Assessing emotional intelligence measures : do they predict work and life outcomes?

Abstract

Many organizations are using emotional intelligence (EI) measures for selection and training purposes as a result of the claims that these measures predict successful work and life functioning (e.g., Bar-On, 1997; Boyatzis, Goleman, & Rhee, 2000; Goleman, 1995; Goleman, 1998; Mayer & Salovey, 1997; Mayer, Salovey, & Caruso, 1999). However, little is known about the definition and measurement of this new construct and many researchers question what EI measures are assessing and what they predict (e.g., Newsome, Day, & Catano, 2000; Petrides & Furnham, 2000). In the present study, two popular EI measures (i.e., Emotional Quotient Inventory, EQ-i, Bar-On, 1997; Mayer Salovey Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test, MSCEIT, Mayer et al., 1999) were examined in terms of their construct validity and predictive validity. Officers and basic recruits in the Canadian Forces (CF) completed two measures of EI, personality, job satisfaction, and life satisfaction which were correlated with their scores on the Canadian Forces Aptitude Test (CFAT) and training performance ratings. The EQ-i had moderate to high correlations with the Big Five personality dimensions, suggesting a great deal of overlap between these two measures. Conversely, only the emotional management scale of the MSCEIT was associated with personality. Both the EQ-i and MSCEIT were unrelated to general cognitive ability and training performance. The MSCEIT was unrelated to job satisfaction and life satisfaction. In contrast, the EQ-i accounted for variance in both job satisfaction and life satisfaction after controlling for the influence of demographic characteristics and personality.