International Journal of Information Management 48 (2019) 139–150

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Information Management

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijinfomgt

Emotional intelligence: The key to mitigating stress and fostering trust T

among software developers working on information system projects
⁎
Azadeh Rezvania, , Pouria Khosravib
a
The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, 4072, Australia
b
Queensland University of Technology, 2 George Street, Brisbane, Queensland, 4000, Australia

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The successful accomplishment of information systems development (ISD) activities is reliant on the efforts of
Stress developers, who are largely responsible for creating the required system artefacts. Developers encounter nu-
Trust merous obstacles in their efforts to successfully complete activities, such as the need to develop software within
Emotional intelligence highly-complex broad-ranging projects. These problems increase levels of stress, which subsequently affect
Information system development project
developers’ ability to self-regulate their feelings and understanding. However, only scant attention has been paid
IT projects
Performance
to their personal skills and competency in overcoming these issues. This study therefore aimed to bridge this gap
System developers by exploring the impact of developers’ emotional intelligence on stress, trust, and performance. Our empirical
results show that emotional intelligence mitigates stress and fosters trust among software developers working on
information system projects. Additionally, role ambiguity increases the effect of stress on performance.

1. Introduction
Information Systems Development (ISD) projects are experiencing
increased rates of failure (Dwivedi et al., 2015; Hung, Hsu, Su, &
Huang, 2014; Windeler, Maruping, & Venkatesh, 2017). For example,
only one out of every eight ISD-related projects is completed within the
set deadline, within the budget, and according to the pre-determined
specifications (Gingnell, Franke, Lagerström, Ericsson, & Lilliesköld,
2014; Hughes, Dwivedi, Rana, & Simintiras, 2016). The lack of success
in such projects has proved to be highly detrimental to numerous or-
ganisations (Aladwani, 2016). It is estimated that project failures across
the European Union led to an expenditure of €142 billion in 2004
(McManus & Wood-Harper, 2007).
The successful accomplishment of ISD activities is heavily reliant on
developers, who are largely accountable for creating the required
system artefacts. Of significant concern is the fact that developers en-
counter numerous obstacles in their efforts to successfully complete
such activities, such as the need to develop software for highly-complex
broad-ranging projects (Gupta, George, & Xia, 2019). These problems
increase levels of stress among developers. This subsequently impacts
their ability to self-regulate their feelings and understanding (Hancock
& Szalma, 2008) with a resulting negative impact on their effectiveness.
The capacity to successfully build a system requires developers to
maintain constructive relationships with their peers in order to obtain
their input and collaboration while simultaneously meeting the project
goals (Ozer & Vogel, 2015).
Our review of the literature showed that only scant attention is paid
to developers’ personal skills and competency within ISD projects. More
specifically, there is limited information on the effect or influence of the
skills and competency of software developers in terms of stress, trust,
and performance. Among those studies that have been conducted,
Windeler et al. (2017) investigated the influence of empowerment
leadership on IS software developers, while Cruz, da Silva, and Capretz
(2015) explored the influence of IS developers’ personality factors on
the performance of pair programming teams. Rezvani, Dong, and
Khosravi (2017) also examined the extent to which the personal char-
acteristics of senior management influenced team performance. How-
ever, Rezvani, Khosravi, and Ashkanasy (2018) later found that orga-
nisational theories and practices applicable to small teams, such as
those involved in pair programming and small projects, may not gen-
eralise to larger teams and projects. Additionally, the effectiveness of
the personal skills and competency of software developers was over-
looked. This is an important issue to investigate, as Hsu, Li, and Sun
(2017) highlighted the importance of teamwork in ISD projects.
To address the aforesaid gaps, our first research objective was to
develop a theoretical rationale regarding the influence that individual
characteristics and skills of software developers, such as emotional in-
telligence, have on performance. Growing evidence from IS projects

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: a.rezvani@uq.edu.au (A. Rezvani), pouria.khosravi@hdr.qut.edu.au (P. Khosravi).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.02.007
Received 14 January 2019; Received in revised form 24 February 2019; Accepted 24 February 2019
0268-4012/ © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
A. Rezvani and P. Khosravi
shows that emotionally intelligent individuals have the potential to
improve performance (e.g., Maqbool, Sudong, Manzoor, & Rashid,
2017; Rezvani Khosravi et al., 2018). Emotional intelligence may
therefore be particularly appropriate for comprehending the personal
attributes and abilities of software developers. This is relevant because
ISD projects incorporate increased levels of technical risk and may
elevate stress and increase lack of trust (Cram & Wiener, 2018; Hsu,
Hung, Chen, & Huang, 2013). Christie, Jordan, and Troth (2015) found
that emotional intelligence augments the ability of a team to develop
effective solutions when unexpected problems arise and is significantly
correlated with team productivity and performance (Ashkanasy &
Dorris, 2017; Rode et al., 2007).
However, the mechanism underlying the relationship between
emotional intelligence and performance within ISD projects remains
unexplored. Scholars calling for a greater focus on the relationship
between the competency of software developers and team performance
also emphasise the need to explore the likely moderators and mediators
of this relationship (Rezvani Khosravi et al., 2018; Windeler et al.,
2017). Therefore, drawing upon affective events theory (AET; Weiss &
Cropanzano, 1996), role theory (Merton, 1957), and conservation of
resources (COR; Hobfoll, 2001) theory, our second objective was to
examine these mediator and moderator variables. For instance, based
on COR theory (Hobfoll, 2001), we argue that stress mediates the re-
lationship between emotional intelligence and performance. COR
theory (Hobfoll, 2001) posits that people aim to keep, safeguard, and
construct resources. Resources are defined as objects, conditions, per-
sonal abilities, and attributes or energies in which the individual places
value (Hobfoll, 2001). These can either be valued in themselves or fa-
cilitate the achievement of specified objectives (Hobfoll, 2001). A set-
ting that drives an individual to anticipate a possible or actual loss of
resources, or the application of resources without the potential to ac-
quire further resources, can therefore generate stress (Hobfoll, 1989,
2001). However, the advancement of personal aptitudes or compe-
tencies serves as a buffer to any loss of resources in such scenarios
(Hobfoll & Shirom, 2001; Holmgreen, Tirone, Gerhart, & Hobfoll,
2017). We therefore propose that emotional intelligence represents an
interpersonal support resource that can be used to moderate the ne-
gative influence of work-related stress on software developers within
ISD projects.
Furthermore, in accordance with the principles of AET theory, we
argue that trust mediates the association between emotional in-
telligence and performance. Central to AET (Weiss & Cropanzano,
1996) is the claim that an individual’s affective and emotional experi-
ences determine their attitudes and subsequent behaviours (Ashkanasy
& Dorris, 2017). In this context, emotional experiences refer to em-
ployees’ positive and negative emotions, while attitudes and behaviours
are an evaluative, cognitive judgment based on emotional experiences
(Ashkanasy & Daus, 2005). By adopting AET as a theoretical lens
through which to examine the relationship between emotional in-
telligence, trust, and performance, we propose that trust is an attitude
that arises out of emotional experiences and may enhance performance.
Scholars have also highlighted the negative influence of role am-
biguity throughout the system development cycle (Liu & Chiu, 2016;
Liu, Chiang, Yang, & Klein, 2011). Research has shown that uncertainty
and an insufficient definition of specified responsibilities and roles
within ISD projects are key concerns for team managers and software
developers (Liu et al., 2011). Given such role ambiguity, we attempt to
reconcile this perspective with the significant role played by stress in
software projects (Liu & Chiu, 2016). Role theory (Merton, 1957) ar-
gues that each employee is subject to particular expectations and social
status. We therefore argue that role ambiguity, as a moderator, furthers
our understanding in terms of its adverse effects on the relationship
between stress and performance within ISD projects.
This study contributes to theory and practice in various ways. First,
it contributes to the IS literature by revealing the influence of software
developers’ emotional intelligence on performance in ISD projects. In so
140
International Journal of Information Management 48 (2019) 139–150
doing, it answers calls for better contextualisation within such projects
(Tsang & Williams, 2012). Secondly, we develop and empirically test a
model of the influence emotional intelligence has on stress, trust, and
performance among a sample of software developers working on ISD
projects. Thus, our work extends the IS literature by highlighting the
theoretical mechanisms by which software developers’ skills and com-
petency mitigate the negative influence of stress and foster the positive
influence of trust on performance. Thirdly, by identifying trust and
stress as mediators between emotional intelligence and performance
within ISD projects, this study establishes the underlying mechanism by
which a critical component of software developers’ skill – emotional
intelligence – is linked to performance. Fourthly, we explored the
moderating influence of role ambiguity on the relationship between
stress and performance. Thus, our research adds to an increasing body
of literature on the emotional, behavioural, and attitudinal implications
of emotional intelligence within ISD projects. Understanding the effect
of emotional intelligence on both stress and trust means that more ef-
fective approaches to stress management and trust development can be
incorporated into social support systems. Moreover, top managers can
aid software developers in understanding, managing and regulating
emotions to mitigate stress through the development of management
strategies. These will prevent the adverse effect of stress before it can
escalate and harm software developers’ wellbeing, ISD project out-
comes, staffing levels, and software quality.
2. Theory and hypotheses
2.1. Emotional intelligence
Although various definitions of emotional intelligence have been
proposed in the literature, the most broadly acknowledged and widely
accepted definition is that proposed by Mayer and Salovey (1997), cited
in Ashkanasy & Daus, 2005). They define emotional intelligence as “the
ability to monitor one’s own and others’ emotions, to differentiate be-
tween them, and to use the information to guide one’s thinking and
actions”. Ashkanasy and Daus (2005) identified three different
“streams” of research on emotional intelligence. The first stream in-
volves the utilisation of the Mayer-Salovey emotional intelligence test
(MSCEIT) (Mayer, Salovey, Caruso, & Sitarenios, 2003). The second
stream involves the application of a self-report measure founded on
Mayer and Salovey (1997) definition of emotional intelligence (e.g.
Schutte et al., 1998; Wong & Law, 2002). The third stream incorporates
additional measures of emotional intelligence that do not correspond
with Mayer and Salovey’s definition. This stream was best described by
Goleman (2000), who defined emotional intelligence as a broad range
of capabilities and expertise that includes personality-related items
which may have no direct association with emotional intelligence, such
as social responsibility (Ashkanasy & Daus, 2005). Those who advocate
Mayer and Salovey’s model (Streams 1 & 2) assert that emotional
capabilities are acquired skills that can be nurtured and enhanced. The
conceptualisation of emotional intelligence as a capability, a view
adopted by Mayer and Salovey (1997)), means it is perceived as a form
of intelligence that comprises four aspects, which are the ability to: 1)
observe emotion precisely, 2) utilise emotion to facilitate thought, 3)
comprehend emotion, and 4) control emotion. Mayer et al. (2003)
contend that these facets inform each other so that, when they are
combined, they form an overall concept of emotional intelligence, a
claim that has been supported empirically in the literature (Ashkanasy
& Daus, 2005). In the current study, the second stream approach will be
adopted, as this research will try to determine the capability for per-
ceiving, using, understanding, and regulating emotions among the
members of a project team. Additionally, the ability model comprises
the important attributes of understanding and controlling one’s own
emotions as well as the emotions of others, which facilitates the es-
tablishment of respected thinking and ways of acting (Mayer, Roberts,
& Barsade, 2008; Rezvani Khosravi et al., 2018).
A. Rezvani and P. Khosravi
Emotional intelligence can facilitate cohesiveness and collaboration
among team members and is essential to project performance (Troth,
Jordan, Lawrence, & Tse, 2012). Previous research has tended to ignore
emotional intelligence as it unfolds in specific contexts (2010, Müller &
Turner, 2007). Jordan, Dasborough, Daus, and Ashkanasy (2010) ar-
gued that testing the impact of emotional intelligence and its influence
on various outcomes across different contexts is important. In the
context of ISD, when software developers are confronted with a parti-
cular scenario, their competence in managing and regulating their
emotions enables them to control their feelings and behaviours by ob-
serving and evaluating the emotions and feelings of other team mem-
bers (e.g. testers, systems analysts, and managers). Because emotions
are a pivotal factor in cooperative behaviours, a person’s capacity to
comprehend and manage their own emotions can be highly beneficial
in forming effective relationships with other people (Ashkanasy &
Dorris, 2017). This factor is extremely significant in ISD-related projects
because software developers operate in highly complex networks of
peers and clients (Liu & Wang, 2016). Because of their specific features,
project teams often experience negative or positive emotions. Positive
emotions enable project team members to perform better in a work
environment where uncertainty and ambiguity are high. Conversely,
negative emotions such as interpersonal tensions, anger, and frustration
can often obstruct real-time communication of information which leads
to poor performance (Troth et al., 2012; Rezvani et al., 2016). Thus, the
ability to communicate and cooperate effectively with others is espe-
cially important in enhancing user satisfaction and team and business
performance (Windeler et al., 2017).
2.2. Stress
Stress is defined as the reaction to a threat and has both cognitive
and emotional aspects (Lazarus, 1966). It is dependent on a person’s
understanding of his/her capacity to perform a work-related activity
involving a specific level of complexity or challenge. Stress emerges as a
result of a disparity between a person’s perception of their capability
and his/her actual ability to effectively manage their responsibilities
(Blascovich, 2008). There is also a negative correlation between re-
lationships and employment satisfaction, organisational dedication,
and the performance of a team. Stress is positively correlated with non-
productive work attitudes, disengagement, alcohol and drug con-
sumption, the intent to seek new employment, and depressive beha-
viours (Bowen et al., 2014; Harris, Brett, Johnson, & Deary, 2016;
Windeler et al., 2017). Similarly, the prolonged effects of stress on
physical, psychological, and behavioural outcomes have been widely
documented (Anthony‐McMann, Ellinger, Astakhova, & Halbesleben,
2017; Bell, Rajendran, & Theiler, 2012; Bowen et al., 2014; McCraty,
Atkinson, & Tomasino, 2003). For example, when the stress-response
system is activated for prolonged periods without an effective resolu-
tion, the physiologically heightened alert response can lead to various
cardiovascular, immune, and metabolic diseases as well as a cognitive
decline in memory, learning, and functioning (Khamisa, Oldenburg,
Peltzer, & Ilic, 2015; Krysinska & Lester, 2010). Further negative out-
comes include poor psychological health, depression, instances of sui-
cide ideation, and increases in substance abuse as a means of coping
(Eddy, Wertheim, Kingsley, & Wright, 2017; Matthews & Gump, 2002).
ISD projects place constraints on a project team member’s behaviour
and emotions resulting in increased stress (Windeler et al., 2017). For
instance, members are frequently allocated a variety of different re-
sponsibilities, which can subsequently cause problems when i) at-
tempting to prioritise tasks and allocate resources appropriately, and ii)
reporting structures that can be complex and cause conflicts (Liu et al.,
2011). Moreover, ISD projects create significant interdependencies
among software developers (Lindsjørn, Sjøberg, Dingsøyr, Bergersen, &
Dybå, 2016). It may be necessary for software developers to commu-
nicate with other departments in order to access or share resources and
collate, enhance, and distribute new data when modifications are
141
International Journal of Information Management 48 (2019) 139–150
implemented. This can cause agitation, exasperation, and increased
stress (Lindsjørn et al., 2016).
Stress also interferes with the self-regulation of emotions, cognition,
and motivation to complete a task and thus negatively influences the
success of projects (Graziotin, Fagerholm, Wang, & Abrahamsson, 2017;
Nakata, 2017). Studies have found that stress among developers is
common and highly problematic (Chilton, Hardgrave, & Armstrong,
2005; Windeler et al., 2017). It is manifested in symptoms such as poor
communication, low morale, hostility, anger and frustration, redoing of
software programs, and a decrease in problem-solving, coordination,
and cooperation among developers (Arsenio & Loria, 2014; Liu et al.,
2011; Lovallo, 2015). Coping with stress throughout the system de-
velopment cycle is therefore imperative to the success of ISD projects.
However, current empirical evidence on the impact of personal skills
and characteristics in mitigating stress is inconclusive.
2.3. Trust
Trust is pivotal to the success of most relationships between pro-
fessionals, businesses and stakeholders (Pinto, Slevin, & English, 2009;
Serrador & Pinto, 2015). It has been demonstrated that trust
strengthens both communication and relationships among stakeholders,
which can often improve project performance (Wu, Liu, Zhao, & Zuo,
2017). An analysis of the literature on trust reveals that both its defi-
nition and fundamental meaning have been widely debated (Jiang, Lu,
& Le, 2016). For instance, Moorman, Deshpande, and Zaltman (1993)
contended that trust indicates partners are willing to depend on and
place confidence in each other. Conversely, Jiang, Zhang, and Le,
(2011) claim that trust represents a trustor’s preparedness to accept
their vulnerability towards a trustee whose behaviour they cannot
control. Hence, trust consists of the potential for loss (risk) and de-
pendence on another person (interdependence). Puusa and Tolvanen
(2006) extended this argument further by claiming that there are three
different levels of trust: individual, team, and organisational. Individual
trust implies that the confidence individuals have in their team mem-
bers can enhance collaborative efforts and instigate improved methods
of completing tasks that augment individual performance (Rezvani
et al., 2016). Individual trust can also be present between members of
the team and the leader. Consequently, this form of trust transitions
upwards from the team member to his/her leader. Team level trust is
perceived to be a collective phenomenon (Costa & Anderson, 2011;
Hogg & Terry, 2014). Organisational trust passes upwards from the
personnel to the organisation based on perceptions of the different
policies and procedures that have been implemented. Although the
present study recognises the significance of trust for leadership and
organisational effectiveness, the primary focus will be on interpersonal
trust. In accordance with previous studies (e.g. Buvik & Tvedt, 2017;
Rezvani Khosravi et al., 2018), the authors contend that when a high
level of interpersonal trust exists and members of a team believe their
colleagues are helpful and sincere, there is an increased likelihood that
software developers will collaborate and communicate in an effective
manner. If there are increased levels of vagueness, doubt, and inter-
dependency in software development projects, the vulnerability of
software developers to the actions of other parties is likely to increase
and they will show trust in their peers by sharing knowledge and in-
formation (Park & Lee, 2014; Stephens & Carmeli, 2016).
The literature also shows there are positive correlations between
trust and the following elements: productive communication within
project teams, the ability to solve problems, an individual’s willingness
to take risks, collaboration, and performance levels (e.g. Rezvani et al.,
2016; Wu et al., 2017). If team members trust each other, they are more
likely to acknowledge and comply with the contrasting viewpoints and
ideas of others (Hogg & Terry, 2014). In a trusting environment, there is
an increased likelihood of cooperation and communication among
project teams (Barczak, Lassk, & Mulki, 2010; Jiang et al., 2016). This
means they will collaborate closely and engage in effective partnerships
A. Rezvani and P. Khosravi
when faced with challenges and problems, which are important factors
when attempting to deliver positive results that generate enhanced le-
vels of performance (Barczak et al., 2010). If there is a deficit of trust
within ISD project teams, this can lead to defensive behaviours, reduced
cooperation, extra transaction expenditures, and can also obstruct the
dissemination of information (Colquitt, Scott, & LePine, 2007). Fur-
thermore, although it is still possible to communicate and collaborate,
this will not be optimal (Rezvani Khosravi et al., 2018).
2.4. Emotional intelligence and performance
One of the primary concerns for senior managers and leaders is how
to enhance developers’ performance because both profits and business
success are heavily reliant on software developers (Subramanian, Jiang,
& Klein, 2007). Troth et al. (2012) identified emotional intelligence as a
pivotal factor in developing a positive supportive environment, pro-
ductive communication, and high-performance teams. In this context, it
is plausible to conclude that software developers who exhibit increased
emotional intelligence have the ability to enhance teamwork within ISD
project teams. This in turn presents certain challenges for members of
the team, such as the management of resources, how to combine in-
dividual objectives into a common mission, the resolution of compli-
cated tasks in periods of crisis, the ability to communicate effectively,
and coordinating the transferral of information between individuals. In
this respect, Rezvani Khosravi et al. (2018) established that individual
emotional intelligence (which corresponds to a capacity to manage and
comprehend the temperament, feelings, and emotions of team mem-
bers) is a crucial aspect that determines the performance of large-scale
construction projects. This is because people with increased emotional
intelligence can foster a supportive emotional environment that pro-
motes higher levels of performance (Troth et al., 2012). Jordan et al.
(2010) also found that the performance of a team has a direct corre-
lation with team members’ emotional skill levels because, when allo-
cating resources and materials, increased emotional intelligence will
encourage empathetic and supportive perceptions that subsequently
improve the level of collaboration within the team (see also Ayoko,
Callan, & Härtel, 2008; Greenidge, Devonish, & Alleyne, 2014; Jordan &
Troth, 2004; Law, Wong, & Song, 2004; Rezvani, Barrett & Khosravi,
2018). Sheldon, Dunning, and Ames (2014) also claimed that the per-
ception of diminished emotional intelligence can lead to a reduction in
team performance as well as causing conflict within the team. These
outcomes indicate that emotional intelligence is an extremely vital
ability, as members of a team utilise their emotional intelligence to
collect and share information with respect to their objectives and ex-
ceed expectations when fulfilling their responsibilities to enhance
overall performance levels (Barczak et al., 2010).
Based on the AET, Weiss and Cropanzano (1996) argued that the
job-related attitudes and behaviours of employees can vary according to
their flow of emotional experiences. In the workplace, it is common for
employees to experience both positive and negative feelings (Ashkanasy
& Dorris, 2017). In general, positive feelings have a positive impact and
enable employees to improve their work performance (Troth et al.,
2012; Sy et al., 2006) whereas negative feelings such as exasperation,
annoyance, and hostility can make employees feel less enthusiastic and
subsequently leads to decreased performance (Glinow, Shapiro, & Brett,
2004). Software developers with high levels of emotional intelligence
are more likely to experience, manage, and express their emotions in a
positive manner. This will potentially augment levels of enthusiasm
among software developers, thus facilitating effective communication
with other members of the team. It will also foster a creative environ-
ment conducive to resolving complex problems (Rezvani et al., 2016).
Thus, in line with AET theory and previous research, we conclude that
emotional intelligence is a major driver of performance. We therefore
hypothesise that:
H1. Emotional intelligence among software developers is positively
142
International Journal of Information Management 48 (2019) 139–150
related to performance.
2.5. Emotional intelligence and stress
An individual’s ability to understand, manage, and regulate their
emotions as well as those of others is likely to impact the degree of
stress software developers experience within the workplace. This is
important because a correlation has been established between occu-
pation-related stress within software firms and a lack of satisfaction,
depressive symptoms, and increased absence among software devel-
opers, as well as various medical conditions related to heart rate and
blood pressure (Eddy et al., 2017; Matthews & Gump, 2002). We argue
that the personal abilities and competencies of software developers can
impact stress in two ways. Firstly, they enable software developers to
develop certain coping mechanisms when faced with stressful situations
(Bolger & Zuckerman, 1995). Secondly, personal abilities and compe-
tencies can, according to Lazarus and Folkman’s stress theory, influence
the “personal appraisal process” which is directly related to the level of
stress he/she will experience. A personal appraisal process refers to an
intricate combination of biological, cognitive and individual char-
acteristics as well as sociocultural attributes that affect an individual’s
perception of their present condition (Hobfoll, 2001). As suggested by
Lazarus and Folkman (1984), this process comprises both threat and
challenge elements that have a separate impact on the manner in which
stress occurs. Furthermore, software developers with increased levels of
emotional intelligence can help avert undesirable scenarios, as emo-
tional intelligence is a component of situation selection and alteration.
Emotional intelligence can also foster the ability to cope with stress as
this is predominantly manifested as an emotional reaction to stimuli in
the workplace. Thus, if software developers have the ability to com-
prehend, control, and regulate their feelings by not reacting when
provoked, their stress levels within the workplace will be reduced.
Research into healthcare professionals has shown that there is a nega-
tive correlation between emotional intelligence and stress (Landa,
López-Zafra, Martos, & del Carmen Aguilar-Luzón, 2008; Por, Barriball,
Fitzpatrick, & Roberts, 2011).
Additionally, based on COR theory, the development of personal
skills and competencies can act as a buffer against resource loss in
highly stressful situations (Hobfoll & Shirom, 2001; Holmgreen et al.,
2017). This means that individuals with high emotional intelligence are
more likely to build a strong relationship with their coworkers and team
members (Ashkanasy & Dorris, 2017). Robust social relationships are a
key medium through which constrained resources within the self can be
disseminated to the external environment. Investments made in robust
emotional relationships within the work environment have the poten-
tial to enhance resource gains and communication and can additionally
ameliorate levels of stress and agitation among personnel (Rezvani
Khosravi et al., 2018). Therefore, we hypothesise that:
H2. Emotional intelligence among software developers is negatively
associated with stress.
2.6. Emotional intelligence and trust
Research studies (e.g. Barczak et al., 2010; Rezvani Khosravi et al.,
2018) have consistently reported that emotional intelligence has a
significant effect on trust between individuals. For instance, evidence
indicates that personnel with increased emotional intelligence are more
effective at dealing with emotional changes in the workplace than peers
with lower emotional intelligence. A connection has also been estab-
lished between emotions and the development of improved social re-
lationships with other people (Barczak et al., 2010; Christie et al.,
2015). Compared to those who experience feelings such as dismay,
depression, and annoyance, positive emotions are also linked to en-
hanced trust and dependence levels (Jordan et al., 2006; Rezvani
A. Rezvani and P. Khosravi
Khosravi et al., 2018). For example, Dunn and Schweitzer (2005) found
that positive emotions enhance confidence in others, whereas negative
emotions (like anger) have the opposite effect. In regard to negative
emotions, Tyler Boden and Berenbaum (2007) found that a lack of
emotional awareness causes workers to become more suspicious and
frustrated. Because emotional awareness is considered an integral part
of emotional intelligence (Mayer & Salovey, 1997), there should also be
a connection between emotional intelligence and team members’ per-
ceived trust in other people. Finally, several researchers (e.g., Sy et al.,
2006; Christie et al., 2015; Rezvani Khosravi et al., 2018) have also
investigated the effect of emotional intelligence on work behaviours
and found that perceptions of trust have a direct correlation with
emotional abilities. We therefore hypothesise that:
H3. Emotional intelligence among software developers is positively
related to trust.
2.7. Trust and performance
According to AET theory (Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996), attitudes in
the workplace (such as trust) have the capacity to elevate i) the ex-
pectation that an individual’s dependence on and confidence in others
will result in improved performance and ii) the perception that constant
effort will yield advantageous behavioural results. Rezvani Khosravi
et al. (2018) extended this concept by suggesting that having con-
fidence and trust in their colleagues and leaders motivates people to
contribute towards achieving common goals and thus their work per-
formance will increase. This is because trust mediates interactions
among software developers through the provision of functional hor-
izontal work relationships, particularly in uncertain and ambiguous
situations such as those which frequently exist in ISD projects. In such
conditions, trust in their co-workers will improve developer’s skills in
communication, problem-solving, and organisational backing (Diallo &
Thuillier, 2005). Previous research into IS project management has
revealed that communication and collaboration among software de-
velopers is a critically important factor (Hertel, Niedner, & Herrmann,
2003; Licorish & MacDonell, 2017). Furthermore, such activities are
largely dependent on trust (Rezvani Khosravi et al., 2018). McEvily,
Perrone, and Zaheer (2003) also suggest that developers require con-
fidence and assurance in other people in order to distribute risks and
provide resources. This enables others to collaborate in efforts towards
the development and delivery of products or services that would not be
achievable working alone. Conversely, distrust among developers can
cause them to act defensively and could obstruct the delivery of in-
formation that facilitates productive communication, collaborative re-
lationships, and problem-solving assignments (Mayer & Gavin, 2005;
Moe & Šmite, 2008). Furthermore, Rezvani Khosravi et al. (2018) found
that distrust can initiate flawed and selfish behaviours within the team,
causing team members to focus their efforts on identifying indicators of
opportunism and decreased performance within the team instead of
making positive efforts that can enhance overall performance. Thus, we
hypothesise that:
H4. Interpersonal trust among software developers is positively related
to performance.
2.8. Stress and performance
According to stress theory (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984), stress di-
minishes performance as a result of its impact on the personal appraisal
process. This process comprises an intricate combination of biological,
cognitive, affective and sociocultural characteristics that impact an
individual’s perception of his/her present condition (Hobfoll, 2001).
The process of personal appraisal comprises elements of threat and
challenge that have a separate impact on the manner in which stress
affects performance (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984). For example, Gilboa,
143
International Journal of Information Management 48 (2019) 139–150
Shirom, Fried, and Cooper (2008) suggests that stress undermines
performance by re-directing an individual’s emotional and cognitive
performance resources towards efforts that enable them to cope in the
workplace. The ultimate outcome of this redistribution of resources is
withdrawal behaviour and diminished performance (Gilboa et al.,
2008).
ISD projects generally aggravate problems of stress due to the pre-
sence of various stakeholders (Khosravi, Rezvani, & Ahmad, 2013).
Because these projects have a high level of interdependence, the stress a
developer experiences will have an impact on the work that is dis-
tributed between interdependent team members (Windeler et al.,
2017). In such projects, different members will have a variety of ex-
pectations in regard to the duties of a particular team member. This
could, therefore, augment the unclear nature of an individual’s duties,
as different people will interpret the responsibilities related to a given
role in different ways. This issue is exacerbated by the fact that, when
the individual’s level of stress rises, their ability to communicate, co-
ordinate, and engage is reduced (Khamisa, Peltzer, Ilic, & Oldenburg,
2016). Deficiencies in communication and engagement could lead to
uncertainty among team members regarding comprehension of their
position within the team and this represents a threat to team perfor-
mance (Anthony‐McMann et al., 2017). It also can cause strain and
frustration to the extent that a project member leaves the team which,
in turn, may jeopardise the performance of an entire project. Thus, we
hypothesise that:
H5. Stress among software developers is negatively related to
performance.
2.9. Mediating role of stress
The underlying principles of COR theory (Hobfoll, 2001) posit that
the objective of individuals is to maintain, preserve, and construct re-
sources. Consequently, conditions in which the individual anticipates a
possible or real resource loss, or where resources are invested without
the potential to acquire any further resources, can generate stress
(Hobfoll, 1989, 2001). Resources are defined as situations, personal
abilities, and attributes or energies in which the individual places value,
which can be valued themselves, or which facilitate the achievement of
specific objectives (Hobfoll, 2001). According to COR theory, the en-
hancement of personal abilities and competencies can serve as a buffer
against the loss of resources when extremely stressful situations arise
(Hobfoll & Shirom, 2001; Holmgreen et al., 2017). This means that
individuals with strong emotional intelligence have an increased like-
lihood of forming robust relationships with their colleagues and other
team members (Ashkanasy & Dorris, 2017). Robust social relationships
act as a medium through which constrained, internal resources are
disseminated more widely to those with whom the individual engages.
It is thus likely that any investments made in emotional relationships in
the work environment will generate more productive resource gains
and communication and can also prevent employees from experiencing
stress and worry (Rezvani Khosravi et al., 2018). COR theory empha-
sises that, when there are no alternative resources, an established social
network presents a valuable resource to those team members who are
experiencing stress. This is because it generates a resource gain that can
be utilised as a buffer against stress.
We argue that software developers who exhibit better under-
standing and have the ability to manage their emotions will be empa-
thetic, sympathetic, and considerate to others in order to form con-
structive relationships within the work environment. Thus, emotional
intelligence can be regarded as a key factor that can facilitate resource
gain and attenuate the loss of resources (Rezvani Khosravi et al., 2018).
Therefore, understanding, managing, and regulating emotions in the
self and others is expected to affect the level of stress experienced by
software developers at work. This is important given that such stress is
related to dissatisfaction, depression, and absenteeism, which in turn is
A. Rezvani and P. Khosravi
related to low performance (Graziotin et al., 2017; Windeler et al.,
2017). The development of high-quality interpersonal relationships is
therefore likely to increase as a result of understanding, managing and
regulating negative emotions during stressful situations. This will result
in effective communication, troubleshooting cooperation, and en-
hanced performance (Rezvani et al., 2016). Therefore, we hypothesise
that:
H6. The relationship between emotional intelligence and performance
among software developers is mediated by stress.
2.10. Mediating role of trust
AET (Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996) proposes that interpersonal trust,
which results from team members’ emotional experiences, acts as a
mediator between emotional intelligence and performance. However,
different characteristics such as trust and workplace behaviour are
impacted when individuals experience emotions such as joy, irritation,
fatigue, exasperation, gratification, and eagerness. These emerge as a
result of actions that generate emotional responses in the workplace.
Consequently, individuals who feel these emotions are likely to exhibit
certain behaviours in the work environment (Ashkanasy & Dorris, 2017;
Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996). Christie et al. (2015) and Rezvani Khosravi
et al. (2018) concluded that emotional intelligence is a pivotal in-
dividual competence and a fundamental aspect of establishing trust
with other people and improving social relationships. Consequently,
such trust can potentially facilitate interactions among software de-
velopers through the production of constructive workplace relation-
ships. In the context of ISD projects, which are fundamentally uncertain
in nature, social interactions, communication, and collaboration can
potentially be improved if individuals have confidence in their team
(De Clercq, Haq, & Azeem, 2018; Nakata, 2017; Ostberg, Graziotin,
Wagner, & Derntl, 2017). To make reliable deductions regarding the
dependability of other team members, individuals must base their
perceptions on communicative abilities and social interactivity, which
are known to have a direct correlation with emotional intelligence
(Christie et al., 2015). This means that software developers with high
emotional intelligence are more likely to engage in increased co-
operation and communication which will enhance the level of trust
within the team (Barczak et al., 2010; Christie et al., 2015; Graziotin
et al., 2017). Software developers who can effectively manage inter-
personal relationships will gradually improve shared perceptions of the
dependability and trust of the team (Mayer et al., 2008; Nakata, 2017).
Thus, team members should be more inclined to organise such inter-
action and communication as this will enhance the level of participa-
tion and feeling of belonging among team members. This in turn will
foster the distribution of resources with the aim of achieving shared
objectives (Christie et al., 2015; Rezvani Khosravi et al., 2018). Hence,
we hypothesise that:
H7. The relationship between emotional intelligence and ISD
performance among software developers is mediated by trust.
2.11. Moderating influence of role ambiguity
Role ambiguity is defined as the extent to which the expectations of
a team member’s responsibilities are not clarified. In this paper, role
ambiguity is investigated as a potential moderator between stress and
performance on the basis of three factors: a) ISD projects are essentially
team-focused, b) previous literature, and c) the guiding theory (role
theory). Firstly, because ISD projects are completed by development
teams, role ambiguity may have an impact on the association between
stress and performance. This is because the level of interdependency
within ISD projects requires developers to depend on unambiguous
roles, duties, and expectations when performing their tasks and, as will
be demonstrated, the perceptions of these roles are formed as a result of
144
International Journal of Information Management 48 (2019) 139–150
technical ISD risk factors. Secondly, previous studies have shown that
role ambiguity has a detrimental impact on performance as it can ne-
gatively impact individuals’ work capabilities and is related to a sense
of powerlessness and a lack of control (Liu & Chiu, 2016; Liu et al.,
2011). Hence, examining role ambiguity can facilitate an understanding
of how stress negatively impacts performance. Finally, according to role
theory, role ambiguity increases the demands placed on members of a
team and can also impact their perceptions of the role and their posi-
tion. Role ambiguity thus contravenes the tenets of role theory by re-
ducing the clarity of information that flows and incorporating ex-
pectations from different sources (Liu & Chiu, 2016). People who are
uncertain regarding their duties and position are less likely to accept
and engage in efforts to foster interaction: they will be more likely to
assume a defensive stance to avert the possibility of dealing with po-
tentially challenging clients and diminish the threat of lost resources
(Liu et al., 2011). Within ISD projects, a variety of resources may be
introduced that members of the project team must manage in order to
achieve predetermined aims and objectives. In line with role theory,
such projects can aggravate stress due to the increased demands and
constraints placed on the developers. These projects often have re-
porting frameworks that are highly complex. This subsequently worsens
the problems of role ambiguity as members of the project team ex-
perience challenges when determining from whom they should seek
direction (Liu & Chiu, 2016). Additionally, role ambiguity is more likely
to occur in ISD projects in circumstances where different members of
the team are fulfilling the duties of a given role (Liu et al., 2011). This
could, therefore, exacerbate the uncertainty surrounding particular
responsibilities, as different team members could interpret these in
different ways. This issue is aggravated by the fact that each team
member has a reduced capacity to solve problems, communicate, and
engage with others (Liu et al., 2011), which ultimately reduces overall
team performance. Insufficient communication and engagement could
lead to increased ambiguity among members of the project team re-
garding their understanding of their responsibilities (Liu & Chiu, 2016).
In such circumstances, team members will find it challenging to em-
brace shared norms and values. It is plausible to conclude that the level
of stress is likely to escalate when there is a lack of clarity about in-
dividual responsibilities and roles. Therefore, we hypothesise that:
H8. A higher level of role ambiguity among software developers
increases the negative influence of stress on performance.
3. Methodology
3.1. Measurements
Emotional intelligence: In this study, we used the Wong and Law EI
measure (WLEIS; Wong & Law, 2002). WLEIS contains four branches:
awareness of emotion in self; awareness of emotion in others; use of
emotion; and emotion regulation. (See Appendix for list of measure-
ments)
3.1.1. Trust
The five items of interpersonal trust scale developed by Cook and
Wall (1980) was used to reflect trust in the team. This scale was used
since it is the most widely used measure of interpersonal trust in-
dicating good psychometric properties (e.g. Costa & Anderson, 2011).
Role ambiguity: Seven items developed by House, Schuler and
Levanoni (1983) were used to measure role ambiguity.
3.1.2. Stress
We used 8 items developed by Stanton, Balzer, Smith, Parra, and
Ironson (2001) to assess workplace stress.
Performance: To assess performance, we asked participants’ per-
ception regarding time, cost and quality of the project. For all items, we
used the Likert scale.
A. Rezvani and P. Khosravi International Journal of Information Management 48 (2019) 139–150

Table 1 Table 3
Participants’ information. Discriminant validity and correlation among constructs.
Demographics Male Female Total 1 2 3 4 5
(N = 323) (N = 40) (N = 363)
EI 0.888
Mean S.D. Mean S.D. Mean Performance 0.299 0.730
Role Conflict −0.306 −0.457 0.741
Age 36.41 6.83 38.31 6.63 37.36 Stress −0.399 −0.347 0.343 0.733
Experience 11.49 6.88 7.65 4.63 9.5 Trust 0.425 0.408 −0.626 −0.328 0.718

Frequency Frequency (%)

validity.
Male Female Total (N = 163)
In order to validate discriminant validity, we inspected whether the
Education square root of AVE for each construct was greater than its correlation
Diploma 7 (2.2%) 0 (0%) 7 (1.9%) with other constructs (Chin, 1998; Fornell & Larcker, 1981). As Table 3
College 57 (17.6%) 3 (7.5%) 60 (18.5%) shows our analysis confirms strong discriminant validity.
Undergraduate 220 (68.1%) 29 (72.5%) 249 (68.6%)
Postgraduate 39 (12.1%) 8 (20%) 47 (12.8%)
4. Result

3.2. Participants and procedure
The target group for the study was 630 software developers working
in both large and medium-sized organisations in Australia. The ques-
tionnaires were pre-tested prior to their formal implementation. To
improve the clarity of the questionnaires, six software engineers were
invited to review the draft questionnaires. Paper-based surveys were
administered among the participants. Participants received survey
packs conveyed by a letter describing the aim of the study and ensuring
voluntary and anonymous participation. We received 368 surveys.
Incomplete questionnaires were excluded due to missing or incomplete
data, the final sample comprised 363 respondents. The overall response
rate was 53.17%. Of 363 respondents, 89% (n = 323) were male. The
mean age of respondents was 35.6 years ranging from 22 to 54 years
with 9.5 years of work experience on average (see Table 1).
3.3. Data analysis
This study employed a Partial Least Square – Structural Equation
Modelling (PLS-SEM), to test the theoretical framework for several
reasons. First, it offers accurate estimates of the paths among constructs
by analysing the structural and measurement models simultaneously
(Chin, 1998). Second, Hair et al. (2011- p. 144) explained unlike SEM
which is suitable for theory testing, PLS-SEM is an appropriate statis-
tical method for exploratory studies, analysing complicated relation-
ships and testing moderation effects (Chin, Marcolin, & Newsted, 2003;
Ringle et al., 2012; Sarstedt, Ringle, & Hair, 2017). Finally, PLS-SEM
has been widely used in information system studies to test complicated
relationships like our research model (e.g. Rezvani et al., 2017).
3.4. Measurement model
We assessed the measurement model by checking convergent and
discriminant validity. For convergent validity we checked: Cronbach’s
alpha, Composite Reliability (CR) and Average Variance Extracted
(AVE). As Table 2 shows both CR and Cronbach’s alpha scores are be-
yond the cut off value of 0.70 and AVE is above the cut off value of 0.5
(Fornell & Larcker, 1981) which demonstrate strong reliability and
Table 2
Convergent validity.
Cronbach’s Alpha CR
EI 0.877 0.897
Performance 0.712 0.820
Role Conflict 0.862 0.894
Stress 0.855 0.889
Trust 0.815 0.863
Hypothesis 1 suggested that software developers’ emotional in-
telligence is positively related to performance. Our result showed a
significant, positive relationship between emotional intelligence and
performance (β = .31, p < .001). Therefore, Hypothesis 1 was sup-
ported. Hypotheses 2 proposed a negative association between software
developers’ emotional intelligence and stress. As predicted, emotional
intelligence was negatively associated with stress (β = -0.40, p <
.001). Thus Hypothesis 2 was supported. Hypothesis 3 suggested that
software developers’ emotional intelligence is positively associated
with trust. The result showed a significant, positive relationship be-
tween emotional intelligence and trust (β = .42, p < .001).
Hypothesis 4 proposed a positive association between software devel-
opers’ interpersonal trust and performance. As predicted, trust was
positively associated with performance (β = .14, p < .05). Hypothesis
5 proposed a negative association between software developers’ stress
and performance. As predicted, stress was negatively associated with
performance (β = -0.18, p < .01). Therefore, Hypotheses 3, 4 and 5
are supported.
To test the mediation effect for Hypotheses 6 and 7 we employed
parallel multiple mediator analysis as suggested by (Preacher & Hayes,
2008) and compared the results with and without the mediators in-
cluded. This method reduces the possibility of parameter bias due to
absent variables (Preacher & Hayes, 2008). We used an extension of the
simple mediation model recommended by MacKinnon and Luecken
(2008) to test the multiple mediators in our study. The positive asso-
ciation between software developers’ emotional intelligence and per-
formance (without mediators) has established in H1 (β = .31,
p < .001). After including stress and trust the path coefficients be-
tween emotional intelligence and performance became non-significant
(β = .07, p = .10). Therefore, Hypotheses 6 and 7 are supported (see
Fig. 1). We also employed the Bootstrapping procedure which provides
a powerful method for gaining confidence limits for mediation re-
lationships (Preacher & Hayes, 2008). As Table 4 shows, the direct ef-
fect of emotional intelligence to performance is not significant and the
lower and upper bounds does include zero while the indirect paths are
significant. These findings confirm the mediation effect of stress and
trust. We also tested education, age, gender and work experience as
control variables and found no significant influences.
To test the moderation effect of role ambiguity (Hypothesis 8) we
employed the product indicator approach suggested by Henseler and
Chin (2010). First, we obtained R2 and path coefficient between role
AVE
ambiguity and performance (β = -0.27, p < 0.001). Second, the
moderator variable (role ambiguity) was included in the model. We
0.789 obtained the interaction effect by carrying out the bootstrap procedure
0.533 (Henseler & Chin, 2010). As Table 5 shows, role ambiguity negatively
0.548
moderates the effect of stress on performance (β = -.15, p < 0.001).
0.537
0.514 Therefore, only hypothesis 8 is supported.
Fig. 2 shows the moderation effect of role conflict on the

145
A. Rezvani and P. Khosravi International Journal of Information Management 48 (2019) 139–150

Fig. 1. Result.

Table 4 better performance. We thus extend the literature on skills and com-
Bias-corrected bootstrap. petency of software developers by linking them to trust, stress, role
Relationships Bias-corrected bootstrap P-Value
ambiguity and performance. Thus, the objective of this research was to
examine how emotional intelligence as an important competency and
Lower Upper skills influences developers’ stress, trust and performance, the me-
EI → Performance −.020 .186 .107 chanisms by which this occurs, and how role ambiguity can increase the
EI → Stress −.497 0.30 .000
negative effects of stress on performance in ISD projects. Drawing on
EI → Trust .337 .511 .000
Stress → Performance −.301 −.061 .002 the AET, COR and role theory (Hobfoll, 2001; Merton, 1957; Weiss &
Trust → Performance .029 .268 .020 Cropanzano, 1996), we hypothesized that emotional intelligence which
reflects the ability to manage, understand and control the positive and
negative emotions fosters trust and mitigates stress which results in
Table 5 increased performance. Trust and stress were also suggested to mediate
Moderating effect of role ambiguity. the relationship between emotional intelligence and performance in ISD
Row Independent variables Dependent variable projects. Role ambiguity was also hypothesized to contribute to de-
velopers’ stress. The results indicate that enhancing developers’ skills
1 Role ambiguity −.27*** (t = 3.68) and competency in particular emotional intelligence reduced the ad-
2 Role ambiguity*Stress −.15*** (t = 4.49)
5 R2 .300
verse effect of stress on performance and increased trust and reliance
6 ΔR2 .070 (23%) among software developers. Finally, the results show that role ambi-
7 Control variables guity increased developers’ stress in ISD projects.
8 Gender .02
9 Age .06
10 Education .04 5.1. Theoretical implications

Fig. 2. Moderation effect.
relationship between stress and performance. As Fig. 2 shows there are
differences between the Low and High level of role conflict. When stress
is high performance is lower than when stress is low, however, the high
levels of role ambiguity have a lower level of performance. Role am-
biguity, therefore, appears to make differences in high and low levels of
stress.
5. Discussion
By focusing on the technical skills of software developers on project
outcome, prior work has overlooked developers’ social and emotional
skills. This is challenging because ISD project success depends on the
ability of software developers to manage several inputs to achieve
Our first motivation to conduct the present study was to find the
implications of emotional intelligence on developer stress and perfor-
mance in ISD project. We contribute to the ISD projects by extending
research on personal skills and competency of software developers and
performance by identifying the direct influence of emotional in-
telligence on stress and performance. This gap in the IS literature is
noteworthy, due to the negative influence of stress on performance and
software quality (Windeler et al., 2017). Our work unites the project
management, stress and emotional intelligence literature to shed light
on the theoretical mechanisms by which software developers’ compe-
tency and skills can reduce stress. Generally, developers’ well-being is a
significant element in ISD project performance and should be closely
evaluated by managers. By leveraging the COR as the overarching
theoretical lens for the relationship between emotional intelligence,
stress and performance, this research provides insight not only on the
influences of emotional intelligence on performance but also on the role
of emotional intelligence as a pre-emptive approach to manage stress.
Our results show that emotionally intelligent software developers are
effective in managing the adverse effect of stress. Specifically, emo-
tional intelligence mitigates stress which results in increased perfor-
mance in a team, thereby shedding light on the factors that increase
performance and decrease poor wellbeing in ISD project. It may not
possible to eliminate stress but understanding the skills and competency
of software developers by which they influence stress offers practi-
tioners a preemptive approach to manage stress.
Second, we extend the AET theory (Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996),
advanced by Rezvani et al. (2016), by examining how emotionally in-
telligent software developers foster positive work attitude such as trust.
In doing so, this study follows a change toward a social actor approach

146
A. Rezvani and P. Khosravi
in IS research. This study, therefore, contributes to better understanding
of the skills and competency of software developers more specifically
emotional intelligence on developers’ trust and performance in ISD
project. By focusing on how personal skills and competency of software
developers influence positive work attitude and performance, we shed
light on how the ability to manage, understand and control positive and
negative emotions in self and others affect developers’ performance.
This positive association also concurs with the outcomes of prior studies
on the subject of emotional intelligence and workplace attitudes in the
food and defence sectors (e.g. Rezvani et al., 2016; Sy et al., 2006,
Wong & Law, 2002). The conclusions of the present study will help to
elucidate on this pivotal organisational procedure that has received
minimal focus in terms of theoretical and empirical research. Due to the
fact that it has been demonstrated that emotional intelligence can be
influential in regard to trust and performance in the implementation of
an ISD project, these findings can facilitate future research that intends
to determine the possible performance-enhancing impacts of amalga-
mating emotional intelligence and positive workplace attitudes in the
context of ISD projects.
Third, the present research makes a valuable contribution to the
literature on IS through the identification of the mediators (i.e., trust
and stress) that enable emotional intelligence to impact performance
levels in ISD projects. By viewing the issue from the theoretical per-
spective of AET and COR (Hobfoll, 2001; Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996),
we contended that there is a relationship between emotional in-
telligence and performance and deduced that this association can be
mediated through two paths. It was argued that trust is an attitude-
related variable, which indicates that there is an emotional connection
that links performance and emotional intelligence. Hence, trust is de-
veloped by software developers who have strong emotional intelligence
with their colleagues by forming an emotional connection, and this
relationship subsequently has a positive impact on performance in
terms of their ability to communicate, troubleshoot, coordinate and
work collaboratively. Additionally, on the basis of COR theory (Hobfoll,
2001), the results of the current study indicate that emotional in-
telligence is a pivotal factor in the process of reducing stress as well for
enhanced performance in ISD projects. It has also been determined that
emotional intelligence has both a direct and indirect impact on per-
formance through decreasing stress and elevating trust. Although a
certain degree of stress is expected when many workers collaborate on a
project, emotional intelligence can enable software developers to create
more effective work conditions, while also ensuring that their collea-
gues are supportive in the efforts to satisfy client demands and user
specifications.
Finally, further to comprehending the mediating role that stress and
trust play between emotional intelligence and performance, it is also
necessary to examine why stress negatively impact on performance in
the context of ISD projects. Consequently, this was the driver behind
our fourth motivation to comprehend the procedure through which
stress impacts on performance. This will facilitate the process of de-
termining aspects of intervention. Based on role theory, it is hypothe-
sised in the present research that performance is influenced more by
stress when there is role ambiguity is high. Thus, this indicates the
significance of clarifying developers’ roles and expectations. In the
circumstance that there is ambiguity among developers in terms of their
responsibilities and accountabilities regarding the expected output,
certain problems can emerge. This can cause one of the most significant
issues in the process of software management and also enhances the
possibility of ineffective performance and lack of success if there is no
clarity or definition for every team members’ role (Liu et al., 2011).
This concurs with the empirical findings of research that has examined
the ramifications of role ambiguity in various contexts (e.g. Bowling
et al., 2017; Qian, Wang, Han, Wang, & Wang, 2015). This work con-
tributes to the literature on project management by determining the
detrimental impact of role ambiguity on the stress and performance
levels of developers. The present research builds on role theory, which
147
International Journal of Information Management 48 (2019) 139–150
takes into account the impact of role ambiguity on the project results
and places emphasis on the necessity to manage this impact. These
conclusions are the initial step in determining the particular facets of
role ambiguity that have the potential to cause stress for software de-
velopers. It is also suggested that there is a positive correlation between
role ambiguity and stress among software developers, which should be
an indication to management teams that they should identify the kinds
of role expectations that can lead to stressful scenarios. Based on this
knowledge, managers can make more informed decisions in terms of
the focus of their interventions targeted at managing stress. For ex-
ample, instead of directing such interventions at all software developers
within a team, it is possible to pinpoint those who are at greatest risk of
developing stress by investigating the project environment and role
demands in regard to each individual software developer.
5.2. Practical implications
The findings of this study have various important ramifications for
the management of ISD projects. Firstly, this discussion began by em-
phasising the significance of emotional intelligence as a pro-active
means of managing stress. The conclusions drawn here are the first
stage in determining the particular competencies and abilities that
software developers possess that have the potential to diminish stress in
ISD projects. It is also suggested that emotional intelligence has a ne-
gative association with the stress of developers, which should alert the
attention of management staff and team leaders to the kinds of abilities
and competencies that are necessary when faced with stressful sce-
narios in ISD projects. Armed with this knowledge, managers can be
more focused when targeting inventions aimed at controlling stress.
Managers can be pro-active in their approach to implementing stress
management interventions for software developers involved in ISD
projects. This study has found that the ability to understand, manage,
and regulate one’s own emotions as well as those of others are specific
abilities and competencies that allow developers with the potential to
induce stress to cope with the resulting pressure.
Research has demonstrated that revenue growth can be augmented
when trust is enhanced (Mohr & Puck, 2007). Positive attitudes in the
work environment, including trust, can be developed by nurturing
software developers’ levels of emotional intelligence. The study findings
imply that when implementing ISD projects, consideration should be
given to hiring developers who exhibit increased positivity in terms of
work behaviours. It is also possible to enhance emotional intelligence
through in-service training (Herpertz, Schütz, & Nezlek, 2016). In re-
gard to the development of human resources, increased focus should be
applied to the development of software developers’ emotional in-
telligence, as it appears to be a crucial component of social environ-
ments, creating the sense of trust and cooperation with external project
teams. Specifically in working conditions that induce extreme stress like
large-scale ISD projects.
Lastly, role ambiguity seems to cause stress by asserting a detri-
mental impact on software developers’ perceptions of their roles as well
as by generating conflicts in terms of role expectations. The ability to
understand this connection between role ambiguity, stress and perfor-
mance are particularly beneficial in the context of interventions by
managers. Managers can be certain in the establishment of definite
boundaries, which means that software developers will understand the
scope of their duties. When running a project, it is also important that
managers carefully assess the different tasks allocated to the individual
team members in order to guarantee that there is no task conflict.
Indeed, for projects with increased scope and complexity, it will be
necessary for managers to review and revise these project expectations
on a regular basis during the project duration. Additionally, if it is not
possible to prevent role ambiguity from emerging, companies will be
required to implement systems that enable managers to approach and
find solutions to the problem of role ambiguity.
A. Rezvani and P. Khosravi International Journal of Information Management 48 (2019) 139–150

5.3. Limitations and future research directions
There are some limitations in our study that suggest the potential
research opportunities for future studies. First, while this study justified
specific mediators (stress and trust) between emotional in-
telligence–performance relationships, it was acknowledged that other
mediators such as project managers’ leadership style, organisational
culture and climate may amplify or reduce the influence of emotional
intelligence on performance. In addition, future research may wish to
find other drivers of stress and trust among software developers such as
their project leader’s or team members’ technical skills. Second, con-
sistent with extant theoretical and empirical evidence, we modelled
role ambiguity as a moderator of the relationship between stress and
performance in ISD project. An alternative perspective could view role
ambiguity as an outcome of stress, as another avenue for future study.
In addition, future research may wish to test other moderators. For
instance, culture may amplify or reduce the influence of stress on
performance. Third, defining project success/performance is a chal-
lenging task as it lies in the eye of beholder (Dwivedi et al., 2015;
Hughes, Dwivedi, & Rana, 2017; Rezvani & Khosravi, 2018). In this
regard, Hughes, Rana, and Dwivedi (2019) identified a list of critical
success factors in IS projects such as use of skilled resources and sta-
keholders satisfaction. In this study, we measured time, cost and quality
as a measure of performance. Future research may wish to test our
model by including various success indicators. Forth, we only collected
data from developers in this study. Future research may wish to collect
data from various stakeholders and find out whether the role of EI is
more important for performing specific tasks or it is more important for
a specific role in ISD projects. Finally, the self-report measures were
used to make the findings of this study subject to the common method
bias. In order to decrease the Common Method Bias (CMB), the statis-
tical and procedural techniques proposed by (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, &
Podsakoff, 2012) were employed. In addition, to increase the certain
level of validity and decrease the method effect this study assured the
anonymity of participants. Moreover, Harman’s single factor and
marker variable were employed as suggested by prior studies to sta-
tistically test the CMB. Harman’s test showed more than one factor
accounted for the majority of covariance. As suggested by Rönkkö and
Ylitalo (2011) PLS marker variable analysis, was employed to check
CMB. The model was tested with and without PLS marker variable. We
found no significant differences among paths coefficient that suggesting
CMB in this study, is not an issue.
6. Conclusions
We presented and tested a model of emotional intelligence of soft-
ware developers in ISD projects with the objective of understanding
how emotional intelligence influences stress, trust and performance
among software developers. We also examined the influence of role
ambiguity as a moderator of the relationship between stress and per-
formance. Our results showed that emotionally intelligent software
developers are more likely to manage the negative influence of stress
and are more likely to trust in other team members which result in
increased performance. We also found that role ambiguity increases the
negative influence of stress on performance in ISD projects. Our find-
ings have implications for skills and competency of software developers
as an intervention to mitigate stress and foster interpersonal trust in the
ISD project. We encourage organizations to empower developers with
emotional intelligence skills by providing an appropriate training pro-
gram that associated with decreased stress and development of trust
between software developers because studies have shown a pre-emptive
approach to mitigate stress and foster trust among employees lead to
revenue growth and productivity (Mohr & Puck, 2007).

Appendix A. Measurements

Emotional intelligence (Wong & Law, 2002)

I have a good sense of why I have certain feelings most of the time
I have good understanding of my own emotions
I really understand what I feel
I always know whether or not I am happy
I always know my team members’ emotions from their behaviour
I am a good observer of my team members’ emotions
I am sensitive to the feelings and emotions of my team members
I have good understanding of the emotions of my team members around me
I always set goals for myself and then try my best to achieve them
I always tell myself I am a competent person
I am a self-motivated person
I would always encourage myself to try my best
I am able to control my temper and handle difficulties rationally
I am quite capable of controlling my own emotions
I can always calm down quickly when I am very angry
I have good control of my own emotions
Trust (Cook & Wall,1980)
If I got into difficulties at work I know my team members would try and help me out
I can trust my team members I work with to lend me a hand if I needed it
Have full confidence in the skills of my team members
Most of my team members can be relied upon to do as they say they will do
I can rely on my team members not to make my job more difficult by careless work
Performance
Finish project within the budget
Finish project on time
Met quality standards
Enable continuous improvement
Stress (Stanton et al., 2001)
Problems associated with my job have kept me awake at night.
My job is emotionally exhausting.
I feel burnt out because of my job
My job frustrates me.
I feel worn out at the end of a working day
I have felt fidgety or nervous as a result of my job.

148
A. Rezvani and P. Khosravi
Emotional intelligence (Wong & Law, 2002)
I am exhausted in the morning at the thought of another day at work
I feel that every working hour is tiring for me
Role ambiguity (House, Schuler, & Levanoni, 1983)
My authority matches the responsibilities assigned to me within this team
My responsibilities in the team are clearly defined
I feel certain about how much authority I have within this team
I have clear planned goals and objectives for my work in this team
The planned goals and objectives for my work in this team are not clear
Within this team, I know what is expected of me
Within this team, I know what my responsibilities are
References
Aladwani, A. M. (2016). Corruption as a source of e-Government projects failure in de-
veloping countries: A theoretical exposition. International Journal of Information
Management, 36(1), 105–112.
Anthony‐McMann, P. E., Ellinger, A. D., Astakhova, M., & Halbesleben, J. R. (2017).
Exploring different operationalizations of employee engagement and their relation-
ships with workplace stress and burnout. Human Resource Development Quarterly,
28(2), 163–195.
Arsenio, W. F., & Loria, S. (2014). Coping with negative emotions: Connections with
adolescents’ academic performance and stress. The Journal of Genetic Psychology,
175(1), 76–90.
Ashkanasy, N. M., & Daus, C. S. (2005). Rumors of the death of emotional intelligence in
organizational behavior are vastly exaggerated. Journal of Organizational Behavior,
26(4), 441–452.
Ashkanasy, N. M., & Dorris, A. D. (2017). Emotions in the workplace. Annual Review of
Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 4, 67–90.
Ayoko, O. B., Callan, V. J., & Härtel, C. E. (2008). The influence of team emotional in-
telligence climate on conflict and team members’ reactions to conflict. Small Group
Research, 39(2), 121–149.
Barczak, G., Lassk, F., & Mulki, J. (2010). Antecedents of team creativity: An examination
of team emotional intelligence, team trust and collaborative culture. Creativity and
Innovation Management, 19(4), 332–345.
Bell, A. S., Rajendran, D., & Theiler, S. (2012). Job stress, wellbeing, work-life balance
and work-life conflict among australian academics. E-Journal of Applied
Psychology, 8(1).
Blascovich, J. (2008). Challenge, threat, and health. In J. Y. Shah, & W. L. Gardner (Eds.).
Handbook of Motivation Science (pp. 481–493). New York, NY: US: The Guilford Press.
Bolger, N., & Zuckerman, A. (1995). A framework for studying personality in the stress
process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(5), 890.
Bowen, K. S., Uchino, B. N., Birmingham, W., Carlisle, M., Smith, T. W., & Light, K. C.
(2014). The stress-buffering effects of functional social support on ambulatory blood
pressure. Health Psychology, 33(11), 1440.
Bowling, N. A., Khazon, S., Alarcon, G. M., Blackmore, C. E., Bragg, C. B., Hoepf, M. R.,
et al. (2017). Building better measures of role ambiguity and role conflict: The va-
lidation of new role stressor scales. Work and Stress, 31(1), 1–23.
Buvik, M. P., & Tvedt, S. D. (2017). The influence of project commitment and team
commitment on the relationship between trust and knowledge sharing in project
teams. Project Management Journal, 48(2), 5–21.
Chilton, M. A., Hardgrave, B. C., & Armstrong, D. J. (2005). Person-job cognitive style fit
for software developers: The effect on strain and performance. Journal of Management
Information Systems, 22(2), 193–226.
Chin, W. W. (1998). The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling.
Modern methods for business research, 295(2), 295–336.
Chin, W. W., Marcolin, B. L., & Newsted, P. R. (2003). A partial least squares latent
variable modeling approach for measuring interaction effects: Results from a Monte
Carlo simulation study and an electronic-mail emotion/adoption study. Information
Systems Research, 14(2), 189–217.
Christie, A. M., Jordan, P. J., & Troth, A. C. (2015). Trust antecedents: Emotional in-
telligence and perceptions of others. The International Journal of Organizational
Analysis, 23(1), 89–101.
Cook, J., & Wall, T. (1980). New work attitude measures of trust, organizational com-
mitment and personal need non-fulfilment. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 53,
39–52.
Colquitt, J. A., Scott, B. A., & LePine, J. A. (2007). Trust, trustworthiness, and trust
propensity: A meta-analytic test of their unique relationships with risk taking and job
performance. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(4), 909.
Costa, A. C., & Anderson, N. (2011). Measuring trust in teams: Development and vali-
dation of a multifaceted measure of formative and reflective indicators of team trust.
European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 20(1), 119–154.
Cram, W. A., & Wiener, M. (2018). Perceptions of control legitimacy in information
systems development. Information Technology and People, 31(3), 712–740.
Cruz, S., da Silva, F. Q., & Capretz, L. F. (2015). Forty years of research on personality in
software engineering: A mapping study. Computers in Human Behavior, 46, 94–113.
De Clercq, D., Haq, I. U., & Azeem, M. U. (2018). Self-efficacy to spur job performance:
Roles of job-related anxiety and perceived workplace incivility. Management Decision,
56(4), 891–907.
Diallo, A., & Thuillier, D. (2005). The success of international development projects, trust
and communication: An African perspective. International Journal of Project
Management, 23(3), 237–252.
Dunn, J. R., & Schweitzer, M. E. (2005). Feeling and believing: The influence of emotion
on trust. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88(5), 736.
149
International Journal of Information Management 48 (2019) 139–150
Dwivedi, Y. K., Wastell, D., Laumer, S., Henriksen, H. Z., Myers, M. D., Bunker, D., et al.
(2015). Research on information systems failures and successes: Status update and
future directions. Information Systems Frontiers, 17(1), 143–157.
Eddy, P., Wertheim, E. H., Kingsley, M., & Wright, B. J. (2017). Associations between the
effort-reward imbalance model of workplace stress and indices of cardiovascular
health: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral
Reviews, 83, 252–266.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable vari-
ables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. Journal of Marketing Research,
382–388.
Gingnell, L., Franke, U., Lagerström, R., Ericsson, E., & Lilliesköld, J. (2014). Quantifying
success factors for IT projects—An expert-based bayesian model. Information Systems
Management, 31(1), 21–36.
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.
Glinow, M. A. V., Shapiro, D. L., & Brett, J. M. (2004). Can we talk, and should we?
Managing emotional conflict in multicultural teams. Academy of Management Review,
29(4), 578–592.
Goleman, D. (2000). Leadership that gets results. Harvard Business Review, 78(2), 4–17.
Graziotin, D., Fagerholm, F., Wang, X., & Abrahamsson, P. (2017). Unhappy developers:
Bad for themselves, bad for process, and bad for software product. MayProceedings of the
39th International Conference on Software Engineering Companion. IEEE Press362–364.
Greenidge, D., Devonish, D., & Alleyne, P. (2014). The relationship between ability-based
emotional intelligence and contextual performance and counterproductive work be-
haviors: A test of the mediating effects of job satisfaction. Human Performance, 27(3),
225–242.
Gupta, M., George, J. F., & Xia, W. (2019). Relationships between IT department culture
and agile software development practices: An empirical investigation. International
Journal of Information Management, 44, 13–24.
Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2011). PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet. The
Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 19(2), 139–152.
Hancock, P. A., & Szalma, J. L. (Eds.). (2008). Performance Under Stress. Ashgate
Publishing, Ltd..
Harris, M. A., Brett, C. E., Johnson, W., & Deary, I. J. (2016). Personality stability from
age 14 to age 77 years. Psychology and Aging, 31(8), 862.
Henseler, J., & Chin, W. W. (2010). A comparison of approaches for the analysis of in-
teraction effects between latent variables using partial least squares path modeling.
Structural Equation Modeling, 17(1), 82–109.
Herpertz, S., Schütz, A., & Nezlek, J. (2016). Enhancing emotion perception, a funda-
mental component of emotional intelligence: Using multiple-group SEM to evaluate a
training program. Personality and Individual Differences, 95, 11–19.
Hertel, G., Niedner, S., & Herrmann, S. (2003). Motivation of software developers in Open
Source projects: An Internet-based survey of contributors to the Linux kernel.
Research Policy, 32(7), 1159–1177.
Hobfoll, S. E. (1989). Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualizing stress.
The American Psychologist, 44(3), 513.
Hobfoll, S. E. (2001). The influence of culture, community, and the nested‐self in the
stress process: Advancing conservation of resources theory. Applied Psychology, 50(3),
337–421.
Hobfoll, S. E., & Shirom, A. (2001). Conservation of resources theory: Applications to
stress and management in the workplace. In R. T. Golembiewski (Ed.). Handbook of
organization behavior (pp. 57–81). (2nd ed.). New York: Dekker.
Hogg, M. A., & Terry, D. J. (2014). Social identity processes in organizational contexts.
Psychology Press.
Holmgreen, L., Tirone, V., Gerhart, J., & Hobfoll, S. E. (2017). Conservation of resources
theory. The handbook of stress and health: A guide to research and practice, 443–457.
House, R. J., Schuler, R. S., & Levanoni, E. (1983). Role conflict and ambiguity scales:
Reality or artifacts? Journal of Applied Psychology, 68(2), 334–337.
Hsu, J. S., Hung, Y. W., Chen, Y. H., & Huang, H. H. (2013). Antecedents and con-
sequences of user coproduction in information system development projects. Project
Management Journal, 44(2), 67–87.
Hsu, J. S. C., Li, Y., & Sun, H. (2017). Exploring the interaction between vertical and
shared leadership in information systems development projects. International Journal
of Project Management, 35(8), 1557–1572.
Hughes, D. L., Dwivedi, Y. K., & Rana, N. P. (2017). Mapping IS failure factors on
PRINCE2® stages: An application of interpretive ranking process (IRP). Production
Planning and Control, 28(9), 776–790.
Hughes, D. L., Dwivedi, Y. K., Rana, N. P., & Simintiras, A. C. (2016). Information systems
project failure–analysis of causal links using interpretive structural modelling.
Production Planning and Control, 27(16), 1313–1333.
Hughes, D. L., Rana, N. P., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2019). Elucidation of IS project success
factors: An interpretive structural modelling approach. Annals of Operations Research,
A. Rezvani and P. Khosravi
1–32.
Hung, Y. W., Hsu, S. C., Su, Z. Y., & Huang, H. H. (2014). Countering user risk in in-
formation system development projects. International Journal of Information
Management, 34(4), 533–545.
Jiang, W. P., Zhang, Q., & Le, Y. (2011). Occurrence and influence of trust in construction
projects from the view of clients. Journal Engineering Management, 25(2), 177–181.
Jiang, W. P., Lu, Y. J., & Le, Y. (2016). Trust and project success: A twofold perspective
between owners and contractors. Journal Engineering Management, 32(6).
Jordan, P. J., Dasborough, M. T., Daus, C. S., & Ashkanasy, N. M. (2010). A call to context.
Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 3(2), 145–148.
Jordan, P. J., & Troth, A. C. (2004). Managing emotions during team problem solving:
Emotional intelligence and conflict resolution. Human Performance, 17(2), 195–218.
Khamisa, N., Peltzer, K., Ilic, D., & Oldenburg, B. (2016). Work related stress, burnout, job
satisfaction and general health of nurses: A follow‐up study. International Journal of
Nursing Practice, 22(6), 538–545.
Khamisa, N., Oldenburg, B., Peltzer, K., & Ilic, D. (2015). Work related stress, burnout, job
satisfaction and general health of nurses. International Journal of Environmental
Research and Public Health, 12(1), 652–666.
Khosravi, P., Rezvani, A., & Ahmad, M. N. (2013). Does Organizational Identification
Lead to Information System Success? World Applied Sciences Journal, 21(3), 402–408.
Krysinska, K., & Lester, D. (2010). Post-traumatic stress disorder and suicide risk: A
systematic review. Archives of Suicide Research, 14(1), 1–23.
Landa, J. M. A., López-Zafra, E., Martos, M. P. B., & del Carmen Aguilar-Luzón, M. (2008).
The relationship between emotional intelligence, occupational stress and health in
nurses: a questionnaire survey. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 45(6),
888–901.
Lazarus, R. S. (1966). Psychological stress and the coping process. New York, NY: US:
McGraw-Hill.
Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Coping and adaptation. The handbook of behavioral
medicine 282325.
Licorish, S. A., & MacDonell, S. G. (2017). Exploring software developers’ work practices:
Task differences, participation, engagement, and speed of task resolution. Information
& Management, 54(3), 364–382.
Lindsjørn, Y., Sjøberg, D. I., Dingsøyr, T., Bergersen, G. R., & Dybå, T. (2016). Teamwork
quality and project success in software development: A survey of agile development
teams. The Journal of Systems and Software, 122, 274–286.
Liu, J. Y. C., & Chiu, G. C. T. (2016). Influence of project partnering on stakeholder role
ambiguity and project manager risk perception in information system projects. Project
Management Journal, 47(6), 94–110.
Liu, S., & Wang, L. (2016). Influence of managerial control on performance in medical
information system projects: The moderating role of organizational environment and
team risks. International Journal of Project Management, 34(1), 102–116.
Liu, J. Y., Chiang, J. C., Yang, M. H., & Klein, G. (2011). Partnering effects on user–de-
veloper conflict and role ambiguity in information system projects. Information and
Software Technology, 53(7), 722–729.
Lovallo, W. R. (2015). Stress and health: Biological and psychological interactions. Sage
publications.
MacKinnon, D. P., & Luecken, L. J. (2008). How and for whom? Mediation and mod-
eration in health psychology. Health Psychology, 27(2S) S99.
Maqbool, R., Sudong, Y., Manzoor, N., & Rashid, Y. (2017). The impact of emotional
intelligence, project managers’ competencies, and transformational leadership on
project success: An empirical perspective. Project Management Journal, 48(3), 58–75.
Matthews, K. A., & Gump, B. B. (2002). Chronic work stress and marital dissolution in-
crease risk of posttrial mortality in men from the Multiple Risk Factor Intervention
Trial. Archives of Internal Medicine, 162(3), 309–315.
Mayer, J., & Salovey, P. (1997). What is emotional intelligence? In P. Salovey, & D.
Sluyter (Eds.). emotional development and emotional intelligence: Implications for edu-
cators. (pp. 3–31). New York: Basic Books.
Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P., Caruso, D. R., & Sitarenios, G. (2003). Measuring emotional
intelligence with the MSCEIT V2.0. Emotion, 3, 97–105.
Mayer, J. D., Roberts, R. D., & Barsade, S. G. (2008). Human abilities: Emotional in-
telligence. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 507–536.
Mayer, R. C., & Gavin, M. B. (2005). Trust in management and performance: who minds
the shop while the employees watch the boss? Academy of Management Journal, 48(5),
874–888.
McCraty, R., Atkinson, M., & Tomasino, D. (2003). Impact of a workplace stress reduction
program on blood pressure and emotional health in hypertensive employees. The
Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine, 9(3), 355–369.
McEvily, B., Perrone, V., & Zaheer, A. (2003). Trust as an organizing principle.
Organization Science, 14(1), 91–103.
McManus, J., & Wood-Harper, T. (2007). Understanding the sources of information systems
project failure.
Merton, R. K. (1957). The role-set: Problems in sociological theory. The British Journal of
Sociology, 8(2), 106–120.
Moorman, C., Deshpande, R., & Zaltman, G. (1993). Factors affecting trust in market
research relationships. Journal of Market, 57(1), 81–101.
Moe, N. B., & Šmite, D. (2008). Understanding a lack of trust in Global Software Teams: A
multiple-case study. Software Process: Improvement and Practice, 13(3), 217–231.
Mohr, A. T., & Puck, J. F. (2007). Role conflict, general manager job satisfaction and
stress and the performance of IJVs. European Management Journal, 25(1), 25–35.
Müller, R., & Turner, J. R. (2007). Matching the project manager’s leadership style to
project type. International Journal of Project Management, 25(1), 21–32.
Müller, R., & Turner, R. (2010). Leadership competency profiles of successful project
managers. International Journal of Project Management, 28(5), 437–448.
Nakata, A. (2017). Long working hours, job satisfaction, and depressive symptoms: A
community-based cross-sectional study among Japanese employees in small-and
150
International Journal of Information Management 48 (2019) 139–150
medium-scale businesses. Oncotarget, 8(32), 53041.
Ostberg, J. P., Graziotin, D., Wagner, S., & Derntl, B. (2017). Towards the assessment of
stress and emotional responses of a salutogenesis-enhanced software tool using psycho-
physiological measurements. MayProceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on
Emotion Awareness in Software Engineering. IEEE Press22–25.
Ozer, M., & Vogel, D. (2015). Contextualized relationship between knowledge sharing
and performance in software development. Journal of Management Information
Systems, 32(2), 134–161.
Park, J. G., & Lee, J. (2014). Knowledge sharing in information systems development
projects: Explicating the role of dependence and trust. International Journal of Project
Management, 32(1), 153–165.
Pinto, J. K., Slevin, D. P., & English, B. (2009). Trust in projects: An empirical assessment
of owner/contractor relationships. International Journal of Project Management, 27(6),
638–648.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2012). Sources of method bias in
social science research and recommendations on how to control it. Annual review of
psychology, 63, 539–569.
Por, J., Barriball, L., Fitzpatrick, J., & Roberts, J. (2011). Emotional intelligence: Its re-
lationship to stress, coping, well-being and professional performance in nursing
students. Nurse Education Today, 31(8), 855–860.
Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing
and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research
Methods, 40(3), 879–891.
Puusa, A., & Tolvanen, U. (2006). Organizational identity and trust. EJBO-Electronic
Journal of Business Ethics and Organization Studies.
Qian, J., Wang, H., Han, Z. R., Wang, J., & Wang, H. (2015). Mental health risks among
nurses under abusive supervision: The moderating roles of job role ambiguity and
patients’ lack of reciprocity. International Journal of Mental Health Systems, 9(1), 22.
Rezvani, A., & Khosravi, P. (2018). A comprehensive assessment of project success within
various large projects. The Journal of Modern Project Management, 6(1).
Rezvani, A., Barrett, R., & Khosravi, P. (2018). Investigating the relationships among team
emotional intelligence, trust, conflict and team performance. Team Performance
Management: An International Journal.
Rezvani, A., Khosravi, P., & Ashkanasy, N. M. (2018). Examining the interdependencies
among emotional intelligence, trust, and performance in infrastructure projects: A
multilevel study. International Journal of Project Management, 36(8), 1034–1046.
Rezvani, A., Chang, A., Wiewiora, A., Ashkanasy, N. M., Jordan, P. J., & Zolin, R. (2016).
Manager emotional intelligence and project success: The mediating role of job sa-
tisfaction and trust. International Journal of Project Management, 34(7), 1112–1122.
Rezvani, A., Dong, L., & Khosravi, P. (2017). Promoting the continuing usage of strategic
information systems: The role of supervisory leadership in the successful im-
plementation of enterprise systems. International Journal of Information Management,
37(5), 417–430.
Rode, J. C., Mooney, C. H., Arthaud‐Day, M. L., Near, J. P., Baldwin, T. T., Rubin, R. S.,
et al. (2007). Emotional intelligence and individual performance: Evidence of direct
and moderated effects. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 28(4), 399–421.
Rönkkö, M., & Ylitalo, J. (2011). PLS marker variable approach to diagnosing and controlling
for method variance. ICIS 2011 Proceedings8.
Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., & Hair, J. F. (2017). Partial least squares structural equation
modeling. Handbook of Market Research, 1–40.
Schutte, N. S., Malouff, J. M., Hall, L. E., Haggerty, D. J., Cooper, J. T., Golden, C. J., et al.
(1998). Development and validation of a measure of emotional intelligence.
Personality and individual differences, 25(2), 167–177.
Serrador, P., & Pinto, J. K. (2015). Does Agile work?—A quantitative analysis of agile
project success. International Journal of Project Management, 33(5), 1040–1051.
Sheldon, O. J., Dunning, D., & Ames, D. R. (2014). Emotionally unskilled, unaware, and
uninterested in learning more: Reactions to feedback about deficits in emotional
intelligence. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 99(1), 125.
Stanton, J. M., Balzer, W. K., Smith, P. C., Parra, L. F., & Ironson, G. (2001). A general
measure of work stress: The stress in general scale. Educational and Psychological
Measurement, 61(5), 866–888.
Stephens, J. P., & Carmeli, A. (2016). The positive effect of expressing negative emotions
on knowledge creation capability and performance of project teams. International
Journal of Project Management, 34(5), 862–873.
Subramanian, G. H., Jiang, J. J., & Klein, G. (2007). Software quality and IS project
performance improvements from software development process maturity and IS
implementation strategies. Journal of Systems and Software, 80(4), 616–627.
Troth, A. C., Jordan, P. J., Lawrence, S. A., & Tse, H. H. (2012). A multilevel model of
emotional skills, communication performance, and task performance in teams.
Journal of Organizational Behavior, 33(5), 700–722.
Tsang, E. W., & Williams, J. N. (2012). Generalization and induction: Misconceptions,
clarifications, and a classification of induction. MIS Quarterly, 729–748.
Tyler Boden, M., & Berenbaum, H. (2007). Emotional awareness, gender, and suspi-
ciousness. Cognition and Emotion, 21(2), 268–280.
Weiss, H. M., & Cropanzano, R. (1996). Affective events theory: A theoretical discussion of the
structure, causes and consequences of affective experiences at work.
Windeler, J. B., Maruping, L., & Venkatesh, V. (2017). Technical systems development
risk factors: The role of empowering leadership in lowering developers’ stress.
Information Systems Research, 28(4), 775–796.
Wong, C. S., & Law, K. S. (2002). The effects of leader and follower emotional intelligence
on performance and attitude: An exploratory study. The Leadership Quarterly, 13(3),
243–274.
Wu, G., Liu, C., Zhao, X., & Zuo, J. (2017). Investigating the relationship between com-
munication-conflict interaction and project success among construction project
teams. International Journal of Project Management, 35(8), 1466–1482.