Chapter 3

Research Design
3.1 Introduction
In this study the research methodology was adopted to examine the factors of EI with
reference to IT employees and to empirically evaluate the strength of each factor. The
research design that was adopted was descriptive in nature as quantitative analysis has been
adopted for the study. The opinions and behaviours of the respondents were measured using
quantitative research. To simplify the data generated to comprehend the significance between
independent and dependent variable a statistical, mathematical or computational techniques
were used.
SPSS version 20 and AMOS were used for carrying out the data analysis (Arbuckle, 2017).
The responses were collected from the faculty members employed in the higher education
sector through the self-reported method. “Well-Structured, validated and reliable
questionnaire was used to carry out the survey.” Descriptive statistics was done for
computing the Means and Standard Deviation (SD), Reliability, Normality, Exploratory
Analysis Factor, ANOVA, linear regression, test for significance was taken to study the
constructs. Path analysis was done using Structural Equation Model (SEM).

3.2 Research Design

It was planned in two phases.
Phase I: Pilot Study: The data was collected over 8 months and 100 IT employees
participated and completed the survey.
Phase II: Main Study: The data was collected over 18 months and 423 IT employees
participated and completed the survey.

3.3 Variables under Investigation

 Predictor Variables-
Self-Awareness, Self-Management, Social Awareness and Relationship
Management
 Criterion Variable-
Emotional Intelligence (EI)
 Demographic/ Background Variables- Age, Experience, Gender, Marital Status

3.4 Hypotheses of the study

Hypothesis 1: There is no indication of considerable relationship amid Self-Awareness, Self-
Management, Social Awareness, Relationship Management and EI of IT employees
Hypothesis 2: There is no significant prediction of Self-Awareness by Emotional Self-
Awareness, Accurate self-Assessment & Self-Confidence.
Hypothesis 3: There is no significant prediction of Self-Management by Emotional Self-
Control, Transparency, Adaptability, Achievement, Initiative & Optimism.
Hypothesis 4: There is no significant prediction of Social Awareness by Empathy,
Organizational Awareness & Service Orientation.
Hypothesis 5: There is no significant prediction of Relationship Management by Developing
others, Inspirational Leadership, Change Catalyst, Influence, Conflict Management &
Teamwork & Collaboration.
Hypothesis 6: There is no indication of considerable prediction of EI by Self-Awareness,
Self-Management, Social Awareness and Relationship Management.
Hypothesis 7: There is no difference in EI with reference to gender (Male and Female)
Hypothesis 8: There is no difference in EI with reference to marital status (Single and
Married)
Hypothesis 9: There is no difference in EI with reference to Age (<=30, 31-40, >=41)
Hypothesis 10: There is no difference in EI with reference to the employee job roles.
Hypothesis 11: There is no difference in EI with reference to the employee experience.

3.5 Sampling Design

Sample frame
IT Employees who work for any of the companies selected under the study
Sampling Technique
Stratified sampling technique was used to identify and select the respondents. Around 20
Indian IT companies from across Bangalore city were identified from the 4 zones of
Bangalore namely Bangalore North, Bangalore South, Bangalore East and Bangalore west.
From each of the 20 IT firms, around 20 respondents were selected for the study. More
than 800 questionnaires were administered, out of which the responses from 423 IT
employees were obtained, the response rate being 52.8 per cent. The researcher collected
the data by online mode through Google forms as well as by personally visiting most of the
IT firms across Bangalore.
Pilot Study:
The researcher collected data from 100 respondents for the pilot study from employees
working in different IT firms. The data was collected over 8 months.

Main Study: The researcher divided Bangalore into North, South, East and West zone and
identified IT firms in each of these zones in order to collect the data from the IT employees
working there. Around 423 responses were collected from the IT employees working in 20 IT
firms over a period of 18 months.
Sample Size determination
The sample size was determined using Cochran’s formula for sample size determination.”
Cochran’s formula is normally used in situations with large population. The Cochran’s
formula is:
Sample Size = Z2pq/e2
Where e = margin of error
p = population proportion in question
q=1–p
The Z value can be found in the Z table.
In this study:
p = 0.5
The confidence level considered in this study is 95%, hence the margin of error would be
e = 0.05
In the Z table, the value for Z stands at 1.96 at 95% level of confidence.
Therefore,
“Sample size = (1.96)2(0.5)(0.5) / (0.05)2
Sample size = 385 IT employees
To account for individuals that the researcher is unable to reach, often researchers raise the
sample size by 10%. To account for nonresponse, the sample size is often increased by 10%.
Hence the revised sample size = 423 IT employees.

3.6 Data Collection

The instrument was administered to the IT employees across Bangalore only after obtaining
oral consent. Data was collected between January 2021 and October 2022. The pilot study -
test sample was drawn from (January 2021 – August 2021). The questionnaire was
administered to two fifty (250) IT employees and one hundred (100) completed the study at
(40%) response rate. Samples were received and used for treatment and model testing. The
main data was collected between January 2021 and October 2022. The data was collected
over a period of 18 months. The survey was administered to 800 IT employees across
Bangalore 423 responses were collected with a reply rate of 52.8 per cent.

3.7 Data collection measures

The Emotional Competence Inventory (ECI) v2.0 comprising of 72 items measures 18
competencies organized into four clusters: Self-Awareness, Self-Management, Social
Awareness and Relationship Management. Internal consistency reliability (Cronbach’s alpha)
of the instrument has been found to be good. A number of studies are presented in the manual
that highlight the criterion and construct validity of the instrument. Research presented shows
that ECI is related to outcomes such as an individual’s life success (Sevinc, 2001),
department performance (Nel, 2001), perceptions of leadership in a group (Humphrey, Sleeth
& Kellet, 2001), sales performance (Lloyd, 2001), fire fighter performance (Stagg & Gunter,
2002), softball coaches win/loss record (VanSickle, 2004), and parishioner satisfaction
(Brizz, 2004). Byrne (2003) conducted an overall validity study of the ECI using the self-
scored version. He concluded that the instrument shows good construct, discriminant, and
criterion validity. Hence ECI 2.0 self-scored version of the tool is used in the present study.
The ECI 2.0 tool used for this study is taken from the Hay Group (2005) Emotional
Competence Inventory (ECI) Technical Manual prepared by Steven B. Wolff, Bos-ton
developed by Boyatzis, Goleman & Rhee (2000).

3.8 Pilot Study

“Pilot study, is a small scale preliminary study conducted in order to evaluate feasibility,
time, cost, and statistical variability of any research. It is an attempt to improve upon the
research design prior to performance of a full-scale research. A pilot study is usually carried
out on units of the target population; these units will not be included in the final sample. It
would generate valuable insight to the researcher to improve the chances of a fruitful research
study.
Respondent Profile
The pilot study was carried out by sending out the questionnaire to 250 IT across Bangalore
out of which 100 filled responses were received and were used for the Pilot study. The
reliability of the questionnaire was tested and the standardised tools were validated using
Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA).
The pilot study specimen (100) was spread comprising of (40%) gentlemen and (60%) ladies.
Among them (55%) were married and (45%) were unmarried. When it comes to age group
(4%) were below 25 years, (16%) were between 26 and 30 years, (40%) were between 31 and
40 years, (25%) were between 41 and 50 years and (15%) were above 50 years of age. When
it came to job roles, (25%) of employees were working at the entry level, (45%) were
working at the middle management level and (30%) were working at the top management
level.
The pilot study data was studied to understand the reliability of the seventy two (72)
construct items in the questionnaire. The data was analysed using EFA-Principal factor
Analysis (PCA): incorporating Varimax rotation factor loading: “Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO)
and Bartlett‘s test” and extraction communalities to confirm the reliability of construct‘s
factors and items. The suitability of factor analysis was measured using KMO measure of
specimen acceptability. The factor analysis could produce distinct and consistent factors. The
test of significance was analysed using PCA, factor analysis appropriateness and its
significance was tested using Bartlett‘s test of Sphericity.
Reliability Results – Cronbach Alpha Values
Coefficient
Scales Factor No. of items Item deleted
Alpha

Emotional Self- None

4 0.922
Awareness

Self-Awareness Accurate Self-

4 0.865
Assessment

Self-Confidence 4 0.908

Emotional Self-
4 0.837
Control

Transparency 4 0.735
Self- Adaptability 4 0.779
Management
Achievement 4 0.813

Initiative 4 0.811

Optimism 4 0.911

Social Empathy 4 0.859

Awareness
Organizational 4 0.817
Awareness
 Service
4 0.795
Orientation

Developing
4 0.769
Others

Inspirational
4 0.853
Leadership

Change Catalyst 4 0.881

Relationship
Management
Influence 4 0.951

Conflict
4 0.849
Management

Teamwork &
4 0.839
Collaboration

The above table shows the ECI 2.0 tool used for the study along with their sub-dimensions
and the number of items in the measuring instrument that measures each of those factors. The
above table also shows the Cronbach alpha values for each sub-dimension scale and items
deleted (if any) from each scale.
KMO and Bartlett's Test – Self-Awareness, Self-Management, Social Awareness &
Relationship Management
“KMO and Bartlett's Test” SA SM Soc. A RM

“Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling

.921 0.935 0.944 0.929
Adequacy.”

Approx. Chi-Square 442.198 5137.78 725.25 1111.68

“Bartlett's Test of
Df 99 99 99 99
Sphericity”
Sig. .000 .000 .000 .000

From the above table, it is clearly seen that the KMO and Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity is
significant indicating that the sample is adequate as well as indicating that the Principal
Component Analysis (PCA) could be undertaken.
Phase 1: “Pilot Study”
It was conducted to analyse the study‘s viability, time, budget, and statistical erraticism. It
provides an opportunity to improvise the research methodology toward executing the final
study. This will provide useful insights to the investigator to develop the study into a robust
and fruitful exercise. A structured and valid questionnaire of seventy two (72) items of ECI
2.0 tool with 10 demographic questions in five (5) sections was used for the pilot study
survey.
First section: “This section comprised of 10 items corresponding to the respondent’s
personal details; Name (optional), Gender, Age, Marital Status, Qualification, Annual
Income, Work experience, Job Role & Name of the Organization.”
Second section: This section comprised of 12 items of the Self-Awareness sub-scale of ECI
2.0
Third section: This section comprised24 items of the Self-Management sub-scale of ECI 2.0
Fourth section: This section comprised of 12 items of the Social Awareness sub-scale of ECI
2.0
Fifth section: This section comprised of 24 items of the Relationship Management sub-scale
of ECI 2.0

3.9 Test and Validate the Conceptual model

Interpretation of the Model: It was a Good Fit
The variables fit measure (χ2/df : RMSEA; GFI; CFI; and NFI) guidelines were as per the
satisfactory range (Bollen, 1989) accepting the measure validity. The model developed and
tested was a good fit.

Statistical Techniques Adopted for Data Treatment

Reliability Test: It measures the consistencies of the measuring instrument over a period of
time and between different respondents to produce consistent results. The study adopted
reliability test to analyse the construct items for Cronbach coefficient alpha. Similarly the
internal stability of the items: individual, sub-dimension and total construct items were
analysed. The study accepted Coefficient alpha beyond (0.70) for the construct scale or items.

Normality Test: This test was used to determine if the data set was well-modelled and
normally distributed. The measure of Skewness and Kurtosis indicated the normalcy of data.
Histograms indicated the data is normally distributed.

Descriptive Statistics: This technique was used to measure the validity of descriptive
coefficients that summarise the data representation of the sample population. It is also used to
calculate the intermediate propensity and (spread) variability. Distributions of data of the
construct were measured using mean and the standard deviation.

“Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) Principal Component Analysis:” It is a technique as

part of multivariate statistics. To reveals the underlying formation of a moderately huge set of
construct variables exploratory factor analysis is used. It is used to recognise the fundamental
association amid the variables to be measured. The analysis of EFA is performed with
principal component analysis (PCA) integrating varimax rotation. PCA is based on alteration
extraction technique towards factor analysis. It converts quantitative data into compact
unrelated factors from a large data set.

KMO and Bartlett's Test: It is a technique to measuring sampling adequacy by

understanding the construct variable and the research model. It points out towards the
hypothesis variance among the construct variables that may occur due to fundamental factors.
A value nearby (1.0) points out that the factor analysis outcome is beneficial for the study.
Karl Pearson’s Co-efficient Correlation Analysis: It is used to identify the high and low
relationships amid study constructs.

Regression Analysis: In the statistical method, linear regression is adopted to examine the
relationship and its influence between independent variables is related to dependent variables.
Also establish the types of these relationships.

Tests for significance of mean differences: This method is engaged to determine the
difference between construct sample mean and hypothetical mean including population
variables. It is measured using ‘t-test and One-way ANOVA’. Further, post-hoc tests were
used to exposes the difference amid group means which has three or more clusters using
(ANOVA) F test of significance.

Structure Equation Model (SEM): It is based on diverse models and statistical approach
that fits the construct relationships of the research data. It is a blend of analysis that is
regression, factor or path.