162

International Journal of Accounting & Business Management

www.ftms.edu.my/journals/index.php/journals/ijabm

Vol. 1 (No.1), April, 2013 Page: 162-174

ISSN: 2289-4519

This work is licensed under a

Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

The Effects Of Emotional Intelligence On Counterproductive Work Behaviors And Organizational

Citizenship Behaviors

Cheah Yeh Ying College of Business Management

and Accountancy, Universiti Tenaga National

yy_cheah@yahoo.com

Shirley Ken Tzu Ting College of Business Management

and Accountancy, Universiti Tenaga National

kayllnt@yahoo.com

Abstract Numerous studies have identified emotional abilities as being strongly associated with success in academic achievement, general life experiences, and a wide range of factors related to people’s jobs. In the hospitality industry, emotional intelligence of an employee plays an essential role in carrying out duties and ensuring organizational outcomes. In order to interact constructively and effectively with others, it is crucial for employees in the hospitality industry to have the ability to manage, regulate and control their emotions. However, research thus far has focused on the positive aspects of emotional intelligence among the non-task related behaviors of employees. No study has used outcome variables in a negative dimension In particular, since organizational citizenship behavior (OCBs) and counterproductive work behaviors (CWBs) as voluntary behaviors are non-task related behaviors that appear as employees’ emotional intelligence declines, they will

be more significant as outcome variables. Thus, this study identifies the associations among emotional intelligence, CWBs, and OCBs that have not yet been fully explored in the hospitality industry literature. Survey questionnaires were distributed to hotels employees working in the city of Kuala Lumpur. This study will provide a better understanding of emotional intelligence and its relationship to OCBs and CWBs, provide a more informed link between theory and practice and address the gaps currently existing in literature today. Keywords: counterproductive work behaviors, emotional intelligence, organizational citizenship behavior.

I. Introduction Emotional intelligence (EI) has emerged as an interesting topic for research and has drawn the attention of many researchers. Many studies have been conducted extensively to examine how emotional intelligence affects both the

163

organizational effectiveness (Wong & Law, 2002; Weinberger, 2003) and the non-task related behaviors of employees (Cote & Miners, 2006; Cartwright & Pappas, 2008). With this increasing interest in emotions, the importance of emotional intelligence is emphasized because human relations in organizations are affected by emotional factors more than by rational factors (Jung & Yoon, 2011). According to Mayer & Salovey (1997), emotional intelligence can be defined as the ability to perceive accurately, appraise, and express emotion, the ability to access or generate feelings when they facilitate thought, and the ability to understand emotion and emotional knowledge and the ability to regulate emotions to promote emotional and intellectual growth. Therefore, the emotional intelligence of employees are crucial as employees with a high level of emotional intelligence will be able to manage their emotions in order to display organizationally desired emotions (Moon & Hur, 2011) and successful organizations require employees who can communicate effectively, control their emotions and demonstrate their technical abilities (Druskat & Wolff, 2001). When employees fail to control their emotions are likely to fail in social interactions (Lopes et al., 2005) and experiencing negative emotions which resulted in counterproductive work behaviour (Anderson et al., 1995; Fox et al., 2001). Robinson & Bennett (1995) says that counterproductive work behaviors (CWB) are voluntary behaviours that violates significant organizational norms, and in doing so

threatens the well being of the organization or its members, or both. Spector & Fox (2002) suggest that CWB resulted from an emotional response and aims either to attack the cause of the situation or to passively cope with the emotion. Counterproductive work behavior is an urgent concern of the organization because it is assumed to cost organization billions of dollars each year (Bennett & Robinson, 2000). Negative emotions are related to counterproductive work behavior because employees who create problem in others’ work and not help others usually have negative emotions (Khan, Afzal & Zia, 2010). Increased in counterproductive work behavior has been linked to decreased productivity, 3 employer dissatisfaction, and greater psychological distress (Dunlop & Lee, 2004 ; Tepper, 2000). Negative employee behavior is related to behavior of employees with others which in turn may reduce other employee performance and cause conflict (Folger & Skarlicki, 2005). Emotional intelligence may contribute to the quality of people relationships at work as communicative and social functions, conveying information about thoughts and intentions and helping to coordinate social encounters (Keltner & Haidt, 2001). If employee emotional intelligence is improved, deviant behavior related to organizational tasks would reduce (Mayer et al., 2000). Studies in the past have shown that majority of the employees involve themselves in the negative behaviour of the workplace such as withholding effort, reporting late to work,

164

absenteeism, abusing medical certificates, working slowly and hiding needed resources (Giacalone & Greenberg, 1997; Skarlicki & Folger, 1997). In Malaysia, counterproductive work behaviour (CWB) cases has increasingly reported each year and become a serious problem (Naser, 2011). Despite the prevalence and costs of workplace deviance, our understanding of workplace deviance remains limited and much empirical research is yet to be done (Bennett & Robinson, 2000). In addition, the connection of study in the areas of emotional intelligence and counterproductive work behaviours is very rare (Azib, 2006). While considerable evidence of the importance of EI has been acknowledged, research efforts on the effectiveness of emotional intelligence among hotel employees are lacking in the hospitality literature (Jung & Yoon, 2011; Carvelzani et.al, 2003; Langhorn, 2004). In the Malaysia context, research regarding EI was done in various areas e.g. manufacturing (Tee, 2011) and banking (Noorlaila, 2010) but not the hospitality industry. Hence, there is a gap in literature with regards to understanding emotional intelligence in the hospitality industry in Malaysia and how employees emotional intelligence affects counterproductive work behavior and organizational citizenship behavior. Thus, this study identifies the associations among emotional intelligence, CWBs, and OCBs that have

not yet been fully explored in the Malaysia hospitality industry literature. II. Literature Review Emotional intelligence, CWBs, and OCBs Emotional intelligence originated from the concept of social intelligence as introduced by Thorndike (Thorndike, 1920) and it has been studied extensively in the recent years. Salovey and Mayer (1990) were the earliest who introduced the term emotional intelligence to show the ability of the people to deal with their emotions. Wong and Law (2002) explained that EI is an ability to understand one’s own emotions and those of others and to control emotions in diverse situations and they suggested that EI consists of four dimensions: others’ emotion appraisal (OEA), use of emotion (UOE), self-emotion appraisal (SEA), and regulation of emotion (ROE). Wong and Law (2002) developed this model based on work developed by Salovey and Mayer (1990). The first dimension, the others’ emotion appraisal (OEA) is the ability to perceive and understand others’ emotions. It relates to people’s ability to perceive and understand the emotions of those people around them The second dimension, the use of emotion (UOE) is the ability to use one’s own emotion information in one’s performance and productive activities. A person who is highly capable in this dimension would be able to encourage him or herself to perform better continuously. The third dimension, self-emotion appraisal (SEA) is the ability to understand and express

165

one’s own emotions. This relates to the individual’s ability to understand their deep emotions and be able to express these emotions naturally. Lastly, the fourth dimension, regulation of emotion (ROE) is the ability to control one’s own emotions based on appropriate behavior in a given situation. Emotional intelligence and Counterproductive work behaviors (CWBs) Counterproductive work behaviors (CWBs) are defined as “voluntary behavior of organizational members that violates significant organizational norms, and in doing so, threatens the well-being of the organization and/or its members” (Bennett & Robinson, 2000). Voluntary or chosen behavior would indicate that the employee is not motivated to conform and/or is motivated to act against established organizational norms. Bennett and Robinson (2000) identified two forms of deviance that is that are organizational deviance which is non personal and is aimed at harming the organization and interpersonal deviance which is interpersonal and detrimental to individuals. Behaviors within each of these types of deviance vary from relatively slight acts to more harsh acts. Fox et al. (2001) stated that CWBs are negative behaviors of employees toward organizations and colleagues. Mayer et al. (2000) explained that, if employees’ emotional intelligence improved, deviant behaviors related to organizational tasks would be remarkably reduced, thereby revealing negative relationships between emotional intelligence and employees’ deviating behaviors. Martin et al. (1998)

believed that employees’ emotional intelligence plays a role in preventing negative behaviors. Salgado (2002) and Colbert et al. (2004) noted that employees’ emotional continuity would adversely affect CWBs. Deshpande et al, (2005) found that,respondents with high EI perceived counterproductive behaviors to be more unethical than those with low EI. This suggests that people with high EI tend to be better corporate citizens and that better ethical attitudes towards their firm and work. Petrides, Frederickson & Furnham, (2004) posit that people with high levels of EI engage less in deviant behaviors than those with low EI. Similarly, Eisenberg (2000) states that low trait of EI may be a key factor in a variety of deviant behavior. This study therefore suggests that the emotional intelligence of employees could reduce CWBs. In conclusion, employees who lack emotional intelligence have a high level of CWBs. Hence, the following hypothesis is proposed: Hypothesis 1. Emotional intelligence is negatively related to CWBs. Emotional intelligence and Organizational Citizenship Behaviors (OCB) Since its introduction nearly twenty years back, OCB has been extensive researched on (Bateman & Organ, 1983). The vast majority of OCB research has focused on the effects of OCB on individual and organizational performance. Organizational citizenship behaviors (OCBs) are “the maintenance and enhancement of the social and

166

psychological context that supports task performance” (Organ, 1997). According to Katz (1964), organizational citizenship behavior were voluntary and creative behaviors to performed roles other than officially given duties by the organization, not directly or explicitly recognized by the formal award system and are known to be contributing factors of organizational performance. Turnipseed & Rassuli (2005) define OCB as defending the organization when it is criticized or urging peers to invest in the organization; which means that OCB is ‘going beyond the call of duty’. Organ (1988) identified five categories of OCB: 1) altruism refers to the helping of an

individual coworker on a task, 2) courtesy refer to alerting others in

the organization about changes that may affect their work,

3) conscientiousness refer to carrying out one’s duties beyond the minimum requirements,

4) sportsmanship refer to refraining from complaining about trivial matters, and

5) civic virtue refer to participating in the governance of the organization.

Each of these dimensions explains the different type of behaviors the employee have. Modassir & Singh (2008) examined the relationship of EI with transformational leadership (TL) and OCB of the followers. The results indicated that EI of leaders enhances the OCB of their followers. High emotional intelligence leadership appears to have a strong influence on an

employee's willingness to engage in OCBs (Podsakoff et al., 2000). Cote & Miners (2006) conclude that emotional intelligence and organizational citizenship behavior has been found that is positive relation. The results of the former study supported the higher emotional intelligence get higher task performance and organizational citizenship behavior directed at the organization (Petrides, Frederickson, and Furnham, 2004; Cote and Miners, 2006). Hence, the following hypothesis is proposed: Hypothesis 2: Emotional intelligence is positively related to OCB Research methodology Targeted participation for this study were front-line employees from hotels in the Klang valley area. The researcher uses the method of convenience sampling due to time and budget constraints. A total of 480 employees had been invited to participate in this research; a self-administered written questionnaire was used to collect data for this study. The total number of usable questionnaire is 285. Therefore, the response rate for this study is 59%. Wong and Law Emotional Intelligence Scale (WLEIS) This study adopted the work of Wong and Law (2002). Wong and Law developed a self-report EI scale named as the Wong and Law EI Scale (WLEIS) based on the work of Mayer and Salovey (1990). The WLEIS contains 16 items Likert-type self-report statements.

167

Studies done by Karim (2010), Mulla et.al., (2008) and Kim and Agrusa (2011) provided evidence for the reliability and validity of the WLEIS scale. Besides that, the WLEIS was developed through Chinese respondents in Hong Kong, it would be a better starting point for other Asian cultures than EI scale originated in the Western countries (Wong, Law, & Wong, 2004). Counterproductive work behaviors (CWBs) measures Currently, this study adopted the work of Fox and Spector (1999), to measure counterproductive work behavior. The components developed by Fox and Spector (1999) were divided into four dimensions namely minor organizational, serious organizational, minor interpersonal and serious interpersonal. Counterproductive work behavior is measured by using 25 items based on seven point scale (1: strongly disagree to 7: strongly agree). The scales have been found to have sufficient levels of reliability and validity. Organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) To measure organizational citizenship behavior (OCB), this study adopted the work of Organ (1988). OCB will be divided by five categories; altruism, conscientiousness, sportsmanship, courtesy, and civic virtue.

III. Findings and Discussion

TABLE 1: RESPONDENTS’ PROFILE Items

% Items %

Years of Service in the Current Employment: Less than 1 year 1 to 5 years 6 to 10 years More than 10 years

31.9 35.4 14.7 17.9

Gender: Male Female

54.70 45.30

Working experience: Less than 1 year 1 to 5 years 6 to 10 years 11 to 15 years 16 to 20 years More than 20 years

18.2 28.4 20.7 14.0 6.7 11.9

Age: 21-30 years 31-40 years 41-50 years 51 years and

above

44.20 32.60 16.80 6.30

Departments: Front Office Housekeeping F&B Human Resource

Department Admin & Operations Finance & Accounting Marketing Others

34.0 12.6 17.9 15 7.8 4.2 1.8 6.7

Education Level: Secondary

School Certificate Bachelor

Degree Master Degree

46.00 28.40 22.10 3.50

Table 1: Respondents’ Profile

Most of the respondents are between 21 to 30 years. Respondents with age 21-30 was the highest among others with 44.2%, followed by 31-40 years, which is 32.6 % and the lowest would be 6.3% aged 51years and above. There were 156 (54.7%) male and 129 (45.3%) female participants. Next, the third demographic is length of current service. The highest percentage of employees had 1 to 5 years (35.4%) while the lowest percent in working experience is 17.9% which are more than 10 years and the respondents is 51 respondents. The highest number of respondents came from the front office department (34%) while the lowest number of

168

respondents came from the marketing department with 5 respondents (1.8 %).

169

Variables No. of item

α

1 Emotional

Intelligence 16 0.940

2 Counterproductive

Work Behaviors (CWB)

27 0.962

3 Organizational

Citizenship Behavior (OCB)

23 0.922

Table 2: Cronbach’s Alpha Of Variables

Table 2 presents Cronbach alpha value for each dimension used in the study. All of the Cronbach alpha values were more than 0.7 which indicate that the dimensions used for each variable are highly reliable (Hair, Bush & Ortinau, 2006; Nunnally, 1978).

EI CWB OCB EI 1 -.339** .487**

CWB -.339** 1 OCB .487** 1

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Table 3: Correlation Between Emotional Intelligence (Ei),

Counterproductive Work Behaviors (Cwb) And Organizational Citizenship Behavior (Ocb)

Table 3 showed the results of correlation analysis used to identify the relationship between emotional intelligence and counterproductive work behaviors. To further check for multicollinearity, the variance inflation factors (VIF) was examined and the VIF values obtained are all less than 2.0. Hence, there is no multicollinearity problem for multivariate analysis. The correlation of between emotional intelligence and counterproductive work behaviors is significant at -0.339. Thus, there is a negative relationship between emotional intelligence and organizational citizenship behavior. Therefore, H1 is accepted. This parallels the findings of Siu (2009) that emotional

intelligence is inversely related to counterproductive work behaviors. Jung & Yoon (2011) also reported similar results in which their study was conducted in the hospitality industry in Korea. The correlation of between emotional intelligence and organizational citizenship behavior is significant at 0.487. Thus, there is a relationship between emotional intelligence and organizational citizenship behavior. Therefore, H2 is accepted. These finding support previous work research by Brief and Motowidlo (1986), Isen et al. (1987), MacKenzie et al. (1991), Wong and Law (2002), and also Cote and Miners (2006). These findings are consistent with MacKenzie et al. (1991) results where employees with higher emotional intelligence showed more OCBs. According to Abraham (1999), employees with high emotional intelligence would better understand colleagues’ feelings than those with low emotional intelligence; as such, they were more likely to exhibit altruistic behaviors. Hence, the results of the current study established that emotional intelligence would result in voluntary and positive behaviors.

Model (1) DV- CWB Model (2) DV- OCB

Variable Coefficient (t-stat)

Coefficient (t-stat)

Intercept 0.3816*** (11.697)

2.349*** (7.467)

EI -.350*** (-6.066)

.522*** (9.382)

Adj. R2 F-statistic

0.112 36.791***

.235 88.026***

a*, **, and *** denote the statistical significance at the 10%, 5%, and 1% level, respectively.

Table 4: OLS Regression Analysis

Table 4 reports the OLS regression results. The F-statistics indicates the

170

overall significance of the models at 0.01 significance level. The empirical evidence of Model (1) depicts a significantly negative relationship between EI and CWB. The value of R2 and the value of F-statistics (36.791) confirm a moderate explanatory power of the model. This finding is consistent with hypothesis 1 of this study as well as prior studies (Jung & Yoon, 2011), indicating that employees with high levels of emotional intelligence have a lower level of CWBs. In other words, Emotional intelligence (EI) is negatively related to CWBs. The empirical evidence of Model (2 depicts a significantly positive relationship between EI and OCB. The value of R2 and the value of F-statistics (88.026) confirm a strong explanatory power of the model. This finding is consistent with hypothesis 2 of this study as well as prior studies (e.g. Cote & Miners, 2006), indicating that employees with high levels of emotional intelligence have a higher level of OCBs. In other words, Emotional intelligence is positively related to OCB. IV. Conclusion This study is important because it explores the emotional intelligence of employees and verifies the causal relationship between hotel employees’ CWBs and OCBs. V. Limitations As stated previously in the document, ours was a cross sectional study in which the respondents rated themselves, which may have an effect on the study due to the difference in

perception regarding the questions included in the study. Secondly, there are chances of the contamination of data due to the self rating procedure, as in case of counterproductive work behavior, the respondents are usually expected to rate themselves low on CWB scale, even if they are assured of confidentiality. Finally, future research needs to expand this study to samples of staffs. Researchers may also conduct longitudinal study to provide strong evidence of the association between EI , OCB and CWB of same group of respondents. Another interesting area of future research is the impact of some demographics factors as moderators. References Abraham, R., 1999. Emotional

intelligence in organizations: a conceptualization. Social & General Psychology Monographs 125 (2), 209–219.

Abdul Azib, A. (2006). Emotional Intelligence and Workplace Deviant Behavior. Master Dissertation. Universiti Utara Malaysia.

Adil, Adnan, Chaudhry, Amjad Ali and Malik, Muhammad Imran, Emotional Intelligence and Students’ Academic Performance: A Study Conducted in Pakistan and Afghanistan (2012). Science Series Data Report, 4(3), 61-69, 2012. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2171793

171

Anderson, C.A., Deuser, W.E., & DeNeve, K.M. (1995). Hot temperatures, hostile affect, hostile cognition, and arousal: tests of a general model of affective aggression. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 21 (5), 434–448.

Bateman, T. S., and Organ, D. W. (1983). Job Satisfaction and the Good Soldier: The Relationship between Affect and Employee " Citizenship & quot;. The Academy of Management Journal, 26, 587-595.

Bennett, R.J., & Robinson, S.L. (2000). Development of a measure of workplace deviance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85 (3), 349–360.

Brief, A.P., Motowidlo, S.J., 1986. Prosocial organizational behaviors. Academy of Management Review, 11 (4), 710–725.

Cartwright, S., Pappas, C., (2008). Emotional intelligence its measurement and implications for the workplace. International Journal of Management Review 10 (2), 149–171

Carvelzani, A. S., Lee, I. A., Locatelli, V., Monti, G., & Villamira, M. A. (2003). Emotional intelligence and tourist services: the tour operator as a mediator between tourists and residents. International Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Administration, 4(4), 1-24.

Colbert, A.E., Mount, M.K., Harter, J.K., Witt, L.A., Barrick, M.R., 2004.

Interactive effects of personality and perception of the work situation on workplace deviance. Journal

of Applied Psychology, 89 (4), 599–609.

Cote, S., Miners, C.T.H., (2006). Emotional intelligence, cognitive intelligence and job performance. Administrative Science Quarterly 51 (1), 1–28

Deshpande, Et Al. (2005). The Impact of Emotional Intelligence on Counterproductive Behavior In China. Management Research News, 28( 5).

Druskat, V.U., & Wolff, S.B. (2001). Building the emotional intelligence of groups. Harvard Business Review, 79 (3), 80–90.

Dunlop, P. D., & Lee, K. (2004). Workplace deviance, organizational citizenship behavior, and business unit performance: The bad apples do spoil the whole barrel. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25, 67–80.

Eisenberg, N. (2000). Emotion, regulation, and moral development. Annual Review of Psychology, 51, 665-697.

Folger,R., & Skarlicki, D.P. (2005). Beyond counterproductive work behavior: Moral emotions and deontic retaliation versus reconciliation. In S. Fox & P.E. Spector (Eds.), Counterproductive workplace behavior: Investigations of actors and targets (pp. 83-105).Washington, DC:APA.

Fox, S., Spector, P.E., 1999. A model of work frustration-aggression. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20 (6), 915–931.

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

172

stressors and organizational justice: some mediator and moderator tests for autonomy and emotions. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 59, 291-309.

Giacalone, R. A., & Greenberg, J. (1997). Antisocial behavior in organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage

Hair, J.F.J, Bush, R.P. & Ortinau, D.J. (2006). Marketing research: Within a changing information environment, McGraw Hill International Edition.

Isen, A.M., Daubman, K.A., Nowicki, S., 1987. Positive affect facilitates creative problem solving. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52 (6), 1122–1131.

Jung H.S., Yoon,H.H.,(2011) The effects of emotional intelligence on counterproductive work behaviors and organizational citizen behaviors among food and beverage employees in a deluxe hotel, International Journal of Hospitality Management.

Karim, J. (2010). Examining the Factor Structure of Wong and Law’s Emotional Intelligence Scale with a Pakistani General Population Sample. IUP Journal of Organization Behavior, 9 (1&2), 32-44.

Katz, J.J. (1964). Mentalism in linguistics. Language, 40, 124–137.

Keltner, D., & Hadith, J. (2001). Social functions of emotions. In T.J. Mayne and G.A. Bonanno (eds.): Emotions: Current issues and futures directions (pp.192-213). New York: Guilford.

Khan, D.M.A., & Afzal, H., Zia. (2010). Impact of counterproductive work behaviour in organization performance in Pakistan. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, 1(12), 281-291.

Kim, J.K., & Agrusa, J. (2011). Hospitality service employees’ coping styles: The role of emotional intelligence, two basic personality traits, and socio demographic factors. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 30, 588-598.

Langhorn, S. (2004). How emotional intelligence can improve management performance. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 16(4), 220-230.

Lopes, P.N., Salovey, P., Côté, S., & Beers, M. (2005). Emotion regulation ability and the quality of social interaction. Emotion, 5 (1), 113–118.

MacKenzie, S.B., Podsakoff, P.M., Fetter, R., (1991). Organizational citizenship behavior and objective productivity as determinants of managerial evaluations of sales-persons’ performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 50, 123–150.

Martin, J.M., Knopoff, K., Beckham, C., 1998. An alternative to bureaucratic impersonality and emotional labor: bounded emotionality at the body shop. Administrative Science Quarterly 43 (2), 429–470.

Mayer, J. D., & Salovey, P. (1997).What is emotional intelligence? In P.

173

Salovey & D. Sluyter (Eds.), Emotional development and emotional intelligence: Educational implications (pp. 3–34). New York: Basic Books.

Mayer, J.D., Caruso, D.R., & Salovey, P. (2000). Emotional intelligence meets traditional standards for an intelligence. Intelligence 27 (4), 267–298.

Modassir, Atika &, Singh, Tripti. (2008). Relationship of Emotional Intelligence with Transformational Leadership and Organizational Citizenship Behavior. International journal of leadership studies, 4(1), 3-21.

Moon, T.W., & Hur, W.M. (2011). Emotional Intelligence, emotional exhaustion and job performance. Social Behavior and Personality, 39(8), 1087-1096.

Mulla, Z.R., Premarajan, R.K., & Shukla, M. (2008). Assessment of Emotional Intelligence: The Role of Self Other Agreement. Great Lakes Herald, 2(1), 1-19.

Naser, N.M. (2011). The relationships between workplace spirituality and Counterproductive work behaviour. Master Dissertation. Universiti Utara Malaysia.

Nunnally, J.C. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Organ, D.W. (1988). A restatement of the satisfaction performance hypothesis. Journal of Management 14, 547–557.

Organ, D.W. (1997). Organizational citizenship behavior: it’s construct clean-up time. Human Performance 10, 85–97.

Petrides, K.V., Frederickson, N., & Furnham, A. (2004). The role of trait emotional intelligence in academic performance and deviant behavior at school. Personality and Individual Differences, 36, 277-293.

Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Paine, J.B., Bachrach, D.G., 2000. Organizational citizenship behaviors: a critical review of the theoretical and empirical literature and suggestions for future research. Journal of Management 26 (3), 513–563.

Robinson, S.L., & Bennett, R. (1995). A typology of deviant workplace behaviours: Multidimensional scaling study. Academy of Management Journal, 38(2), 555-572.

Salgado, J.F., 2002. The Big Five personality dimensions and counterproductive behaviors. International Journal of Selection and Assessment 10 (1/2), 117– 125

Salovey, P., & Mayer, J. (1990). Emotional intelligence. Imagination, cognition, and personality, 9(3), 185-211.

Salarzehi, H., Yaghoubi, N. M., Naroei, M., & Sin, L. G. (2011). A Survey of Relationship Between Emotional Intelligence and Organizational Citizenship Behavior in Iran. International Business and Management, 3(1), 130-135.

Skarlicki, D.P., & Folger, R. (1997). Retaliation in the workplace: The roles of distributive, procedural, and interactional justice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 434-443.

174

Spector, P. E., & Fox, S. (2002). An emotion-centered model of voluntary work behavior: Some parallels between counterproductive work behavior and organizational citizenship behavior. Human Resource Management Review, 12, 269–292.

Singh, Tripti and Modassir, Atika , Relationship of Emotional Intelligence with Transformational Leadership and Organizational Citizenship Behavior (July 30, 2007). IIM Bangalore Research Paper No. 262. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2145266 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2145266

Siu, A.F.Y., 2009. Trait emotional intelligence and its relationships with problem behavior in Hong Kong adolescents. Personality and Individual Differences 47 (6), 553–557.

Tepper, B. J. (2000). Consequences of abusive supervision. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 178–190.

Thorndike, E. L. (1920). Intelligence and its uses. Harper’s Magazine, 140, 227–235.

Turnipseed, D. L., and Rassuli, A. (2005). Performance Perceptions of Organizational Citizenship Behaviours At Work: A Bi-Level Study Among Managers And Employees. British Journal of Management, Vol. 16, 231-244.

Weinberger, L.A., (2003). An examination of the relationship between emotional intelligence, leadership style and perceived leadership effectiveness. Doctoral Dissertation. The Graduate School of the University of Minnesota.

Wong, C., Law, K.S., (2002). The effect of leader and follower emotional intelligence on performance and attitude: an exploratory study. Leadership Quarterly 13 (3), 243–274.

Wong, C. S., Law, K. S., & Wong, P. M. (2004). Development and validation of a forced choice emotional intelligence measure for Chinese respondents in Hong Kong. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 21(4), 535-559.