SOCIAL BEHAVIOR AND PERSONALITY, 2011, 39(1) , 21-32

Society for Personality Research (Inc.)

DOI 10.2224/sbp.2011.39.1.21

JOB STRESS AND JOB PERFORMANCE AMONG

EMPLOYEES IN THE TAIWANESE FINANCE SECTOR:
THE ROLE OF EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE

YU-CHI WU
National University of Kaohsiung, Kaohsiung, Taiwan, ROC
Prior empirical research findings regarding the relationship between job stress and job
performance are inconsistent. It was argued in this study that one reason for these
inconsistent results may be an existing moderating effect. Stress does not always result
directly from the source of pressure itself, but rather from the perception of that pressure.
Therefore, individual difference variables (e.g., emotional intelligence) that might relate to
that perception should also be considered. The effects of emotional intelligence on the
relationship between job stress and job performance were investigated with a sample of
employees in the Taiwanese finance sector. The results indicated that emotional intelligence
had a positive impact on job performance and moderated this relationship. In this respect,
highly emotionally intelligent employees are more likely than are low emotional intelligence
employees to be able to reduce or transform the potential negative effects of job stress on job
performance. The results of this study clarify knowledge of stress effects and, thus, the
usefulness of stress management practices can be improved and enhanced.
Keywords: job stress, emotional intelligence, job performance, finance sector.

The findings gained in prior empirical studies regarding the relationship

between job stress and job performance are inconsistent. Although the majority
of empirical research results have shown a negative linear relationship between
stress and performance (Siu, 2003; Van Dyne, Jehn, & Cumming, 2002) there
have also been studies in which a positive linear relationship or an inverted U
relationship has been found.

Yu-Chi Wu, Assistant Professor, Institute of Business and Management, National University of
Kaohsiung, Kaohsiung, Taiwan, ROC.
Appreciation is due to anonymous reviewers.

EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE AND JOB PERFORMANCE

22

Please address correspondence and reprint requests to: Yu-Chi Wu, Institute of Business and
Management, National University of Kaohsiung, 700, Kaohsiung University Road, Nanzih District,
Kaohsiung 811, Taiwan, ROC. Phone: +886-9-72520146; Email: sycwu@nuk.edu.tw

21
In order to address the theoretical issues underlying the stress-performance
relationship, the aim in this study was to develop and test a theory that can help
researchers and managers better understand this relationship. One possible
explanation for inconsistent findings may be an existing moderator. While Jex
(1998) suggested the addition of a broader range of moderators to the
relationship of stress-performance, Jordan, Ashkanasy, and Hartel (2002)
recommended that emotional intelligence should be considered as an
individual-difference variable that moderates stimulus-behavior linkages (p.
369). In line with the suggestion by Carmeli (2003) that researchers should
investigate the effect of emotional intelligence on the relationship between job
stress and performance, the purpose in this study was to examine whether or not
emotional intelligence moderates the relationship between stress and
performance.
As already noted, it has been found in previous studies of stressor-performance
relationships that a substantial amount of variance in the stressor-performance
correlation remained unexplained, so that identifying the variables that moderate
this relationship should fill a gap in our current understanding. In addition, a
better knowledge of stress effects may improve and enhance the usefulness of
stress management practices.
Employers demands may affect employee stress which is an unpleasant
emotional experience associated with elements of fear, dread, anxiety, irritation,
annoyance, anger, sadness, grief, and depression (Motowidlo, Packard, &
Manning, 1986, p. 618). Job stress is a condition in which job-related factors
affect employees to the extent that their psychological state deviates from
normal functioning (Richardson & Rothstein, 2008).
Job performance involves a quantity and quality of outcomes from individual
or group effort attainment (Schermerhorn, Hunt, & Osborn, 2005). Robbins
(2005) described job performance as the amount of effort an individual will
exert in his or her job. Moreover, the essence of job performance relies on the
demands of the job, the goals and missions of the organization, and beliefs in the
organization about which behaviors are most valued (Befort & Hattrup, 2003,
p. 17).
It has been shown in previous studies that some types of stress can have
desirable consequences and there are certain types that are commonly associated
with positive work outcomes. For example, LePine, Podsakoff, and LePine
(2005) observed that when a stressor is appraised primarily as a challenge it may
lead to internal arousal and better performance outcomes.

EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE AND JOB PERFORMANCE

23

Although some researchers have indicated that the relationship between stress
and performance is either a positive linear or an inverted-U shape, most have
found a negative stress-performance relationship (e.g., Gilboa, Shirom, Fried, &
Cooper, 2008; Siu, 2003; Van Dyne et al., 2002). Job stress is often seen as
dysfunctional in effect in that it decreases both the quality and quantity of job
performance. Job stress also wastes the time and energy that an individual
spends dealing with the stressor, limiting concentration on the task at hand and
thereby affecting performance (Siu, 2003). Taking into account these findings
led to the formulation of the following hypothesis:
H1: There will be a negative relationship between job stress and job
performance.
Individuals who are emotionally intelligent have the capacity to be aware of,
regulate, and utilize their own emotions effectively and also their relationships
with others (Salovey & Mayer, 1990). Goleman (1998) demonstrated that
emotional intelligence is a required factor for job performance and is positively
correlated to successful individual outcomes in an organization. Most
researchers have focused on the effects of emotional intelligence on
management leadership skills. Managers with a high level of emotional
intelligence tend to display high levels of job satisfaction, job performance, and
transformational leadership, as well as low levels of intention to leave their job
(Mandell & Pherwani, 2003; Slaski & Cartwright, 2002). In addition, emotional
competencies have been identified as necessary to facilitate performance within
many occupations (King & Gardner, 2006). Higgs (2004) found that emotional
intelligence was strongly correlated with job performance within United
Kingdom call centers.
Carmeli (2003) found that most individuals with a high level of emotional
intelligence can utilize and regulate their own emotions and they also have the
social competence to manage others and maintain interpersonal relationships.
Further, employees with a high level of emotional intelligence are generally
aware of, and manage, their emotions in terms of retaining a positive mental
state, a situation that leads to improved job performance. Based on these
findings, the following hypothesis was proposed:
H2: There will be a positive relationship between emotional intelligence and job
performance.
Variation in stress-performance relationship research results is common. Jex
(1998) argued that major factors may be ignored and suggested the use of a
broader range of moderators to investigate the stress-performance relationship.
For example, stress does not always result directly from the source of pressure
itself, but rather from the individuals perception of that pressure. Therefore,
individual difference variables that relate to perceptions should be considered.
Further, dispositional variables (e.g., emotional intelligence) are associated with
stress perceptions, and some researchers argue that these could moderate the

24

EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE AND JOB PERFORMANCE

effect of stress outcomes within an organization (Ivancevich & Matteson, 1980;

Parker & DeCotiis, 1983). Emotional intelligence has also been found to
influence an individuals response and ability to deal effectively with
organizational demands (Slaski & Cartwright, 2002). Highly emotionally
intelligent individuals tend to understand emotions through cognitive
reappraisal, and employ strategies that include social resources and disclosure of
feelings in the stressful workplace (King & Gardner, 2006), so that high
emotional intelligence may be associated with resilience and adaptability in
stressful environments. In this study it was expected that highly emotionally
intelligent employees would be more likely than employees with little emotional
intelligence to reduce or transform the potential negative effects of job stress on
job performance. This led to the following hypothesis:
H3: Emotional intelligence will moderate the relationship between job stress and
job performance.
METHOD
SAMPLE AND PROCEDURE
Participants were selected from workplaces within the finance sector in
Taiwan including banks, insurance companies, and securities companies. In
2008 the Taiwan Council of Labor Affairs reported that employees at financial
institutions and insurance companies had heavy workloads and high job stress
owing to competitive sales performance evaluations. Data were gathered from
Taiwans top 100 financial institutions as identified in the Common Wealth
Magazine (Top 100 companies, 2008).
DATA COLLECTION
Sixteen questionnaires were sent to each of 100 financial institutions (total =
1,600), and 583 were returned (response rate, 36%). Twelve of the 583 returned
questionnaires were excluded owing to incomplete answers or because it was
clear that the respondents had not treated the questionnaire seriously (e.g.,
choosing the same option for each question). Therefore, usable data were
obtained from 571 respondents. The average tenure in the current position or
firm was 8.71 years (SD = 7.34). The sample included managers (25%, n = 143)
and nonmanagers (75%, n = 428). Respondents places of employment included
banks (50.2%, n = 287), life insurance companies (24.2%, n = 138), securities
companies (18.4%, n = 105), and other organizations, such as property and
casualty (third party) insurance companies (7.2%, n = 41).
MEASURES

EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE AND JOB PERFORMANCE

25

Job Stress Job stress was measured using the questionnaire developed by Parker
and DeCotiis (1983). Researchers have reported that this questionnaire has good
psychometric properties (e.g., Baba, Jamal, & Tourigny, 1998; Jamal & Baba,
2000). Sample items include: Too many people at my level in the company get
burned out by job demands and I have too much work and too little time to do
it in. Respondents are asked to rate each item using a 5-point Likert scale (1 =
strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree).
Emotional Intelligence The Self-Report Emotional Intelligence Test (SREIT)
developed by Schutte et al. (1998) was used in this study. SREIT is one of the
three best-known emotional intelligence tests and is widely used in research
(e.g., Carmeli, 2003; Ciarrochi, Deane, & Anderson, 2002). The SREIT scales
are designed to suit the workplace (Brackett & Mayer, 2003). Sample items
include: I easily recognize my emotions as I experience them (evaluation and
expression of emotions); When I am faced with obstacles, I remember times I
faced similar obstacles and overcame them (regulation of emotions); and
Some of the major events of my life have led me to reevaluate what is
important (utilization of emotions). Respondents are asked to rate each item
using a 5-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree).
Job Performance The questionnaire used to measure job performance was
originally developed by Dubinsky and Mattson (1979), and was modified by
Singh, Verbeke, and Rhoads (1996). This modified version, a self-appraisal
instrument containing six items, is widely used in research (e.g., Fogarty, Singh,
Rhoads, & Moore, 2000; Kalbers & Cenker, 2008). Sample items include: How
would you rate yourself in terms of the quantity of work (e.g., sales) you
achieve? and How do you rate yourself in terms of your performance potential
among coworkers in your company? Respondents are asked to rate each item
using a 5-point Likert scale (1 = poor, 5 = excellent).
Control Variables Individual and organizational features that may have had an
effect on study variables were controlled, including job tenure (measured by the
number of years an employee had worked for his/her company), and job level
(i.e., managerial vs. nonmanagerial). Job tenure within an organization has a
positive impact on job performance, because employees learn and enhance their
skills as they gain experience (Schmidt & Hunter, 2004). Because length of job
tenure is associated with developing skills and an understanding of products and
customers, long tenure is seen as beneficial for employees to carry out their tasks
well (Hunter & Thatcher, 2007). Research findings show that job level may
impact job performance (Siu, 2003). Beehr and Drexler (1986) have pointed out
that higher level jobs tend to include more autonomy, decision latitude, and other
coping resources (e.g., power, prestige, income) that enable individuals who
hold these jobs to handle the work-related demands better and carry out their
tasks more efficiently and effectively.

26

EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE AND JOB PERFORMANCE

RESULTS
The means, standard deviations, and bivariated correlations between the
variables involved in this research are reported in Table 1. Job stress had a
significant negative bivariated correlation (r = -0.100, p < 0.05) with job
performance, while emotional intelligence had a significant positive bivariated
correlation (r = 0.444, p < 0.001) with job performance.
Hypotheses 1 and 2 were tested using regression analyses as shown in Table 2.
The control variables were added in Model 1, and the two main effect variables
were added in Model 2. The negative relationship between job stress and job
performance operated as expected ( = -0.076, p < 0.05). Likewise, a significant
negative correlation (r = -0.100, p < 0.05) was found between job stress and job
performance, and this provided further support for the predicted negative
relationship between job stress and job performance. Thus, Hypothesis 1 was
supported.
The relationship between emotional intelligence and job performance was
positive and significant ( = 0.437, p < 0.001) as shown in Table 2. Likewise, a
significant positive correlation (r = 0.444, p < 0.001) was found between
emotional intelligence and job performance, and this provided further support
for the predicted positive relationship between emotional intelligence and job
performance. Thus, Hypothesis 2 was supported.
TABLE 1
MEANS, STANDARD DEVIATIONS, ALPHA COEFFICIENTS, AND CORRELATIONS
AMONG STUDY VARIABLES
Variables
1 Job performance
2 Job stress
3 Emotional intelligence

SD

3.43
2.96
3.75

.56
.57
.40

(.86)
-.100*
.444***

(.94)
.034

Note: Values on the diagonal represe nt alpha coefficients. wo*

tailed tests); N = 571.
p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001 (t
TABLE 2
Variables

Control variables
Job tenure
Job level
Main effect variables

REGRESSION RESULTS
Job performa nce
Model 1

Model 2

0.138***
0.136***

0.134***
0.040

(.88)

EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE AND JOB PERFORMANCE

Job stress
Emotional intelligence
R2
R2

0.046
0.046***

27

-0.076*
0.437***
0.231
0.185***

Notes: * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001

The hypothesized interactions were also explored using hierarchical regression

analysis (as shown in Table 3) based on the methodology of Cohen, Cohen,
West, and Aiken (2003): The control variables were added in Model 1, the main
effects were added in Model 2, and the interaction term was created by
multiplying the two main effects was added in Model 3.
TABLE 3
HIERARCHICAL REGRESSION RESULTS
Variables

Job performance

Control variables
Job tenure
Job level
Main effect variables

Model 1

Model 2

Model 3

0.138***
0.136***

0.134***
0.040

0.120**
0.057

-0.076*
0.437***

-0.878**
-0.009

0.231
0.185***

0.939***
0.249
0.018***

Job stress (JS)

Emotional intelligence (EI)
Interaction variables
JS *EI
R2
R2

0.046
0.046***

Notes: * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001

In order to demonstrate moderation, the change in R-squared was analyzed in

Model 3, where the interaction variable was added while controlling for the
control and main effect variables. If a significant change in R-squared was
found, the significance of each interaction variable was assessed (Cohen et al.,
2003). The results of Model 3 in Table 3 show a significant change in R-squared
(R2 = 0.018, F = 13.57, p < 0.001). The moderating effect of emotional
intelligence on the relationship between job stress and job performance was also
significant ( = 0.939, p < 0.001). Thus, Hypothesis 3 was supported.
The moderating effect of emotional intelligence is represented graphically in
Figure 1. The interactions were plotted with cut values of one standard deviation
below the mean and one standard deviation above the mean on the moderator
variable. Figure 1 shows that when the levels of emotional intelligence are low,
job stress has a negative relationship with job performance, but when levels of

4.5
4

28

Job Performa
3.5
nce

EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE AND JOB PERFORMANCE

Low (-1.0
SD)

2.5

High(+1.0SD)

Job Stress
High EI

Low EI

Figure 1. The moderating effect of emotional intelligence on the relationship between job stress an

emotional intelligence are high, job stress has a positive relationship with job
performance.
Following the method of testing and interpreting interactions set out by Aiken
and West (1991), the simple slopes of the lines were analyzed to assess their
significance in Figure 1. The results show that the slope of the lines representing
the relationship between job stress and job performance at the low emotional
job performance.

intelligence ( = -0.18, p < 0.001) and high emotional intelligence ( = 0.32, p <
0.001) levels were both significantly different from zero. The results of these
plots are consistent with Hypothesis 3.
As all the variables were obtained from the same source using self-reports,
there was a potential common method variance (CMV) issue concerning
whether a single factor would emerge from the factor analysis or if one general
factor would account for the majority of variance in the variables. Harmans
one-factor test (Harman, 1967) was applied to test for CMV. All the variables in
this study were entered into a factor analysis. Two factors emerged with
eigenvalues greater than 1.0 (1.45 and 1.01 respectively) as opposed to one
general factor. Moreover, none of the factors accounted for the majority of
variance in the variables. Therefore, the result suggested that CMV was not a
potential issue in this study.
DISCUSSION
In this study it was found that job stress was negatively related to job
performance, and this result is consistent with the results gained by the majority
of previous researchers (e.g., Gilboa et al., 2008; Siu, 2003; Van Dyne et al.,
2002). It has been pointed out that almost all job stress research and theories
have been developed and empirically tested in Western industrialized countries
(Jamal, 1999). However, the issue of job stress is also relevant for other
countries, including China and Taiwan where they are undergoing large-scale

EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE AND JOB PERFORMANCE

29

economic and social changes. This studys findings are, therefore, valuable in
that they provide a test for whether the Western theories may be generalized to
include Taiwan.
The similarity of the results of this study to those recorded in Western countries
lends support to the suggestion that there may be no cross-cultural limits to the
generalizability of these theories.
The positive relationship found in this study between emotional intelligence
and job performance corroborates findings in previous studies with Western
samples (e.g., Higgs, 2004). Therefore, recruiting highly emotionally intelligent
employees may have a positive impact on organizational success. Further, as
researchers have pointed out that emotional intelligence is not fixed and can be
improved (Salovey & Mayer, 1990), the emotional intelligence of employees can
be enhanced through coaching or other forms of training. This, in turn, can
improve the performance of both local and foreign financial organizations in
Taiwan.
The results of the present study also show that emotional intelligence
moderates the relationship between job stress and job performance. As noted
earlier, stress does not always directly result from the source of the pressure
itself, but rather, from the individuals perception of that pressure and it was also
suggested in this study that highly emotionally intelligent employees are more
likely than are employees with low emotional intelligence to reduce or transform
the potential negative effects of job stress on job performance, or at least to
moderate them to an acceptable degree.
However, for employees with little emotional intelligence there was a negative
relationship between job stress and job performance. This finding implies that,
compared to high emotional intelligence employees, those with little emotional
intelligence are less able to deal with stressful matters associated with their jobs.
In addition, the current findings of the moderator role of emotional intelligence
imply that organizations may add some degree of challenge-related stress (e.g.,
time pressure) to stimulate highly emotionally intelligent employees to be more
productive and improve their performance. However, organizations may need to
help their employees reduce the amount of stress in order for the employees with
a low level of emotional intelligence to be productive.
The findings of this study contribute to existing theories on job stress. A
reason was suggested for the inconsistent findings in previous empirical research
studies regarding the job stress and job performance relationship and this
suggestion was supported by the results. The moderating effect of emotional
intelligence on this relationship, as evidenced in the results of the study, provides
support for the observation of Parker and DeCotiis (1983) that dispositional
variables are associated with perceived stress, and that they moderate the effect
of stress outcomes within an organization.

30

EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE AND JOB PERFORMANCE

One limitation in this study was its focus on the role of job stress among
employees in workplaces in one industry only, that is, the Taiwanese financial
sector. Because of this, extreme caution should be exercised in claiming
generalizability of the results. Another limitation is that all data were obtained
from sources using self-reports, raising the issue of CMV. However, the result of
Harmans one-factor test suggested that CMV was not a potential issue in this
study. Nevertheless, in future research, supervisory and peer ratings should be
used as well as self-reports, so that this potential issue is overcome.
In addition, researchers should replicate the study in other industries and carry
out cross-cultural comparisons with other countries to determine whether or not
the findings of this study can be generalized.
REFERENCES
Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions.
Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Baba, V. V., Jamal, M., & Tourigny, L. (1998). Work and mental health: A decade in Canadian
research. Canadian Psychology, 39(1/2), 94-107.
Beehr, T. A., & Drexler, J. A. (1986). Social support, autonomy, and hierarchical level as moderators
of the role characteristics-outcome relationship. Journal of Occupational Behaviour, 7(3),
207214.
Befort, N., & Hattrup, K. (2003). Valuing task and contextual performance: Experience, job roles,
and ratings of the importance of job behaviors. Applied HRM Research, 8(1), 17-32.
Brackett, M. A., & Mayer, J. D. (2003). Convergent, discriminant, and incremental validity of
competing measures of emotional intelligence. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,
29(9), 1147-1158.
Carmeli, A. (2003). The relationship between emotional intelligence and work attitudes, behavior,
and outcomes: An examination among senior managers. Journal of Managerial Psychology,
18(8), 788-813.
Ciarrochi, J., Deane, F. P., & Anderson, S. (2002). Emotional intelligence moderates the relationship
between stress and mental health. Personality and Individual Differences, 32(2), 197-209.
Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied multiple regression correlation
analysis for the behavioral sciences (3 rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Dubinsky, A. J., & Mattson, B. E. M. (1979). Consequences of role conflict and ambiguity
experienced by retail salespeople. Journal of Retailing, 55(4), 70-86.
Fogarty, T. J., Singh, J., Rhoads, G. K., & Moore, R. K. (2000). Antecedents and consequences of
burnout in accounting: Beyond the role stress model. Behavioral Research in Accounting, 12, 3167.
Gilboa, S., Shirom, A., Fried, Y., & Cooper, C. (2008). A meta-analysis of work demand stressors
and job performance: Examining main and moderating effects. Personnel Psychology, 61(2),
227-271.
Goleman, D. (1998). Working with emotional intelligence. New York: Bantam Books.
Harman, H. H. (1967). Modern factor analysis (2nd ed.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Higgs, M. (2004). A study of the relationship between emotional intelligence and performance in UK
call centres. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 19(4), 442-454.

EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE AND JOB PERFORMANCE

31

Hunter, L. W., & Thatcher, S. M. B. (2007). Feeling the heat: Effects of stress, commitment, and job
experience on job performance. Academy of Management Journal, 50(4), 953-968.
Ivancevich, J. M., & Matteson, M. T. (1980). Optimizing human resources: A case for preventive
health and stress management. Organizational Dynamics, 9(2) , 5-25.
Jamal, M. (1999). Job stress, Type-A behavior, and well-being: A cross-cultural examination.
International Journal of Stress Management, 6(1), 57-67.
Jamal, M., & Baba, V. V. (2000). Job stress and burnout among Canadian managers and nurses: An
empirical examination. Canadian Journal of Public Health, 91(6), 454-458.
Jex, S. M. (1998). Stress and job performance: Theory, research, and implications for managerial
practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Jordan, P. J., Ashkanasy, N. M., & Hartel, C. E. J. (2002). Emotional intelligence as a moderator of
emotional and behavioral reactions to job insecurity. Academy of Management Review, 27(3),
361-372.
Kalbers, L. P., & Cenker, W. J. (2008). The impact of exercised responsibility, experience, autonomy,
and role ambiguity on job performance in public accounting. Journal of Managerial Issues,
20(3), 327-347.
King, M., & Gardner, D. (2006). Emotional intelligence and occupational stress among professional
staff in New Zealand. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 14(3), 186-203.
LePine, J. A., Podsakoff, N. P., & LePine, M. A. (2005). A meta-analytic test of the challenge
stressorhindrance stressor framework: An explanation for inconsistent relationships among
stressors and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 48(5), 764-775.
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.
Motowidlo, S. J., Packard, J. S., & Manning, M. R. (1986). Occupational stress: Its causes and
consequences for job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71(4), 618-629.
Parker, D. F., & DeCotiis, T. A. (1983). Organizational determinants of job stress. Organizational
Behavior and Human Performance, 32(2), 160-177.
Richardson, K. M., & Rothstein, H. R. (2008). Effects of occupational stress management
intervention programs: A meta-analysis. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 13(1), 6993.
Robbins, S. P. (2005). Essentials of organizational behavior (8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Prentice Hall.
Salovey, P., & Mayer, J. D. (1990). Emotional intelligence. Imagination, Cognition, and Personality,
9(3), 185-211.
Schermerhorn J. R., Hunt, J. G., & Osborn, R. N. (2005). Organizational behavior. New York:
Wiley.
Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (2004). General mental ability in the world of work: Occupational
attainment and job performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86(1), 162-173.
Schutte, N. S., Malouff, J. M., Hall, L. E., Haggerty, D. J., Cooper, J. T., Golden, C. J., & Dornheim,
L. (1998). Development and validation of a measure of emotional Intelligence. Personality and
Individual Differences, 25(2), 167-177.
Singh, J., Verbeke, W., & Rhoads G. K. (1996). Do organizational practices matter in role stress
processes? A study of direct and moderating effects for marketing-oriented boundary spanners.
Journal of Marketing, 60(3), 69-86.
Siu, O. L. (2003). Job stress and job performance among employees in Hong Kong: The role of
Chinese work values and organizational commitment. International Journal of Psychology,
38(6), 337-347.

32

EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE AND JOB PERFORMANCE

Slaski, M., & Cartwright, S. (2002). Health performance and emotional intelligence: An exploratory
study of retail managers. Stress and Health, 18(2), 63-68.
Top 100 financial enterprises. (2008, May 7). Common Wealth Magazine, No. 396.
Van Dyne, L., Jehn, K. A., & Cummings, A. (2002). Differential effects of strain on two forms of
work performance: Individual employee sales and creativity. Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 23(1), 57-74.

Copyright of Social Behavior & Personality: An International Journal is the property of Society
for Personality Research and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted
to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print,
download, or email articles for individual use.