You are on page 1of 17

Supervised by:

Dr. SHAZIA NAUMAN

Submitted by:

FAISAL SHAHZAD 402773


SYNOPSIS

HOW TEAM EFFECTIVENESS MEDIATES


BETWEEN MNAGER’S EMOTIONAL
INTELLIGENCE AND PROJECT SUCCESS
How Team effectiveness mediates Between Manager’s

emotional Intelligence and Project success

Supervision by: DR. SHAZIA NAUMAN

Conducted by: FAISAL SHAHZAD


CMS: 402773
MSPM 1st semester

1
Abstract:

Effective Events Theory (AET) and Transformational leadership Theory (TLT) is used to

research out how emotional intelligence (EI) trait of a leader leads the Team Effectiveness (TE)

and Project Success. We propose and test a model linking EI to project success and examine

the mediating effects of team effectiveness between EI and project success, and also consider

moderation of project manager's trust and Transformational leadership style. Based on data

collected I found evidence that Team effectiveness mediate the relationship between EI and

project success. Our findings suggest that top management should be aware of the importance

of project managers' Emotional intelligence, leadership style and trust in others serve to boost

project success in complex project situations.

Key Words: Emotional Intelligence, Team Effectiveness, Transformational Leadership Style,

Trust, Project success.

1. Introduction:

1.1. Problem Statement:

The ability to simultaneously perform as an individual and together with your colleagues or

employees in effective teamwork is key to attaining growth and success. In today’s knowledge

economy, most of our jobs involve interacting with others that are not even in the same line of

profession. The need for effective teamwork is critical for any business.

In effect, teamwork is important and essential in order to accomplish the overall objectives and

goals of an organization. A teamwork environment promotes an atmosphere that fosters

friendship and loyalty. These close-knit relationships motivate employees in parallel and align

them to work harder, cooperate and be supportive of one another. And teamwork could provide

improved efficiency and productivity, great learning opportunities, motivates unity in the

workplace, promotes workplace synergy and offers differing perspectives and feedback

2
1.2. Rational of study

The study of emotions in the context of leadership has become a key topic of interest among

organizational behavioral researchers over the past decade. This is reflected for example in

studies on the impact of leaders' emotional expression in the workplace (Bono & Ilies, 2006;

Sy, Côté, & Saavedra, 2005), emotional contagion between leaders and followers (Barsade,

2002), as well as in how leadership styles influence the emotional states of employees and

their job performance Bono, Foldes, Vinson, and Muros (2007). Likewise, popular press and

academic interest in the utility of emotional intelligence in the leadership process has not

dissipated despite serious attempts to discredit the concept e.g. (Antonakis, 2004; Locke, 2005).

The scholarly study of emotional intelligence (EI) began in the early 1990's when (Salovey &

Mayer, 1990)(p. 189) initially defined emotional intelligence as: “the sub-set of social

intelligence that involves the ability to monitor one's own and others' feelings and emotions, to

discriminate among them and to use this information to guide one's thinking and actions.”

Being emotionally intelligent involves being able to actively identify, understand, process, and

influence one's own emotions and those of others to guide feeling, thinking, and subsequent

behaviors (Mayer, Caruso, & Salovey, 1999). Of course, emotional intelligence is a broad

construct and measures such as the Mayer–Salovey–Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test

(MSCEIT) (Mayer, Salovey, & Caruso, 2002) were not developed expressly for the workplace.

Yet various measures of emotional intelligence do appear to correlate with important leader

and organizational outcomes.

1.3. Objective of study

A growing body of literature has suggested that leaders' ability to understand and manage their

own feelings, moods and emotions, as well as those of their followers contributes to effective

leadership in a variety of organizations (Hur, van den Berg, & Wilderom, 2011; Prati,

McMillan-Capehart, & Karriker, 2009; Walter, Cole, & Humphrey, 2011). Moreover,

3
researchers have argued that the emotional intelligence of leaders is a critical component in

leading a team effectively (Melita Prati, Douglas, Ferris, Ammeter, & Buckley, 2003).

In order to incorporate emotions as an element in our research we draw on the principles of

Affective Events Theory AET (Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996) in developing a testable model of

this process. Within the AET model, events at work result in employee affective reactions that,

in turn, determine their subsequent work attitudes and behaviors. As (Ashkanasy & Tse, 2000)

has pointed out, the underlying principles of AET enable us to cause and consequence of

emotional experience on employee work attitudes and behavior. In our study we extend this to

consider how emotion plays a role in the leadership of complex projects

2. Rational view

Recent research findings are accumulating evidence that Emotional Intelligence (EI) is

associated positively with important work manners. However, the research on Emotional

Intelligence is mainly conducted in business field and in western countries; therefore there is a

shortage of research on Emotional Intelligence in the context of public sector in Jordan. The

aim of this study is to explore the influence of Emotional Intelligence on job performance and

job satisfaction as well as the mediating role of job satisfaction on job performance among the

administrative employees of the University of Jordan. The present study is based on Mayer,

Salovey, and Caruso (2000) ability model of Emotional Intelligence. A sample consisted of

354 employees from the University of Jordan who completed self-report questionnaire.

Structural equation modeling (SEM) was used in order to test the proposed hypotheses. The

research found that Emotional Intelligence is positively correlated with team effectiveness. The

findings of this study also confirm the mediatory role of Team effectiveness in relationship

between Emotional Intelligence and project success. It is suggested that Emotional Intelligence

can be used to predict team effectiveness, therefore the understanding of Emotional Intelligence

4
theory and its applications can be promoted for managerial and human resource practices

throughout public sector organizations.

3. Theory and hypotheses development

3.1. Emotional intelligence and transformational leadership

A growing body of studies has shown that emotional intelligence is inherently associated with

transformational leadership (Barling, Slater, & Kevin Kelloway, 2000; Leban & Zulauf, 2004;

Mandell & Pherwani, 2003) found significant correlations between emotional intelligence and

several factors of the transformational leadership model. Specifically, the ability to monitor

and manage emotions correlated with the inspirational, motivational and individualized

consideration factors of transformational leadership. Similarly, Gardner and Stough (2002)

showed that the emotional intelligence of leaders accounted for the majority of the variance in

transformational leadership. Collectively, the findings of previous studies provide evidence

that leaders who scored high on emotional intelligence were perceived by followers as

exhibiting more transformational leadership behaviors. Transformational leadership theory has

also highlighted the importance of leaders' influence on followers' emotional states Ashkanasy

and Tse (2000) and several studies have provided emotion-type insights into the

transformational leader–follower linkage. Gardner and Stough (2002) for example, showed that

transformational leaders who suggested alternative solutions to problems and who showed

individualized consideration to followers were able to redirect follower negative feelings of

frustration and helplessness to more constructive ones, which, in turn, led to heightened

followers' performance. Conversely, perceptions of minimal transformational leadership

behaviors resulted in high levels of follower frustration and low performance levels. Recent

studies have also shown that energetic, exciting, and emotionally appealing expressions of

charisma created positive moods in followers (Bono & Ilies, 2006) and lessened the emotion-

related phenomena of burnout and stress in the workplace (Bono et al., 2007) Such results

5
imply that transformational leadership can be interpreted as a process in which leaders use

emotions to: communicate a vision to, as well as elicit responses from, followers; and to ensure

that followers are emotionally motivated to perform their tasks beyond their own expectations

(Brown & Moshavi, 2005; J. Humphrey & Schmitz, 2002). The qualities of empathy,

motivation, self-awareness, trust, and emotional stability, all qualities of a transformational

leader, are also considered to be important elements of emotional intelligence (Bar-On, 1997;

Goleman, 1998). From the angle of individual and contextual antecedents of transformational

leadership behavior, emotional intelligence can be seen as the bedrock for transformational

leaders. Based on our review of the literature we propose a direct linkage between emotional

intelligence and team effectives.

3.2. Transformational leadership and leader/team effectiveness

The positive effects of transformational leadership on leader effectiveness and performance

have been found at the individual, group, and organizational level see: (Burke & Paton, 2006;

Judge & Piccolo, 2004). Transformational leaders induce strong levels of satisfaction,

citizenship behaviors in followers. Transformational leaders, who showed individual

consideration toward individual followers' growth and development by spending time to teach

and coach, raised followers' awareness of the significance and worth of specified work

outcomes and how their jobs affected organizational performance (Mayer & Salovey, 2007).

Moreover, transformational leaders can dramatically influence a team environment when they

change the attitudes and values of their followers in the direction of collective goals (Bass &

Avolio, 2000) . They then create team atmospheres in which employees become convinced that

they can attain higher goals than they initially thought possible which, in turn, has led to

positive team performance in both subjective and objective measures of performance, DeGroot,

Kiker, and Cross (2000) have noted that “an effect size of transformational leadership at the

group-level of analysis is double in magnitude relative to the effect size at the individual level.”

6
3.3. The mediating role of transformational leadership

Thus far we have reviewed research on the links between emotional intelligence and

transformational leadership, and between transformational leadership and the three team

outcomes: leadership and team-effectiveness, and service climate. The key proposition in this

study is that transformational leadership mediates the relationship between emotional

intelligence and the team outcomes. A requirement for this proposition is that emotional

intelligence be related to team outcomes, and an extensive range of studies supports this

proposition e.g., (Gardner & Stough, 2002; George, 2000; Kerr, 2006). Leaders who scored

high on emotional intelligence have been shown to affect follower job satisfaction, followers'

psychological climate (Klem & Schlechter, 2008) as well as to promote various work-related

performance factors, such as extra-role behaviors (Wong & Law, 2002), project team

performance, and customer satisfaction (Langhorn, 2004). Our model assumes that emotional

intelligence precedes transformational leadership thus has a causal effect on transformational

leadership. Many authors have described emotional intelligence as a constellation of

personality traits and have noted that emotional intelligence can be considered as reasonably

stable. Bar-On (1997) for instance, has suggested that emotional intelligence increases

gradually from early childhood until the fifth decade of life. Related predictive validity studies

have provided further intriguing results. R. H. Humphrey (2002) has posited that individuals

who have more empathy and emotional self-management are more likely to emerge as

transformational leaders.

3.4. Leadership and Project success

Though defining project success in complex projects – where timeframes for completion are

long and the size of the projects are substantial – remains a challenging issue (Ogunlana, 2010;

Yue, Austin, Wang, & Huang, 2006), project management scholars generally agree on two

components that define project success: success criteria and critical success factors (Müller &

7
Jugdev, 2012; Turner & Zolin, 2012) Success criteria focus on objective measures, such as

completion timeliness, quality, and cost (Pinto & Mantel, 1990). Such objective criteria,

however, have been criticized, especially in the context of defining complex project success.

This is because they tend to draw on overly simplistic constructs which do not mirror the

experience in large, complex projects (Toor & Ogunlana, 2008). Moreover, such criteria fail to

address broader factors that can be considered as success indicators, such as behavioral skills

or strategic management objective criteria. Critical success factors, on the other hand, focus on

“soft” issues, such as behavioral skills of project teams as well as customer and stakeholder

satisfaction, and therefore represent a more realistic progressive approach to assessing project

success (Jugdev & Muller, 2005; Pinto & Mantel, 1990) . Turner and Zolin (2012) have pointed

out that success factors, unlike impacts such as time, cost, and quality, can be measured prior

to the end of the project. Given the long timeframes for complex projects this type of

measurement is useful in assessing a project's progress. We employ Pinto and Slevin (1987)

approach, which uses project managers' ratings of “critical success factors”. These are the

factors that have been identified by Jugdev and Muller (2005) as the most widely recognized

and used measures of success factors.

3.5. Trust

Our final variable is trust, which Rousseau, Sitkin, Burt, and Camerer (1998) define as “a

psychological state comprising of the intention to accept vulnerability based upon positive

expectations of the intentions or behaviors of another” (p. 395). The key elements of this

definition are a willingness to accept vulnerability in the relationship and positive expectations

about another party under conditions of interdependence and risk (Lewicki, Tomlinson, &

Gillespie, 2006). Trust has been found to be a predictor of project performance and project

effectiveness (Diallo & Thuillier, 2005; Kadefors, 2004; Lee-Kelley & Sankey, 2008; Park &

Lee, 2014; Webber & Klimoski, 2004), stakeholder satisfaction (Bresnen & Marshall, 2000)

8
creativity and problem solving (Smyth, 2005), knowledge and information disclosure, and

project success

4. Model and hypotheses development

Model

Hypothesis

Relationship between IV and DV

H.1. Project managers' EI is positively related to project success.

Relationship between IV and Mediators

H.2. Project managers' EI is positively related team effectiveness

Relationship of Mediators with DV

H.3. Team effectiveness is positively related to Project success

Relationship of mediators between IVs & DVs (Mediation)

H.4. Team effectiveness is positively mediates between project manager’s EI and

project success.

Moderator relationship (Moderation)

H.5. Project manager’s trust in others positively moderates between team effectiveness

and project success.


9
H.6. Transformational leadership is positively moderates between project manager’s

EI and team effectiveness.

5. Method

5.1. Context

We collected the data for our study as members of a team examining leadership and team

effectiveness in a defense organization. Within this organization complex projects are

characterized by high project management complexity, high levels of technical complexity,

difficult support and commercial arrangements, and a typical lifecycle period of 12 years or

more.

5.2. Sampling procedure

Our research model was empirically tested using an online survey. To collect our data we asked

the Human Resource Department to make our online survey available to 2500 employees in

the organization, and to invite them to complete the instrumentation

5.3. Measure

5.3.1. Emotional intelligence

Emotional intelligence was measured using the 16 items from the Wong and Law Emotional

Intelligence Scale WLEIS (Wong & Law, 2002). Whereas most of the currently available

measures of emotional intelligence have been developed in Western countries, the WLEIS was

developed expressly for Asian contexts and is consistent with (Hosseinian, Yazdi, Zahraie, &

Fathi-Ashtiani, 2008) conceptualization of emotional intelligence. Similar to Wong and Law

(2002) comment about how Chinese fail to display overt emotions in the workplace.

5.3.2. Transformational leadership

10
The Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ-Form 5X-Short; (Bass & Avolio, 2000) was

used to assess the transformational leadership style of team leaders. The questionnaire

instructed employees to judge how often team leaders displayed each of 20 different

transformational leadership behaviors along a 5 point rating scale ranging from 1 (not at all) to

5 (frequently, if not always). Sample items for each of the five dimensions of transformational

leadership include: (a) Idealized Influence (Attributed), “Displays a sense of power and

confidence”; (b) Idealized Influence (Behavior), “Emphasizes the importance of having a

collective sense of mission”; (c) Inspirational Motivation, “Articulates a compelling vision of

the future”; (d) Intellectual Stimulation, “Suggests new ways of looking at how to complete

assignments”; and (e) Individual Consideration, “Spends time teaching and coaching.”

Team effectiveness

Eight items from among three extant effectiveness scales were selected to capture the full range

of team effectiveness: three items were taken from a scale originally developed by (Kulik,

Oldham, & Hackman, 1987) , three items were adopted from (Schaubroeck, Lam, & Cha,

2007). Items were scored on a 5-point scale, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly

agree).

5.3.3. Trust.

Finally, we employed the 10-item Behavioral Trust Inventory (BTI) to measure trust (Gillespie,

2012; Lewicki et al., 2006). The BTI has two dimensions: (1) willingness to rely on another's

work-related skills, abilities, and knowledge (sample item: “How willing are you to rely on

your leader's task-related skills and abilities?”); and (2) willingness to disclose sensitive work

or personal information to another (sample item: “Discuss how you honestly feel about your

work, even negative feelings and frustration”).

5.3.4. Project success

11
To measure project success we utilized (Pinto & Mantel, 1990) 20-item scale to investigate

participants' assessments against four factors: (1) communication (sample item: “Individuals/

groups supplying input have received feedback on the acceptance or rejection of their input”);

(2) trouble-shooting (sample item: “Immediate action is taken when problems come to the

project team's attention”); (3) mission clarity (sample item: “The basic goals of the project are

made clear to the project team”); and (4) top management support (sample item: “Upper

management is responsive to our requests for additional resources, if the need arises”.

6. Appendix

6.1. Team Effectiveness.

Use the following rating scale for each answer:

1 2 3 4 5

Totally somewhat unsure somewhat totally

Disagree disagree agree agree

1. Goal Clarity - Goals and objectives are clearly understood and accepted by all members.
2. The employees of our team are good in coming up with ways to complete their tasks.
3. The employees of our team get their work done very effectively.”
4. Participation - Everyone is involved and heard during group discussions. There is no “tyranny of
a minority.”
5. Consultation - Team members are consulted on matters concerning them.
6. Decision Making - The group is both objective and effective at reaching decisions.
7. Roles and Responsibilities - When action is planned, clear assignments are made and accepted.
8. Procedures - The team has clear rules, methods and procedures to guide it. There are agreed-to
methods for problem solving.
9. Communications- Communication between members is open and honest. Members listen
actively.
10. Confronting Difficulties - Difficult or uncomfortable issues are openly worked through, and
conflicts are not avoided.
11. Openness and Trust - Team members are open in their transactions, and there are no hidden
agendas. Members feel free to be candid.
12. Commitment - Team members are committed to deadlines, meetings and other team activities.
13. Support - Members pull for and help each other, including when one person makes a mistake.
14. Risk Taking - Individuals feel they can try new things and risk failure. The team encourages risk
taking.
15. Atmosphere - The team atmosphere is informal, comfortable and relaxed.

12
16. Leadership - Leadership roles are shared. The same people do not dominate or control.
17. Evaluation - The team routinely stops and evaluates how it’s doing in order to improve.
18. Meetings - Meetings are orderly, well planned and productive.
19. Fun - There is an “esprit de corps,” or sense of fun, on this team.
6.2. Emotional Intelligence
a. Self-emotion appraisal
I have a good sense of why I have certain feelings most of the time.
I have good understanding of my own emotions.
I really understand what I feel.
I always know whether or not I am happy.
b. Others’ emotion appraisal
I always know my friends’ emotions from their behavior.
I am a good observer of others’ emotions.
I am sensitive to the feelings and emotions of others.
I have good understanding of the emotions of people around me.
c. Use of emotion
I always set goals for myself and then try my best to achieve them.
I always tell myself I am a competent person.
I am a self-motivated person.
I would always encourage myself to try my
d. Regulation of emotion
I am able to control my temper and handle difficulties rationally.
I am quite capable of controlling my own emotions.
I can always calm down quickly when I am very angry.
I have good control of my own
6.3. Trust
1. How willing are you to rely on your leader's task-related skills and abilities?
2. Discuss how you honestly feel about your work, even negative feelings and frustration.
3. Most people tell a lie when they can benefit by doing so.
4. Those devoted to unselfish causes are often exploited by others.
5. Some people do not cooperate because they pursue only their own short-term self-interest. Thus,
things that can be done well if people cooperate often fail because of these people.
6. Most people are basically honest.
7. There will be more people who will not work if the social security system is
developed further.
8. How willing are you to rely on your leader's task-related skills and abilities.
9. Discuss how you honestly feel about your work, even negative feelings and frustration
6.4. PROJECT SUCCESS
1. The project was completed on time.
2. Individuals/ groups supplying input have received feedback on the acceptance or rejection
of their input
3. Immediate action is taken when problems come to the project team's attention.
4. The basic goals of the project are made clear to the project team.

13
5. Upper management is responsive to our requests for additional resources, if the need arises.
6. The project was completed according to the budget allocated.
7. The outcomes of the project are used by its intended end users.
8. The outcomes of the project are likely to be sustained.
9. The outcomes of the project have directly benefited the intended end users, either through
increasing efficiency or effectiveness.
10. Given the problem for which it was developed, the project seems to do the best job of
solving that problem.
11. I was satisfied with the process by which the project was implemented.
12. Project team members were satisfied with the process by which the project was
implemented.
13. The project had no or minimal start-up problems because it was readily accepted by its end
users.
14. The project has directly led to improved performance for the end users/target beneficiaries.
15. The project has made a visible positive impact on the target beneficiaries.
16. Project specifications were met by the time of handover to the target beneficiaries.
17. The target beneficiaries were satisfied with the outcomes of the project.
18. Our principal donors were satisfied with the outcomes of the project implementation.
References

Antonakis, J. (2004). On why “emotional intelligence” will not predict leadership effectiveness beyond IQ
or the “big five”: An extension and rejoinder. Organizational Analysis, 12(2), 171-182.
Ashkanasy, N. M., & Tse, B. (2000). Transformational leadership as management of emotion: A conceptual
review.
Bar-On, R. (1997). The emotional intelligence inventory (EQ-I): Technical manual. Toronto, Canada: Multi-
Health Systems.
Barling, J., Slater, F., & Kevin Kelloway, E. (2000). Transformational leadership and emotional
intelligence: An exploratory study. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 21(3), 157-
161.
Barsade, S. G. (2002). The ripple effect: Emotional contagion and its influence on group behavior.
Administrative Science Quarterly, 47(4), 644-675.
Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (2000). MLQ, Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire sampler set: Technical report,
leader form, rater form, and scoring key for MLQ form 5x-short: Mind Garden.

Bono, J. E., Foldes, H. J., Vinson, G., & Muros, J. P. (2007). Workplace emotions: The role of supervision
and leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(5), 1357.
Bono, J. E., & Ilies, R. (2006). Charisma, positive emotions and mood contagion. The Leadership Quarterly,
17(4), 317-334.
Bresnen, M., & Marshall, N. (2000). Partnering in construction: a critical review of issues, problems and
dilemmas. Construction Management & Economics, 18(2), 229-237.
Brown, F. W., & Moshavi, D. (2005). Transformational leadership and emotional intelligence: A potential
pathway for an increased understanding of interpersonal influence. Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 26(7), 867-871.
Burke, K. J., & Paton, D. (2006). Predicting police officer job satisfaction: Traditional versus contemporary
models of trauma in occupational experience. Traumatology, 12(3), 189.
DeGroot, T., Kiker, D. S., & Cross, T. C. (2000). A meta‐analysis to review organizational outcomes related
to charismatic leadership. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences/Revue Canadienne des
Sciences de l'Administration, 17(4), 356-372.
Diallo, A., & Thuillier, D. (2005). The success of international development projects, trust and
communication: an African perspective. International journal of project management, 23(3), 237-
252.

14
Gardner, L., & Stough, C. (2002). Examining the relationship between leadership and emotional
intelligence in senior level managers. Leadership & organization development journal, 23(2), 68-78.

George, J. M. (2000). Emotions and leadership: The role of emotional intelligence. Human relations, 53(8),
1027-1055.
Gillespie, N. (2012). 17 Measuring trust in organizational contexts: an overview of survey-based measures.
Handbook of research methods on trust, 175.
Goleman, D. (1998). Working with emotional intelligence: Bantam.

Hosseinian, S., Yazdi, S.-M., Zahraie, S., & Fathi-Ashtiani, A. (2008). Emotional intelligence and job
satisfaction. Journal of Applied Sciences, 8, 903-906.
Humphrey, J., & Schmitz, H. (2002). How does insertion in global value chains affect upgrading in
industrial clusters? Regional studies, 36(9), 1017-1027.
Humphrey, R. H. (2002). The many faces of emotional leadership. The leadership quarterly, 13(5), 493-504.

Hur, Y., van den Berg, P. T., & Wilderom, C. P. (2011). Transformational leadership as a mediator between
emotional intelligence and team outcomes. The Leadership Quarterly, 22(4), 591-603.
Judge, T. A., & Piccolo, R. F. (2004). Transformational and transactional leadership: a meta-analytic test
of their relative validity. Journal of applied psychology, 89(5), 755.
Jugdev, K., & Muller, R. (2005). A retrospective look at our evolving understanding of project success.

Kadefors, A. (2004). Trust in project relationships—inside the black box. International Journal of project
management, 22(3), 175-182.
Kerr, I. R. (2006). Leadership strategies for sustainable SME operation. Business Strategy and the
Environment, 15(1), 30-39.
Klem, C., & Schlechter, A. (2008). The relationship between leader emotional intelligence and psychological
climate: An exploratory study. South African Journal of Business Management, 39(2), 9-23.
Kulik, C. T., Oldham, G. R., & Hackman, J. R. (1987). Work design as an approach to person-environment
fit. Journal of vocational behavior, 31(3), 278-296.
Langhorn, S. (2004). How emotional intelligence can improve management performance. International
Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 16(4), 220-230.
Leban, W., & Zulauf, C. (2004). Linking emotional intelligence abilities and transformational leadership
styles. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 25(7), 554-564.
Lee-Kelley, L., & Sankey, T. (2008). Global virtual teams for value creation and project success: A case
study. International journal of project management, 26(1), 51-62.
Lewicki, R. J., Tomlinson, E. C., & Gillespie, N. (2006). Models of interpersonal trust development:
Theoretical approaches, empirical evidence, and future directions. Journal of management, 32(6),
991-1022.
Locke, E. A. (2005). Why emotional intelligence is an invalid concept. Journal of organizational Behavior,
26(4), 425-431.
Mandell, B., & Pherwani, S. (2003). Relationship between emotional intelligence and transformational
leadership style: A gender comparison. Journal of business and psychology, 17(3), 387-404.
Mayer, J. D., Caruso, D. R., & Salovey, P. (1999). Emotional intelligence meets traditional standards for an
intelligence. Intelligence, 27(4), 267-298.
Mayer, J. D., & Salovey, P. (2007). Mayer-Salovery-Caruso emotional intelligence test: Multi-Health Systems
Incorporated.

Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P., & Caruso, D. (2000). Models of emotional intelligence. RJ Sternberg (ed.).
Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P., & Caruso, D. R. (2002). Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test:
MSCEIT. Item booklet.

Melita Prati, L., Douglas, C., Ferris, G. R., Ammeter, A. P., & Buckley, M. R. (2003). The role of emotional
intelligence in team leadership: Reply to the critique by Antonakis. The International Journal of
Organizational Analysis, 11(4), 363-369.
Müller, R., & Jugdev, K. (2012). Critical success factors in projects: Pinto, Slevin, and Prescott–the
elucidation of project success. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 5(4), 757-
775.

15
Ogunlana, S. O. (2010). Beyond the ‘iron triangle’: Stakeholder perception of key performance indicators
(KPIs) for large-scale public sector development projects. International journal of project
management, 28(3), 228-236.
Park, J.-G., & Lee, J. (2014). Knowledge sharing in information systems development projects: Explicating
the role of dependence and trust. International Journal of Project Management, 32(1), 153-165.

Pinto, J. K., & Mantel, S. J. (1990). The causes of project failure. IEEE transactions on engineering
management, 37(4), 269-276.
Pinto, J. K., & Slevin, D. P. (1987). Critical factors in successful project implementation. IEEE transactions
on engineering management(1), 22-27.
Prati, L. M., McMillan-Capehart, A., & Karriker, J. H. (2009). Affecting organizational identity: A
manager's influence. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 15(4), 404-415.
Rousseau, D. M., Sitkin, S. B., Burt, R. S., & Camerer, C. (1998). Not so different after all: A cross-discipline
view of trust. Academy of management review, 23(3), 393-404.
Salovey, P., & Mayer, J. D. (1990). Emotional intelligence. Imagination, cognition and personality, 9(3), 185-
211.
Schaubroeck, J., Lam, S. S., & Cha, S. E. (2007). Embracing transformational leadership: team values and
the impact of leader behavior on team performance. Journal of applied psychology, 92(4), 1020.

Smyth, H. (2005). Trust in the design team. Architectural engineering and design management, 1(3), 211-
223.
Sy, T., Côté, S., & Saavedra, R. (2005). The contagious leader: impact of the leader's mood on the mood of
group members, group affective tone, and group processes. Journal of applied psychology, 90(2),
295.
Toor, S. U. R., & Ogunlana, S. O. (2008). Problems causing delays in major construction projects in
Thailand. Construction management and economics, 26(4), 395-408.
Turner, R., & Zolin, R. (2012). Forecasting success on large projects: developing reliable scales to predict
multiple perspectives by multiple stakeholders over multiple time frames. Project Management
Journal, 43(5), 87-99.
Walter, F., Cole, M. S., & Humphrey, R. H. (2011). Emotional intelligence: Sine qua non of leadership or
folderol? The Academy of Management Perspectives, 25(1), 45-59.
Webber, S. S., & Klimoski, R. J. (2004). Client–project manager engagements, trust, and loyalty. Journal
of Organizational Behavior, 25(8), 997-1013.
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 behavior: An
annual series of analytical essays and critical reviews, Vol. 18.
Wong, C.-S., & Law, K. S. (2002). The effects of leader and follower emotional intelligence on performance
and attitude: An exploratory study. The leadership quarterly, 13(3), 243-274.
Yue, J., Austin, J., Wang, M.-C., & Huang, Z. (2006). Coordination of cooperative advertising in a two-
level supply chain when manufacturer offers discount. European Journal of Operational Research,
168(1), 65-85.

16