Journal of Human Resources in Hospitality & Tourism, 12:175191, 2013

Copyright Taylor & Francis Group, LLC

ISSN: 1533-2845 print / 1533-2853 online
DOI: 10.1080/15332845.2013.752710

Emotional Intelligence, Job Satisfaction,

and Job Tenure among Hotel Managers
KARA WOLFE
Bradley University, Family and Consumer Sciences, Peoria, Illinois, USA

HYUN JEONG KIM

School of Hospitality Business Management, College of Business, Washington State University,
Pullman, Washington, USA

This study investigates the association between emotional intelligence and job satisfaction as well as between emotional intelligence
and job tenure (company and hotel industry). Data were collected
from supervisory and managerial employees of one hotel company
located in the Midwest of the United States. Results show that several
emotional intelligence components (Intrapersonal, General Mood,
and Stress Management) are predictors of some job satisfaction
categories (Nature of Work, Communication, Contingent Rewards,
and Coworkers), and that the Interpersonal component of emotional intelligence is a predictor of longevity in the hotel industry
but not longevity with the company. Based on study results, implications are provided for practitioners.
KEYWORDS

Emotional intelligence, job satisfaction, job tenure

INTRODUCTION
The recent literature on emotional intelligence, albeit largely controversial,
has been flourishing (e.g., Davies, Stankov, & Roberts, 1998). The rise in interest about emotional intelligence is attributed to authors such as Goleman
(1995) and coverage in the popular media, including Time magazine (Gibbs,
Epperson, Mondi, Graff, & Towle, 1995). However, the concept is not
new; it is considered to be derived from the concept of Social Intelligence
(Thorndike, 1920), defined as [the] ability to understand and manage people (Thorndike & Stein, 1937, p. 275).

Address correspondence to Kara Wolfe, Bradley University, Hospitality Leadership, 1501

West Bradley Avenue, Peoria, IL 61625. E-mail: klwolfe2@bradley.edu
175

176

K. Wolfe and H. J. Kim

The concept of emotional intelligence has been debated and scrutinized

(Cartwright & Pappas, 2008). The validity of the concept has been diminished because of varying reactions or perceptions to situations that evoke an
emotional response. Additionally, researchers disagree on how to measure
the concept (e.g., Bar-On, 1997; Mayer, Salovey, & Caruso, 2002; Wong &
Law, 2002), unlike the IQ test in which there was consensus on the correct
answers. It is easier for researchers to agree on formulas, calculations, and
verbal fluency than on an appropriate response to emotions (e.g., anger or
frustration), which is more like a Rorschachs test that allows latitude for
subjective observation.
Unlike mental ability, which has been researched for centuries, the term
emotional intelligence was coined in 1990 (Salovey & Mayer, 1990). Thus,
it is no surprise that the relatively new concept of emotional intelligence is
heavily disputed (VanRooy & Viswesvaran, 2004). The most divisive issue is
over the ability-focused (e.g., MSCEIT; Mayer et al., 2002) versus the traitbased construct (e.g., EQ-i; Bar-On, 1997).
While the psychology literature remains ambivalent about the concept of
emotional intelligence, the management literature has accepted it (Cartwright
& Pappas, 2008). Utilizing a variety of emotional intelligence scales, management studies have linked emotional intelligence to task performance,
organizational achievement, organizational commitment, and work-related
stress (Dulewicz & Higgs, 1998; Dulewicz, Higgs, & Slaski, 2003; Higgs, 2004;
Law, Wong, & Song, 2004; Nikolaou & Tsaousis, 2002). Hospitality literature
has also shown an interest in the relationship between emotional intelligence and work outcomes. For example, positive relationships were found
between emotional intelligence scores and contextual performance among
National Automatic Merchandising Association members (Cha, Cichy, & Kim,
2009); restaurant general managers emotional intelligence was identified as
a critical determinant of a units profit performance, team satisfaction, and
team turnover (Langhorn, 2004).
Among work-related outcomes, research on the relationship between
emotional intelligence and job satisfaction has been limited. For example,
researchers have found a link between emotional intelligence and job satisfaction among food service workers (Sy, Tram, & OHara, 2006) and government Chief Financial Officers (CFOs; Carmelli, 2003). However, these studies
used a single-faceted job satisfaction measures with few items (e.g., I like
my job/company) mostly concerning overall satisfaction, whereas job satisfaction can be complex and multifaceted (Lee & Way, 2010; Spector, 1985).
There is also a dearth of articles on the effect of emotional intelligence on
job satisfaction of managers; most studies have focused on satisfaction of
subordinates.
To fill this gap in the research, this study investigates the association
between managers emotional intelligence scores and a multi-faceted job
satisfaction scale. In addition, this study examines if emotional intelligence

Emotional Intelligence

177

scores affect job tenure, which is a crucial factor in the success of a hospitality
business (Simons & Hinkin, 2001). Job tenure is divided into two categories
(i.e., industry tenure and company tenure) to provide more insight into its relationship to emotional intelligence. Specifically, the objectives of this study
are: (1) to assess the effect of managerial emotional intelligence, measured
by the trait-based instrument (i.e., EQ-i; Bar-On, 1997), on multi-dimensional
job satisfaction in the hotel context; (2) to test the effect of managerial emotional intelligence on company tenure; and (3) to test the effect of managerial
emotional intelligence on the hospitality industry tenure. The literature section explains the proposed relationships among emotional intelligence, job
satisfaction, and job tenure.

LITERATURE REVIEW
Emotional Intelligence
Salovey and Mayer (1990) defined emotional intelligence as the ability to
monitor ones own and others feelings and emotions, to discriminate among
them and to use this information to guide ones thinking and action (p. 189).
Many emotional intelligence measures (e.g., Bar-On, 1997; Schutte et al.,
1998; Wong & Law, 2002), were derived from Salovey and Mayers (1990)
definition.
One of the first emotional intelligence measures was the Bar-On Emotional Quotient Inventory (EQ-i; Bar-On, 1997). The EQ-i consists of 133
items; the results are computed to include a total EQ-i score as well as
scores of 15 components on five composite scales: Intrapersonal EQ (emotional self-awareness, assertiveness, self-regard, self-actualization, and independence), Interpersonal EQ (empathy, interpersonal relationship, and social
responsibility), Stress Management EQ (stress tolerance and impulse control),
Adaptability EQ (reality testing, flexibility and problem solving) and General
Mood EQ (optimism and happiness). Other researchers have confirmed the
validity and reliability of the Bar-On EQ-i (e.g., Dawda & Hart, 2000). Some
researchers have found that the measure correlates with the ability-based
emotional intelligence test (i.e., MSCEIT). However, other researchers believe
that the Bar-On EQ-i is not a measure of cognitive ability, but a measure of
personality traits (OConnor & Little, 2003).
One of the other early emotional intelligence measures was the Multifactor Emotional Intelligence Scale (MEIS; Mayer, Caruso, & Salovey, 2000).
The assessment had four branches, including Emotional Identification (identifying emotions in faces, music, designs, and stories), Assimilating Emotions
(identifying situations that evoke certain feelings and rating his/her feelings toward a person in a fictional story), Understanding Emotions (defining,
matching, and word analogies), and Managing Emotions (choosing appropriate responses to vignettes). Participants responses were scored against those

178

K. Wolfe and H. J. Kim

of experts (two authors of the scale, both of whom are American males) and
consensus (other participants). The scale was later revised to Mayer-SaloveyCaruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT), which used more experts for
the scoring criteria and reduced the number of items. In its current form, the
MSCEIT V2 includes a total of 141 items and eight subscales (two for each
of the four branches). Several studies have been conducted to evaluate the
validity of the instrument (Fan, Jackson, Yang, Tang, & Zhang, 2010; Palmer,
Gignac, Manocha, & Stough, 2005; Rossen, Kranzler, & Algina, 2008). Results
have conflicted with the authors conclusions of the four-factor model.
There are other emotional intelligence measures, such as Schutte et al.s
(1998) one-factor model with 33 items, which was primarily tested on college students. A more commonly used instrument was developed by Wong
and Law (2002). This Wong-Law Emotional Intelligence Scale (WLEIS) measurement has a four-factor model with 16 items. The authors began with a
36-item questionnaire that was tested on college students. Exploratory factor
analysis was used to reduce the scale to its current 16 items, which were
validated with employees and managers. Wong and Law (2002), who are
management scholars, developed the scale to investigate the role of emotions in the workplace. The WLEIS has not been validated in the psychology
literature.
An emotional intelligence measure was also developed by hospitality
researchers. Cichy, Cha, and Kim (2007) developed a 20-item scale that is a
three-factor model. This scale was developed in response to criticism of other
measures being too lengthy. The researchers developed and tested the scale
on club managers. Thus, there is a variety of emotional intelligence scales
from which to choose and researchers should consider the most appropriate
one for their purpose.
Emotional intelligence was found to be related to consultants job performance (measured by revenue; Downey, Lee, & Stough, 2011). Law et al.
(2004) suggested that emotional intelligence is a predictor of task performance and two dimensions of contextual performance (i.e., job dedication
and interpersonal facilitation) in the workplace. Hospitality researchers have
reported similar findings regarding the positive influence of emotional intelligence on job performance. For example, Jung and Yoon (2012) have
found that emotional intelligence affects organizational citizenship behaviors among hotel food and beverage employees; Kim and Agrusa (2011)
discovered that emotional intelligence can influence hospitality employees
coping styles. Previous research also suggested that emotional intelligence
was related to job satisfaction among nurses (Gulieryuz, Guney, Aydin, &
Asan, 2008).

Job Satisfaction
There has been a renewed interest in job satisfaction in organizational research (Whitman, VanRooy, & Viswesvaran, 2010). Job satisfaction is defined

Emotional Intelligence

179

as an emotional-affective response to ones job or job experience (Locke,

1976). Job satisfaction of hotel employees has been correlated with their organizational performance (Hwang & Chi, 2005) as well as turnover intention
(Jang & George, 2012).
The Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ; Weiss, Davis, England,
& Lofquist, 1967) and Job Description Index (JDI; Smith, Kendall, & Hulin,
1969) are the two widely known job-satisfaction measures. The MSQ has 100
items, in the two-factor model (Weiss et al., 1967). The JDI is a multi-faceted
measurement tool with five facets (work, pay promotion, supervision, and
coworkers), comprised of 72 questions (Bowling Green, n.d.) and it is commonly used in research. These scales are based on industrial organizations
and therefore may not accurately reflect human service jobs (Spector, 1985).
Spector (1985) developed a similar scale, the Job Satisfaction Survey (JSS),
including the same five facets and additional ones (benefits, contingent rewards, operating procedures, and communication), comprising a total of 36
items. The JSS was developed for human service organizations, which show
lower satisfaction than norms on the JDI and other measures (Spector, 1985,
2012).
Hospitality organizations suffer from high employee turnover. Pavesic
and Brymer (1990) revealed some causes of hospitality managers reason for
leaving; while pay and stress were linked to turnover, benefits were associated with a positive outcome (retention), and respondents recommended
that their employers show more appreciation for their employees. More recently, it was suggested that, to improve employee performance, managers
should focus on rewards, support, and making expectations known (Way,
Sturman, & Raab, 2010). The authors chose the JSS for this study because
it includes comprehensive categories that measure job satisfaction of service employees such as hospitality workers. It also has fewer items than the
MSQ or JDI, making it more feasible for the company to allow employees to
participate during work hours.

Relationships among Emotional Intelligence, Job Satisfaction,

and Job Tenure
Literature has shown the positive effect of emotional intelligence on job satisfaction. Carmellis (2003) survey of 98 senior government financial officers
used a short form of the Schutte Self Report emotional intelligence inventory (Schutte et al., 1998) and a six-item, single-faceted, job satisfaction scale
developed by Tsui, Eagen, and OReilly (1992). Emotional intelligence was
found to be positively related to job satisfaction in Carmellis (2003) study.
Wong and Law (2002) used their emotional intelligence scale, along with
the four-item job satisfaction scale from the Job Diagnostic Survey (Hackman
& Oldham, 1976), which focuses on the work itself. The authors hypothesized that the emotional intelligence and job satisfaction relationship would

180

K. Wolfe and H. J. Kim

be stronger for jobs requiring a high level of emotional labor (often referred
to as surface acting and deep acting). Results revealed no interaction effect of
emotional intelligence and emotional labor on satisfaction, suggesting emotional intelligence as a predictor of employees job satisfaction, regardless of
the nature of work.
Sy et al. (2006) looked at 187 food service workers, and found that their
emotional intelligence (measured with WLEIS) was positively associated with
a three-item single-faceted, job satisfaction scale (Michigan Organizational
Assessment Questionnaire; Seashore, Lawler, Mirivis, & Cammann, 1982)
even after controlling for the Big Five personality factors. Lastly, Choi, Oh,
Guay, and Lee (2011) found that emotional intelligence (also measured with
WLEIS) was related to positive work attitudes, including job satisfaction and
organizational commitment. The studies cited used a total emotional intelligence score, which combines several emotional intelligence sub-dimensions,
and a single-faceted satisfaction measure, mainly addressing overall job satisfaction or nature of work itself.
It has been suggested that job satisfaction is positively associated with
job tenure. Sarker, Crossman, and Chinmeteepituck (2003) found that, among
hotel employees in Thailand, job satisfaction is correlated with length of
service. Among United States government workers, job longevity affected the
importance of certain work environment/features (Katz, 1978). Katz showed
that new employees are more satisfied when they perceive their job as
necessary to the overall operation, whereas long-time employees are more
satisfied when they can demonstrate their expertise. Others have found that,
among manufacturing employees, job satisfaction is negatively correlated
with time on the job (Gibson & Klein, 1970). Despite this range of findings,
the positive link between job satisfaction and job longevity is more prevalent.
If emotional intelligence contributes to various aspects of job performance including job satisfaction, emotional intelligence may likely be associated with other work outcomes such as job tenure. To date, few scholars have explored the possible direct effect of emotional intelligence on
job longevity. The relationship appears reasonable; if employees with high
emotional intelligence are likely to be satisfied with their work, their satisfaction in turn can lead to job longevity. This study, however, focuses only
on the direct effect of emotional intelligence on job longevity rather than
the mediated (indirect) relationship via job satisfaction. If the direct effect is
determined, future researchers can look at mediating or intervening variables
for the direct relationship. Job tenure was divided into two types: years with
the company and years in the hospitality industry. Previous studies typically
use the company tenure as a proxy for job tenure. Given the unique characteristic of hospitality industry jobs requiring a great deal of guest contact, the
effect of emotional intelligence on industry tenure merits investigation. To
sum up, based on the extensive review of literature, the following hypotheses
are put forward:

Emotional Intelligence

181

Hypothesis 1: Emotional intelligence (EQ-i) has a positive relationship with

job satisfaction.
Hypothesis 2: Emotional intelligence (EQ-i) has a positive relationship with
two types of job tenureindustry tenure (Hypothesis 2a) and company
tenure (Hypothesis 2b)

METHODS
Data Collection and Procedure
A hotel company that owns and operates several properties throughout the
Midwestern United States was used for this study. The company operates
full-service, midscale, and limited service properties; the properties range in
size from 70 to 300 rooms. One hundred employees (supervisors and managers) were invited to participate in the study, including general managers
(GMs), assistant GMs, sales directors, rooms division managers, food and
beverage (F&B) managers, and front desk and housekeeping supervisors.
The company provided a list of the employees names and email addresses.
These employees received an email from the researcher explaining the online survey with an ID code for confidentiality purposes. The emotional
intelligence (EQ-i) measure was administered through Multi-Health Systems,
Inc., since the company owns the copyright. Thus, two separate links to
emotional intelligence and job satisfaction assessments were embedded in
the email. A follow-up email was sent to non-respondents two weeks after
the implementation of the survey.

Measures
Emotional intelligence was assessed with the EQ-i (Bar-On, 1997). As previously stated, the EQ-i is a 133-item, self-reported measure which consists
of five factors: intrapersonal, interpersonal, adaptability, stress management,
and general mood. Each statement on the EQ-i questionnaire is rated with
five response choices (1 = not true of me, 2 = seldom true of me, 3 =
sometimes true of me, 4 = often true of me, and 5 = very often true of me).
Job satisfaction was measured with Spectors (1985) JSS. The JSS comprises nine aspects of job satisfaction: promotion, pay, supervision, fringe
benefits, contingent rewards, operating procedure, coworkers, nature of
work, and communication. Each subscale has four items, thereby creating
a 36-item measure. The JSS uses a summated rating scale format with sixresponse choices (1 = disagree very much, 2 = disagree moderately, 3 =
disagree slightly, 4 = agree slightly, 5 = agree moderately, and 6 = agree very
much), making the possible range for each subscale 4 to 24. The assessments

182

K. Wolfe and H. J. Kim

included questions on age, gender, years with the company and years in the
hospitality industry.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Descriptive Analyses
Of the 100 supervisory and managerial employees invited to participate, 83
completed the EQ-i assessment (response rate: 83%) and 76 completed the
JSS assessment (response rate: 76%). Table 1 shows the profile of respondents. The respondents consisted of approximately one-third male employees and two-thirds female employees. The respondents were fairly evenly
distributed among different age categories with a mean of 41 years. Respondents years with the company ranged from a few months to over 30 years.
Seven percent of the managers had been with the company between 16 and
20 years, and about 19% worked for the company for more than 20 years.
The respondents tenure in the hospitality industry was much longer
than their longevity with the company. About a quarter (24%) of the respondents had worked in the hospitality industry for 16 to 20 years; another

TABLE 1 Profile of respondents

Gender
Male
Female
Age
1829
3039
4049
5059
60 or older
Years with the company
Less than 1 year
12 years
35 years
610 years
1115 years
1620 years
Over 20 years
Years in the hospitality industry
Less than 1 year
12 years
35 years
610 years
1115 years
1620 years
Over 20 years

30
46

36.1
55.4

19
20
15
13
7

25.7
27.0
20.3
17.6
9.5

6
6
18
17
8
5
14

8.1
8.1
24.3
23.0
10.8
6.8
18.9

1
4
10
11
12
18
20

1.3
5.3
13.2
14.5
15.8
23.7
26.3

Emotional Intelligence

183

TABLE 2 Means and standard deviations of emotional intelligence and job satisfaction
Variables
EQ-i category
Intrapersonal
Interpersonal
Stress management
Adaptability
General mood
Total EQ-i
JSS category
Salary
Promotion
Supervision
Benefits
Contingent rewards
Conditions
Coworkers
Nature of work
Communication
Total JSS

Mean

SD

100.81
100.90
102.77
101.95
99.16
101.11

12.92
13.38
11.37
13.43
12.07
12.93

14.7
14.4
20.5
16.4
16.0
18.2
18.3
21.0
17.9
157.6

4.56
4.42
3.60
4.39
4.43
3.76
3.53
2.92
3.93
22.44

Note: Total EQ-i is the mean value of five factors. Total JSS score is the sum of nine subscales. Mean
values of JSS subscales are the sum of all items in each dimension. SD = standard deviation.

quarter (26%) worked for the industry for more than 20 years. In sum, the
majority of managers (50%) showed an extensive work background in hospitality operations.
Table 2 presents the descriptive information of EQ-i and JSS. The
average total EQ-i score (101.11) was within the normal range (Bar-On,
1997). The Bar-On EQ-i is similar to an IQ test in that 100 is average and
85115 is a normal range (as defined by Bar-On, 1997). The reliability
was relatively good; the coefficients alphas ranged from 0.710.83, except
for stress management ( = 0.53). The total JSS score (157.6) fell into the
satisfaction range of 144216 and was higher than the norm for Americans
(Spector, 2012). The reliability of the sub-categories ranged from 0.590.78
except for Conditions ( = .39), which was not used for further analysis.

Hypotheses Testing
EQ-I

AND JOB

SATISFACTION

The first hypothesis (Hypothesis 1) predicted that emotional intelligence (EQi) would have a positive relationship with job satisfaction. After matching the
two assessments (EQ-i and JSS) via ID codes, Pearson correlation analysis
was conducted. A significant correlation was found between the overall EQi and JSS constructs (r = 0.571, p = 0.000). Therefore, Hypothesis 1 was
supported. Further, regression models were used to see which EQ-i factors

184

K. Wolfe and H. J. Kim

TABLE 3 EQ-i dimensions as predictors of job satisfaction categories

t-value

Adjusted R2

Intrapersonal
General mood
Interpersonal
Stress management
Adaptability
Intrapersonal
Interpersonal
Stress management
Adaptability
General mood

0.410
0.341
0.054
0.056
0.130
0.515
0.022
0.122
0.119
0.178

3.115
2.588
0.503
0.503
1.033
4.840
0.181
1.019
0.829
1.138

0.475

30.814

0.254

30.814

General mood
Intrapersonal
Interpersonal
Stress management
Adaptability
Stress management
Intrapersonal
Interpersonal
Adaptability
General mood

0.384
0.043
0.003
0.029
0.078
0.495
0.072
0.160
0.051
0.173

3.354
0.254
0.020
.0206
0.518
4.597
0.587
0.175
0.362
1.309

0.134

11.247

0.234

21.135

Dependent variable

Independent variables

Nature of work

Communication

Contingent rewards

Coworkers

Note: = standardized beta.

.01.

.001.

were influential on the eight JSS subfacets (Table 3). Each JSS subscale
was regressed on the five EQ-i dimensions. To minimize the type I error,
Bonferronis correction technique was used to calculate the cutoff value of
the significance level. Since eight regression models were constructed, the
significance level of p = 0.006 (0.05 8 = 0.00625) was used for the cutoff,
F value of the model (Abdi, 2007). The models were also checked for multicollinearity, and results showed that they were well below the cutoff levels.
Of the eight facets of job satisfaction, four facets (Nature of Work, Communication, Contingent Rewards, and Coworkers) were influenced by EQ-i
factors (Table 3). Total adjusted R 2 values of the four regression models
ranged from 0.134 (13.4%) to 0.475 (47.5%). For Nature of Work, two EQ-i
factors (Intrapersonal and General Mood) were significant predictors. This
might be different than expected; Interpersonal factors (e.g., Empathy) would
seem to be more likely related to satisfaction with Nature of Work. However, Intrapersonal factors (i.e., self-regard, emotional self-awareness, independence, and self-actualization) were found to be statistically significant,
rather than Interpersonal factors. Managers often work independently and
are more involved in decision-making in order to achieve company goals.
Intrapersonal skills allow individual employees to work independently and
confidently, and to feel good about what they are doing. Hospitality literature
has shown employees in managerial positions have higher self-confidence

Emotional Intelligence

185

than those in non-managerial positions (Kim, Shin, & Umbreit, 2007). Therefore, the results of this study appear to be a reflection of the managerial
sample. In addition, the association between General Mood and Nature of
Work seems to indicate that employees who have a happy and optimistic
outlook on life are more likely to enjoy working in the hospitality industry.
The Intrapersonal factor was also a predictor of employees satisfaction
with communication at work. This may be because these employees have
the confidence to ask the right questions and work independently; thus,
they are satisfied with the amount of communication and information they
receive at work. Satisfaction with the Contingent Rewards category was affected by General Mood. Contingent Rewards have to do with appreciation
and recognition. It seems reasonable that those with a more positive outlook
and general contentment with life are more satisfied with positive reinforcement. Stress Management was related to employees satisfaction with their
coworkers. Again, this is appropriate, in that people who have the ability to
withstand stress would be more tolerant and appreciative of their coworkers. Similar to the findings of this study, researchers have reported that
emotional intelligence (measured with WLEIS) is related to Nature of Work
and Coworkers (Al Hajj & Dagher, 2010), even though all of their regression
models show a much lower portion of the variance explained (7.214.5%).
On the other hand, Lee and Ok (2012) did not find a direct relationship
between emotional intelligence (measured with WLEIS) and a three-item job
satisfaction measure, but they did report an indirect effect of emotional intelligence on job satisfaction via personal accomplishment, which has some
overlap with Nature of Work.
EQ-I

AND JOB

TENURE

The second hypothesis (Hypothesis 2) predicted that emotional intelligence

(EQ-i) would have a positive relationship with two types of job tenure- industry tenure (Hypothesis 2a) and company tenure (Hypothesis 2b). There was
a significant positive correlation between the total EQ-i score and years in the
hospitality industry (r = 0.361, p = 0.003). It indicates that as respondents
EQ-i scores increased, so did their years of work in the industry. Therefore,
Hypothesis 2a concerning the positive relationship between emotional intelligence and industry tenure was supported. Regression analysis was then
applied to see which EQ-i factors affected the managerial and supervisory
employees hospitality industry longevity (Table 4). The model for industry
tenure was significant with a total adjusted R 2 of 0.142 (14.2%). Of the five
EQ-i factors, the Interpersonal factor was the only significant predictor of
longevity in the hotel industry. This was expected in that people in supervisory positions, who have interpersonal skills such as empathy, can build
trust and relate well with others, thus fare better in a people industry and
stay longer.

186

K. Wolfe and H. J. Kim

TABLE 4 EQ-i and JSS dimensions as predictors of two types of job tenure
Dependent variable

t-value

Adjusted R2

0.394
0.096
0.002
0.210
0.007
0.336
0.329
0.236
0.005
0.134
0.141
0.169
0.071

3.453
0.739
0.016
1.628
0.049
2.966
2.803
2.029
0.043
0.947
1.110
1.341
0.573

0.142

11.925

0.181

5.796

Independent variables

Years in hospitality industry Interpersonal

Intrapersonal
Stress management
Adaptability
General mood
Years with hotel company Benefits
Pay
Nature of work
Supervision
Contingent rewards
Coworkers
Communication
Promotion
Note: = standardized beta. p .05.

.01.

.001.

As for the time with the hotel company, the correlation between EQ-i
and company tenure was not significant, indicating EQ-i is not related to
company longevity. This result leads to the rejection of Hypothesis 2b postulating a positive link between emotional intelligence and company tenure.
Additional analyses were conducted to understand predictors of longevity
with the company. As the literature indicated that job satisfaction leads to
job tenure, the time with the hotel company was regressed on JSS factors
(Table 4). Three aspects of JSS were found to be significant: Benefits, Pay,
and Nature of Work. Benefits seemed to be the most important aspect in
managers tenure with the company with the largest beta coefficient in regression. The significant negative association between company longevity
and pay requires additional thought. It could show that managers become
dissatisfied with their salary as time passes, but their benefits tend to keep
them with the company. The participating company provides good benefits
such as quarterly performance bonuses, excellent health insurance coverage,
and retirement plans. The findings of this study seem to support the common
problem raised by hospitality workers (i.e., low pay). For example, the study
by Pavesic and Brymer (1990) reported that hospitality managers liked their
benefits but were often dissatisfied with their salary.

CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS

This study was conducted to determine if there is a link between emotional
intelligence (EQ-i) and job satisfaction and job tenure of hotel managers.
The findings of this study show that EQ-i is positively associated with job
satisfaction and industry tenure, but not with company tenure. This study
indicates that the interpersonal dimension of EQ-i is the fundamental driver

Emotional Intelligence

187

for long-term survival in the hospitality industry, but other EQ-i factors such
as intrapersonal skills, stress management, and a positive outlook also appear
crucial for hotel managers to be successful at work and satisfied with their
job. Overall, the results of this study seem to support the idea of screening
job applicants. Professionals in the hospitality industry should focus on hiring
people with higher levels of emotional intelligence, which can be assessed
by one of the well-established emotional intelligence measures.
Emotional intelligence, however, only predicts longevity in the hospitality industry, not longevity with a company. In other words, although people
with high emotional intelligence, and especially those with great interpersonal skills, stay longer in the hospitality industry, they may not remain with
the same employer for their entire working life. The additional regression
results (i.e., positive effects of benefits and nature of work on company
tenure) suggest that managers are less likely to move into other industries,
demanding a different nature of work, but they may be willing to move to
other hotel (or hospitality) companies if they see opportunities for better
benefits (or possibly pay). These findings can be used by hotel owners who
wish to help their companies retain capable managers. First, hotel owners or
executives could screen current and future managers with the EQ-i assessment, to understand their potential for job satisfaction and to see how likely
they are to stay in the hospitality industry. Once the managers are hired, the
hotel owners could provide workshops and seminars for the supervisors to
enhance their managerial skills. It may help them have a greater appreciation
for the nature of their jobs and hopefully increase their likelihood to stay
with the company. At the same time, as shown in the results, the owners
should ensure that they offer generous benefits and competitive wages to
keep them.
This study was completed in efforts to bridge the gap between industry
and academia. As noted by King, Funk, and Wilkins (2011), human resource
issues are prevalent among concerns of hospitality managers, including the
concept of succession planning. By identifying the strengths of current managers, the company owners and executive team can continue to cultivate
employees to fill management vacancies as they occur. The EQ-i has 133
questions and can take more than 20 minutes to complete. Despite the
lengthy time required, the participation of the company in the study shows
its interest in emotional intelligence and the high response rate indicates
that employees are also interested in emotional intelligence. As the company leaders who participated in this study work on a succession plan, they
should be mindful of the significant EQ-i qualities that keep employees in the
industry and make them successful. Emotional intelligence is believed to develop with age and experience (Mayer, Caruso, & Salovey, 2000). Thus, hotel
company executives should periodically test the level of emotional intelligence of their employees and discuss strengths and areas for improvement
to help their employees career progression.

188

K. Wolfe and H. J. Kim

LIMITATIONS
The results of this study must be interpreted with caution, as the data were
collected from the employees of a single hotel company. There is a limitation,
since the population represents one companys culture. More studies with
other companies should be conducted to see if the predictors of satisfaction
and tenure are similar. Because of the small sample, it should be also noted
that only large effects were detected significant. In the future, larger-scale
studies (with more participants) are recommended to validate the findings
of this study and also possibly to detect meaningful, yet, smaller effects.
However, although the data were taken from only one company with a
small number of respondents, the fact that the company portfolio includes
full-service to limited service properties makes the results somewhat solid
and generalizable.

REFERENCES
Abdi, H. (2007). Bonferroni and S idak corrections for multiple comparisons. In N.J.
Salkind (Ed.), Encyclopedia of measurement and statistics. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage. Retrieved from http://www.utdallas.edu/herve/Abdi-Bonferroni2007pretty.pdf.
Al Hajj, R., & Dagher, G. (2010). An empirical investigation of the relation between
emotional intelligence and job satisfaction in the Lebanese service industry. The
Business Review, Cambridge, 16(2), 7177.
Bar-On, R. (1997). The BarOn Emotional Quotient Inventory (EQ-i): Technical manual. Toronto, Canada: Multi-Health Systems.
Bowling Green. (n.d.). Job descriptive index. Retrieved from http://www.bgsu.edu/
departments/psych/io/jdi/index.html
Carmelli, A. (2003). The relationship between emotional intelligence and work attitudes, behavior and outcomes: An examination of senior managers. Journal of
Managerial Psychology, 18(8), 788813.
Cartwright, S., & Pappas, C. (2008). Emotional intelligence, its measurement and
implications for the workplace. International Journal of Management Reviews,
10(2), 149171.
Cichy, R., Cha, J., & Kim, S. H. (2007). Private club leaders emotional intelligence:
Development and validation of a new measure of emotional intelligence. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 31(1), 3955.
Cha, J., Cichy, R., & Kim, S. H. (2009). The relationship between emotional intelligence and contextual performance: Application to automated and vending
service industry executives. Journal of Human Resources in Hospitality and
Tourism, 8(2), 170183.
Choi, D., Oh, I., Guay, R., & Lee, E. (2011). Why do emotionally intelligent people have positive work attitudes? The mediating role of situational judgment
effectiveness. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 19(4), 352
362.

Emotional Intelligence

189

Davies, M., Stankov, L., & Roberts, R. D. (1998). Emotional intelligence: In search
of an elusive construct. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 75(4),
9891015.
Dawda, D. & Hart, S. (2000). Assessing emotional intelligence: Reliability and validity of the Bar-On Emotional Quotient Inventory (EQ-i) in university students.
Personality and Individual Differences, 28, 797812.
Downey, L., Lee, B., & Stough, C. (2011). Recruitment consultant revenue: Relationships with IQ, personality, and emotional intelligence. International Journal of
Selection and Assessment, 19(3), 281286.
Dulewicz, V., & Higgs, M. (1998). Emotional intelligence: Can it be measured reliably
and validly using competency data? Competency, 6(1), 115.
Dulewicz, V., Higgs, M., & Slaski, M. (2003). Measuring emotional intelligence: Content, construct, and criterion-related validity. Journal of Managerial Psychology,
18(5), 405420.
Fan, H., Jackson, T., Yang, X., Tang, W., & Zhang, J. (2010). The factor structure
of the Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligences Test V 2.0 (MSCEIT): A
meta-analytic structural equation modeling approach. Personality and Individual Differences, 48, 781785.
Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional intelligence. New York, NY: Bantam Books.
Gibbs, N., Epperson, S., Mondi, L., Graff, J., & Towle, L. (1995, October 2). Emotional
intelligence: The EQ factor. TIME, 6068. Retrieved from http://www.time.com/
time/magazine/article/0,9171,983503,00.html
Gibson, J., & Klein, S. (1970). Employee attitudes as a function of age and length
of service: A reconceptualization. Academy of Management Journal, 13(4),
411425.
Guleryuz, G., Guney, S., Aydn, E., & Asan, o . (2008). The mediating effect of job
satisfaction between emotional intelligence and organizational commitment of
nurses: A questionnaire survey. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 45,
16251635.
Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1976). Development of the job diagnostic survey.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 60(2), 159170.
Higgs, M. (2004). A study of the relationship between emotional intelligence and performance in UK call centres. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 19(4), 442454.
Hwang, I., & Chi, D. (2005). Relationships among internal marketing, employee job
satisfaction and international hotel performance: An empirical study. International Journal of Management, 22(2), 285293.
Jang, J., & George, R. T. (2012). Understanding the influence of polychronicity on job
satisfaction and turnover intention: A study of non-supervisory hotel employees.
International Journal of Hospitality Management, 31, 585595.
Jung, H., & Yoon, H. (2012). The effects of emotional intelligence on counterproductive work behaviors and organizational citizen behaviors among food
and beverage employees in a deluxe hotel. International Journal of Hospitality
Management, 31, 369378.
Katz, R. (1978). Job longevity as a situational factor in job satisfaction. Administrative
Science Quarterly, 23, 204222.
Kim, H., & Agrusa, J. (2011). Hospitality service employees coping style:
The role of emotional intelligence, two basic personality traits, and

190

K. Wolfe and H. J. Kim

socio-demographic factors. International Journal of Hospitality Management,

30, 588598.
Kim, H., Shin, K., & Umbreit, T. (2007). Hotel job burnout: The role of personality characteristics. International Journal of Hospitality Management 26, 421
434.
King, C., Funk, D., & Wilkins, H. (2011). Bridging the gap: An examination of the
relative alignment of hospitality research and industry priorities. International
Journal of Hospitality Management, 30, 157166.
Langhorn, S. (2004). How emotional intelligence can improve management performance. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 16(4),
220230.
Law, K. S., Wong, C., & Song, L. J. (2004). The construct and criterion validity of
emotional intelligence and its potential utility for management studies. Journal
of Applied Psychology, 89(3), 483496.
Lee, C., & Way, K. (2010). Individual employment characteristics of hotel employees
that play a role in employee satisfaction and work retention. International
Journal of Hospitality Management, 29, 344353.
Lee, J., & Ok, C. (2012). Reducing burnout and enhancing job satisfaction: Critical role
of hotel employees emotional intelligence and emotional labor. International
Journal of Hospitality Management, 31(4), 11011112.
Locke, E. A. (1976). The nature and causes of job satisfaction. In M. D. Dunnette
(Ed.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 12971349).
Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.
Mayer, J. D., Caruso, D., & Salovey, P. (2000). Emotional intelligence meets traditional
standards for an intelligence. Intelligence 27(4), 267298.
Mayer, J., Salovey, P., & Caruso, D. (2002). Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT): users manual. Toronto, Canada: Multi-Health Systems.
Nikolaou, I., & Tsaousis, I. (2002). Emotional intelligence in the workplace: Exploring its effect on occupational stress and organizational commitment. The
International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 10(4), 327342.
OConnor, R., & Little, I. (2003). Revisiting the predictive validity of emotional intelligence: Self-report versus ability based measures. Personality and Individual
Differences, 35, 18931902.
Palmer, B., Gignac, G., Manocha, R., & Stogh, C. (2005). A psychometric evaluation of
the Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test Version 2.0. Intelligence,
33, 285305.
Pavesic, D. V., & Brymer, R. A. (1990). Job satisfaction: Whats happening to the
young managers? Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 30(4),
9096.
Rossen, E., Kranzler, J., & Algina, J. (2008). Confirmatory factor analysis of the
Mayer-Salovey-Caurso Emotional Intelligence Test V 2.0 (MSCEIT). Personality
and Individual Differences, 44, 12581269.
Salovey, P., & Mayer, J. D. (1990). Emotional intelligence. Imagination, Cognition,
and Personality 9, 185211.
Sarker, S. J., Crossman, A., & Chinmeteepituck, P. (2003). The relationship of age
and length of service with job satisfaction: An examination of hotel employees
in Thailand. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 17(7/8), 745758.

Emotional Intelligence

191

Schutte, N., Malouff, J., Hall, L., Haggerty, D., Cooper, J., Golden, C., & Dornheim,
L. (1998). Development and validation of a measure of emotional intelligence.
Personality and Individual Differences, 25, 167177.
Seashore, S., Lawler, E., Mirivis, P., & Cammann, C. (1982). Observing and measuring
organizational change: A guide to field practice. New York, NY: Wiley.
Simons, T., & Hinkin, T. (2001). Employee turnover on hotel profits: A test across
multiple hotels. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 42,
6569.
Smith, P. C., Kendall, L. M., & Hulin, C. L. (1969). Measurement of satisfaction in
work and retirement. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.
Spector, P. E. (1985). Measurement of human service staff satisfaction: Development
of the job satisfaction survey. American Journal of Community Psychology,
13(6), 693713.
Spector, P. (2012). Job satisfaction survey, JSS Page. Retrieved from http://shell.cas.
usf.edu/pspector/scales/jsspag.html
Sy, T., Tram, S., & OHara, L. (2006). Relation of employee and manager emotional
intelligence to job satisfaction and performance. Journal of Vocational Behavior,
68, 461473.
Thorndike, E. L. (1920). Intelligence and its uses. Harpers, 140, 227235.
Thorndike, R. L. & Stein, S. (1937). An evaluation of the attempts to measure social
intelligence. The Psychological Bulletin, 34(5), 275285.
Tsui, A., Eagen, T., & OReilly, C. (1992). Being different: Relational demography
and organizational attachment. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37, 549579.
VanRooy, D., & Viswesvaran, C. (2004). Emotional intelligence: A meta-analytic
investigation of predictive validity and nomological net. Journal of Vocational
Behavior, 65, 7195.
Way, S., Sturman, M., & Raab, C. (2010). What matters more? Contrasting the effect
of job satisfaction and service climate on hotel food and beverage managers
job performance. Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, 51(3), 379397.
Weiss, D. J., Davis, R. V., England, G. W., & Lofquist, L. H. (1967). Manual for
the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota.
Whitman, D., VanRooy, D. & Viswesvran, C. (2010). Satisfaction, citizenship behaviors, and performance in work units: A meta-analysis of collective construct
relations. Personnel Psychology, 63(1), 4181.
Wong, C., & Law, K. (2002). The effect of leader and follower emotional intelligence
on performance and attitude: An exploratory study. Leadership Quarterly, 3,
243274.

Copyright of Journal of Human Resources in Hospitality & Tourism is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and
its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's
express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.