ISSN 0798 1015

Vol. 39 (# 08) Year 2018. Page 19

Emotional intelligence and styles of behavior in business communication of middle managers

Inteligencia emocional y estilos de comportamiento en la comunicación empresarial de mandos intermedios

Svetlana GURIEVA 1; Irina KUZNETSOVA 2; Ekaterina YUMKINA 3

Received: 24/10/2017 • Approved: 08/11/2017

Content

1. Introduction

2. Object and methods

3. Results and discussion

4. Discussion

5. Conclusion

6. Conclusion and future direction

Acknowledgments

Funding Information

Authors’ note

Ethics

References

1. Introduction

Until the last century most of the scientists understand the intelligence as cognitive complex of memory, learning and problem solving. E. Thorndike described the social intelligence that related close to managing and understanding others. H. Gardner is known by the famous theory of multiple intelligence, moreover, that theory focused on the following items: the ability to understand one’s own feelings, motivations, values, attitudes and fears; the ability to understand others and their feelings, motivations, values, intentions.

The business communications in themselves are reviewed as emotional situation (Ogilvie & Carsky, 2002), emerging due to intensification of needs and interests of two or more parties. The negotiating process may often transfer into conflict interaction; as a result, emotional regulation of own behavior and ability to influence the partner positively come into special focus as these traits are interrelated with the establishment of trust, satisfaction with cooperation, wish for long-term collaboration (K. Kim, N.L. Cundiff,  S.B. Choi, 2015), perspectives for creation of teams (Druskat & Wolff, 2001) and strengthening of business image (Goleman, 1995). In this study we set the goal to check interrelation between components of emotional intelligence and preferred style of behavior in process of business communication. We plan to review such components of business communication style as behavioral strategy in conflict and focus of business interaction.   

1.1. Background

The emotional intelligence has increasingly been perceived as one of the most important integral parts of personality. Since 1990-es this phenomenon has become a special object of its study and rapidly gains the factual base. Theoretically, J. Mayer, P. Salovey and D. Caruso have suggested distinguishing "models of abilities" and "mixed models" of emotional intelligence (Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P., & Caruso, D., 2000). The first type includes their own model that defines emotional intelligence as cognitive ability; the second type includes models that define emotional intelligence as combination of cognitive abilities and personal characteristics. The "mixed models" are models of emotional intelligence by R. Bar-On and D. Goleman; they unite cognitive, personal and motivation traits, due to which they are in close connection with adaptation to real life (Bar-On, R., 2006). These models presume measurement of emotional intelligence using questionnaires based on self-report that are similar to traditional personality traits questionnaires. It is important that in the model by D. Goleman the emotional intelligence is not a separate ability, but is related to the goal-setting of a personality (Goleman, D., 2006). It means that demonstration of a certain trait depends on a vital need.

In Russia, D. Lusin has developed the model, which is similar to the model by J. Mayer and P. Salovey. Within its frames, the emotional intelligence is defined as "ability to understand own emotions and emotions of others, as well as to manage these emotions" (Lusin, D., 2009).

It is evident that negotiations as a method have been used since ancient times, but the scientific analysis of negotiations as an object of shear scientific analysis started only in the second part of the 20-th century. Following J. Camp (2012), P. T. Steele and T. Beasor (2004), R. Fisher and W.L. Ury (2011) we perceive the negotiations as a dialog between parties discussing an idea, information and alternatives to achieve the mutually acceptable solution (agreement). Each of the participants studies his own interests but the parties are interdependent and due to this fact, they use negotiations to find solution of the problem. W. Mastenbroek paid special attention to the problem of interdependence. He perceived negotiations as "ability to follow own interests in combination with awareness that interdependence is inevitable" (Mastenbroek, W., 1993). The researcher has repeatedly stressed that the process of negotiations emerges just due to the interdependence: the participants follow interests that they cannot satisfy on their own, at the same time their interests cross. According to him, the negotiations are aimed to solve this opposition.

One of the significant factors during negotiations is a demonstration of personality of the participants, out of the setting. According to evaluation by J. Rubin and B. Brown (citation from Lebedeva, 1997), they may be of two types depending on focus on the situation or on the interpersonal relations. In 2015 S. Gurieva proposed the four negotiating styles (focus on the action, on the process, on people and on the idea). With this, the negotiating styles are defined by several factors: from personal peculiarities to interests and needs of participants. Selection of one or other style depends on goals of negotiations, as well as on conditions of their conduction and further collaboration with the opposite party.

2. Object and methods

Hypothesis 1: The better interpersonal part of emotional intelligence is developed, the higher is a degree of a person's focus on people in the process of business communication.

Hypothesis 2: The better intrapersonal part of emotional intelligence is developed, the higher is a degree of a person's focus on the process in business communication.

Hypothesis 3: The higher a degree of interpersonal emotional intelligence development, the more often collaboration is a preferred behavioral strategy in conflict. Other strategies are associated with insufficient development of any component of emotional intelligence.

Object of the research

The object of this study

Is to review the preferred negotiating styles depending on the level of emotional intelligence. The employees of "ХХХ" Ltd. company, whose main activity is legal support of business operations, served as the object of our study. Among them, accountants, economists, financial managers, IT specialists, marketing specialists, HR specialists, merchandisers, sales managers, area directors, quality managers, purchase managers, secretaries and logistic specialists).

"ХХХ" Ltd. is a commercial organization, main activity of which includes production and sales of sausage products. Most of the respondents take part in negotiations at different levels, starting from establishing contact with a customer to negotiations at the highest level.

Methods

The study was conducted in St. Petersburg in 2016. 63 persons aged from 22 to 61 y.o. (average age was 36.38 years), including 33 women and 30 men, took part in the research. Among them, 27 persons hold executive positions and 36 persons hold administrative positions.

Among the respondents, 58.51% participate in negotiations on regular basis, 11.3% do it every day, 11.3% do it every month and 18.9% participate in negotiations occasionally.

Major part of the respondents (87.3%) has higher education (one or several). 8% of participants have secondary professional education or unfinished higher education. Marital status analysis has demonstrated that 74.6% of the respondents have registered or common-law marriage. Other 25.4% of the respondents are not married.

Procedure of the study

After the verbal agreement the material was sent to the respondents via e-mail or handed over in printed form. The respondents filled in the procedures at their convenience and returned them back in similar way.

The respondents were asked to fill in five procedures and the inquiry form (see Table 1).

Table 1.
Methods of the study

The value factors of emotional intelligence components at EQ (Hall) procedure scales may be found within the range from -18 to 18 scores.

"Your Business Communication Style" test enables to detect four ways of behavior in professional sphere:

- style 1, "focus on the actions"; characterized by discussion of results, specific issues, behavior, efficiency, moving forward, responsibility, confirmations, experience, disturbances, achievements, changes, solutions.

- style 2, "focus on the process"; characterized by discussion of facts, procedure issues, planning, organization, control, check, tests, analysis, supervisions, validations and details.

- style 3, "focus on people"; characterized by discussion of people in general, people's needs, people's motives, team work, problems of communication, feelings, "team spirit", understanding, self-development, susceptibility, awareness, collaboration, convictions, values, expectations and relations.

- style 4, "focus on the idea"; characterized by discussion of concepts, novelties, creative approach, opportunities, probabilities, big plans, different issues regarding what is new in a certain sphere, interdependence, new ways, new methods, improvements, problems, potential and alternatives.

For data processing we used Pearson’s rho correlation coefficient and factor analysis (principal component analysis) on the basis of IBM SPSS Statistic software, version 20.0.

3. Results and discussion

The analysis of the primary results enables to mention the following peculiarities (see Table 2).

Table 2.
Descriptive statistics

The respondents, who took part in the study, demonstrate medium level of emotional intelligence both for the general factor and for its separate components. The most expressed abilities they have are to recognize own emotional states, make themselves overcome negative feelings and continue to solve the task. Management of own emotions is at the low level, which means that despite the above mentioned ability to move their negative feelings aside it is very difficult for the respondents to keep an equal mind. We may assume that their feelings are displaced to sphere of the unconscious and are not analyzed in full scope.

The more detailed picture can be created using components that are included into Lusin's EmIn procedure. The respondents have slightly more expressed intrapersonal emotional intelligence as opposed to the interpersonal one. At the same time it is hard to speak about significant differences as the average values are only slightly different (44.10 and 47.86). These procedures confirm that the respondents have difficulties with management of their own emotions, especially in the part of their expression control.

The prevailing styles of business communication among the respondents are focus on the process and people. It is less common for them to focus mainly on the ideas or perspectives.

In case of conflict situations the respondents, in general, stick to the strategy of compromise and prefer the "lose-lose" model. The next preferable strategies are avoidance and collaboration; the most rarely participants of the study choose active protection of own interests and rivalry.

3.1.  Factor analysis of interrelations between components of emotional intelligence

We performed the factor analysis (principal component analysis) in order to evaluate to what extension the related phenomena are measured by N. Hall's and D. Lusin's emotional intelligence procedures. The analysis revealed 2 factors, one of which includes those parameters of both procedures which characterize recognition, expression and management of own emotions, and the other one includes the parameters characterizing emotions of other people. The first factor may be named as "generalized intrapersonal emotional intelligence factor", and the second as "generalized interpersonal emotional intelligence factor".

Results of the analysis are the basis for correct interpretation of correlation analysis data.

3.2. Interrelation between emotional intelligence and negotiating style, as well as ways of conflicts solution

A) Interrelation between emotional intelligence and negotiating style

Lets address to the more detailed analysis of the peculiarities of interrelations between variables.

The business communication styles, which were measured using "Your Business Communication and Behavior Style" questionnaire (see Appendix C), appeared (according to the results of our study) related to emotional intelligence factors measured using Hall’s EQ and EmIn tests (see Appendix K).

The table gives values of Pearson’s rho correlation coefficient. Legend: * - correlation at significance level p <0.05.

The respondents who prefer to pay more attention to the process side of the issues under solution during communication are more able to control expression of emotions and, in general, have more developed intrapersonal emotional intelligence related to understanding of own feelings.

The style focused on people requires significantly higher degree of emotional intelligence development. Using of such strategy presumes empathy with partner's state, ability to "read" his needs and understand the reasons that have triggered a certain emotion.

The business communication style focused on the actions is related to brighter expression of emotions. The more a person is focused on comprehension, discussion and development, first of all, of any idea, the less developed such components of interpersonal emotional intelligence as recognition, empathy and understanding of others' emotions he has.

The general picture of the obtained interrelations demonstrates that the degree of a person's confidence in his/her ability to "read" information about the state of other person, as well as reflection of his own feelings dynamics, influence selection of communication style in process of professional tasks solution. We may assume that emphasizing of one or other part during negotiations (for example, to pay more attention for the certain solutions, acts or focus on sense-bearing part) is a way to compensate insufficient level of emotions understanding. 

B) Interrelation between emotional intelligence level and way of conflicts solution

The strategies of conflict avoidance used by the respondents have demonstrated significant interrelations with emotional intelligence factors in this study.

The table gives values of Pearson’s rho correlation coefficient. Legend: * - correlation at significance level p <0.05; ** - correlation at significance level p <0.01.

There is an interesting contrast in signs of the obtained correlation links formed by "avoidance" and "compromise" strategies on the one side and "rivalry" and "collaboration" strategies on the other side. The first two strategies, in case they are used by a person as the main ones, denote insufficient level of several emotional intelligence factors expression; as against, the second two strategies are related to higher level of emotional intelligence. Let's review each of the strategies in details.

For example, those respondents who often prefer to avoid conflict situations demonstrate lower level of ability to understand and manage their own emotions and are less able to motivate themselves to switch from negative emotions to positive ones and to keep on solving the life tasks. The strategy of avoidance presumes that main efforts of a personality are focused on prevention of the tense situation occurrence. According to Thomas' procedure, this may be achieved by transferring reliability, displacement of negative emotions, postponement of decision making, termination of clarification and discussion.

The results of the study demonstrate that such non-constructive way of behavior may be related, for instance, to a person's weak awareness and understanding of his own emotional sphere. Negative emotions are perceived as a threatening wave of unpleasant impetus, which a person tries to prevent with all his best efforts. Negative interrelation between the reviewed strategy and management of emotions is the most brightly expressed. Due to weak understanding of own feelings a person experiences difficulties with control of own reactions on possible outcome of a conflict of interests situation.

The strategy of compromise presumes search for a medium, grant of concession in return to concession granted by an opponent. This model is often deemed as one of the desirable ways for peaceful settlement of conflict situation. But in fact it presumes that both parties lose as they obtain the result they were not intended to get. The respondents' data correlation analysis has demonstrated several negative interrelations with emotional intelligence factors. For example, a person more often uses compromise in case he has difficulties with recognition and understanding of other people's emotions; on the other words, when he has lower level of interpersonal emotional intelligence development. These data additionally prove the idea of non-productive compromise as a way to solve a conflict.

It appeared unexpected in many respects that there are numerous positive, highly significant and strong links between different parameters of emotional intelligence and such behavioral strategy in conflict as rivalry. This happens due to the fact that a person in conflict situation is persistent in protection of his own interests and applies efforts to reach his goal; he actively persuades and proves benefits of his position. Such strategy, as appeared, is based on a person's good understanding of how his own feelings appear and the meaning of these feelings, his ability to switch from negative feelings to tasks solution, high level of control and management of his own emotions. The peculiarities of correlation links demonstrate that those who prefer rivalry have highly expressed management of own emotions component, which is important for sequential protection of own interests.

Finally, collaboration - which is one of the most productive strategies of conflict situations solution in the Thomas' procedure - includes ability to respect partner's interests, clarification of his position, and focus on winning result for both parties. In correlation picture it is proved by interrelations with interpersonal emotional intelligence. The more frequent a person uses collaboration, the better ability to understand other people's emotions he has.

4. Discussion

The obtained data regarding interrelation between preferred business communicating styles and emotional intelligence conforms to other authors' data. For example, in the study of Marzuki, N.A. et al. (Marzuki, N.A., Mustaffa, C.S., Mat Saad, Z., 2015) we revealed that emotional intelligence has positive correlations with communicative competence, which includes such skills as ability to endear yourself to an interlocutor and create trust-based environment.

At the same time, in our study we revealed that making accent in process of work primarily on analysis of people's needs and relations presumes highly developed interpersonal emotional intelligence, and ability to rationally arrange work and focus efforts on solution of tasks conforms with development of intrapersonal components of emotional intelligence. The above mentioned interrelations enable us to assume that development of these parts of emotional intelligence may have different mechanisms of generation. For the interpersonal interactions, experience of successful contacts with people and availability of humanistic views are probably important. Self-discipline and self-reflection play an important role for self-control. These presumptions may become subjects of further study: in particular, for analysis of interrelations between emotional intelligence parameters and styles of parent-child relations. Besides, identification of people with similarly developed interpersonal and intrapersonal emotional intelligence in order to make their biographical and personal profiles is an independent research task.

Regarding behavior in conflict, the results of our study have been confirmed by works of other authors in such aspect that there are several parameters of emotional intelligence which have positive interrelations with such strategies as collaboration and dominance and negative interrelations with avoidance (Jain, P., Duggal, T., 2017), (Başoğul, C., Özgür, G., 2016), (Margaret M. Hopkins, Robert D. Yonker, 2015). Therefore, we may assert that avoidance of tense situations is actually related to difficulties in understanding of own emotions and self-control. With this, selection of dominance (rivalry) is related to highly developed self-respect (according to Bar-On's model), which includes understanding and evaluation of oneself, own abilities and limits.

Our data is different in question of compromise strategy. For example, in studies of several authors we revealed positive interrelations between this strategy and emotional intelligence in the part related to ability to solve problems (Margaret M. Hopkins, Robert D. Yonker, 2015). In our study we revealed a link between use of compromise strategy and some difficulties related to interpersonal emotional intelligence (in particular, in recognition of other people's emotions). We may assume that those who prefer compromise have really high degree of ability to identify a problem. In fact, to propose an alternative or something in between, it is important to understand what is replaced by this alternative. This peculiarity does not exclude the existing problems with diagnostic of an interlocutor's state. As a result, people have fear they will fail to understand reactions of their partner correctly and due to this prefer to be satisfied with something in the middle rather than discuss and search for satisfactory solution for both parties.

5. Conclusion

In summary, we would like to mention that emotional intelligence plays an important role in the process of business interaction and negotiation. And it becomes especially important in conflict situation.

Those people who are mainly focused on the process in business interaction have more developed intrapersonal emotional intelligence. Focus on the process presumes higher control over the process of work task execution, and excessive expressions of the internal state may become an obstacle. Focus on the task, attention to details, control of own actions quality requires attention and management of own emotional state.

Those for whom it is important to keep friendly relations with people have more developed interpersonal emotional intelligence. Ability to precisely determine and emphasize with other people's feelings enhance people's affection and development of trust relations.

There are also such styles of business interaction for which some parts of emotional intelligence have no importance. For example, people who are focused on actions are less prone to control expression of emotions. Their expression is an integral part of their modus operandi.

The nature of interrelations of those persons who prefer to focus on the idea appear completely opposite to those who are focused on people and relations. It is not natural for them to have deep understanding of other person's feelings, they are not skilled in recognition and interpretation of others' emotions, and it is probably because they are wrapped up in general concept of activity and its planning.

Different parts of emotional intelligence become much more vital in conflict situations when they mark a certain behavioral strategy. Those who prefer rivalry have the most developed intrapersonal emotional intelligence. The necessity to get your viewpoint over to other person consistently, clearly and in details presumes high level of ability to manage own emotions that ensures preservation of self-control and clarity of thoughts.

On the contrary, collaboration, being focused on a partner's interests, makes importance of interpersonal emotional intelligence (that ensures precise recognition of state and needs of a partner) actual.

Avoidance and compromise appear imperfect strategies of conflict situation solution and may indicate some difficulties that a person experiences in the emotional sphere. For example, those who avoid acute situations have problems with management of own emotions; they have tendency to be obsessed with negative emotional feelings and due to this fact prefer to avoid any conflicts. Those who have a tendency for compromise experience difficulties with understanding of other people's emotions. It is possible that mistakes of interpretation lead to concession in order to avoid unpleasant situations and exacerbation of relations.

In our work we have reviewed one of the situations when interrelations between preferred behavioral styles of business communication and components of emotional intelligence are revealed. In our further studies it would be interesting to compare groups in relation to a kind of activity (for example, economists and HR-specialists, lawyers and marketing specialists etc.).  Besides, it would be interesting to specify peculiarities of emotional intelligence depending on communication style of top level managers.

The results of this study, despite of being preliminary ones, may be interesting for HR-specialists and executives in the process of recruitment and creation of project teams.

6. Conclusion and future direction

The research has shown that the majority of respondents in all the selections tend to evaluate the activity of main characters of Internet memes as high, and informativity of the plot as very low. This may indicate that an Internet meme does not need to have deep meaning to become popular, but it is good if its main characters are active and spread positive emotions.

Further, it would be interesting to repeat the research with more respondents in order to check the key assumption and results obtained, as well as to make necessary corrections.

The research is of high practical importance for advertising and marketing. Besides, the authors’ method absolutely matches the tasks of the research and can be further applied to studying and analyzing different sources of information. We face a complicated issue regarding the predictors of success and expansion of any information block or source, why Internet memes are so popular and how this influence and expansion in modern society can be explained.

Acknowledgments

We would appreciate to receive feedback and comments on the paper from its readers. They will help us complete and enhance the research.

Funding Information

This work was supported and funded by the Social Psychology Department of Saint Petersburg State University.

Authors’ note

Svetlana Gurieva developed the conceptual idea and design of the research work, provided critical research reviewing for significant intellectual content.
Ekaterina Umkina carried out the study, data collection of the study sample and wrote the manuscript, participated in the results analysis, contributed to drafting the article, wrote discussion and conclusion sections, and described the further study perspectives.
Irina Kuznetsova developed the conceptual idea and design of the research work, carried out the study, drafting the article, writing the description of the future research direction.
The authors declare that there are no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Ethics

This article is original and contains unpublished materials. The corresponding author confirms that all of the other authors have read and approved the manuscript and there are no ethical issues involved.

References

Bar-On R., The Bar-On model of emotional-social intelligence (ESI), Psicothema, 18, suppl., 13-25, 2006.

Druskat, V. U., & Wolff, S. B. (2001, March-April). Building the emotional intelligence of groups. Harvard Business Review, pp. 81-90.

Fisher R., Ury W.L. Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In. NY.: Penguin Books. 2011.

Goleman D. Emotional Intelligence – NY.: Bantam Book. 2006.

Goleman D., Boyatzis R., McKee  A. Primal Leadership: Unleashing the Power of Emotional Intelligence – Boston- Harvard Business Review Press. 2013. 

Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional intelligence. New York: Bantam Books.

John R. Ogilvie Mary L. Carsky, (2002) Bulding-emotional in Negotlations, International Journal of Conflict Management, Vol. 13 Iss 4 pp. 381 – 400

K. Kim,  N.L. Cundiff,  S.B. Choi  Emotional Intelligence and Negotiation Outcomes: Mediating Effects of Rapport, Negotiation Strategy, and Judgment Accuracy // Group Decis Negot (2015) 24:477–493

Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P., & Caruso, D. (2000). Models of emotional intelligence. In R. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of intelligence (pp. 396-420). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Gurieva, S., Negotiation Tactics and Strategies: study guide – St. Petersburg: Publishing of St. Petersburg State University, 2015.

Camp, J. No: The Only Negotiating System. -- Moscow: Dobraya Kniga, 2012..

Lebedeva, M., Political Settle of Conflicts: Approaches, Solutions, and Technologies. – Moscow: Aspekt Press, 1997.

Lusin, D., Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire EmIn: New Psychometric Data // Social and Emotional Intelligence: From Models to Measurements/Edited by D. Lusin, D. Ushakov. Moscow: Russian Academy of Science Institute of Psychology, 2009. P. 264 – 278.

Mastenbroek, W. Negotiate. — Kaluga: Kaluga Institute of Sociology, 1993.

Steele, P. T., Beasor, T. Business Negotiation: A Practical Workbook/translation from English. Moscow, 2004.

1. Saint Petersburg State University, Saint Petersburg, Universitetskaiya nab. 7/9, Russia. Corresponding author. email: s_gurieva@bk.ru

2. Saint Petersburg State University, Saint Petersburg, Universitetskaiya nab. 7/9, Russia

3. Saint Petersburg State University, Saint Petersburg, Universitetskaiya nab. 7/9, Russia