFORMANCE, 19(4),

403–419

Deshpande, Et AL. (2005). The Impact of Emotional Intelligence on Counterproductive Behaviour in

China. Management Research News, Vol. 28, No. 5.

Eagly, A. & Chrvala, C. (1986). Sex differences in conformity: Status and gender role interpretations.

Psychology of Women Quarterly, 10(3), 203-220.

Eagly, A. H. (1987). Sex differences in social behavior: a social-role interpretation. Hillsdale, N.J.,

L.Erlbaum Associates.

Fox, S., Spector, P. E., & Miles, D. (2001). Counterproductive work behaviour (CWB) in response to

job stressors and organizational justice: Some mediator and moderator tests for autonomy and

emotions. Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 59, 291-309

Glenn, G., (Eds.). (2004). Measuring Emotional Intelligence: Common Ground and Conroversy.

New York: Nova Science Publisher, Inc.

Goleman, D.(1995). Emotional Intelligence. New York: Bantam Book

Haaland, S. A. (2002). Understanding organizational citizenship and counterproductive work

behaviours: examing interactions utilizing an organizational versus interpersonal

categorization strategy. The paper of Doctor of Philosophy, Department of Psychology,

Central Michigan University, 1-176. Retrieved October 15, 2009, from ProQuest Information

and Learning Company (ProQuest).

Heneman HG III, (1985), Pay satisfaction. In Rowland KW, Ferris G (Eds.)

Research in personnel and human resource management Vol. III, pp.

115-139, Greenwich, CN: JAI Press.

Herzberg, F.,Mausner, B. & Snyderman, B. (1959). The motivation to work. New York: Wiley.

Jonathan, H. Turner., & Jan, E. Stets. (2005). The Sociology of Emotions. United States of America:

Cambridge University Press.

Khalid, S. A., Kassim, K. M., Ismail, M., Noor, A. N. M., Rahman, N. A. & Zain, R. S. (2009).

Emotional Intelligence and Organizational Citizenship Behaviour as Antecedents of Students’

Deviance. The International Journal of Business and Mangament, 4, 7

Tjiong, Linda A. (2000). The relationship between emotional intelligence, hardiness and job stress

among registered nurses. D.B.A. dissertation, University of Sarasota, United States -- Florida.

Retrieved November 15, 2009, from ABI/INFORM Global.(Publication No. AAT 3030160).

Martinko MJ, Gundlach MJ, Douglas SC. (2002). Toward an integrative theory of counterproductive

workplace behaviour: A causal reasoning perspective. International Journal of Selection and

Assessment, 10, 36-50.

Mayer, J. D. & Salovey & D. Sluyter (Eds.) (1997). What is emotional intelligence? : Implications


25

for educators. In, Emotional development, emotional literacy, and emotional intelligence: 3-31.

New York: Basic Books.

Mayer, J. D., DiPaolo, M. T., & Salovey, P. (1990). Perceiving affective content in ambiguous visual

stimuli: A component of emotional intelligence. Journal of Personality Assessment, 54,

772-781.

Oginska-Bulik, Nina. (2005). Emotional Intelligence in the Workplace: Exploring its Effects on

Occupational Stress and Health Outcomes in Human Service Workers. International Journal of

Occupational Medicine & Environmental Health, 28(2), 167-175. Retrieved from

PsychoINFO

Patton, P., (1997), EQ in the workplace. Singapore: SNP Publishing Pte Ltd.

Robinson, S. L., & Bennett, R. J. (1995). A typology of deviant workplace behaviours: A

multidimenonal scaling study. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 555-572

Schulze, R., & Roberts, R. D. (Eds.). (2005). Emotional intelligence: an international handbook,

Washington: Hogrefe.

Schutte, N. and Malouff, J., Hall, L., Haggerty, D., Cooper, J., Golden, C., and Dornheim, L. (1998).

Development and validation of a measure of emotional intelligence. Personality and

Individual Difference, 25, 167-177.

Spector, P. E. & Fox, S. (2002). An emotional-centred model of counterproductive work behaviour

and organizational citizenship behaviour. Human Resources Management Review, 12,

269-292

Spector, P. E. & Fox, S. (2005). A stressor-emotion model counterproductive work behavior. In Fox

S, Spector PE (Eds.), Counterproductive work behavior: Investigations of actors and targets

(pp. 151-174). Washington, DC: APA

Suzy, F., Paul, E. S., and Don, M. (2001). Counterproductive Work Behavior (CWB) in Response to

Job Stressors and Organizational Justice: Some Mediator and Moderator Tests for Autonomy

and Emotions. Journal of Vocational Behavior 59, 291–309

Tjiong, Linda A. (2000). The relationship between emotional intelligence, hardiness and job stress

among registered nurses. D.B.A. dissertation, University of Sarasota, United States -- Florida.

Retrieved November 8, 2009, from ABI/INFORM Global.(Publication No. AAT 3030160).

Van, Katwyk. P. T., Fox, S., Spector, P. E. & Kelloway, E. K. (2000). Using the job-related affective

well-being scale (JAWS) to investigate affective response to work stressors. Jounral of

Occupational Health Psychology, 5, 219-230

Vardi, Y., & Weitz, E. (2004). Misbehaviour in organizations: Theory, research, and management.

Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Weiss, H. M., & Cropanzano, R. (1996). Affective events theory: A theoretical discussion of the

structure, causes and consequences of affective experiences at work. Research In

Organizational Behaviours, 18, 1-74

Yang, J., & Diefendorff, J. (2009). THE RELATIONS OF DAILY COUNTERPRODUCTIVE

WORKPLACE BEHAVIOR WITH EMOTIONS, SITUATIONAL ANTECEDENTS, AND

PERSONALITY MODERATORS: A DIARY STUDY IN HONG KONG. Personnel

Psychology, 62(2), 259-295. Retrieved October 23, 2009, from ABI/INFORM Global.

(Document ID: 1739571201)


26

Variables Items Percentage (%) 1. Gender Male

Male

44.1

44.1

Female 55.9

2. Age 16-25

16-25

24.7

24.7

26-35 50.0

36-45 17.6

46-55 7.1

56 or above .6

3. Marital Status Single

Single

66.5

66.5

Divorced 1.8

Married 31.8

Widowed 0.0

4. Number of Children 0

0

79.4

79.4

1 13.5

2 6.5

3 or above .6

5. Educational Level Secondary School

Secondary School

44.1

44.1

Associate’s degree 6.5

Bachelor’s degree 38.8

Postgraduate 0.0

Doctoral degree 5.9

Other 4.7

6. Tenure in the Organization 1-5

1-5

68.8

68.8

6-10 16.5

11-15 11.2

16-20 .6

>20 2.9

7. Tenure in the Position 1-5

1-5

78.8

78.8

6-10 12.9

11-15 7.1

16-20 0.0

>20 1.2

8. Monthly Salary <10,000

<10,000

35.9

35.9

10,001-20,000 41.8

20,001-30,000 14.7

30,001-40,000 5.3

40,001-50,000 0.0

50,001 or above 2.4

9. Job Level Supervisory

Supervisory

17.6

17.6

Non-supervisory 82.4

10. Working Class Blue –collar

Blue –collar

14.1

14.1

White –collar 85.9

Table 3: A Table of Demographic information of the respondents (N=170)

TABLES:


27

Variables Negative

Emotions

Counterproductive

Work Behaviours

Emotional

Intelligence

Q 114 I seek out activities that make me happy

Q 109 I am aware of my emotions as I experienced them

Q 104 Other people find it easy to confide me

Q 103 I expect that I will do well on most things I try

Q 112 When I experience a positive emotions, I know how to

make it last

Q 102 When I am faced with obstacles, I remember times that I

faced similar obstacles and overcame them

Q 110 I expect good things to happen

Q 106 Some of the major events of my life have led me to

re-evaluate what is important and not important

Q 107 When my mood changes, I see new possibilities

Q 111 I like to share my emotions with others

Q 113 I arrange events others enjoy

Q 101 I know when to speak about my personal problems to

others

.74

.69

.69

.68

.67

.66

.64

.63

.61

.60

.56

.52

Q 206 Task problems

Q 209 Company policies

Q 203 Lack of goal achievement

Q 212 Workload

Q 204 Lack of receiving recognition

Q 211 Physical situations

Q 208 Lack of Influence or control

Q 202 Acts of management

Q 201 Acts of colleagues

Q 210 External environment

Q 207 Making mistakes

.75

.75

.69

.68

.68

.63

.61

.59

.59

.58

.56

Q 321 Did something to make co-workers look bad

Q 306 Put little effort into your work

Q 307 Intentionally worked slower than you could have

Q 323 Ignored a co-worker

Q 320 Delayed actions on matters that were important to others

Q 324 Showed favouritism

Q 309 Worked on personal matter instead of working for your

employer

Q 322 Refused to help a co-worker

Q 305 Tried to be looked busy while doing nothing

Q 311 Took supplies or tools home without permission

Q 318 Withheld needed information from someone at work

Q 303 Left work earlier than you were allowed to take

Q 304 Took an additional or longer break than you were

allowed to take

Q 319 Avoided returning a phone call or other communications

to someone you should at work

Q 317 Insulted or made fun of a co-worker personal life

Q 308 Daydreamed rather than you could have worked

Q 316 Gossiped about someone at work

Q 313 Verbally abused someone at work

Q 301 Called in sick when you were not

Q 310 Called or e-mailed to family or friends during work time

Q 315 Acted rudely toward someone at work

.74

.74

.72

.71

.69

.68

.66

.66

.64

.64

.61

.61

.59

.58

.58

.55

.55

.55

.55

.55

.52

Table 4: A Table of Factor Analysis for Emotional Intelligence, Negative Emotions and

Counterproductive Work Behaviours (N=170)


28

Scale Cronbach Alpha Reliability Coefficient

Negative emotions .87

Counterproductive Work Behaviours .93

Emotional Intelligence .85

Table 5: A Table of the Cronbach Alpha Reliability Coefficient of the Scale (N=170)


0

Variables Mean S.D. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

1. Gender a 1.56 .50 -

2. Age b 2.10 .87 -.10 -

3. Marital Status c 1.65 .93 -.13 .58** -

4. Number of Children 1.28 .61 -.13 .45** .56 -

5. Education Level d 2.25 1.33 .00 -.13 .00 -.08 -

6. Tenure in Organization (year) 1.52 .93 -.11 .46** .40** .34** .02 -

7. Tenure in this Position (year) 1.32 .71 -.17 .29** .30** .30** -.02 .63** -

8. Monthly Salary 1.99 1.05 -.15 .49** .44** .36** -.22** .52** .27** -

9. Job Level e 1.82 .38 .09 -.43** -.37** -.34** -.11 -.30** -.10 -.55** -

10. Working Class f 1.86 .35 -.16 .00 .10 .08 -.09 -.06 -.03 .13 -.10 -

11. Emotional Intelligence (EI) 1.64 .49 -.03 -.05 -.09 -.06 .03 .06 -.06 .00 -.13 .02 -

12. Negative Emotions 3.82 .55 .08 -.11 -.01 -.09 .10 -10 -.08 -.08 .09 -.08 -.03 -

13. Counterproductive Work Behaviours

(CWB)

2.82 .64 .13 -.02 -.01 -.04 -.01 -.04 -.08 -.08 .15 -.29** -.32** .38**

Table 6: A Table of Mean, Standard Deviation and Zero-Order Correlation (N =170)

Note: *p<.05; **p<.01

a Male= 1; Female= 2.

b 16 to 25 years old= 1; 26 to 35 years old= 2; 36 to 45 years old= 3; 46 to 55 years old= 4; 56 years old or above= 5.

c Single= 1; Divorced= 2; Married= 3; Widowed= 4.

d Secondary School= 1; Associate’s degree= 2; Bachelor’s degree= 3; Postgraduate= 4; Doctoral degree= 5; Other= 6.

e <10,000= 1; 10,001-20,000= 2; 20,001-30,000= 3; 30,001-40,000= 4; 40,001-50,000= 5; <50,001= 6.

f Blue –collar= 1; White –collar= 2.

29

Emotional Intelligence as a Moderator in the relationship between Negative Emotions and Counterproductive Work Behaviours

CWB

Variable M1 M2 M3 M4

Control variables

Gender

Age

Marital Status

No. of Children

Education Level

Tenure in the Organization

Tenure in the Position

Salary

Job Level

Working Class

.06

.01

.06

.00

.00

.02

-.08

-.01

.18

-.39**

.04

.02

.03

.02

-.02

.03

-.07

.00

.16**

-.35**

.03

.01

.01

.01

-.01

.06

-.10

-.02

.08

-.34**

-.01

.00

.02

-.02

.00

.10

-.12*

-.04

.04

-.30**

Independent variable

Negative emotions (NegEmot)

.27**

.27**

.28**

Moderator

Emotional Intelligence (EI)

-.27**

-.22**

Interaction

NegEmot X EI

-.13**

Adjusted R2 .06 .19 .27 .37

∆R2 .12 .09 .10

F 2.11* 4.49** 6.28** 8.69**

∆F 25.08** 19.95** 25.71**

Table 7: A Table of Hierarchical Regression Analysis for variables predicting Counterproductive Work Behaviours targeted at individual and

Counterproductive Work Behaviours targeted at organization (N=170)

*p<.05, **p<.01

30

Emotional Intelligence as the moderator in the...

Documents

Transcript of Emotional Intelligence as the moderator in the...