THE INFLUENCE OF PERSONALITY, CRITICAL THINKING, AND EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE ATTRIBUTES IN PERUVIAN MANAGERS LEADERSHIP by Fernando A.

DAlessio

A Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Business Administration

UNIVERSITY OF PHOENIX June 2006

UMI Number: 3235055

Copyright 2006 by D'Alessio, Fernando A. All rights reserved.

UMI Microform 3235055 Copyright 2006 by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.

ProQuest Information and Learning Company 300 North Zeeb Road P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1346

ii

2006 by FERNANDO, A., DALESSIO ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

ABSTRACT This quantitative investigation is the first attempt to examine relationships between personality domains, critical thinking, emotional intelligence and transformational leadership styles. This study is also the first attempt to develop such research in a developing country. Four well-known instruments that had been translated into Spanish, namely, the NEO PI-R, WGCTA, MSCEIT, and MLQ, were used. Peruvian managers personality domains of extraversion and conscientiousness demonstrated the strongest and most consistent correlations to transformational leadership styles followed by openness to experience and neuroticism. The final model developed indicated that agreeableness, critical thinking, and emotional intelligence had no significant effects on transformational leadership styles. Personality traits were the most important aspects for influencing transformational leadership styles. The extraversion and conscientiousness personality domains may encourage individuals to emerge as leaders.

iv DEDICATION

To my wife Marcela Margarita for her love and patience during this demanding DBA program. To my grown children Marcela, Fernando, Franco, and Renzo for their constant support and encouragement. To my adorable grandchildren Francesca, Alessandro, and Fernando. All of them were sources of constant inspiration to achieve this doctoral degree. I am very proud of them.

v ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

To my mentor Dr. Cheryl Winsten-Bartlett who supported my efforts since the very beginning of this research study. To my committee members Dr. Zhenhu Jin, Dr. Ervin Caraballo, and Dr. Thomas Griffin, very capable professionals that were not only great teachers but outstanding counselors during this excellent DBA learning process. To the staff of the University of Phoenix, a very helpful and capable group of persons that solved skillfully every administrative situation presented during this academic process. Special thanks to my colleagues Carlos Vliz and Ana Valdivia for their relentless efforts to help me in solving the inextricable mysteries of statistics and its applications to research. Finally, thanks to my efficient assistant Natalia Chu.

vi TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES............................................................................................... xi CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ......................................................................... 1 Background of the Problem .................................................................................. 2 Statement of the Problem...................................................................................... 7 Purpose of the Study ............................................................................................. 8 Significance of the Problem................................................................................ 10 Nature of the Study ............................................................................................. 11 Research Questions............................................................................................. 13 Hypotheses.......................................................................................................... 14 Theoretical Framework....................................................................................... 15 Definition of Terms............................................................................................. 18 Assumptions........................................................................................................ 19 Limitations .......................................................................................................... 19 Delimitations....................................................................................................... 20 Summary ............................................................................................................. 21 CHAPTER 2: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ............................................. 23 Documentation.................................................................................................... 23 Literature Review................................................................................................ 25 Independent Variables ........................................................................................ 25 Personality ................................................................................................... 25 Critical Thinking.......................................................................................... 27 Emotional Intelligence................................................................................. 31

vii Dependent Variable: Leadership......................................................................... 35 Studies Relating Two or More Variables............................................................ 41 Personality and Leadership.......................................................................... 41 Emotional Intelligence and Leadership ....................................................... 48 Critical Thinking and Leadership ................................................................ 52 Personality and Critical Thinking................................................................ 54 Personality, Emotional Intelligence, and Leadership .................................. 54 Personality, Critical Thinking, Emotional Intelligence, and Leadership..... 55 Summary ............................................................................................................. 56 Conclusion .......................................................................................................... 58 CHAPTER 3: METHOD .................................................................................... 60 Research Design.................................................................................................. 60 Variables ............................................................................................................. 61 Appropriateness of Design.................................................................................. 63 Research Questions............................................................................................. 64 Population ........................................................................................................... 64 Informed Consent................................................................................................ 65 Sampling Frame .................................................................................................. 65 Confidentiality .................................................................................................... 66 Geographic Location........................................................................................... 67 Instrumentation ................................................................................................... 67 Data Collection ................................................................................................... 69 Data Analysis ...................................................................................................... 70

viii Analysis of the Revised NEO Personality Inventory Form S...................... 71 Analysis of the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal Form A ......... 72 Analysis of the Mayer Salovey Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test .......... 73 Analysis of the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire................................ 73 Combined Analysis of the Variables ........................................................... 74 Validity and Reliability....................................................................................... 75 Summary ............................................................................................................. 76 CHAPTER 4: RESULTS.................................................................................... 77 Participants and Procedure.................................................................................. 77 Measures ............................................................................................................. 79 Findings............................................................................................................... 82 Personality ................................................................................................... 82 Critical Thinking.......................................................................................... 95 Emotional Intelligence................................................................................. 99 Leadership.................................................................................................. 103 Combined Analysis of Variables ............................................................... 108 Summary ........................................................................................................... 112 CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.................... 114 Discussion ......................................................................................................... 115 Personality and Leadership........................................................................ 115 Critical Thinking and Leadership .............................................................. 120 Emotional Intelligence and Leadership ..................................................... 120 Combined Analysis of the Variables ......................................................... 121

ix Conclusions....................................................................................................... 122 Implications....................................................................................................... 126 Recommendations............................................................................................. 126 REFERENCES ................................................................................................. 128 APPENDIX A: INFORMED CONSENT ........................................................ 143 APPENDIX B: AUTHORIZATIONS.............................................................. 151 Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO PI-R) ............................................ 151 Watson Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal...................................................... 151 Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire .............................................................. 151 Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT) ..................... 152 APPENDIX C: PERSONALITY TESTS......................................................... 153 NEO Personality Inventory TestRevised (NEO-PI-R) Form S ...................... 153 The Cattell Personality Factor Questionnaire 16PF Fifth Edition (16PF)...... 154 Million Index of Personality Styles Revised (MIPS-R) ............................... 156 APPENDIX D: CRITICAL THINKING TESTS ............................................. 160 Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal (WGCTA) Form A ..................... 160 The California Critical Thinking Skills Test (CCTST) .................................... 160 The California Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory (CCTDI)................... 162 APPENDIX E: EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE TESTS ............................... 164 Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT) ..................... 164 Emotional Competency Inventory (ECI) .......................................................... 165 The Emotional Quotient (EQ) Map .................................................................. 166 APPENDIX F: LEADERSHIP TESTS ............................................................ 170

x Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ).................................................. 170 Leadership Competency Inventory (LCI)......................................................... 171 Global Executive Leadership Inventory (GELI)............................................... 172 Campbell Leadership Index (CLI) ............................................................... 173 APPENDIX G: STATISTICAL TERMS DEFINITIONS .............................. 176

xi LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Sample Demographic Information......................................................... 78 Table 2 Descriptive Statistics for NEO PI-R ...................................................... 83 Table 3 Internal Consistency and Factor Structure of NEO PI-R Form S Scales ............................................................................................................................. 84 Table 4 Factor Loadings and Congruences for Factors in the Peruvian Managers NEO PI-R Form S Rotated to the Normative American Structure... 87 Table 5 Pearsons Correlations for NEO PI-R Domains ................................... 90 Table 6 Significant Differences Between Means Represented by p-Values........ 91 Table 7 Analyses of Variance for Neuroticism ................................................... 92 Table 8 Analyses of Variance for Extraversion .................................................. 92 Table 9 Analyses of Variance for Openness to Experience ................................ 93 Table 10 Analyses of Variance for Agreeableness ............................................. 94 Table 11 Analyses of Variance for Conscientiousness ....................................... 94 Table 12 Descriptive Statistics for the WGCTA Form A .................................... 96 Table 13 Spearmans Correlations for Critical Thinking Subtests .................... 97 Table 14 Analyses of Variance for Critical Thinking ......................................... 98 Table 15 Descriptive Statistics for MSCEIT..................................................... 100 Table 16 MSCEITs Fit Measures among Several Factor Models................... 101 Table 17 Pearsons Correlations for Emotional Intelligences Branches........ 102 Table 18 Analyses of Variance for Emotional Intelligence .............................. 103 Table 19 Descriptive Statistics for MLQ .......................................................... 104

xii Table 20 Reliability and Spearmans Correlations for Leadership Factor Scores ........................................................................................................................... 106 Table 21 Analyses of Variance for Transformational Leadership.................... 108 Table 22 Correlations Between Transformational Leadership and the Big Five Traits, Critical Thinking, and Emotional Intelligence...................................... 109 Table 23 Regression Coefficients Using the Enter Variable Selection Method111 Table 24 Regression Coefficients Using the Stepwise Variable Selection Method ........................................................................................................................... 112 Table 25 Comparison of Correlations Between Personality Domains and Transformational Leadership ........................................................................... 117 Table C1 Personality Tests ............................................................................... 159 Table D1 Critical Thinking Tests...................................................................... 163 Table E1 Emotional Competency Inventory Areas of Assessment.................... 165 Table E2 Emotional Intelligence Tests ............................................................. 169 Table F1 Leadership Tests ................................................................................ 175

1 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION Peru is a developing country struggling with political, social, and economic problems, and is attempting to begin an economic development process. Despite its high level of economic growth, Peru still suffers from several pressing economic problems. The official unemployment rate in the country is above 10 percent, and many analysts believe the actual unemployment rate could be much higher (Energy Information Administration [EIA], 2005, 3). A striking number of 7,600 firms were declared insolvent in Peru in the last decade, according to the Instituto Nacional de Defensa de la Competencia y de Proteccin de la Propiedad Intelectual (National Institute for the Consumer Defense and Protection of the Intellectual Property [Indecopi], 2005). The failure of these firms has affected Perus economy, generating a critical unemployment situation, affecting the stakeholders, and provoking a negative reaction in the firms supply chains. Globalization has also had an impact on local firms. For example, multinational corporations that have started operations in Peru have brought upper-level managers into Peru from overseas (Cavanagh, 2005). Bass (1990) stated, Leadership is often regarded as the single most critical factor in the success or failure of institutions (p. 8). Leadership is, as indicated by Bass (1990), a personal attribute that is still a preoccupation for both the research community and business leaders; Murensky (2000) agreed with Bass (1990): Leadership at high levels of management has been widely researched; [however,] the criteria for such leaders at these levels remain elusive (p. 1).

2 The implications of leadership for organizations are a matter of concern, as indicated by the vast amount of leadership literature. The background to the problem will be reviewed in the following section and the problem and purpose statements will follow thereafter. The area of concern for this study is related to Peruvian managers leadership styles, which may be one of the possible causes of business failure. Why this study constitutes a unique approach to the leadership problem in general and why this study will make an original contribution to the still elusive concept of leadership, a concept considered critical in the success or failure of institutions (Bass, 1990; Murensky, 2000) is explained in the following sections. A quantitative research study was conducted to establish whether relationships exist among personality domains, critical thinking, and emotional intelligence with respect to transformational leadership. Background of the Problem James MacGregor Burns (1978) presented his reflections about leaders and the concept of leadership in his book Leadership. In his prologue, Burns stated, One of the most universal cravings of our time is a hunger for compelling and creative leadership (p. 1). Burns conclusive statements, namely, that The crisis of leadership today is the mediocrity or irresponsibility of so many of the men and women in power, but leadership rarely rises to the full need for it (p. 1) and that Leadership is one of the most observed and least understood phenomena on earth (p. 2), initiated a vast amount of literature and research on the subject of leadership. This research study intended to explore Burns statement that too much is known about leaders, but far too little is known about leadership.

3 The nature/nurture debate about whether leaders are made or born continues to be disputed in psychology (Shriberg, Shriberg, & Lloyd, 2002). The nature side posits that an individual personality is based largely on genetics. The nurture position argues that personality and leadership qualities are learned and are based less on heredity and more on life experience (Shriberg et al., 2002). Bass (1990), in his encyclopedic handbook, stated, Leadership is one of the worlds oldest preoccupations. The understanding of leadership has figured strongly in the quest for knowledge (p. 3). Shriberg et al. (2002) stated, As we begin the new millennium, everyone is talking, writing, theorizing about, and searching for leadership (p. 1). The fascination with leadership is nothing new, and long before psychologists and management scientists of the 20th century worked at defining, studying, and measuring leadership, Sun Tzu, Plato, Machiavelli, and Shakespeare offered images of leadership cast in the contexts of their times. Leadership, they suggested, is needed and is vital for the survival of a society. Society should therefore prepare people to become leaders. Bass (1990) provided 7,500 references in the third edition of his handbook, compared to the 3,000 references provided in the first edition, published in 1981. Judge and Bono (2000) conducted research in order to determine the post-1990 popularity of transformational leadership styles, and more articles were found about transformational or charismatic leadership styles than all other leadership theories combined, namely, 207 versus 190, respectively. Transformational leadership has therefore been the focus of research about leadership since 1990. Personality domains, critical thinking, and emotional intelligence as related to leadership styles are attributes that have merited special attention among researchers and

4 academics. A vast amount of research has been produced which studies relationships between personality domains and leadership styles. Some research has been conducted which relates critical thinking and leadership and emotional intelligence and leadership. However, little research has been conducted that studies the combined relationships of personality domains, critical thinking, and emotional intelligence with respect to leadership styles, and this research gap is evident in the literature. The only evidence of literature that studies existing relationships among personality domains, critical thinking, and emotional intelligence uses organizational performance as a measure of leadership (Murensky, 2000). Murenskys research suggested that personality traits, the cognitive abilities comprising critical thinking, and the competencies associated with emotional intelligence were some of the personal attributes that influence leadership styles. Personality traits are important aspects to consider with respect to leaders and followers (Shriberg, Shriberg, & Kumari, 2005). Five traits have been recognized as important domains of personality for leaders: extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, emotional stability, and openness to experience (Costa & McCrae, 1995, 1997; Judge & Bono, 2000). Each domain is made up of six facets and one single score can measure every domain, but no single score exists for personality itself (Costa & McCrae, 1992). Critical thinking is a normative enterprise in which people apply appropriate criteria and standards directed toward some end or purpose that needs intellectual resources (Bailin, Case, Coombs, & Daniels, 1999). Paul and Elder (2001) indicated that critical thinking enables thinkers to produce and assess intellectual work. Moreover, Paul and Elder suggested that critical thinking is an art, not a science. Watson and Glaser

5 (1980b) presented five subtests of the critical thinking appraisal: inference, recognition of assumptions, deduction, interpretation, and evaluation of arguments. One single score is provided in the test developed by Watson and Glaser to measure critical thinking. Salovey and Mayer (1990) defined emotional intelligence as The subset of social intelligence that involves 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 actions (p. 189). Goleman (1998) stated that an Intelligence Quotient (IQ) and technical skills are important, but emotional intelligence is the sine qua non of leadership (p.93). Caruso, Mayer, and Salovey (2002) presented emotional intelligence as a four-branch model: perceiving emotions, facilitating thought, understanding emotions, and managing emotions. One single score can measure emotional intelligence using the test developed by Caruso, Mayer, and Salovey. Burns (1978) defined leadership as Leaders inducing followers to act for certain goals that represent the values and the motivationsthe wants and needs, the aspirations and expectationsof both leaders and followers (p. 19) and the reciprocal process of mobilizing, by persons with certain motives and values, various economic, political, and other resources, in a context of competition and conflict, in order to realize goals independently or mutually held by both leaders and followers (p. 425). Avolio and Bass (2004) presented the five major components of transformational leadership, namely, idealized influence (attributes and behaviors), inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individual consideration and had one single score for transformational leadership. Transactional leadership components are the following: contingent reward and active management-by-exception, with one score for each component but no single

6 score for transactional leadership. Passive/avoidant behavior components are the following: passive management-by-exception and laissez faire, with both types of behavior being presumed to have negative impacts on followers. Failures, as indicated by Bass (1990), are primarily due to a lack of leadership that affects developing countries such as Peru. Globalization is affecting developing countries and these effects are demonstrated by the number of global and multinational firms that bring their managers from developed countries when coming to developing countries, rather than hiring local professionals, especially with respect to upper-level management positions. Peruvian citizens who hold masters of business administration (MBA) degrees from prestigious local and foreign universities are not generally considered for upper-level management positions in Peru. Cavanagh (2005), for example, presented information about the ranking of global and multinational firms as compared to local firms in Peru. Information about global companies Web pages indicated the presence of developed countries managers in upper-level management positions in Peru. Hetland and Sandal (2003) stated, With growing globalization, research on cultural similarities and differences concerning leadership is crucial (p. 167). Hetland and Sandal concluded that cultural differences need to be taken into account when research about leadership from developed countries is applied to developing countries. Most research that addresses personality domains, critical thinking, emotional intelligence, and transformational leadership styles has been conducted in developed countries. No research appears to have been conducted in developing countries. The combined influence of personality domains, critical thinking, and emotional intelligence

7 on transformational leadership styles does not appear to have been studied in either developed or developing countries. Statement of the Problem In Peru, 5,363 firms since 2000 have declared insolvency with the Indecopi (2005), which is the equivalent of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Since 1995, 7,600 firms have entered into the insolvency process in Peru. This large number of firms that have been declared insolvent in the last decade has affected Perus economy and has generated a critical unemployment situation. To have transformational leaders in Peruvian firms could be one of the solutions to the spiraling failure of firms and resulting unemployment problem. Peruvian managers leadership therefore requires methodical and systematic scrutiny. More recently, firms management has been drawing more attention to leadership development programs, courses, seminars, workshops, and related training programs by sending their executives and staff on these programs. Top management is aware that the lack of leadership is one of the contributing causes of failure. Firms decisions to extend leadership training to employees supports the nurture position, namely, that personality and leadership qualities are learned or are based less on heredity and more on life experience (Shriberg et al., 2002). Although a vast amount of research studies relationships between personality domains and transformational leadership styles, and some research relates critical thinking and emotional intelligence to transformational leadership styles in developed countries, a lack of research studying these relationships in developing countries is apparent. Moreover, the combined influence of personality domains, critical thinking, and

8 emotional intelligence on transformational leadership styles has never been addressed in developed or developing countries. These gaps in the literature are addressed with this research. This research is an effort to establish whether relationships exist among personality domains, critical thinking, and emotional intelligence for transformational leadership styles. The research will help firms that are attempting to identify their managers personal attributes and help business schools that are attempting design their programs. This research will also be useful to this investigations participants. The study was of a quantitative design and surveyed 375 students from the MBA Gerencial (managerial MBA) program at Centrum Catlica (Centrum), the Pontificia Universidad Catlica del Pers (Pontifical Catholic University of Peru) graduate business school in Lima, Perus capital city. Centrum operates as a business center on an independent campus. The university awards official degrees on behalf of the education ministry. Purpose of the Study The intent of this quantitative research study was to assess the individual and combined influences of personality domains, critical thinking, and emotional intelligence on Peruvian managers leadership styles. The study explored the relationships that exist between managers personality traits, the cognitive abilities comprising critical thinking, and the competencies associated with emotional intelligence in relationship to managers leadership styles. Personality domains, critical thinking, and emotional intelligence constituted the independent variables, and transformational leadership styles constituted the dependent variable.

9 Neuman (2003) presented the four dimensions of research: (a) how research is usedbasic and applied; (b) the purpose of the studyexploratory, descriptive, and explanatory; (c) the way time affects the researchcross-sectional, longitudinal (time series, panel, and cohort), and case study; and (d) techniques for collecting data quantitative data (experiments, surveys, content analysis, and existing statistical studies) and qualitative data (field research and historical, comparative research). The dimensions of the research conducted were the following: (a) basic research is the attempt to advance fundamental leadership knowledgein basic research subjects are selected with a great deal of freedom; (b) descriptive research is presenting a picture of the specific details of a situation, social setting, and the relationships with it; (c) cross-sectional research is a snapshot approach to the social worldmeasures are taken once; and (d) quantitative data uses survey techniques in which the researcher makes use of questionnaires to ask many people numerous questions over a short period using validated and reliable instruments. This study assessed 375 students enrolled in the managerial MBA at Centrum business graduate school in Lima, Peru. The managerial MBA is a 26-month, six-cycle, part-time program with students attending classes every other weekend. Students who began the program between October 2003 and October 2005 were chosen for the sample. Managerial MBA students demographic averages are the following: 35 years of age, 15 years of working experience, and a 3:1 ratio of males to females. Confidentiality and human research participants protection were provided to managerial MBA students participating in the research (CITI, 2005).

10 Significance of the Problem Leadership has received a great deal of research attention. Bass (1990) provided an enormous amount of information related to studies performed about the controversial and complex personal attribute called leadership. The existing relationships amongst the four attributes, namely, personality traits, the cognitive abilities that comprise critical thinking, the competencies associated with emotional intelligence, and transformational leadership styles need to be investigated. Murenskys (2000) dissertation is the only research identified that studied the combined relationships among emotional intelligence, personality traits, critical thinking abilities, and organizational leadership performance at the upper levels of management. Murensky used the balance scorecard (Kaplan & Norton, 1996) as the instrument to measure upper-level managements organizational leadership performance. This research is important because it is the first study that has attempted to discover if personality domains, critical thinking, and emotional intelligence have a combined influence on transformational leadership styles among Peruvian managers. The methodology could be used in other developing countries to explore these relationships. The results of this research could be added to the body of leadership-knowledge literature because it is the first study that has attempted to explore the individual and combined influences of personality domains, critical thinking, and emotional intelligence on transformational leadership styles. This study could extend knowledge about how personality domains, critical thinking, and emotional intelligence are related to transformational leadership styles for managers in both developed and developing countries. The study could also help business schools in their attempts to train leaders.

11 The process of developing leaders requires, among other things, knowledge of the personal attributes of admitted business school applicants in order to measure their attributes at the beginning of the MBA program and throughout the MBA program. The process could be useful for any organization that is interested in measuring managers attributes in both developed and developing countries. Bennis and OToole (2005) stated the following: Business schools are facing intense criticism for failing to impart useful skills, failing to prepare leaders, failing to instill norms of ethical behaviorand even failing to lead graduates to good corporate jobs. These criticisms come not just from students, employers, and the media but also from deans of some of Americas most prestigious B schools. (p. 154). Nature of the Study Seven statements suggested that a new way of thinking about leadership was identified at the beginning of the 21st century: (a) Ones understanding of leadership is a function of ones position in the leadership hierarchy; (b) no one formula for leadership exists; (c) leadership is not differentiated by setting; (c) ones understanding of leadership requires the vantage point of multiple perspectives; (e) studying leadership across a range of human differences is the only way to approach the subject in the 21st century; (f) leadership can best be understood through metaphors and described indirectly through paradigms; and (g) leadership is a verb (Shriberg et al., 2002). In terms of Neumans (2003) understanding of the dimensions of research, a quantitative and basic research design that is descriptive in its purpose, that is crosssectional, and that uses survey techniques to collect data was conducted. Statistical

12 analyses were developed using descriptive and inferential statistical analyses and used the following well-established instruments: (a) the NEO Personality Inventory Revised (PIR) Revised Form Sthis questionnaire attempts to evaluate a persons personality traits and was developed by Paul T. Costa Jr. and Robert R. McCrae in 1992; (b) the WatsonGlaser Critical Thinking Appraisal Form Athis questionnaire attempts to evaluate cognitive characteristics associated with a persons critical thought and was developed by Goodwin Watson and Edward M. Glaser in 1980; (c) the Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Testthis questionnaire is a self-evaluation that attempts to measure features and personal characteristics of emotional intelligence and was developed by J. Mayer, P. Salovey, and D. Caruso in 2002; and (d) the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire Leader Form 5x-Shortthis questionnaire attempts to determine personal leadership styles and was developed by Bruce J. Avolio and Bernard M. Bass in 2004. The following works, the most consulted by researchers, were used in order to establish operational definitions of the concepts used in this research: (a) Costa and McCrae (1992, 1995) on personality; (b) Watson and Glaser (1980a) and Paul and Elder (2001, 2002) on critical thinking; (c) Salovey and Mayer (1990) and Goleman (1998, 2000) on emotional intelligence; and (d) Burns (1978) and Bass (1990) on leadership. This research used seminal works about these four personal aspects. Research published after the year 2000 relating two or more of these attributes was used. Only research studies and works in English were used.

13 Research Questions Personality, critical thinking, and emotional intelligence attributes, among others, have drawn the attention of researchers, mainly in developed countries, and have been studied independently in order to assess the attributes specific influences on leadership styles. Several studies that relate these attributes have been conducted, mostly in the United States of America (Bono & Judge, 2004; Caruso et al., 2002; Crant & Bateman, 2000; Dulewicz & Higgs, 2003; Gardner & Stough, 2002; Judge & Bono, 2000; Judge, Bono, Ilies, & Gerhardt, 2002; Kobe, Reiter-Palmon, & Rickers, 2001; Palmer, Walls, Burgess, & Stough, 2001) and a small number of studies in developed countries such as Australia (McCormack & Mellor, 2002), Canada (Bradley, Nicol, Charbonneau, & Meyer, 2002), Norway (Hetland & Sandal, 2003; Kornor & Nordvik, 2004), Singapore (Lim & Ployhart, 2004; Ployhart, Lim, & Chan, 2001), Taiwan (Yang & Lin, 2004), India (Kejriwal & Krishnan, 2004), and New Zealand (Margaret, 2003). No similar research was found with respect to developing countries. The following research questions were used to test for significant relationships between personality domains, cognitive abilities that comprise critical thinking, competencies associated with emotional intelligence, and transformational leadership styles. The combined influences that personality domains, cognitive abilities that comprise critical thinking, and competencies associated with emotional intelligence exert on transformational leadership styles were also researched. The five personality domains constitute five scores because a single score for personality does not exist. Critical thinking and emotional intelligence are both attributes that have single scores, as is the case for transformational leadership styles. The study

14 was conducted in terms of participants self-assessments because participants completed the four questionnaires in terms of their own perceptions of themselves and their personalities, critical thinking, emotional intelligence, and leadership styles. The research questions addressed were the following: 1. Does neuroticism (also known as emotional instability) relate to transformational leadership styles? 2. Does extraversion relate to transformational leadership styles? 3. Does openness to experience relate to transformational leadership styles? 4. Does agreeableness relate to transformational leadership styles? 5. Does conscientiousness relate to transformational leadership styles? 6. Does critical thinking relate to transformational leadership styles? 7. Does emotional intelligence relate to transformational leadership styles? 8. Do the personality domains of neuroticism, extraversion, openness to experience, agreeableness, and conscientiousness as well as critical thinking and emotional intelligence exert a combined influence on transformational leadership styles? Hypotheses The previous research questions constituted the basis for establishing the following hypotheses for this quantitative research study that intends to examine the leadership attributes of managerial MBA students at Centrum business school in Lima, Peru: 1. A negative relationship exists between neuroticism and transformational leadership styles.

15 2. A positive relationship exists between extraversion and transformational leadership styles. 3. A positive relationship exists between openness to experience and transformational leadership styles. 4. A positive relationship exists between agreeableness and transformational leadership styles. 5. A positive relationship exists between conscientiousness and transformational leadership styles. 6. A positive relationship exists between critical thinking and transformational leadership styles. 7. A positive relationship exists between emotional intelligence and transformational leadership styles. 8. The personality domains of neuroticism, extraversion, openness to experience, agreeableness, and conscientiousness as well as critical thinking and emotional intelligence do exert a combined influence on transformational leadership styles. Theoretical Framework The general research topic is leadership and management development. Psychological factors and personal attributes are important aspects associated with the general topic. A basic quantitative research that is descriptive in its purpose, crosssectional in its design, and that uses a survey method for collecting quantitative data was attempted (Neuman, 2003).

16 The variables for the study are the following: 1. Dependent variabletransformational leadership. 2. Independent variablesneuroticism, extraversion, openness to experience, agreeableness, and conscientiousness (the personality domains), critical thinking, and emotional intelligence. An assessment of students personal attributes in terms of personality domains, critical thinking, emotional intelligence, and transformational leadership styles was attempted. To find relationships among the variables and to assess whether personality domains, critical thinking, and emotional intelligence as personal attributes are related to transformational leadership styles is this dissertations primary goal. A second important research goal is to assess whether a combined relationship exists among these personal attributes and transformational leadership styles. Managerial MBA students share the objective of attaining an MBA degree awarded by the Pontificia Universidad Catlica del Per (PUCP), which is considered the best and most prestigious private university in Peru. PUCP together with Universidad del Pacfico, Universidad de Lima, and Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia are considered the best private universities (Apoyo, 2005) in Peru. These universities have formed the Consortium and have several common objectives. In contrast to public education, private education in Peru is of high quality. Centrum is the PUCPs business administration graduate school and operates from a modern facility outside the universitys main campus. Managerial MBA students were chosen because they constitute a specific population with at least 10 years average experience in the business world, they work and

17 come to class every other weekend. Students bring to the program their personality facets, critical thinking abilities, and emotional intelligence competencies, and those personal attributes, abilities, and competencies were analyzed in terms of whether they contributed to students leadership styles. Full-time MBA students are usually younger and possess less corporate experience, so they have not been taken into account for this research. The managerial MBA program is 26 months long. The following well-established and validated instruments were administered in order to measure the individual and combined relationships among personality domains, critical thinking abilities, emotional intelligence competencies, and students leadership styles: the NEO Personality Inventory Revised (NEO PI-R) Form S (Self-Report), the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal (WGCTA) Form A, the Mayer-SaloveyCaruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT), and the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) Leader Form 5x-Short. The NEO PI-R Form S assesses personality constructs and provides measures of five well-established domains: neuroticism, extraversion, openness to experience, agreeableness, and conscientiousness (Costa & McCrae, 1992). The WGCTA Form A measures cognitive abilities using subtests for inference, recognition of assumptions, deduction, interpretation, and evaluation of arguments (Watson & Glaser, 1980b). The MSCEIT features a four-branch model for managing emotions, understanding emotions, using emotions, and perceiving emotions (Mayer et al., 2002). The MLQ Leader Form 5x-Short is based on 12 factors. Five factors measure transformational leadership in terms of idealized influence attributes, idealized influence behaviors, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration. Two factors measure

18 transactional leadership in terms of contingent rewards and active management-byexception. Two factors measure passive/avoidant behavior in terms of passive management-by-exception and laissez-faire. Finally, three factors measure the outcomes of leadership in terms of extra effort, effectiveness, and satisfaction with leadership (Avolio & Bass, 2004). These instruments were administered using the Spanish versions that were provided by the authorized vendors. Definition of Terms The following terms are the most important ones used in this study and their definitions are taken from the indicated authors: Critical thinking is an intellectually disciplined process of actively and skillfully conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing, and evaluating information gathered from or generated by observation, experience, reflection, reasoning, or communication that acts as a guide to belief and action. Critical thinking is a set of skills to process and generate information and beliefs (Paul & Elder, 2001). Emotional intelligence refers to a persons basic underlying capability to recognize and use emotion. Most people are fully capable of recognizing and using emotion. Some people seem to be able to demonstrate excellence in this regard, and the result is a high-level of performance on the job. Emotional competence describes the personal and social skills that lead to superior performance in the world of work (Cherniss & Goleman, 2001). Leadership is the reciprocal process of mobilizing, by persons with certain motives and values, various economic, political, and other resources in a context of

19 competition and conflict in order to realize goals that are independent or mutually held by both leaders and followers (Burns, 1978). Objectives are the targeted goals of individuals, groups, or organizations toward which resources and efforts are channeled (Bass, 1990). Organizational culture is the norms, values, attitudes, and beliefs evident in the myths, stories, jargon, and rituals that are shared by organizational members (Bass, 1990). Personality is the dynamic organization of the abilities, attitudes, beliefs, and motives of a particular individual that contribute to the individuals reaction to his or her environment (Bass, 1990). A manager is a person who manages, directs, and controls a business, a person who controls resources and expenditures, and a person who is in charge of the businesss affairs (Schermerhorn, Hunt, & Osborn, 2004). Assumptions The following assumptions were established: (a) Managerial MBA students at Centrum would be acquainted with the importance of the research to be conducted, would trust the confidentiality assured when completing the questionnaires, and would respond honestly to the questionnaires in a very responsible manner; (b) responses rates would be high and missing data low; and (c) official instruments translated from English to Spanish would preserve the meaning of the diverse statements. Limitations Costa and McCrae (1997) indicated, Every social scientist knows that questionnaires are fallible instruments, subject to an intimidating array of biases and

20 distortions. Respondents may answer at random, or may misunderstand items, or deliberately lie, or agree indiscriminately to any assertion presented to them (pp. 87-88). The following limitations were taken into consideration: (a) This study was limited to managerial MBA students who agreed to participate; (b) this study was limited to managerial MBA students who entered the program between October 2003 and October 2005; and (c) the validity of the study was limited to the reliability of the instruments used. Instruments that were provided in Spanish by official United States vendors were used. Delimitations The study confined itself to surveying 375 managerial MBA students at Centrum, the Pontificia Universidad Catlica del Pers business school. The study focused on assessing the individual and combined influences of personality domains, critical thinking, and emotional intelligence on transformational leadership. These students were admitted into the managerial MBA program after a rigorous admission process, and students had the common goal of being awarded a high-quality MBA degree from the Pontificia Universidad Catlica del Per. The students demographic information provided information about their managerial experience as well as their gender, age, the universities they had attended, and the undergraduate degrees they had obtained. The methodology used and the outcomes associated with transformational leadership styles are broadly generalizable to studies about managers' leadership styles in other developing countries as well as in developed countries. This study attempted to fill several voids in the transformational leadership literature by examining the combined influences of personality, critical thinking, and emotional intelligence for

21 transformational leadership styles. This research could be replicable in other countries and applicable to leadership in diverse institutions. Summary Leadership, as a topic in management development, has received a great deal of attention since Burns (1978) first drew attention to the concept, and the intense interest is evident in the number of studies conducted during the last 30 years. Bass (1990) stated, Leadership is often regarded as the single most critical factor [italics added] in the success or failure of institutions (p. 8). Leadership continues to be thought of as a sine qua nona condition for successfully performing strategically in organizations. Leadership styles have never been measured among Peruvian managers in order to examine if a lack of leadership skills may be a cause of firms failures, despite top management promoting attendance at leadership courses, workshops, seminars, and training by public and private organizations throughout the country. Organizations need leaders to be competitive in the global arena and to guide them strategically. To measure transformational leadership styles and to explore the influence of personal attributes such as personality domains, critical thinking, and emotional intelligence on leadership styles is always a challenge. Research should continue, however, particularly in developing countries. Previous research has been conducted, as discussed in the following chapter, in order to explore relationships among personality domains, critical thinking, emotional intelligence, and leadership styles mainly in the United States and other developed countries such as Australia, Canada, Norway, Taiwan, Singapore, New Zealand, and

22 India. No research appears to have attended to these relationships in developing countries. Chapter 2 reviews the literature related to these personal characteristics.

23 CHAPTER 2: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE Leadership is seen as crucial for organizations success (Bass, 1990; Burns, 1978; Hogan, Curphy, & Hogan, 1994). A vast amount of literature exists on the subject of leadership, with some of the literature going back hundreds of years, and some going as far back in history as the pioneer Sun Tzus Art of War (circa 220 A.D.). The existing relationships among the following four personal variables were reviewed: personality, critical thinking, emotional intelligence, and leadership. This review was limited to germinal studies for each individual variable and to recent studies and research that relate the variables. The independent variables were reviewed first, namely, personality, critical thinking, and emotional intelligence; thereafter, the dependent variable, namely, leadership, was reviewed. Finally, the review was focused on studies in which these variables relationships were studied. Documentation The literature search on these four variables was limited to germinal works on personality, critical thinking, emotional intelligence, and leadership. Thereafter, studies and research performed since the year 2000 were accessed in order to search for research about relationships between these variables, and the search was restricted to works in English. The central library of the Pontificia Universidad Catlica del Per and Centrums documentation center were used as operational centers for developing the literature review process, and five databases were used to support this search: EBSCOhost, ProQuest, JStor, Emerald, and ProQuest Digital Dissertations. The search was performed by looking for studies that related leadership and personality; leadership and critical thinking; leadership and emotional intelligence; personality and emotional

24 intelligence; personality and critical thinking; and critical thinking and emotional intelligence. Strings combining three out of the four variables were also investigated, and finally, strings combining all four variables were investigated. Besides individual studies on each subject, a search using EBSCOhost and ProQuest databases was performed at the beginning of April 2006. Using the four keywords, namely, personality, critical thinking, emotional intelligence, and leadership, the studies examining personality and leadership numbered 787 and 4,092 respectively; those examining critical thinking and leadership numbered 50 and 505, respectively; and those examining emotional intelligence and leadership numbered 103 and 456, respectively. Eight and 37 studies, respectively, examined personality, emotional intelligence, and leadership; only one and nine, respectively, examined personality, critical thinking, and leadership; one and two, respectively, examined personality, emotional intelligence, and critical thinking; and only one and five, respectively, examined critical thinking, emotional intelligence, and leadership. The indicated studies were not necessarily conducted to find relationships between any two of the variables. Few studies were found that related personality and critical thinking, personality and emotional intelligence, and critical thinking and emotional intelligence. Those studies that researched the variables relationships were reviewed in this chapter. The only evidence of an existing relationship among the four variables was from Murensky (2000), a dissertation which was recognized to be among the top 10 dissertations by the ProQuest Information and Learning Best-Selling dissertations list of 2002 (Roach, 2003).

25 Literature Review Hetland and Sandal (2003) indicated in their study that Most of the studies exploring links between transformational leadership and personality have been based on North American samples, which calls into questions whether or not the results will generalize to other societies (p. 149). Hetland and Sandal concluded, With growing globalization, research on cultural similarities and differences concerning leadership is crucialOur findings have indicated the importance of transformational leadership in yet another culture (p. 167). The objective of reviewing germinal works on personality, critical thinking, emotional intelligence, and leadership was to find common traits among constructs which could indicate potential relationships. Literature related to the independent variables and the dependent variable was performed first. Thereafter, a review of studies and research relating two, three, and four of the variables was discussed. Independent Variables The independent variables reviewed were the following: personality, critical thinking, and emotional intelligence. The review focused on germinal studies conducted in these personal attributes to find if intertwined traits and aspects in common did exist. Personality Ajzen (2002) indicated, Dispositional explanations of behavior have a long and distinguished history in personality and social psychology. In the domain of personality the trait concept has carried the burden of dispositional explanation (p. 1). Judge and Bono (2000) stated, The search for the structure of personality is as old as the study of human nature itself (p. 752).

26 Shriberg et al. (2002) stated, Psychology is the study of human behavior (p. 16) and they defined personality as How people affect others and understand themselves. Personality traits are important aspects to consider in terms of leaders and followers (p. 16). Costa and McCrae (1995) indicated that personality psychologists have concluded that five major dimensions account for most individual differences in personality traits. The five-factor model is comprised of five personality domains: neuroticism, extraversion, openness to experience, agreeableness, and conscientiousness. According to Costa and McCrae these five dimensions provide a complete description of personality. Costa and McCrae (1995, 1997) presented the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO PI-R) which consisted of 30 facet scales that defined the five broad domains of the five-factor model of personality. Domains with their respective facets are the following: (a) neuroticismanxiety, angry hostility, depression, self-consciousness, impulsiveness, and vulnerability; (b) extraversionwarmth, gregariousness, assertiveness, activity, excitement seeking, and positive emotions; (c) openness to experiencefantasy, aesthetics, feelings, actions, ideas, and values; (d) agreeableness trust, straightforwardness, altruism, compliance, modesty, and tender-mindedness; and (e) conscientiousnesscompetence, order, dutifulness, achievement striving, selfdiscipline, and deliberation. According to Costa and McCrae (1992), at the core of neuroticism is the tendency to experience negative affects, such as fear, sadness, guilt, and anger. Individuals scoring high in neuroticism tend to view the world through a negative lens, whereas those scoring low in neuroticism are calm, relaxed, and even-tempered. Bono and Judge (2004) explained in their research that extraverts are assertive, active, talkative, optimistic, and

27 energetic and seek excitement and social attention. Openness to experience includes culture and sciences and a critical attitude toward society, and intellect includes tendencies to be creative, imaginative, resourceful, and insightful. Agreeableness represents the tendency to be cooperative, gentle, and kind and to value affiliation and avoid conflict; persons are altruistic and tend to be trusting and trustworthy. Conscientiousness is related to individuals having a strong sense of direction and working toward goal achievement; conscientious persons are cautious, self-disciplined, and well organized. Costa and McCrae (1997) indicated, No major revisions of the basic model are anticipated in the near future. Despite their popularity, social desirability and inconsistency scales will not be added to the NEO-PI-R because their validity and utility have not yet been demonstrated (p. 86). The NEO-PI-R is the most commonly used instrument to measure personality traits and uses five domains and 30 facets. Judge and Bono (2000) stated, The search for the structure of personality is as old as the study of human nature itselfIt has only been within the last decade, however, that a taxonomic structure has become widely accepted. This categorization, termed the five-factor model or, more boldly, the Big Five, has revolutionized personality psychology. (p. 752) Critical Thinking Watson and Glaser (1980b) pioneered the efforts to develop a critical thinking appraisal as a composite of attitudes, knowledge, and skills. This composite includes the following: (a) attitudes of inquiry that involve an ability to recognize the existence of

28 problems and an acceptance of the general need for evidence in support of what is asserted to be true; (b) knowledge of the nature of valid inferences, abstractions, and generalizations in which the weight or accuracy of different kinds of evidence are logically determined; and (c) skills in the employing and applying the above attitudes and knowledge. Watson and Glaser (1980b) listed the abilities related to the concept of critical thinking as the ability: (a) to define a problem, (b) to select pertinent information for the solution of a problem, (c) to recognize stated and unstated assumptions, (d) to formulate and select relevant and promising hypotheses, and (e) to draw valid conclusions and judge the validity of inferences. These five abilities represent a valid estimate of the individuals proficiency with respect to critical thinking. Five subtests are used to determine a final critical thinking score: inference, recognition of assumptions, deduction, interpretation, and evaluation of arguments. Paul and Elder (2001) suggested, Critical thinking is that mode of thinking about any subject, content, or problemin which the thinker improves the quality of his or her thinking by skillfully taking charge of the structure inherent in thinking and imposing intellectual standards upon them (p. xx). An enormous interest has been generated about critical thinking and a vast amount of literature produced. Relevant concepts were discovered when reviewing the literature about critical thinking which indicated the contemporary relevance of the subject. Critical thinking can be understood as an intellectually disciplined process and a set of skills to process and generate information and beliefs (Paul & Elder 2001). Critical thinking is a process that enables thinkers to produce and assess intellectual work, and Paul and Elder consider it

29 an art, not a science. Critical thinking is a normative enterprise in which people apply appropriate criteria and standards that are directed toward some end or purpose. Critical thinking needs some intellectual resources (Bailin et al., 1999). Critical thinking is a normative enterprise in which appropriate criteria and standards that are directed toward some end or purpose are applied. Developing the necessary cognitive and logical skills can only be achieved with ongoing training (critical reading, critical listening, and critical observing), and using a person's well-gained experience together with her or his intellectual virtues (Paul & Elder, 2002). The above mentioned aspects are required in order to become a critical thinker, and among these requirements, cognitive development, logic, and emotionality play important roles. The cognitive domain involves knowledge that a person has to acquire, mainly through formal education, and skills which are gained and nurtured during a lifetime of experience. A few aspects were not covered in the studies about how to improve a persons critical thinking capabilities, namely, the provision of rules, tips, and exercises; how to interrelate the components of critical thinking; and how to analyze the facilitators and barriers to the process. Bailin et al. (1999) concluded, Those who become critical thinkers acquire such intellectual resources as background knowledge, operational knowledge of appropriate standards, knowledge of key concepts, possession of effective heuristics, and of certain vital habits of mind (p. 285). Paul and Elder (2001) presented the intellectual standards, namely, clarity, accuracy, relevance, logicalness, breadth, precision, significance, completeness, fairness, and depth, that must be applied to the elements of reasoning, including purposes, questions, points of view, information, inferences, concepts,

30 implications, and assumptions, in order to develop the intellectual traits of humility, autonomy, integrity, courage, perseverance, empathy, confidence in reason, and fairmindedness. A person needs to acquire those intellectual standards mainly through formal education, and skills must be learnt and nurtured during a lifetime of experience. As a process, critical thinking needs inputs to be transformed into productive outputs and the added value is a way to measure its quality. As a mental process, the results are intangible and can only be measured by the final tangible, obtained applications. Following these ideas, Watson and Glaser (1980a) developed an appraisal that has been constantly improved, and theirs is a well-known instrument that attempts to measure a persons critical thinking and cognitive abilities. Gadzella and Baloglu (2003) used the psychometric properties of the WatsonGlaser Critical Thinking Appraisal (WGCTA) Form A for 135 education majors. An analysis of reliability and validity showed that the instrument was a reliable and valid measure of critical thinking abilities for students majoring in education. Critical thinking has earned special attention in the educational system in different countries. In Australia, Moore (2004) took up the issue of whether the skill of critical thinking in university education is best thought of as a broad universal generic skill or rather as only a loose category taking in a variety of modes of thought (p. 3). Braun (2004) called on educators to make improved critical thinking a national goal and to accomplish the task of improving critical thinking among business school graduates. Braun concluded, Business curriculum is making a contribution to achieving the national education goal for enhanced critical thinking in college graduates (p. 235). Phiters and Soden (2000) reviewed critical thinking in education in countries such as

31 Australia, United Kingdom, New Zealand, and United States and presented ways to teach critical thinking to students and help them to learn how to think well. Kienzler (2001) studied ethics, critical thinking, and professional communication pedagogy and concluded the following: Critical thinking pedagogy offers a supportive environment for teaching ethics in the professional classroom. Four important aspects of critical thinking which particularly encourages ethical thought and behavior are identifying and questioning assumptions, seeking a multiplicity of voices and alternatives on a subject, making connections, and fostering active involvement. (p. 319) Greenlaw and DeLoach (2003) and DeLoach and Greenlaw (2005) emphasized the fact that critical thinking is a skill to be mastered by students as they complete their studies and concluded that little has been attempted to investigate which specific pedagogies aid its development. Finally, they assessed whether critical thinking could be taught effectively using electronic discussions. Van Gelder (2005) concluded that there are six key lessons from cognitive science needed for teachers of critical thinking: acquiring expertise in critical thinking is hard, practice in critical-thinking skills themselves enhances the skills, the transfer of skills must be practiced, some theoretical knowledge is required, diagramming arguments promotes the skill, and students are prone to belief preservation. Emotional Intelligence Mayer and Salovey (1993) suggested, Emotional intelligence is a type of social intelligence that involves the ability to monitor ones own and others emotions, to discriminate among them, and to use the information to guide ones thinking and actions

32 (p. 433). Mayer and Salovey discussed whether intelligence is an appropriate metaphor for the construct and the abilities and mechanisms that may underlie emotional intelligence. Mayer et al. (2002) presented the history of emotional intelligence and stated that the period from 1970-1989 marked the beginning of new research that departed from the classical psychological focus. They stated, Whereas intelligence and emotion had been considered separate fields, this new period saw their integration into the new field of cognition and affect (p. 5). The period from 1990-1993 marked the emergence of the field of emotional intelligence. Mayer et al. (2002) presented the concept of emotional intelligence in 1990: Salovey and Mayer explicitly proposed that a diverse and apparently unrelated group of studiesin aesthetics, brain research, intelligence measurement, artificial intelligence, among otherswere all addressing the same phenomenon: a previously overlooked intelligence. The potentially contradictory nature of the phrase emotional intelligence was addressed, and a first formal definition of the concept and explanation of skills involved was developed. (p. 5) In 1997, Mayer and Salovey presented the four-branch model of emotional intelligence. Branch 1, perceiving emotions (PEIQ), is the ability to perceive emotions in oneself and others as well as in objects, art, stories, music, and other stimuli; branch 2, facilitating thought (FEIQ), is the ability to generate, use, and feel emotions as necessary in order to communicate feelings or employ emotions in other cognitive processes; branch 3, understanding emotions (UEIQ), is the ability to understand emotional information, how emotions combine and progress through relationship transitions, and to

33 appreciate such emotional meanings; and branch 4, managing emotions (MEIQ), is the ability to be open to feelings and to modulate them in oneself and others so as to promote personal understanding and growth (Mayer et al., 2002). The Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT) evolved from the original Multifactor Emotional Intelligence Scale (MEIS). The MSCEIT provides 15 main scores. One overall emotional intelligence score (EIQ) formed by the two area scoresexperiential emotional intelligence (EEIQ), composed of the PEIQ and FEIQ branches scores, and strategic emotional intelligence (SEIQ), composed of the UEIQ and MEIQ branches scores; the four branches scores PEIQ, FEIQ, UEIQ, and MEIQ; and finally, the eight task-level scoresfaces and pictures forming PEIQ; facilitation and sensations forming FEIQ; changes and blends forming UEIQ; and emotional management and emotional relations forming MEIQ. Goleman (1998), a psychologist who applied neuroscience to business stated, IQ and technical skills are important, but emotional intelligence is the sine qua non of leadership (p.93). He enhanced his books contribution with a question that deserves a great deal of attention: What makes a leader? Goleman (1998) presented the following five components of emotional intelligence: (a) self-awareness, (b) self-regulation, (c) motivation, (d) empathy, and (e) social skills. For many years, people have debated whether leaders are born or made. The same debate is evident with respect to emotional intelligence. Scientific inquiry strongly suggests that a genetic component to emotional intelligence exists. Psychological and developmental research, however, indicates that nurture plays a role as well. Emotional intelligence is associated largely with the neurotransmitters of the brains limbic system

34 which governs feelings, impulses, and drives. To enhance emotional intelligence, organizations must help people break old behavioral habits and establish new ones. Building ones emotional intelligence cannot happen without sincere and concerted effort (Goleman, 1998, p. 97). Goleman concluded, It is fortunate that emotional intelligence can be learned. The process is not easy. It takes time and commitment. But the benefits that come from having a welldeveloped emotional intelligence, both for the individual and for the organization, make it worth the effort. (p.102) Goleman (2000) wrote a second article, as a continuation and improvement of the first one, in which he presented the four fundamental capabilities of emotional intelligence or the ability to manage ourselves and our relationships effectively: (a) selfawareness, (b) self-management, (c) social awareness, and (d) social skills. The research found six distinct leadership styles, each springing from different components of emotional intelligence: coercive leaders, authoritative leaders, affiliative leaders, democratic leaders, pacesetting leaders, and coaching leaders. Six key factors influence an organizations environment and form its climate: flexibility, responsibility, standards, rewards, clarity, and commitment. All six leadership styles have a measurable effect on each aspect of the climate. Leaders who have mastered four or more styles especially the authoritative, democratic, affiliative, and coaching styleshave the best climate and business performance (Goleman, 1998; 2000). Goleman, Boyatzis, and McKee (2002) stated "The fundamental task of leaders, we argue, is to prime good feeling in those they lead. That occurs when a leader creates

35 resonancea reservoir of positivity that frees the best in people. At its root, the primal job of leadership is emotional (p. ix) introducing a new concept: primal leadership. This is why emotional intelligencebeing intelligent about emotionsmatters so much for leadership success: Primal demands we bring emotional intelligence to bear" (Goleman et al., 2002, p. ix). The dimensions of intelligence and their accompanying competencies have evolved and been streamlined. Goleman et al. (2002) presented a new vision on the intelligence domains and associated competencies: Personal competence was composed of self-awareness and self-management, and social competence was composed of social awareness and social skills. Mayer, Salovey, Caruso, and Sitarenios (2001) responded the questioning posed by Roberts, Zeidner, and Matthews (2001) to whether there are correct answers to questions on tests purporting to measure EI [emotional intelligence] as a set of abilities (p. 232) presenting arguments for the reasonableness of measuring EI as an ability and indicated that correct answers do exist. Mayer, Salovey, Caruso, and Sitarenios (2003) confirmed in their study, The MSCEIT achieved reasonable reliability, and confirmatory factor analysis supported theoretical model of EI (p. 97). Reviewing the structure of each independent variable, several intertwined traits can be observed. Personality, critical thinking, and emotional intelligences therefore have many aspects in common. Dependent Variable: Leadership Burns (1978) most important contribution is what he termed transformational and transactional leadership. Transformational leadership is leadership that raises both the

36 leader and his or her followers to higher levels of motivation and morality. Within this category, Burns pictured intellectual, reform, revolutionary, and heroic leadership. Transactional leadership is leadership in which the leader exchanges values with his or her followers and acts for the votes of his or her followers. Within this category, Burns pictured opinion, group, party, and executive leadership. Directive leadership, being the third major way of influencing followers, ranges from directive to participatory. Leaders should enter into the process of leadership in an authentic way. Burns (1978) presented a representative list of the traits that characterize transformational leaders. Leaders need to be visionary, charismatic, and inspirational; be able to cultivate relationships; have excellent communication skills; build coalitions across lines; engender motivation in others; empower others; be trustworthy and purposeful; operate according to principles; identify their own values; take risks; be selfreflective; and balance work and life. According to Burns, the concept of moral leadership is attached to the following processes: (a) Leaders and led have a relationship not only of power but of mutual needs, aspirations, and values; (b) in responding to leaders, followers have adequate knowledge of alternative leaders and programs and the capacity to choose among those alternatives; and (c) leaders take responsibility for their commitments. Burns stated that leadership is an aspect of power but is a separate and vital process in itself, and while all leaders are actual power holders, not all power holders are leaders. Leadership studies have concentrated on transformational leadership. The result of transformational leadership is a relationship of mutual stimulation and elevation that converts followers into leaders and may convert leaders into moral agents.

37 Bass (1985) identified nine dimensions of leadership behaviors that cover the two broad domains introduced by Burns (1978), namely, transformational and transactional leadership. The first transformational leadership behavior, idealized influence (attribute and behavior), refers to leaders who have high standards of moral and ethical conduct, who are held in high personal regard, and who engender loyalty from followers. The second transformational leadership behavior, inspirational motivation, refers to leaders with a strong vision for the future based on values and ideals. Leadership behaviors falling into this dimension include stimulating enthusiasm, building confidence, and inspiring followers by using symbolic actions and persuasive language. Idealized influence and inspirational motivation are highly correlated and are sometimes combined to form a measure of charisma. The third transformational leadership behavior is intellectual stimulation which refers to leaders who challenge organizational norms, who encourage divergent thinking, and who push followers to develop innovative strategies. Individual consideration, the fourth transformational leadership dimension, refers to leadership behaviors that are aimed at recognizing the unique growth and developmental needs of followers as well as coaching followers and consulting with them. Transactional leadership behaviors aim to monitor and control employees through rational or economic means. Contingent reward refers to leadership behaviors that are focused on the exchange of resources: leaders provide tangible or intangible support and resources to followers in exchange for their efforts and performance. Active management by-exception refers to monitoring performance and taking corrective action as necessary. The focus of management-by-exception is on setting standards. Passive management-byexception is a less active version of management-by-exception in which leaders take a

38 passive approach, intervening only when problems become serious. Finally, laissez-faire can be thought as nonleadership or the avoidance of leadership responsibilities (Bono & Judge, 2004). Hogan et al. (1994) posed nine questions in their study of leadership behaviors. Three of these questions are highlighted here. First, does leadership matter? A growing body of evidence supports the common sense belief that leadership matters. Consequently, psychologists need to better determine when, where, and how leadership affects organization effectiveness and help organizations choose better leaders (p. 494). Second, how are leaders chosen? Psychologists have known for some time that measures of cognitive ability and normal personality, structured interviews, simulations and assessment centers predict leadership success reasonably well (p. 494). Finally, how to forecast leadership? The best way to forecast leadership is to use a combination of cognitive ability, personality, simulation, role play, and multirater assessment instruments and techniques (p. 497). According to Conger (1999) and other groups of investigators, most theories and empirical studies on charismatic and transformational leadership have been conducted in the area of leader behaviors and the effects of these behaviors. The following elements appear to be common denominators in those studies: (a) influencing followers by establishing a vision for a better future, (b) inspiring followers as opposed to controlling them, (c) leading by example through role modeling, (d) contributing to subordinates intellectual stimulation,(e) enhancing the meaningfulness of goals and behaviors, (f) fulfilling followers self-actualization needs, (g) empowering followers through intrinsic

39 motivation, (h) exhibiting confidence in subordinates abilities to attain higher levels of achievement, and (i) enhancing the collective identity. Charismatic leadership is another aspect that has been studied in great detail. Howell and Shamir (2005) presented a theoretical analysis of the followers role in the charismatic leadership process. The authors distinguished between two types of charismatic relationships, namely, personalized and socialized, and proposed how followers self-concepts may determine the type of charismatic relationships they formed with the leader. Charismatic leadership is also considered to be transformational leadership. Leadership has been analyzed in relationship to its motivational and creativity effects. Bono and Judge (2003) concluded, Followers of transformational leaders viewed their work as more important and as more self-congruent. The effects of self-concordant work goals on job attitudes and performance were generally positive; the pattern of relationships differed in the field study and experimental study. (p. 554) Jung (2000-2001) studied the transformational and transactional leadership effects among people in creativity groups. Results clearly supported the hypotheses in that the participants in the transformational leadership condition and in the nominal group condition outperformed their counterparts in the transactional leadership condition and in the real group condition (p. 185). Leadership has been studied from different perspectives. Bass, Avolio, Jung and Berson (2003) calculated the predictive relationships for transformational and transactional leadership among 72 light infantry platoon leaders for ratings of unit

40 potency, cohesion, and performance in combat simulation exercises. Both transformational and transactional leadership positively predicted unit performance. Garman, Davis-Lenane, and Corrigan (2003) examined the factor structure of the transformational leadership model in human service teams. The MLQ was used with 236 leaders and 620 subordinates from 54 mental health teams. Results suggested active and passive management-by-exception factors were independent constructs. Goodwin, Wofford, and Whittington (2001) examined the contingent rewards subscale in the MLQ in an attempt to explain recent empirical results linking contingent rewards to transformational as opposed to transactional leadership. Felfe, Tartler, and Liepmann (2004) applied the model of transformational leadership, proposed by Bass (1985) and used the MLQ, in Germany and concluded, Compared to findings from North America studies the German version of the instrument provides sufficient reliability and validityand can be transferable to German organizations (p. 280). Kark, Shamir, and Chen (2003) in their research concluded, Transformational leadership was positively related to both followers dependence and their empowerment and that personal identification mediated the relationship between transformational leadership and followers dependence on the leader, whereas social identification mediated the relationship between transformational leadership and followers empowerment. (p. 246) Several authors have attempted to create handbooks for leaders in order to present the complexity of defining and describing leadership, develop a fit model for leadership, or provide lessons for leadership (Hanbury, Sapat, & Washington, 2004;

41 Lussier & Achua, 2001; Mueller & Goic, 2002; Watkins, 2003; Zenger & Folkman, 2002, 2004). The educational aspects of developing leadership skills have also been discussed and studied attempting to find whether business schools can teach leadership, and if so what essential skills should be provided to participants (Ashkanasy & Dasborough, 2003; Bowerman, 2003; Elmuti, Minnis, & Abebe, 2005; Mellahi, 2000). More recently Harland, Harrison, Jones, and Reiter-Palmon (2005) developed a new approach to assess the relationship between leaders behaviors and subordinates resilience. Judge and Bono (2000) stated, Given the centrality of leadership to success or failure of organizations and even societies, there are few more important questions than, What makes a leader great? [italics added] (p. 751). Transformational leadership has been the focus of attention for academics attempting to provide an answer to that old question. Studies Relating Two or More Variables The literature reviews main objective is to focus on research having studied the relationships between two or more variables. The review focuses on the studies conducted in which quantitative analyses have been performed using well-known instruments. Studies relating one of the variables, personality, critical thinking, or emotional intelligence, to leadership were first discussed. Finally, studies relating more than two of these variables were discussed. Personality and Leadership Personality and leadership together were the two most researched attributes. According to Bono and Judge (2004),

42 A recent PsycINFO search revealed that 1,738 of the 15,000 articles (12%) published since 1990 on the topic of leadership included the keywords personality and leadership. Clearly scholars have a strong and continuing interest in the dispositional bases of leadership behavior. (p. 901) Bono and Judge (2004) developed a meta-analysis of personality and transformational and transactional leadership using the five-factor model of personality as an organizing framework and accumulated 384 correlations from 26 independent studies. Transformational leadership was analyzed in terms of four behaviors: idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individual consideration. Transactional leadership was also analyzed in terms of four behaviors, namely, contingent reward, active management-by-exception, passive management-by-exception, and laissez-faire. Personality traits were related to three dimensions of transformational leadership, namely, idealized influence, inspirational motivation, and individual consideration, and to three dimensions of transactional leadership, namely, contingent reward, active management-by-exception, and passive management-by-exception. Results were quite modest, indicating the big five may not be the best way to discover relationships between personality attributes and transformational and transactional leadership. Extraversion was the strongest and most consistent correlate of transformational leadership, especially with respect to the charisma dimension. Kornor and Nordvik (2004) studied personality traits associated with leadership behavior in Norway. Correlational analyses of the personality traits measured by the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO PI-R; Costa & McCrae, 1992) and three leadership styles: Change, Production, and Employee (CPE) measured by Ekvall and

43 Arvonens (1991) CPE questionnaire were performed (p. 49). Ekvall and Arvonen (1991, 1994) suggested a third dimension to the task-oriented (production) and relationsoriented (employee), namely, change/development. A sample of 106 Norwegian leaders was used, and three factors comprising leadership styles and personality domains were interpreted, namely, looking for new possibilities, hard working, and dealing with people. The strongest predictors of the CPE total score were conscientiousness and extraversion; openness to experience and agreeableness were specific predictors for change and employee, respectively. Lim and Ployhart (2004) examined The five-factor model of personality, transformational leadership, and team performance under conditions similar to typical and maximum performance contexts (p. 610). The sample of 276 military personnel from the Singapore Armed Forces participated in the study: 39 team leaders, 202 followers, 20 superiors of these combat teams, and 15 assessment center assessors. Results suggested neuroticism and agreeableness were negatively related to transformational leadership ratings. Transformational leadership related more strongly to team performance in the maximum rather than the typical context. Kejriwal and Krishnan (2004) explored the personality traits and worldview of transformational leaders from an Indian cultural perspective. The Guna theory, called the tridimensional personality theory, explains differences across individuals. The Vedic texts also outline concepts like karma (cause-effect chain or the basic law governing all actions) and maya (existing bundle of inexplicable contradictions of the world) which help with comprehending a persons worldview. The sample consisted of 140 students, 97 males and 43 female, aged between 16 and 20 years, from a prominent school in

44 eastern India. A 47-item multifactor leadership questionnaire was used to capture the five factors of transformational leadership, namely, attributed charisma, idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individual consideration. The discussion was based on the 12 dimensions of Guna as a way to enhance transformational leadership: faith, food, sacrifice, austerity, gift, obligatory work, knowledge, action, agent, intellect, determination, and happiness. Hetland and Sandal (2003) also studied transformational leadership in Norway. Their two objectives were the following: (a) the relationship between transformational leadership and subordinates and superiors ratings of satisfaction, effectiveness, and work motivation, and (b) the relationship between transformational leadership and personality. A sample of 100 midlevel Norwegian managers employed in five different companies completed Cattells Sixteen Personality Factors Questionnaires (16PF5). Each manager was rated for leadership behaviour and outcomes from one superior and two subordinates using the MLQ. Four scales from the 16PF5 were included in the analysis: warmth, reasoning, openness to change, and tension. Using hierarchical multiple regression analyses, the authors showed that transformational leadership was strongly associated with the outcome measures in both subordinates and superiors ratings, when controlling for the impact of transactional and passive-avoidant leadership (p. 147). Judge et al. (2002) provided a qualitative review of the trait perspective in leadership research, followed by a meta-analysis using the five-factor model as an organizing framework and analyzed 222 correlations from 73 samples. The following conclusions were reached:

45 Results indicated that the relations of Neuroticism, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, and Openness to Experience with leadership generalized in that more than 90% of the individual correlations were greater than 0. Extraversion was the most consistent correlate of leadership across study settings and leadership criteria (leader emergence and leadership effectiveness). Overall, the five-factor model had a multiple correlation of .48 with leadership, indicating strong support for the leader trait perspective when traits are organized according to the five-factor model. (p. 765) Bradley et al. (2002) investigated the relationship between personality and leadership development in a sample of Canadian Forces officer candidates. The relationship between personality and leadership has always been a concern in the military. A longitudinal study constituting three stages was performed. In stage one, personality assessments were obtained for candidates at various recruiting centers. In stage two, six to nine months later, 174 military officer candidates were evaluated by instructors and peers in terms of various aspects of the Basic Officer Training Course (BOTC). Four years later, in stage three, the authors examined the extent to which selfratings of personality obtained in stage one predicted leadership performance and perceptions of leadership styles. The authors concluded, Dominance, energy level, and internal control predicted some leadership criteria, with dominance predicting the most. Overall, these results indicate that measures of personality are associated with leadership development in the military (p. 92). McCormack and Mellor (2002) investigated the five-factor model of personality traits domains and leadership effectiveness using a sample composed of 99Australian

46 Army commissioned officers. The NEO PI-R was completed and rated by participants superior officers on the annual leadership effectiveness evaluation schedule. The sample was composed of officers from second lieutenant to lieutenant colonel, 97 men and 2 women, 47 in active duty and 48 reserve officers between the ages of 21 and 53 years. It was hypothesized that leadership effectiveness would be predicted by the personality trait domains of high Conscientiousness, Openness to experience, Agreeableness, and Extraversion and by low Neuroticism (p. 179). The results obtained supported the usefulness of the five-factor model for exploring the role of personality in leadership effectiveness among military officers. Judge and Bono (2000) suggested, This study linked traits from the five-factor model of personality to transformational leadership behavior. Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness to Experience, and Agreeableness were hypothesized to predict transformational leadership (p. 751). In their study, participants were enrolled in or were alumni of community leadership programs throughout the United States of Americas Midwest, and the research was conducted in an effort to encourage local leaders in business and government to exercise their leadership skills as stewards of their communities. The authors conclusions were the following: Results-based on 14 samples of leaders of over 200 organizations revealed that Extraversion and Agreeableness positively predicted transformational leadership; Openness to Experience was positively correlated with transformational leadership, but its effects disappeared once the influence of the other traits was controlled. Results further indicated that specific facets of the Big 5 traits

47 predicted transformational leadership less well than the general constructs. Finally, transformational leadership behavior predicted a number of outcomes reflecting leader effectiveness, controlling for the effect of transactional leadership. (p. 751) Crant and Bateman (2000) tested the relationship between proactive personality and perceptions of charismatic leadership. A sample of 156 managers completed measures of proactive personality along with measures of the five-factor model of personality. The managers immediate supervisors rated their charismatic leadership and in-role behavior. Results suggested that a self-reported proactive personality is positively related to supervisors independent ratings of charismatic leadership. Cable and Judge (2003) studied the links between the five-factor model of personality and managers upward-influence tactic strategies in an attempt to assess the role of a managers personality and a supervisors leadership style. Longitudinal data from 189 managers at 140 different organizations confirmed the following: Managers scoring high on extraversion were more likely to use inspirational appeal and ingratiation; those scoring high on openness to experience were less likely to use coalitions; those scoring high on emotional stability were more likely to use rational persuasion and less likely to use inspirational appeal; those scoring high on agreeableness were less likely to use legitimization or pressure; and those scoring high on conscientiousness were likely to use rational appeal. (p. 197) Results confirmed that managers upward-influence tactic strategies depended on the leadership styles of their supervisors.

48 Cellar, Sidle, Goudy, and O'Brien (2001) stated, Past research has shown that when leader styles were dichotomized as autocratic versus democratic, female leaders were evaluated more harshly for using autocratic styles than their male counterparts (p. 61). The authors investigated whether or not the personality characteristics of agreeableness interacted with a leaders gender and leaders style to affect subordinates reactions to the leader. The results partially supported that disagreeable participants would rate gender-inconsistent behavior more harshly. Emotional Intelligence and Leadership Dulewicz and Higgs (2003) studied the need for emotional intelligence in organizations. The authors used seven main elements of emotional intelligence: selfawareness, emotional resilience, motivation, interpersonal sensitivity, influence, intuitiveness, and conscientiousness (Higgs & Dulewicz, 2002). Three studies were performed. The first study was a survey of directors in the United Kingdom to determine which competencies were important in order to be a successful director in the roles of chairperson, chief executive officer, and executive and nonexecutive director. Of the 38 competencies under investigation, 10 were identified as closely linked to the seven elements of emotional intelligence. The sample comprised 339 directors. The second study was administered to 90 directors of companies quoted on the London Stock Exchange who held similar positions, namely, chairperson (6), chief executive officer (18), executive (63), and nonexecutive director (3). An assessment of the 38 personal competencies described by Dulewicz and Gay (1997) was performed in order to calculate measures of the emotional quotient (EQ), IQ, and managerial competencies (MQ). The third study was a second exploratory study in which 100 managers participated, and the

49 Job Competencies Survey (Dulewicz & Higgs, 2000) was used. Dulewicz and Higgs (2003) stated, The need for effective leadership has become paramount in order to meet the challenges of the 21st century and a growing number of academics and senior managers have recently come to recognize the importance of emotional intelligence (EI) for effective leadership (p. 193). The results supported Goleman at al.s (2002) argument that the higher up one advances in an organization, the more important emotional intelligence becomes. Caruso et al. (2002) questioned whether emotional intelligence is simply a nave theory of personality or a form of intelligence. If emotional intelligence is to be of value, it must measure something unique and distinct from standard personality traits. To explore this question, this study examined an ability test of emotional intelligence and its relationship to personality test variables to determine the extent to which these constructs overlap (p. 306). A sample for 183 men and women took the Multifactor Emotional Intelligence Scale or MEIS, an ability measure of emotional intelligence, as well as measures of career interests, personality, and social behavior. Caruso et al. (2002) concluded, Emotional intelligence was measured reliably and was relatively independent of traditionally defined personality traits, supporting the discriminant validity of the emotional intelligence construct (p. 306). Gardner and Stough (2002) examined the relationship between leadership and emotional intelligence among senior level managers using the Swinburne University Emotional Intelligence Test (SUEIT) (Palmer & Stough, 2001). Questionnaires were sent to 250 high-level managers. Of a total of 110 respondents, 76 were males and 30 females (four subjects did not specify their gender), their average age was 42.7 years, 45% had

50 earned postgraduate degrees, and 69 respondents were senior-level managers or above. Five factors, namely, emotional recognition and expression, emotions direct cognition, understanding of emotion external, emotional management, and emotional control were explored. Gardner and Stough (2002) concluded the study by stating the following: Effective leaders were identified as those who reported transformational rather than transactional behaviours. Emotional intelligence correlated highly with all components of transformational leadership, with the components of understanding of emotions (external) and emotional management [sic] the best predictors of this type of leadership style. The utility of emotional intelligence testing in leadership selection and development is discussed. (p. 68) Kobe et al. (2001) stated, Leadership has both social and emotional components. Social intelligence appears to tap the social component found in leadership. Recently, emotional intelligence has surfaced as a stable individual difference variable and appears to tap the emotional component of leadership (p. 154). Their sample was composed by 192 undergraduate students at a Midwestern university. There were 126 females and 66 males who completed the study, with a mean age of 22 years and representing all levels of university education. The participants completed a questionnaire containing a measure of emotional intelligence, a measure of social intelligence, and a measure of leadership. Emotional intelligence was measured using the Emotional Quotient Inventory a 152-item, five-point Likert-type rating scale. Social intelligence was measured with 30 validated items using a five-point Likert-type rating scale. Leadership was measured using 14 items. The authors concluded that both emotional intelligence and social intelligence are important for leadership among university students. Social intelligence accounted for a

51 larger proportion of variance in leadership experiences than did emotional intelligence. Dearborn (2002) stated, Organizational development professionals are beginning to see emotional intelligence concepts integrated in leadership development curriculums and multi-rater tools (p. 529). Palmer et al. (2001) stated, Emotional intelligence has become increasingly popular as a measure for identifying potentially effective leaders and as a tool for developing effective leadership skills. Despite this popularity, however, there is little empirical research that substantiates the efficacy of emotional intelligence in these areas (p. 5). Palmer et al.s (2001) aim was to explore the relationship between emotional intelligence and effective leadership. The study was developed using a sample of 43 participants, 10 females and 33 males, with a mean age of 37.5 years. The participants were past and current students of the Swinburne University for Innovation and Enterprise Programs. Participants held positions in higher (33%), middle (30%) and lower (27%) management. Prati, Douglas, Ferris, Ammeter, and Buckley (2003a) stated, Emotional intelligence reflects the ability to read and understand others in social contexts, to detect the nuances of emotional reactions, and to utilize such knowledge to influence other through emotional regulation and control (p. 21), and Emotional intelligence has emerged as one of the most notable social effectiveness constructs, and we argue that it is a foundational element of leadership effectiveness (p.22). The study explored the concept of emotional intelligence as it plays a critical role in leadership and team process dynamics and effectiveness, and 10 testable propositions were formulated. These propositions enhanced the concept for the organizations emotional intelligence team

52 performance. Antonakis (2003) questioned whether the first claim in Prati et al.s (2003a) article that emotional intelligence is critical for effective team leadership is justified. Prati, Douglas, Ferris, Ammeter and Buckley (2003b), in response, restated several of the reasons why they posit emotional intelligence as an important factor in team leader effectiveness. Barling, Slater, and Kellowat (2000) investigated whether emotional intelligence was associated with the use of transformational leadership in 49 managers. Managers completed questionnaires assessing their own emotional intelligence and attributional styles, and 157 subordinates provided ratings of their transformational leadership styles. Results showed that idealized influence, inspirational motivation, and individualized consideration differed according to participants levels of emotional intelligence. Critical Thinking and Leadership Yang and Lin (2004) studied the relationship between creative and critical thinking styles among Taiwanese high school students. The study investigated the relationships among demographic variables (class grades, school types, major field, parents education level, etc.), psychological type, critical thinking, and creative thinking is senior high school students (p. 33). The following instruments were administered to 1,119 male senior high school students (grades 10 and 11): The Thinking Styles Inventory, Chopsticks Creativity Test, WGCTA, and Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI). The study examined the following relationships: (a) the relationship between thinking styles as defined by the Steinberg theory of mental self-government and the MBTI personality types as defined by Jungian theory, (b) the relationship between

53 critical and creative thinking and whether certain components of creativity measurements (fluency, flexibility, and originality) were associated with a certain component of critical measurements (inference, recognition of assumptions, deduction, interpretation, and evaluation), and (c) the extent to which psychological types may predict peoples capacity to engage in creative and critical thinking. The authors concluded, The present study, anchored in Steinbergs theory of mental self-government and Jungs theory of personality types, serves to lend partial support to the evidence of the relationships of thinking styles to personality types (p. 33). Rickettss (2003) dissertation focused on the efficacy of leadership development, critical thinking dispositions, and student academic performance on the critical thinking skills of selected youth leaders. The primary purpose of the study was to identify and predict the critical thinking skills of selected youth leaders in the National Future Farmers of America (FFA) Organization (p. 39). Voluntary participants in the study included 212 youth leaders from 50 states. This study was conducted using survey (descriptive) research and a correlational and causal comparative or ex post facto design. The dependent variables were total critical thinking skills and level and the skills of analysis, inference, and evaluation. The independent variables were age, gender, grade point average (GPA), leadership training score, leadership experience score, total critical thinking disposition score, and scores on the specific critical thinking dispositions of innovativeness, maturity, and engagement. The author found some correlations between leadership variables (training and experience) and critical thinking skill scores. The best predictive models of critical thinking skill scores included the variables GPA, leadership training score, innovativeness sum, age, and gender.

54 Personality and Critical Thinking Stewarts (2000) dissertation focused on the effects of psychological type and critical thinking for doctoral students achievements. The MBTI was used to measure personality, the WGCTA was used to measure critical thinking, and the GPA was used to measure the students achievement. The research revealed the following results: No significant difference in the effect of psychological type as an interacting variable with critical thinking in student grade point at the doctoral level. No significant differences were observed in grade point average between Sensing and Intuitive psychological types at the doctoral level. A significant effect of critical thinking on student grade point average in a doctoral program was obtained in this investigation (p. 62). Personality, Emotional Intelligence, and Leadership Palmer, Gardner, and Stough (2003) examined the relationship between emotional intelligence, personality, and effective leadership in three separate samples: 210 participants from the local community, 555 nurses, and 110 senior executives. The Swinburne University Emotional Intelligence Test (SUEIT) was used as a workplace measure of emotional intelligence and three of the five major domains of personality: neuroticism, extraversion, and openness to experience, were use to examine samples one and two. In sample three, the relationships among the workplace measure SUEIT, personality using the full NEO PI-R, and leadership using the MLQ were examined. These authors concluded the following: While there were some moderate correlations between SUEIT and facets of the NEO, the SUEIT was found to account for variance in effective leadership over and above the personality. This latter finding suggests the SUEIT can predict

55 theoretically related variables (e.g., effective leadership) over and above personality. (p. 140) Rosete and Ciarrochi (2005) investigated the relationship between emotional intelligence, personality, cognitive intelligence, and leadership effectiveness using 41 senior executives of an Australian public service. They used the MSCEIT for emotional intelligence, the 16PF5 for personality, and the Weschler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence (WASI). Leadership effectiveness was assessed using an objective measure of performance and a 360 assessment involving each leaders subordinates and direct manager (n=149) (p. 388). Using correlational and regression analyses, they found that higher EI was associated with higher leadership effectiveness, and that EI explained variance not explained by either personality or IQ. Personality, Critical Thinking, Emotional Intelligence, and Leadership Murenskys (2000) dissertation, The Relationships Between Emotional Intelligence, Personality, Critical Thinking Ability and Organizational Leadership Performance at Upper-Levels of Management appears to be the only research that investigated the relationships between personality characteristics, the competencies of emotional intelligence, cognitive abilities comprising critical thinking, and the attainment of strategic organizational goals by managers in high-level leadership positions (p. viii). One hundred executives in key leadership roles at an international oil corporation comprised the subject population, of whom 90 participated, and of whom 13 were females and 77 male. The data collection was performed using the NEO PI-R, the Emotional Competence Inventory (ECI), and the WGCTA. Criteria for managerial

56 performance consisted of the Balance Scorecard (Kaplan & Norton, 1996) results for each business unit, and for each strategic partner. Murensky (2000) performed several correlations and stated, The plan called for a hierarchical regression analysis to test the original research hypotheses that a combination of the three predictors would incrementally increase the ability to predict leader performance outcomes (p. 26). The simultaneous regression analysis was conducted for each perspective of the Balance Scorecard (Kaplan & Norton, 1996) and for the total Balance Scorecard. Murensky (2000) measured leader effectiveness using the Balance Scorecard. Results obtained by Murensky (2000) indicated that emotional intelligence was independent of the cognitive abilities of critical thinking and overlapped with the five personality domains measured by the NEO. Emotional intelligence contributed a minimal amount of variance in predicting organizational performance measured by the balance scorecard and critical thinking were found not to be related to any of the four scorecard performance perspectives. Summary Personality and leadership have been two subjects under research for almost 100 years; researchers have made numerous attempts to explain leadership on the basis of personality traits. Emotional intelligence and leadership have been the other two subjects under research in terms of importance, and finally, critical thinking and leadership. Very few studies have been conducted in which the relationships among three attributes have been explored, and only one study explored the relationships among all four attributes. The most commonly used instrument for measuring personality has been the NEO PI-R (Costa and McCrae, 1992), also known as the five-factor model (FFM) or the big

57 five, or OCEAN, which stands for openness to experience (fantasy, aesthetics, feelings, actions, ideas, and values), conscientiousness (competence, order, dutifulness, achievement striving, self-discipline, and deliberation), extraversion (warmth, gregariousness, assertiveness, activity, excitement seeking, and positive emotions), agreeableness (trust, straightforwardness, altruism, compliance, modesty, and tendermindedness), and neuroticism (anxiety, angry hostility, depression, self-consciousness, impulsiveness, and vulnerability). Emotional intelligence has been measured with several well-known instruments: the Emotional Quotient Inventory (EQ-i) developed by Bar-On; the EQ Map SelfAssessment Test; the ECI developed by Goleman and Boyatzis; the MSCEIT, which is self-assessment test; and the EIQ, produced in cooperation with Henley Management College and one of Englands most popular self-assessment tools. The MSCEIT and the ECI have become the most commonly used instruments. The MSCEIT was chosen for this research. Critical thinking is becoming a popular personal attribute to measure. It was originally studied by Columbia University Professors Goodwin Watson and Edward M. Glaser. The WGCTA, Forms A and B, are the most often used instruments for measuring critical thinking. Form A is composed of five subtests: inference, recognition of assumptions, deduction, interpretation, and evaluation of arguments. The MLQ is the most popular instrument for measuring leadership (Avolio & Bass, 2004) and is a questionnaire based on the original model proposed by Bass (1985). This questionnaire covers nine factors: idealized influence, attributes and behavior,

58 intellectual stimulation, individualized consideration, contingent reward, active management-by-exception, passive management-by-exception, and laissez-faire. Conclusion A vast amount of literature exists that is related to personality, critical thinking, emotional intelligence, and leadership. Germinal and recent books and research were written mainly during the last 25 years. Mellahi (2000) investigated the compatibility of leadership values taught on MBA programs in the United Kingdom and those in three non-westerns cultures and concluded, The ethnocentric approach to the teaching of leadership is due to a large extent to the unavailability of alternative theories and published empirical evidence outside the USA and the low level of expertise and interest in international dimensions of effective leadership styles. (p. 297) Mehallis study revealed that leadership curricula on MBA programs is conceived in the United States and assumed universality. Hetland and Sandal (2003) in their research concluded, The superiority of transformational leadership documented in a number of studies also generalizes to a Norwegian context..Our findings have indicated the importance of transformational leadership in yet another culture. We hope this study will inspire future research on such leaders and their behaviour and traits. (p. 167) This study attempted to continue research on transformational leadership in a developing country, namely Peru.

59 Although literature exists with respect to first world nations, leadership needs to further be studied, especially in developing countries. A study of the relationship among personality traits, the cognitive abilities that comprise critical thinking, the competencies associated with emotional intelligence, and a leader personality traits and competencies was needed as no research on those aspects has been documented for developing countries. Chapter 3 provides a brief background synopsis of chapters 1 and 2 to establish the foundation for the study and appropriateness of the research design. Chapter 3 will further elaborate on the method used to assess the individual and combined influences of personality, critical thinking, and emotional intelligence on Peruvian managers leadership style.

60 CHAPTER 3: METHOD The purpose of this quantitative study is to examine the relationships that may exist among personality traits, the cognitive abilities that comprise critical thinking, the competencies associated with emotional intelligence, and transformational leadership styles. The quantitative research dimensions were the following: basic research that was descriptive in purpose, cross-sectional in design, and collected quantitative data using survey techniques. When using the survey techniques, the researcher can ask many people numerous questions in a short period using validated and reliable instruments (Neuman, 2003). Several classes of students enrolled in the managerial MBA program at Centrum business graduate school in Lima, Peru, constituted the sample. The managerial MBA is a 26-month, six-cycle, part-time program, and students attend classes every other weekend. Active students enrolled in the programs from October 2003 to October 2005 were invited to participate. Research Design Creswell (2002) stated, Quantitative research is an inquiry approach useful for describing trends and explaining the relationship among variables found in the literature (p. 58). The use of instruments to gather data is necessary in order to answer questions and to analyze results using statistics. Survey designs are procedures in quantitative research in which investigators administer a survey or questionnaire to a sample or to an entire population of people in order to describe the attitudes, opinions, behaviors, or characteristics of the population (Creswell, 2002, p. 60). In contrast, qualitative research

61 attempts to understand a central phenomenon using broad, general questions to participants. As such, qualitative methods were not applicable to this research. The general research topic was leadership and related psychological and personal attributes. The variables of the study were the following: (a) dependent variable transformational leadership styles; and (b) independent variablespersonality domains (neuroticism, extraversion, agreeableness, openness to experience, and conscientiousness), critical thinking, and emotional intelligence. This quantitative investigation surveyed 375 managerial MBA students personal attributes in order to discover the individual and combined influences of personality domains, critical thinking, and emotional intelligence in Peruvian managers leadership styles. To discover relationships between these variables was this dissertations main goal. Managerial MBA students constitute a specific heterogeneous population who have an average of more than 10 years of working experience, have an average age of 35, are currently working, are in a middle to high position in companies, and are coming to class every other weekend to share a common goal, namely, to obtain an MBA degree at the Pontificia Universidad Catlica del Per studying at Centrum Catlica. Variables Personality was the first independent variable assessed. Costa and McCrae (1995, 1997) presented the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO PI-R) that consists of 30 facet scales that define the broad domains of the five-factor model of personality: (a) neuroticism (N), which is composed of measures for anxiety, angry hostility, depression, self-consciousness, impulsiveness, and vulnerability; (b) extraversion (E), which is

62 composed of measures of warmth, gregariousness, assertiveness, activity, excitement seeking, and positive emotions; (c) openness to experience (O), which is composed of measures of fantasy, aesthetics, feelings, actions, ideas, and values; (d) agreeableness (A), which is composed of measures of trust, straightforwardness, altruism, compliance, modesty, and tender-mindedness; and (e) conscientiousness (C), which is composed of measures of competence, order, dutifulness, achievement striving, self-discipline, and deliberation. The instrument does not report a final total score for personality, but one score for each domain. Critical thinking was the second independent variable assessed. The Watson Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal (WGCTA) Form A measures cognitive abilities with subtests for inference, recognition of assumptions, deduction, interpretation, and evaluation of arguments. The instrument reports one total score for critical thinking and individual scores for each subtest although the latter are not recommended for use (Watson & Glasser, 1980b). Emotional intelligence was the third independent variable assessed. The MayerSalovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT) provides one final score for emotional intelligence. This overall emotional intelligence scale is composed of two areas: experiential (EEIQ) and strategic (SEIQ), with one score for each area. Each area is composed by two branches for evaluating how a person manages emotions (PEIQ) and understands emotions (FEIQ) for EEIQ, and uses emotions (UEIQ) and perceives emotions (MEIQ) for SEIQ. Each of the four branches is composed of two task levels. There are a total of 14 scores for the instruments components and one final score for the emotional intelligence construct.

63 Finally, the dependent variable, namely, transformational leadership styles was measured using the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) Leader Form 5x-Short. This test assesses nine leadership factors and three leadership outcomes. The nine factors define the three leadership styles: (a) transformational leadership styles, which is composed of five factorsidealized influence attributes, idealized influence behaviors, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration; (b) transactional leadership, which is composed of two factorscontingent reward and active management-by-exception; and (c) passive avoidant, which is composed of two factorspassive management-by-exception and laissez-faire. The three outcomes that result are the following: extra effort, effectiveness, and satisfaction with leadership. The MLQ yields 12 scores, one for each of the instruments components. One final score results from the five factors that form the transformational leadership construct. Appropriateness of Design A correlational quantitative research was the most appropriate design for this research. This type of research is used whenever the following characteristics are present in a study: (a) The research problem is descriptive and explanation oriented; (b) a review of the literature plays a major role and is needed as justification for the research problem and the need of the study; (c) a specific and narrow purpose is measurable using observable data; (d) numerical data is collected using predetermined instruments because a large number of individuals are involved in the process; (e) statistical analysis is required for analyzing and interpreting data in terms of the descriptions of trends, comparisons of groups, or relationships among variables, and a comparison of results with predictors and past studies complements the proposed study; and (f) reporting and

64 evaluating the research uses standard and fixed procedures, and objective and unbiased results are reported (Creswell, 2002). This research conforms to the six characteristics and is therefore a quantitative research study. Research Questions The following research questions were proposed in an effort to find significant relationships among personality domains, critical thinking, emotional intelligence, and transformational leadership styles. The research questions presented for analysis were the following: 1. Does neuroticism (also known as emotional instability) relate to transformational leadership styles? 2. Does extraversion relate to transformational leadership styles? 3. Does openness to experience relate to transformational leadership? 4. Does agreeableness relate to transformational leadership styles? 5. Does conscientiousness relate to transformational leadership styles? 6. Does critical thinking relate to transformational leadership styles? 7. Does emotional intelligence relate to transformational leadership styles? 8. Do the personality domains of neuroticism, extraversion, openness to experience, agreeableness, and conscientiousness as well as critical thinking and emotional intelligence exert a combined influence on transformational leadership styles? Population All Peruvian managers of firms legally constituted in Peru who have an academic degree were the target population of this study, and all students of the managerial MBA

65 program at Centrum in Lima, Peru, were the sampled population. Students who entered the program from October 2003 to October 2005 were used as the sample. Participants in the research needed to be active students and voluntarily wished to participate. The active number of students was 401. Informed Consent The benefits of the research were promoted among managerial MBA students. The following benefits were indicated to participants: (a) to develop research and knowledge about Peruvian managers leadership styles; (b) to let the participating students know about their personality traits, the cognitive abilities that comprise critical thinking, the competencies associated with emotional intelligence, and transformational leadership styles; (c) to allow participating students to understand the influences and relationships among those personal attributes; (d) to use the research results to improve the educational quality of MBA programs; and (e) to establish possibilities for further research. The informed consent form is presented in Appendix A in both a Spanish version, which was the one used for the survey, and the translated English version. Participation was voluntary, as indicated by the informed consent clause. No likely risks were associated with participation in the study, and the possible benefits of this research were described to the students as potentially useful information for them, for companies, for business education, and finally, for the development of leadership in Peru. Sampling Frame All the students enrolled in the managerial MBA program who started the program from October 2003 to October 2005 were invited to participate on a voluntary

66 basis. The diverse characteristics of participants ensured a very heterogeneous sample in terms of gender, age, undergraduate careers, years of working experience, and universities attended, among other demographics aspects. The total possible sample was 401 students and of these, 375 students voluntarily participated in the research. The participation percentage was greater than the 90% expected. Managerial MBA students were chosen for several reasons: (a) They possessed more than 10 years average working experience; (b) they demonstrated diverse careers, ranging from medical doctors to engineers; (c) their genders demonstrated a male to female ratio of 3:1; (d) they had attended an undergraduate university, mostly private and public Peruvian universities and usually the best ranked universities in both groups; (e) they demonstrated diversity with respect to their hierarchical positions in companies, from owners, to chief executive officers, to line managers, among others; and (f) their ages ranged from 23 to 60 years old. These heterogeneous characteristics provide a general description of the Peruvian managers of firms legally constituted in Peru. Confidentiality The informed consent clause assured the participant that his or her responses would be held in confidence by the researcher. In order to ensure the confidentiality of individual participant's information, the raw data was kept in locked boxes in an office, and data files were password protected. No information about individual students was released to anyone but the student him or herself for any reason whatsoever. Moreover, students' names were not recorded on any of the instruments administered. For the purposes of processing the data, each student was allocated a numeric code that was known only to the student and the researcher, and the list of names and codes were kept

67 in a separate locked box. The individual results were delivered to each participant in a closed envelope with a red confidential seal stamped on the envelope. Geographic Location The study was conducted in Lima, Peru, at Centrum, the Pontificia Universidad Catlicas graduate business school. Lima is the capital of Peru, and most of the countrys economy is concentrated in Lima. Peru is a country with 27.2 million inhabitants of which about 7.8 million live in Lima, according to the Instituto Nacional de Estadstica e Informtica (National Institute of Statistics and Informatics) (INEI, 2006). Lima is the countrys political and economic center, and the most important national and multinational companies operating in Peru having their headquarters in Lima in spite of having operations outside Lima, mostly in the mountains and jungle and mainly in the mining and oil sectors. Instrumentation The NEO PI-R Form S is a 240-question questionnaire that attempts to evaluate a persons personality traits. The instrument was developed by Paul T. Costa, Jr., and Robert R. McCrae in 1992 and was provided by Psychological Assessment Resources Inc. The NEO PI-R Form S assesses the personality construct and provides individual measures for five well-established domains: neuroticism, extraversion, openness to experience, agreeableness, and conscientiousness. The WGCTA Form A is an 80-question questionnaire that attempts to evaluate the cognitive characteristics of a persons critical thinking. The instrument was developed by Goodwin Watson and Edward M. Glaser in 1980 and was provided by Harcourt Assessment, Inc. The WGCTA Form A measures cognitive abilities with subtests for

68 inference, recognition of assumptions, deduction, interpretation, and evaluation of arguments (Watson & Glaser, 1980b). The MSCEIT is a 141-question self-evaluation questionnaire that measures the features and personal characteristics of emotional intelligence. The instrument was developed by J. Mayer, P. Salovey and D. Caruso in 2002 and was provided by MultiHealth Systems, Inc. The MSCEIT features a four-branch model for evaluating how a person manages emotions, understands emotions, uses emotions, and perceives emotions (Mayer et al., 2002). The MLQ Leader Form 5x-Short is a 45-question questionnaire that attempts to determine the multiple factors constituting a persons leadership style. The instrument was elaborated upon by Bruce J. Avolio and Bernard M. Bass in 2004 and was provided by Mind Garden, Inc. The MLQ questionnaire assesses nine leadership factors: idealized influence attributes, idealized influence behaviors, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, individualized consideration, contingent reward, active management-byexception, passive management-by-exception, and laissez-faire leadership styles, and three leadership outcomes, namely, extra effort, effectiveness, and satisfaction with leadership (Avolio & Bass, 2004). These instruments were administered using the Spanish version provided by the supplying companies, and the English version was readily available to confirm if the translation used was understandable in the Peruvian Spanish lexicon. Results were statistically processed with the help of the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 13 together with its package for structural equations AMOS (Byrne, 2001; Kline, 2005) version 6 software, and the results have been reported in English in this study. A

69 summary of the permission statements from the four companies providing the questionnaires is presented in Appendix B. Appendixes C, D, E, and F present the most commonly known instruments for measuring personality, critical thinking, emotional intelligence, and leadership styles, respectively. The four chosen instruments for this research were selected after conducting the literature review and assessing the research previously conducted about the relationships among these personal characteristics. Data Collection The research followed a logical sequence of activities. The research was advertised to students, and the procedure to be followed and the benefits of participating were explained; participation was on a voluntary basis and the instruments were administered after emphasizing the confidentiality of the tests results in the informed consent form; collected data were used to create the required databases for each analysis; several statistical analyses were performed; confidential, classified results were provided to participants; and finally, the results were processed and reported in this dissertation. The instruments were administered to groups of managerial MBA students in Classes VII, VIII, IX, X, XI, XII, XIII, and XIV after the groups had been invited to participate in the research. These students started the MBA program between October 2003 and October 2005. Administrators, all of whom were psychologists, helped in the administration of the tests. As such, the administrators were bound by the ethics of confidentiality and engaged the respondents in the task of completing the questionnaires in such a way that the possibility of response sets or random responding to the items was reduced (Costa & McCrae, 1992).

70 Data were collected using the four questionnaires that measure personality (NEO PI-R Form S), critical thinking (WGCTA Form A), emotional intelligence (MSCEIT), and leadership (MLQ) variables. The four instruments were paper-and-pencil tests, and respondents required about 60 minutes on average to complete each of the four instruments. Four 60-minute sessions were allocated for the administration of the instruments. Prior to conducting the first instrument, the informed consent form and demographic information were collected from those who had voluntarily decided to participate. The students respective classrooms were used for administering the instruments. These venues were very comfortable and provided an acclimatized ambiance with all the comfort of Centrums modern facilities. The demographic information requested and needed for the research was gender, age, years of work experience, university attended, and undergraduate degree obtained. This information was classified accordingly. Data Analysis Data analyses were performed by studying the observations collected with the following instruments: NEO PI-R Form S, WGCTA Form A, MSCEIT, and MLQ. The statistical analyses were initiated with an exploratory data analysis in order to detect outliers and missing data. Then, the analyses for each test were performed. The specific sequence for each test was the following: (a) descriptive summaries; (b) reliability analysis; (c) factor analysesexploratory and confirmatory, as needed; (d) analysis of correlations; and (e) tests of differences between means (Black, 2003; Dowdy, Weardon, & Chilko, 2004; Mardia, Kent, & Bibby, 2003; Thompson, 2004). Appendix G presents

71 some definitions of statistical terms. The specific aspects analyzed for each test are presented in the following sections. Analysis of the Revised NEO Personality Inventory Form S Descriptive summaries for the five domains of the NEO PI-R Form S test were obtained. The descriptive summaries included the median, mean, standard deviation, maximum and minimum scores, and coefficient of variation. Reliability analysis allows the researcher to study the properties of measurement scales and the items that make up those scales. Reliability analysis also allows him or her to determine the extent to which the items in the test are related to each other and evaluate if the scale as a whole measures only one trait. Cronbachs alpha coefficient was used for studying the internal consistency of the test. The alpha coefficient was calculated for each of the 30 facets and for the five domains of the test. Factor analysis is a technique commonly used to establish the construct validity of a test. An exploratory factor analysis was used with the 30 facets of the test in order to study its internal structure. According to the recommendations of the test manual (Costa & McCrae, 1992), the extraction of factors was done by applying the principal components analysis and using the correlation matrix. The initial solution was rotated using VARIMAX orthogonal rotation. With this procedure, five factors identified as measures of the five domains of the personality evaluated by the NEO PI-R Form S test were obtained. To confirm the replicability of the five-factor structure of the NEO PI-R Form S instrument, a procrustes rotation was used for confirmatory analysis. A correlation matrix was calculated for the scores obtained in the five domains of the NEO PI-R Form S test; in this case, Pearsons correlations were used because the

72 scores of the domains were sums of 48 items and could be considered interval measures (the central limit theorem allows for approximating the distributions of the scores to normal distributions). Tests of differences between means were used to detect possible significant differences between the scores averages for each domain by the demographic variables. A t-test for two independent samples was used for each independent variable by the variable gender, and analyses of variance (ANOVA) were used to detect differences by the variables age, years of experience, university attended, and undergraduate degree; each variable has three categories. In the case of finding significant differences among the means, post hoc tests were applied in order to detect the categories in which the means were different. Analysis of the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal Form A Descriptive summaries for the five areas of the test and the total score for critical thinking were obtained. The descriptive summaries included the median, mean, standard deviation, and maximum and minimum scores. To study the internal consistency of the test a Cronbachs alpha coefficient was calculated for the total critical thinking score. According to the WGCTA Form A manual (Watson & Glaser, 1980b), the split-half reliability coefficient was also calculated for the total critical thinking score. The Spearman-Brown correction was applied in order to estimate the reliability of the complete test. A second order exploratory factor analysis was used with the scores of the five areas in order to determine if critical thinking can be measured with a unique score. A Spearmans correlation matrix was calculated for the obtained scores in the five areas of the test. Tests of the differences among means were carried out for the total critical

73 thinking score by the demographic variables. When needed, post hoc analyses were carried out. Analysis of the Mayer Salovey Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test Descriptive summaries for the four branches, two areas, and the total score of the test for emotional intelligence were calculated. The descriptive summaries obtained include the median, mean, standard deviation, and maximum and minimum scores. To study the reliability of the MSCEIT scales, the split-half coefficients, corrected by the Spearman-Brown correction, were calculated for the branches, areas, and the total emotional intelligence scores. Confirmatory factor analyses of the eight tasks measured by the MSCEIT were performed for testing one-, two-, and four-factor models in order to examine the range of permissible factor structures of the test. Pearsons correlation matrices were calculated for the four branches of the test. Tests of differences among the means of the groups defined by the demographic variables were carried out for the emotional intelligence score obtained from the test. Analysis of the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire Descriptive summaries were obtained for the nine leadership factors and for the corresponding transformational leadership scores. The descriptive summaries include the median, mean, standard deviation, and maximum and minimum scores. The Cronbachs alpha coefficient was calculated for each of the nine areas of the test, which measure the three leadership styles: transformational, transactional, and passive-avoidant. The alpha coefficient was also calculated for the transformational leadership score. A confirmatory factor analysis was used to determine whether the data confirmed the proposed nine-

74 factor model of leadership. A second-order confirmatory factor analysis was performed to confirm if the nine leadership factors could be reduced to three leadership styles. The correlation matrix was calculated for the scores in the nine areas of the test. A Spearmans correlation matrix was obtained because it deals with scores measured on an ordinal scale. A t-test of the differences between means and analyses of variance were carried out for transformational leadership by the demographic variables. Post hoc analyses were carried out as needed. Combined Analysis of the Variables Pearsons correlations were calculated to evaluate the first seven proposed hypotheses about the association between transformational leadership styles and neuroticism, extraversion, openness to experience, agreeableness, conscientiousness, critical thinking, and emotional intelligence. The strength and significance of those correlations were assessed. The following multiple regression model was proposed as a first approximation to examine, in a multivariate framework, the relationships that could exist between the dependent variable: transformational leadership (TL) styles and the independent variables: emotional intelligence (EI), critical thinking (CT), and the five personality domains, namely, neuroticism (N), extraversion (E), openness to experience (O), agreeableness (A) and conscientiousness (C). The formula is presented as follows: TL = B0 + B1 (EI) + B2 (CT) + B3 (N) + B4 (E) + B5 (O) + B6 (A) + B7 (C) +
B B B B B

The first regression model was estimated using the least-square method and allowed all the independent variables to be used using the enter method. The F statistic and its significance were observed in order to decide whether the model as a whole had a

75 statistically significant predictive capability. Observation of the multiple correlation statistic and the value of the R-square, which measures the strength of the relationship, allowed for studying the percentage of the variance of the dependent variable that could be explained in terms of the variability of the independent variables. The individual analysis of the standardized regression coefficients in the model informed the researcher about the effects of each variable as adjusted for the influence of the other variables in the model. A second regression model was obtained using the stepwise method for variable selection. All models provided at each step of this method were examined and the final model was retained. Validity and Reliability Reliability is the degree to which an instrument consistently measures what the instrument is designed to measure (Costa & McCrae, 1992). Validity refers broadly to the success with which a scale measures the construct it purports to measure (Costa & McCrae, 1992). The four chosen instruments were well-established instruments that have been previously used in different settings and have proven to be reliable and valid instruments in many different contexts, as indicated in Costa and McCrae (1992) for the NEO PI-R Form S; Watson and Glaser (1980b) for the WGCTA Form A; Mayer, Salovey, and Caruso (2002) for the MSCEIT; and Avolio and Bass (2004) for the MLQ. These instruments have been translated into several languages, and their validity and reliability have been confirmed. Reliability and validity analyses were performed for the questionnaires used when applied to the managerial MBA students at the Centrum business graduate school in Lima, Peru. The Cronbachs alpha coefficient was used to evaluate the internal

76 consistency of the tests, and the split-half reliability coefficient was used when required. The evaluation of the validity of each construct was performed using one of the following procedures: exploratory factorial analysis in order to investigate the internal structure of the observed data, confirmatory factor analysis in order to verify the data adjustment for the theoretical model supporting the instrument, or a procrustean rotation to verify the replicability of the proposed factor structure of the test. Summary This research could be replicable in various countries and applicable to leadership in diverse institutions. The procedure used classical statistical techniques and supporting software in order to facilitate the analysis. The instruments used are well-known and have been used in previous studies. A correlational quantitative research design was the most appropriate design for this study because the hypotheses proposed were descriptive, a review of the literature played a major role, and a specific and narrow measurable purpose was evident (Creswell, 2002). This research appears to be the first attempt developed in which three personal characteristics of human beings that are acquired over a lifetime have been related to transformational leadership styles, the latter being an important characteristic for improving organizations in a competitive global arena. Bass (1990) stated that to be effective in crisis conditions, leaders must be transformational in order to transform crises into challenges. Chapter 4 reports the results of the statistical procedures used in this quantitative research. The findings are directly related to the research questions and hypotheses.

77 CHAPTER 4: RESULTS This quantitative investigation surveyed managerial MBA students personal attributes in order to discover the individual and combined influences of personality domains, critical thinking, and emotional intelligence among Peruvian managers and their leadership styles. The following steps are followed in this chapter in order to present the results of the investigation. First, the participants and procedure used for data collection are described and the samples demographic information presented. Second, the instruments used and the measures performed with the instruments are described. Third, the analyses of the collected data performed using SPSS 13 and AMOS 6, two wellknown statistical software packages, are presented. Finally, the results are summarized and the conclusions about the hypotheses are presented. Participants and Procedure Participants in this study were currently enrolled students from eight classes in the managerial MBA program at the Centrum business graduate school in Lima, Peru. The managerial MBA students attended classes every other weekend. The sample was comprised of 375 students whose ages ranged from 23 to 58 years old, with an average age of 36.34. The students possessed an average of 10.58 years of working experience, ranging from 2 years to a maximum 40 years. Students from private universities, usually the best in Peru, numbered 252 compared with 123 coming from public universities. A ratio of three males to one female was evident. Engineering was the dominant undergraduate career (217), compared to 118 from economics, business, and accounting. The samples demographic information is presented in Table 1.

78 Table 1 Sample Demographic Information Gender Females 98 26.13% Age 23 to 30 years 114 30.40% 31 to 40 years 198 52.80% University Attended Consortium of universities 168 44.80% Other private universities 84 22.40% Working Experience 5 years or less 63 16.80% 6 to 10 years 183 48.80% Undergraduate Degrees Engineering 217 57.90% Economics, business administration, and accounting 118 31.50% Other 40 10.60% 11 years or more 129 34.40% Public universities 123 31.50% 41 to 58 years 63 16.80% Males 277 73.87%

79 The sample for the currently study was drawn from students attending the managerial MBA program. Students belonging to classes VII to XIV who started the program between October 2003 and October 2005 were invited to participate. The orientation for the research explaining the scope and objectives of this study, the instruments to be used, and the procedure to be followed in order to complete each questionnaire in class was provided by the researcher. Classes VII to XIV used their assigned classrooms, which were acclimatized and comfortable rooms, for this process. Every student was provided with a pencil and eraser together with an informed consent sheet and a demographic data sheet, both of which were completed before the administration of the instruments. The time used by participants to complete the questionnaires was 75 minutes for NEO PI-R Form S, 70 minutes for WGTCA Form A, 60 minutes for MSCEIT, and 30 minutes for MLQ. From 401 students invited to participate, 375 (92.82%) attended and completed the four paper-and-pencil questionnaires. The testing environment was comfortable, free of distractions, and had adequate lighting. Measures The NEO PI-R Form S was used to measure personality traits with permission granted by Psychological Assessment Resources. The NEO PI-R Form S instrument is considered perhaps the most widely used and extensively validated measure of the fivefactor model (Judge & Bono, 2000, p. 756). The instruments Form S is subdivided into five domains each with six facets and eight questions per facet with a total of 240 items based on a 5-point scale ranging from 0 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree). The maximum raw score for each domain is 192. No single score for personality as an

80 outcome of the test exists but single scores do exist for each domain: neuroticism, extraversion, openness to experience, agreeableness, and conscientiousness. Critical thinking was measured using WGCTA Form A questionnaire with permission granted by Harcourt Assessment. The questionnaire consists of five subtests of the critical thinking appraisal with 16 items for each subtest and a total of 80 items. The maximum raw score for the test is 80. A single score for critical thinking is a result of the test. The use of the scores coming out from each of the subtests, namely, inference, recognition of assumptions, deduction, interpretation, and evaluation of arguments is not recommended for evaluating individual attainment since the part-scores are based upon a relatively small number of items and therefore lack sufficient reliability for this purpose (Watson & Glaser, 1980b, p. 9). Emotional intelligence was measured using the MSCEIT with permission granted by Multi-Health Systems. The questionnaire is a 141-item instrument divided in eight parts (A to H). The MSCEIT assesses the following four-branch model of emotional intelligence using eight tasks, two tasks for each branch: perceiving emotions (faces and pictures), facilitating emotions (facilitation and sensations), understanding emotions (changes and blends), and managing emotions (emotion management and emotional relations). The following areas are derived from the four branches, two branches per area: experiential (perceiving and facilitating) and strategic (understanding and managing). A final score for emotional intelligence is derived from the two areas. Mayer et al. (2002) explained that two main methods to score the correct answer exist. The general consensus method uses the answer given by the majority of people in the standardization sample. The expert method uses the averaged response of experts who are invited to

81 judge what the correct answers are. The MSCEIT tests authors stated, It is recommended that most users employ the general scoring method (p. 33). Brackett and Salovey (2004) explained, Response scores are weighted by the proportion of the normative sample who also provided that answer (p. 185). The general consensus scoring method was used for the present study. Leadership behaviors were measured using the MLQ Leader Form 5x Short with permission granted by Mind Garden. The questionnaire consists of 45 items based on a 5point scale ranging from 0 (not at all) to 4 (frequently, if not always). Each of the nine dimensions is assessed with four items. The test yields one single score for transformational leadership, which is composed of five dimensions: idealized influenceattributed (IIA), idealized influence-behavior (IIB), inspirational motivation (IM), intellectual stimulation (IS), and individualized consideration (IC). The test also yields scores for the other four dimensions: contingent reward (CR), management by exceptionactive (MBEA), management by exception-passive (MBEP), and laissez-faire (LF). Contingent reward and management by exception-active are considered components of transactional leadership styles and have one score for each, but the instrument does not have a single score for transactional leadership. The passive-avoidant style of management is derived from the management by exception-passive and laissez-faire scales, each of which have one score. As such, no single score for passive-avoidant exists. The test also includes the measurement of leadership outcomes: extra effort, effectiveness, and satisfaction with leadership. Each of these outcomes is assessed with three items. This study was focused on transformational leadership styles.

82 Findings The data analysis was performed by studying the observations collected with the instruments used to measure the independent variables, namely, personality domains, critical thinking, and emotional intelligence and the dependent variable, namely, leadership. Finally, a combined analysis of the four attributes was performed to study the associations and influences existing among the dependent and the independents variables. Personality The descriptive statistics resulting from the NEO PI-R Form S questionnaire indicated that the distribution of each domain was nearly symmetrical, as can be observed by the obtained means, medians, and standard deviations. The central limit theorem assured the normality of these scores. Facets results are not presented because the test provided a final score for each domain. From the 375 participants 359 were considered valid cases. Validity checks for acquiescence and random responding resulted in the elimination of 16 cases (Costa & McCrae, 1992). Table 2 presents these results. Neuroticism had the lowest measures of central tendency, mean, and median, and presented the largest dispersion according to its coefficient of variation. The scores corresponding to conscientiousness were the ones with the highest measures of central tendency and the lowest variation. All domains scores except for neuroticism had values varying from 60 to 184 points.

83 Table 2 Descriptive Statistics for NEO PI-R Coefficient of Domains Neuroticism Extraversion Openness to experience Agreeableness Conscientiousness 114.72 143.13 114 145 15.52 17.15 60 93 163 184 .14 .12 M 162.21 129.92 110.62 Mdn 160 132 111 SD 21.55 19.63 14.86 Min. 18 62 64 Max. 149 175 153 variation .35 .15 .13

Note. N = 359 valid cases Internal consistency was assessed using the Cronbachs alpha coefficient and the obtained values for the five domains were all higher than .79. The alpha coefficients for the individual facet scales were lower than those for the domains but almost always demonstrated acceptable values for scales having only eight items compared to the 48 items used for each of the five domains. The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) measure of sampling adequacy is a statistic that indicates the proportion of variance in the observed variables that may be caused by underlying factors. High values generally indicate that a factor analysis may be useful for evaluating the factorial structure of the data being analyzed. A KMO of .90 was observed for the sample scores of the NEO PI-R Form S test, thus indicating that use of exploratory factorial analysis (EFA) was appropriate. Factors were extracted with the most frequently used EFA extraction method called principal components analysis

84 (Thompson, 2004). Using this method, the five highest eigenvalues, varying from 1.43 to 8.53, explained 56.72% of the total variance. Two other eigenvalues greater than one, with values of 1.18 and 1.13, were observed and a solution of seven factors could have explained a 64.08% of the total variance. This investigation used five factors, namely, the five personality domains, and followed the intended structure of the NEO PI-R Form S test. The internal consistency measures and factor structure of the NEO PI-R scales are presented in Table 3. The first five principal components were varimax-rotated and loadings over .40 in absolute magnitude are noted in boldface to be noted. Factor loadings supported the identification of the five rotated factors as measures of the five domains of personality, namely, neuroticism, extraversion, openness to experience, agreeableness, and conscientiousness, because all 30 facets except for O3 and E3 have their highest loadings on the intended factor and the secondary loadings replicated previous findings (Costa & McCrae, 1992). Table 3 Internal Consistency and Factor Structure of NEO PI-R Form S Scales Factora NEO PI-R Scale Domains Neuroticism Extraversion Openness to experience .91 .89 .79 Coefficient N E O A C

85 Factora NEO PI-R Scale Agreeableness Conscientiousness Neuroticism Facets N1: Anxiety N2: Angry hostility N3: Depression N4: Self-consciousness N5: Impulsiveness N6: Vulnerability Extraversion Facets E1: Warmth E2: Gregariousness E3: Assertiveness E4: Activity E5: Excitement-seeking E6: Positive emotions Openness to Experience Facets O1: Fantasy O2: Aesthetics O3: Feelings O4: Actions .59 .74 .56 .46 .26 .18 .26 -.20 .32 .14 .61 .08 .48 .64 .36 .55 -.07 .26 -.03 -.16 -.08 .15 .16 -.07 .75 .70 .67 .62 .50 .78 -.29 -.38 -.15 .09 -.18 -.28 .74 .67 .49 .52 .45 .73 .05 -.00 .09 .14 .39 .14 .30 .00 -.15 -.19 -.24 .09 .18 .13 .51 .44 -.08 .23 .63 .75 .70 .68 .65 .76 .74 .70 .64 .66 .59 .58 -.14 -.29 -.23 -.38 .16 -.21 -.04 -.00 -.05 -.07 -.02 -.16 .03 -.29 .08 .14 -.36 -.05 -.21 -.21 -.50 -.29 -.40 -.52 Coefficient .82 .89 N E O A C

86 Factora NEO PI-R Scale O5: Ideas O6: Values Agreeableness Facets A1: Trust A2: Straightforwardness A3: Altruism A4: Compliance A5: Modesty A6: Tender-mindedness Conscientiousness Facets C1: Competence C2: Order C3: Dutifulness C4: Achievement striving C5: Self-discipline C6: Deliberation
a

Coefficient .71 .40

N -.02 -.22

E -.02 .03

O .77 .39

A .11 -.07

C .23 -.19

.82 .64 .67 .55 .68 .15

-.34 -.05 -.18 -.42 .10 .14

.36 -.06 .50 -.06 -.31 .16

.08 -.04 .01 -.10 .03 .02

.53 .61 .54 .58 .56 .62

.10 .09 .25 -.05 -.19 .12

.58 .65 .56 .55 .75 .71

-.30 -.24 -.16 .07 -.37 -.38

.28 -.03 .25 .27 .19 -.15

.04 -.07 -.05 .06 -.02 -.02

.04 -.02 .28 .07 .03 .27

.66 .67 .64 .70 .74 .58

These factors are varimax-rotated principal components. Loadings over .40 in absolute

magnitude are given in boldface. McCrae, Zonderman, Costa, Bond, & Paunonen (1996) recommended the use of a confirmatory analysis based on the procrustes rotation in order to confirm the replicability of the five-factor structure of the NEO PI-R Form S instrument. In this

87 analysis for the Peruvian samples responses, 28 of the 30 facets have their highest loadings in the intended factor. Factors coefficients of congruence ranged from .94 to .97, and all were significant. The structure of the NEO PI-R Form S Spanish version used in this study closely replicates the structure of the NEO PI-R Form S English version. Table 4 shows these results. Table 4 Factor Loadings and Congruences for Factors in the Peruvian Managers NEO PI-R Form S Rotated to the Normative American Structure Factor Variable NEO PI-R Form S Scale Neuroticism Facets N1: Anxiety N2: Angry hostility N3: Depression N4: Self-consciousness N5: Impulsiveness N6: Vulnerability Extraversion Facets E1: Warmth E2: Gregariousness E3: Assertiveness -.28 -.41 -.23 -.71* -.65* -.47* -.11* -.03* -.12* -.35* -.08* -.16* -.20* -.11* -.48* 1.97** 1.93** 1.93** -.76 -.68 -.69 -.71 -.58 -.63 -.11* -.24* -.20* -.35* -.20* -.17* -.02* -.02* -.05* -.06* -.03* -.17* -.06* -.37* -.01* -.05* -.39* -.08* -.15* -.19* -.43* -.22* -.38* -.46* N E O A C Congruence 1 1.98** 1.95** 1.96** 1.97** 1.95** 1.99**

88 Factor Variable NEO PI-R Form S Scale E4: Activity E5: Excitement-seeking E6: Positive emotions Openness to Experience Facets O1: Fantasy O2: Aesthetics O3: Feelings O4: Actions O5: Ideas O6: Values Agreeableness Facets A1: Trust A2: Straightforwardness A3: Altruism A4: Compliance A5: Modesty A6: Tender-mindedness Conscientiousness Facets C1: Competence C2: Order -.37* -.31* -.25* -.05* -.07* -.05* -.03* -.05* -.64* -.65* 1.99** 1.91** -.29* -.03* -.15* -.32* -.20* -.20* -.32* -.09* -.46* -.09* -.33* -.13* -.13* -.01* -.08* -.08* -.05* -.09* -.57* -.59* -.56* -.64* -.54* -.58* -.13* -.15* -.30* -.01* -.13* -.20* 1.98** 1.98** 1.98** 1.96** 1.89** 1.91** -.22* -.15* -.20* -.24* -.07* -.22* -.30* -.09* -.60* -.05* -.08* -.01* -.50* -.67* -.41* -.52* -.79* -.35* -.12* -.18* -.07* -.15* -.04* -.04* -.09* -.15* -.16* -.13* -.19* -.24* 1.93** 1.00** 1.93** 1.93** 1.98** 1.93** N -.00 -.23 -.32 E -.51* -.43* -.70* O -.19* -.38* -.20* A -.23* -.21* -.13* C -.43* -.13* -.22* Congruence 1.00** 1.80** 1.93**

89 Factor Variable NEO PI-R Form S Scale C3: Dutifulness C4: Achievement striving C5: Self-discipline C6: Deliberation Factor/Total congruence N -.19* -.00* -.44* -.39* -.94* E -.21* -.24* -.16* -.18* -.94* O -.01* -.13* -.02* -.00* -.95* A -.25* -.00* -.02* -.25* -.97* C -.66* -.71* -.71* -.57* -.97* Congruence 1.94** 1.98** 1.98** 1.97** -.95**

Note. N = 359 valid cases. Loadings over .40 in absolute magnitude are given in boldface. These are procrustes-rotated principal components. *Congruence coefficient higher than 99% of random data sets rotated to target. **Congruence coefficient higher than 95% of random data sets rotated to target. Pearsons correlations for the five domains are presented in Table 5. Neuroticism is shown to have a relatively high negative correlation with all the domains except openness to experience. Extraversion shows showing a positive high correlation with all the other domains except neuroticism. Openness to experience is significantly associated only with extraversion.

90 Table 5 Pearsons Correlations for NEO PI-R Domains Domains Neuroticism Extraversion p-value Openness to experience p-value Agreeableness p-value Conscientiousness p-value **p < .01 level, two-tailed. Tests of the differences between means were performed for every domain in personality. A t-test for two independent samples, for equality of means, was used for the domains by the variable gender. Significant differences, two-tailed, were found for neuroticism t(357) = -2.01, p = .046 and extraversion t(357) = - 2.48, p = .014. Females showed more neuroticism and extraversion than males. Nonsignificant differences were found for openness to experience t(357) = -.43, p = .67; agreeableness t(357) = -.59, p = .55; and conscientiousness t(357) = -.23, p = .82. For each of the five domains an analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to detect differences among the means for the categories of the variable age, and significant differences were found for openness to experience (p = .048), conscientiousness (p = .024), and agreeableness (p < .010). A Duncan post hoc N 1.00** -.56** <.01** -.10** .07** -.35** <.01** -.67** <.01** .40** <.01** .20** <.01** .50** <.01** .06** .26** .09** .11** .30** <.01** 1.00 1.00** 1.00** 1.00** E O A C

91 test was performed for agreeableness and found that persons 41 to 58 years old were more agreeable than persons of the other two groups. The ANOVA was also used for the personality domains by the variable university attended, and the only significant difference found was for agreeableness (p = .014). The Duncan post hoc test for this variable showed that participants who attended the Consortiums universities were less agreeable persons than those participants who came from other universities. The ANOVA procedures performed for the five domains by the variable working experience found a significant difference for conscientiousness (p = .039), and a Duncan post hoc test for this variable indicated that participants who had 11 or more years of experience were more conscientious persons than those who had less than 11 years of working experience. The analyses of variance by the variable career demonstrated no differences. Table 6 presents a summary of these results. The analyses of variance (ANOVA) for the five domains of personality are presented in Tables 7 to 11. Table 6 Significant Differences Between Means Represented by p-Values Domains Neuroticism Extraversion Openness to experience Agreeableness Conscientiousness Gender .046* .014* <.048** <.010** <.024** .014* .039* Age University Experience Career

Note. Three decimals are used for accuracy in this table. *p < .050, two-tailed. **p < .010, two-tailed.

92 Table 7 Analyses of Variance for Neuroticism Source 1. Age Error 2. University Error 3. Experience Error 4. Career Error df 352 356 352 356 352 356 352 356 F (1.167) (1.999) (1.512) (1.003) (1.415) (1.003) (1.899) (1.995) .151 .661 .600 p .312

Note. Values enclosed in parentheses represent mean square error. Three decimals are used for accuracy in this table. *p < .050, two-tailed. **p < .010, two-tailed. Table 8 Analyses of Variance for Extraversion Source 1. Age Error 2. University Error df 352 356 352 356 F (1.183) (1.005) (1.794) (1.996) .168 p .833

93 Source 3. Experience Error 4. Career Error df 352 356 352 356 F (1.095) (1.005) (4.284) (1.982) .015 p .909

Note. Values enclosed in parentheses represent mean square error. Three decimals are used for accuracy in this table. *p < .050, two-tailed. **p < .010, two-tailed. Table 9 Analyses of Variance for Openness to Experience Source 1. Age Error 2. University Error 3. Experience Error 4. Career Error df 352 356 352 356 352 356 352 356 F (3.064* (1.989) (1.347) (1.004) (1.649) (1.002) (1.312) (1.004) .732 .523 .707 p .048

Note. Values enclosed in parentheses represent mean square error. Three decimals are used for accuracy in this table. *p < .050, two-tailed. **p < .010, two-tailed.

94 Table 10 Analyses of Variance for Agreeableness Source 1. Age Error 2. University Error 3. Experience Error 4. Career Error df 352 356 352 356 352 356 352 356 F (8.722** (1.959) * (4.310**) (1.982) * (1.086** (1.000) * (1.185** (1.005) * <.831 <.339 <.014 p <.010

Note. Values enclosed in parentheses represent mean square error. Three decimals are used for accuracy in this table. *p < .050, two-tailed. **p < .010, two-tailed. Table 11 Analyses of Variance for Conscientiousness Source 1. Age Error 2. University Error df 352 356 352 356 F (3.777* (1.985) (1.136) (1.005) .872 p .024

95 Source 3. Experience Error 4. Career Error df 352 356 352 356 F (3.276* (1.987) (1.235) (1.004) .791 p .039

Note. Values enclosed in parentheses represent mean square error. Three decimals are used for accuracy in this table. *p < .050, two-tailed. **p < .010, two-tailed. Critical Thinking The descriptive statistics mean, median, and standard deviation resulting from the WGCTA Form A questionnaire indicated that the distributions for each subtest are nearly symmetric. The central limit theorem allows approximating the critical thinking score to a normal distribution. The 375 participants were considered valid cases. Table 12 presents these results. The table shows that the inference subtest has the lower mean and median, and the largest coefficient of variation, indicating high dispersion, and critical thinking as a single attribute presents a maximum of 71 and a minimum of 35 out of 80 possible points. The analysis of the internal consistency of the test showed a Cronbachs alpha coefficient of .73 for the total critical thinking score. The split-half reliability coefficient corrected by the Spearman-Brown formula for equal length was found to be .68, showing good reliability for the whole test. The use of the tests part-scores (subtests scores) is not recommended to evaluate individual attainment for the sub-skills because part-scores are

96 based upon a relatively small number of items that lack reliability (Watson & Glaser, 1980b). Table 12 Descriptive Statistics for the WGCTA Form A Coefficient Subtests Inference Recognition of assumptions Deductions Interpretation Evaluation of arguments M *7.48 12.46 10.55 12.08 11.55 Mdn *7 13 11 12 12 SD 2.39 2.00 2.57 2.03 1.93 Min. *2 *2 *4 *6 *5 Max. 14 16 16 16 16 of variation .32 .16 .24 .17 .17

Critical thinking Note. N = 375 valid cases

54.14

54

7.05

35

71

.13

A Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of sampling adequacy of .74 was observed for the sample scores of critical thinking and suggested the appropriate use of exploratory factorial analysis (EFA) for examination of this test. A second-order EFA was used to verify whether that the five subtests were able to generate a unique total score. Only one factor was obtained with an eigenvalue greater than one (2.08) and explained 41.58% of the total variance. Spearmans correlations for the five subtests, namely, inference, recognition of assumptions, deductions, interpretation, and evaluation of arguments are presented in Table 13. Moderate positive correlations among subtests (areas) were

97 observed. The only nonsignificant correlation was between recognition of assumptions and evaluation of arguments. Table 13 Spearmans Correlations for Critical Thinking Subtests Subtests 1. Inference 2. Recognition of assumption p-value 3. Deductions p-value 4. Interpretation p-value 5. Evaluation of arguments p-value Note. N = 375 valid cases. **p < .01 level, two-tailed. Tests of the differences between means were carried out for the total critical thinking score. A t-test for two independent samples, for equality of means, was used to detect differences by the variable gender, and no differences were found, t(373) =1.699, p = .090, two-tailed. Analyses of variance (ANOVA) for critical thinking by the variables age, university attended, years of working experience, and career were conducted. Significant differences were found for the variable age (p = .010). The Duncan post hoc test indicated that participants aged 23 to 40 showed better competencies in critical 1 1.00** 1.33** <.01** 1.32** <.01** 1.33** <.01** 1.22** <.01** 1.32** <.01** 1.38** <.01** 1.07** 1.17** 1.43** <.01** 1.20** <.01** 1.17** <.01** 1.00** 1.00* 1.00** 1.00** 2 3 4 5

98 thinking than those aged 41 to 58 years. This difference was mainly the result of the influence of the observed inference subtests scores. A significant difference was found for the variable university attended (p < .010). Participants that attended the universities of the Consortium showed better competencies in critical thinking than those participants coming from other universities. Observing the results for the subtests, significant differences were found by the variable university attended for all of the following: inference (p = .016), recognition of assumptions (p < .010), deductions (p < .010), interpretation (p < .010), and evaluation of arguments (p < .010). No significant differences were found at a significant level of .010 for the variables working experience and undergraduate career. The analyses of variance for critical thinking are presented in Table 14. Table 14 Analyses of Variance for Critical Thinking Source 1. Age Error 2. University Error 3. Experience Error 4. Career Error df 352 372 352 372 352 372 352 372 F ( (4.552** (48.708)* ( 21.166** (44.802)* ( 23.141** (49.071)* ( 22.049** (49.356)* <.130 <.044 <.010 p <.010

99 Note. Values enclosed in parentheses represent mean square error. Three decimals are used for accuracy in this table. *p < .050, two-tailed. **p < .010, two-tailed. Emotional Intelligence The descriptive statistics resulting from the branches, areas, and total emotional intelligence of the MSCEIT questionnaire are shown in Table 15. These variables histograms, central tendency and dispersion measures indicate that their distributions are skewed to the left, or demonstrate negative skewness. The 375 participants were considered valid cases. The questionnaire is a 141-item instrument formed by eight sections A to H. Due to their low reliability, 19 items were eliminated: five from section A, two from section B, five from section C, three from section E, and four from section F. The elimination of these items was recommended by Multi-Health Systems, the questionnaires vendor (M. L. Randazzo, personal communication). The MSCEIT is a reliable instrument at the full-scale level, total score, and the area and branch levels (Mayer, Salovey, Caruso, & Sitarenios, 2003). Brackett and Salovey (2004) stated, The MSCEIT branch scores draw on different tasks that include different item forms. Under these conditions, split-half reliability coefficients are used as they involve the orderly allocation of the two different halves of the test (p. 185). The split-half reliability coefficients corrected by the Spearman-Brown formula for equal length were found to be .87 for branch 1, .65 for branch 2, .49 for branch 3, .55 for branch 4, .87 for area 1, .57 for area 2, and .83 for the total score of emotional intelligence when the general consensus method of scoring is used. The total score for emotional intelligence required for this investigation showed good reliability.

100 Table 15 Descriptive Statistics for MSCEIT Branch - Area Branch Perceiving emotions Facilitating thought Understanding emotions Managing emotions Area Experiential emotional intelligence Strategic emotional intelligence Total Emotional Intelligence Note. N = 375 valid cases Brackett and Salovey (2004) stated, the test also has a factor structure congruent with the four-branch model (p. 185), and the factor structure of a test indicates the number of discrete entities it plausibly measures (p. 186). The MSCEITs factor structure indicates how many dimensions emotional intelligence needs: one unified dimension, or the total emotional intelligence score; two dimensions corresponding to the two areas; or four dimensions corresponding to the four-branch theoretical model. A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) of the eight tasks measured by the MSCEIT was .47 .48 .04 .29 .57 .45 .46 .04 .31 .55 .45 .46 .04 .31 .55 .52 .47 .49 .41 .53 .48 .50 .42 .08 .06 .06 .05 .14 .13 .30 .22 .65 .58 .62 .51 M Mdn SD Min. Max.

101 recommended (Mayer et al., 2003) testing a one-, two-, and four-factor models to examine the range of permissible factor structures. Table 16 presents these results and shows that the best fit using a general consensus method was for the four-factor model. In this study, the one-factor model was used because one single score for emotional intelligence was needed Table 16 MSCEITs Fit Measures among Several Factor Models Model One-factor Two-factor Four-factor GFI 0.97 0.98 0.99 AGFI 0.95 0.96 0.98 NFI 0.86 0.90 0.96 TLI 0.88 0.94 1.00 RMSEA 0.06 0.04 0.00

Note. GFI = goodness of fit index; AGFI = adjusted goodness of fit index; NFI = normed fit index; TLI = Tucker-Lewis index; RMSEA = root mean squared error of approximation. Pearsons correlations for the four branches: perceiving emotions, facilitating thought, understanding emotions, and managing emotions are presented in Table 17. Moderate positive correlations among branches are observed. The Pearsons correlation between the two areas, experiential and strategic, is .37 (p = .01).

102 Table 17 Pearsons Correlations for Emotional Intelligences Branches 1 1. Perceiving emotions 2. Facilitating thought p-value 3. Understanding emotions p-value 4. Managing emotions p-value Note. N = 375 valid cases **p < .01 level, two-tailed. Tests of the differences between means were carried out for the total emotional intelligence score. A t-test for two independent samples, for equality of means, was used for emotional intelligence by the variable gender and a difference was found, t(373) = -.2.015, p = .045, two-tailed. Females showed slightly better competencies associated with emotional intelligence than males. Analyses of variance (ANOVA) were used for emotional intelligence by the variables age, university attended, years of experience, and undergraduate career, and no significant differences were found at a significant level of .010 for any of those demographic aspects. Table 18 presents the analyses of variance for emotional intelligence. 1.00** 1.46** <.01** .18** <.01** .30** <.01** 1.19** <.01** 1.32** <.01** 1.16** <.01** 1.00 <1.00** <1.00** 2 3 4

103 Table 18 Analyses of Variance for Emotional Intelligence Source 1. Age Error 2. University Error 3. Experience Error 4. Career Error df 352 372 352 372 352 372 352 372 F (2.268* (1.002)* (3.443* (1.002)* (3.853* (1.002)* (1.432) (1.002) .650 .427 .033 p .105

Note. Values enclosed in parentheses represent mean square error. Three decimals are used for accuracy in this table. *p < .050, two-tailed. **p < .010, two-tailed. Leadership The descriptive statistics means, medians, and standard deviations resulting from the MLQ indicated that the distribution of each of the nine factors is nearly symmetric. The 375 participants were considered valid cases. The five factors for transformational leadership styles are the following: idealized influence attributes (IIA), idealized influence behavior (IIB), inspirational motivation (IM), intellectual stimulation (IS), and individualized consideration (IC). These five factors compose a single measure of transformational leadership styles. The two factors for transactional leadership are the following: contingent reward (CR) and active management-by-exception (MBEA).

104 Finally, the two factors for passive-avoidant styles are the following: passive management-by-exception (MBEP) and laissez-faire (LF). Neither transactional leadership factors nor passive-avoidant factors compose a single measure for these two leadership styles. The observed mean values for transformational leadership styles factors were higher as compared to those for transactional leadership styles factors except for idealized influence attributes and those values were much higher as compared to those for the passive-avoidant factors. Table 19 shows these values. Table 19 Descriptive Statistics for MLQ Leadership Factors Transformational Leadership Idealized influence attributes Idealized influence behaviors Inspirational motivation Intellectual simulations Individual consideration Transactional Leadership Contingent reward MBEA Passive-Avoidant Leadership MBEP Laissez-Faire Note. N = 375 valid cases *.85 *.40 *.75 *.25 .55 .44 *.00 *.00 2.75 2.20 2.92 2.92 3.00 3.00 .56 .65 1.00 *.75 4.00 4.00 M 3.05 2.60 3.23 3.45 3.02 2.95 Mdn 3.10 2.50 3.25 3.50 3.00 3.00 SD .39 .59 .53 .50 .57 .54 Min. 1.67 *.75 1.50 1.50 1.00 1.25 Max. 3.90 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00

105 The confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) with the Peruvian sample was used to determine whether the data confirmed the proposed nine-factor model of leadership. The number of cases analyzed with the CFA were 336 after leastwise deletion from a sample size of 375. Results obtained were the following: GFI = .86, AGFI = .84, NFI = .66, TLI = .79, and RMSEA = .05. These results show reasonable values, thus confirming the nine-factor structure of the leadership model. The internal consistency of the nine-factor leadership scores showed that Cronbachs alpha coefficients varied from .23 to .77; these values are indicated in parentheses in Table 20, together with the Spearmans correlations among the nine factors of leadership. Moderate positive correlations among transformational leadership factors are observed. Moderate positive correlations are found among transformational and transactional leadership factors. Negative correlations are found among the passiveavoidant factors and transformational and transactional leadership factors. Passive management-by-exception and laissez-faire have a moderate positive correlation as expected, given that they are both factors for the passive-avoidant leadership style.

106 Table 20 Reliability and Spearmans Correlations for Leadership Factor Scores 1 1. IIA 2. IIB (.31)* .32** (.54) 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

p-value <.01** 3. IM .30** .53** (.77)*

p-value <.01** <.01** 4. IS .25** .52** .47** (.63)*

p-value <.01** <.01** <.01** 5. IC .21** .40** .31** .41** (.23)

p-value <.01** <.01** <.01** <.01** 6. CR .30** .40** .37** .42** .30** (.29)* * .27** <.01** -.03** .55 * -.19** -.20** (.38)* <.01** -.14** * .34** (.44) (.67)*

p-value <.01** <.01** <.01** <.01** <.01** 7. MBEA .18** .27** .26** .27** .14** .01** -.13** .01* -.23**

p-value <.01** <.01** <.01** <.01** 8. MBEP p-value 9. LF -.10** -.18** -.23** -.19**

.05** <.01** <.01** <.01** -.14** -.28** -.28** -.18**

p-value <.01** <.01** <.01** <.01** <.01** <.01** <.01** <.01*

Note. IIA = idealized influence attributes; IIB = idealized influence behaviors; IM = inspirational motivation; IS = intellectual stimulations; IC = individual consideration; CR= contingent reward; MBEA = management-by-exception: active; MBEP =management-by-exception: passive; LF = laissez-faire. *p < .05 level, two-tailed. **p < .01 level, two-tailed.

107 A second-order confirmatory factor analysis was performed to confirm if the nine leadership factors could be reduced to the three general leadership styles: transformational, transactional, and passive-avoidant. Results obtained were GFI = .97, AGFI = .95, NFI = .94, TLI = .96, and RMSEA = .04 showing that for this sample leadership factors can be reduced to the three leadership styles. This investigations findings differ from previous studies. Judge and Bono (2000) indicated that when the four transactional leadership dimensions: contingent reward, MBEA, MBEP, and laissez-faire were factor analyzed, a clear factor structure did not emerge and due to that, Judge and Bono analyzed those dimensions separately. Avolio and Bass (2004) treated transactional leadership and passive-avoidant as different styles and recommended that researchers not use a unique score for each of these styles. This study focuses only on the analysis of transformational leadership. The Cronbachs alpha coefficient for transformational leadership was .78 when assessing the 20 items for the five factors composing transformational leadership as a single measure. Tests of the differences between means were carried out for the total transformational leadership styles score. To detect differences, a t-test for two independent samples, for equality of means, was used by the variable gender, and no differences were found, t(373) = 1.156, p = .248, two-tailed. Analyses of variance (ANOVA) for transformational leadership by the variables age, university attended, years of working experience, and career were conducted. Significant differences were found by the variable age (p < .010). The Duncan post hoc test indicated than participants aged 31 to 58 showed better transformational leadership behaviors than those aged 28 to 30 years. A significant difference by the variable years of working experience (p < .010) was found for

108 participants with 11 or more years of experience having better transformational leadership behaviors than participants with less than 11 years experience. No significant differences were found for transformational leadership by variables, university attended and undergraduate career. Table 21 presents the analyses of variance for transformational leadership. Table 21 Analyses of Variance for Transformational Leadership Source 1. Age Error 2. University Error 3. Experience Error 4. Career Error df 352 372 352 372 352 372 352 372 F ( (7.881** (8.144)* 21.676** (1.149)* ( (7.524** (1.144) 21.471* (1.148)* <.231 <.010 <.509 p <.010

Note. Values enclosed in parentheses represent mean square error. Three decimals are used for accuracy in this table. *p < .050, two-tailed. **p < .010, two-tailed. Combined Analysis of Variables Pearsons correlations were calculated in order to study the relationships between personality traits measured by the varimax-rotated factor scores, the cognitive abilities that comprise critical thinking, the competencies associated with emotional intelligence,

109 and transformational leadership styles. The directionality of these relationships was provided in the proposed hypotheses as negative for neuroticism and positive for the other four personality domains, critical thinking, and emotional intelligence. Table 22 presents the correlations between transformational leadership styles and neuroticism, extraversion, openness to experience, agreeableness, conscientiousness, critical thinking, and emotional intelligence. The strongest association of transformational leadership styles was found with extraversion followed by conscientiousness, while a relatively weak positive association with openness to experience and emotional intelligence was found, a relatively weak negative association with neuroticism, and no significant correlation with agreeableness or critical thinking. Table 22 Correlations Between Transformational Leadership and the Big Five Traits, Critical Thinking, and Emotional Intelligence Personal Traits Neuroticisma Extraversiona Openness to experience a Agreeablenessa Conscientiousnessa Critical thinking Emotional intelligence
a

r -.19 ** -.43** -.20** -.06** -.39** -.08** -.16**

Significance <.01 <.01 <.01 <.12 <.01 <.06 <.01

N 359 359 359 359 359 375 375

The personality domains scores were the varimax-rotated factor scores.

**p < .01 level, one-tailed.

110 The following regression model was used as a multivariate framework to study the associations between transformational leadership styles and personality domains, critical thinking, and emotional intelligence. TL = B0 + B1 (EI) + B2 (CT) + B3 (N) + B4 (E) + B5 (O) + B6 (A) + B7 (C) +
B B B B B

The first regression model was estimated using the least-square method, thus allowing all the independent variables to be used with the enter method. The significance of the F statistic was .01, less than .05, which means that the variation explained by the model is not due to chance. The R-square showed that the model explains about 43% of the variation in transformational leadership styles. The standardized coefficients showed in Table 23 allow comparison of the effect of each trait adjusted for the influence of the other traits. The estimated regression model was the following: TL = 2.81 - .10 (EI) + .01 (CT) - .08(N) + .17 (E) + .07 (O) + .03 (A) + .15 (C) At a significance level of .05, the only nonsignificant effect was that of emotional intelligence in spite of this trait having a significant correlation with transformational leadership styles. The most important effect was that of extraversion followed by the effect of conscientiousness as was observed in the analysis of the correlations. The following effects, in order of importance, are neuroticism, being negative, and openness to experience, being positive. The effects of agreeableness and critical thinking were low but significant at the level of .05, although the correlations between those variables and transformational leadership styles were not significant at the same level.

111 Table 23 Regression Coefficients Using the Enter Variable Selection Method Unstandardized coefficients Model Constant Neuroticisma Extraversiona Openness to experience a Agreeablenessa Conscientiousnessa Critical thinking Emotional intelligence
a

Standardized coefficients t 14.40 -.20** -.43** -.19** -.08** -.40** -.10** -.01** -4.87 10.52 -4.69 -1.98 -9.79 -2.27 --.27 Significance <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 .05 <.01 .02 .79

B 2.81 -.08 .17 .07 .03 .15 .01 -.10

SEB .19 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .01 .39

The personality domains scores were the varimax-rotated factor scores used to reduce

multicollinearity problems. **p < .05 level, two-tailed. A second regression model was obtained using the stepwise variable selection method. In this method at each step, the independent variable not in the equation which has the smallest probability of F is entered if the probability is sufficiently small. Variables already in the regression equation are removed if their probability of F becomes sufficiently large. The method terminates when no more variables are eligible for inclusion or removal (SPSS, 2005). Table 24 shows the estimations obtained for the final model in which emotional intelligence, critical thinking, and agreeableness were

112 removed by the stepwise method. The variables removed were the same ones which showed the highest significance values when the enter method was used, namely, .05, .02, and .79 for agreeableness, critical thinking, and emotional intelligence, respectively, as shown in Table 23. Table 24 Regression Coefficients Using the Stepwise Variable Selection Method Unstandardized coefficients Model Constant Neuroticisma Extraversiona Openness to experience a Conscientiousnessa
a

Standardized coefficients t 193.57 -.19 -.43 -.20 -.39 ---4.76 -10.67 --4.92 --9.63 Significance <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01

B 3.04 -.08 -.17 -.08 -.15

SEB .02 .02 .02 .02 .02

The scores used for the personality domains were the factor scores obtained with de

varimax-rotated factors used to reduce multicollinearity problems. The R-square showed that the model explains about 43% of the variation in transformational leadership styles. Finally, the regression model found for the Peruvian managers sample was the following: TL = 3.04 - .08 (N) + .17 (E) + .08 (O) + .15 (C) Summary The following conclusions can be stated with respect to the proposed hypotheses:

113 1. A negative relationship between neuroticism and transformational leadership styles is supported by the results. 2. A positive relationship between extraversion and transformational leadership styles is supported by the results. 3. A positive relationship between openness to experience and transformational leadership styles is supported by the results. 4. A relationship between agreeableness and transformational leadership styles is not supported by the results. 5. A positive relationship between conscientiousness and transformational leadership styles is supported by the results. 6. A relationship between critical thinking and transformational leadership styles is not supported by the results. 7. A positive relationship between emotional intelligence and transformational leadership styles is supported by the results. 8. The personality domains of neuroticism, extraversion, openness to experience, and conscientiousness were the only independent variables that seem to exert influence with respect to transformational leadership styles. Chapter 5 presents the discussion of these chapters findings compared to the previous similar studies findings. The following chapter presents also the conclusions, implications, and recommendations resulting from this investigation. Further research will also be suggested.

114 CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The foremost purpose of this investigation was to discover links between transformational leadership styles and the personality traits defined by the five domains, namely, neuroticism, extraversion, openness to experience, agreeableness, and conscientiousness; the cognitive abilities comprising critical thinking; and the competencies associated with emotional intelligence. The study assessed transformational leadership styles in a group of Peruvian managers. A quantitative research was performed using a sample of 375 volunteer managerial MBA students that represented Peruvian managers of firms legally constituted in Peru who have an academic degree and pursuing graduate education. Four known and reliable questionnaires were used in their Spanish versions. Previous researchers suggested for this type of research to be conducted in order to fill voids in the leadership literature. This study filled an important void in the research for both developed and developing countries by exploring the influence of personal attributes such as personality, critical thinking, and emotional intelligence on leadership styles. The questionnaires were self-assessment-type surveys. Chapter 5 begins with a discussion of the findings presented in chapter 4 as related to the results found in previous research performed about these topics, especially those studies that have been performed with the same instruments. The discussion is followed by the conclusions, implications, and recommendations about this investigations findings.

115 Discussion The discussion below is focused on the findings of this investigation. The discussion seeks to emphasize the personal attributes in question and their relationships to transformational leadership styles. The discussion will be followed by the conclusions of this investigation. Finally, implications and recommendations will be presented. Personality and Leadership Previous studies in the United States of America were focused primarily on researching the relationships between the five personality domains and leadership styles, namely, transformational and transactional, and leadership outcomes (Bono & Judge, 2004; Judge & Bono, 2000; Judge, Bono, Ilies, & Gerhardt, 2002). The NEO PIR (Costa & McCrae, 1992) for personality and MLQ (Avolio & Bass, 2004) for leadership were the instruments used. Personality and leadership are the aspects that have earned more attention among researchers with respect to finding possible relationships. Bono and Judge (2004) developed a meta-analysis of the relationship between personality and ratings of leadership. The meta-analysis studied 384 correlations from 26 independent studies. The extraversion domain was found to be the strongest and most consistent variable related to transformational leadership styles and as a trait showed robust relations with both leadership outcomes and leadership behaviors despite the weak results obtained. The other four personality traits correlations with transformational leadership styles were quite modest. In their study, Bono and Judge stressed observations made by other authors that the five-factor model provides too coarse a description of personality. These authors also emphasized that transactional behaviors, namely,

116 contingent reward and active management-by-exception are commonly taught in MBA and management training programs. Judge et al. (2002) performed a qualitative review of the trait perspective in leadership research followed by a meta-analysis using 222 correlations from 73 samples. The extraversion domain was found to be the most consistent variable related to leadership. Neuroticism, extraversion, openness to experience, and conscientiousness were considered to be useful traits to explain leadership. The authors noted criticisms from some researchers who have argued for fewer than five domains for personality and most personality psychologists who suggest that the number of factors used to measure the domains are too few (Judge et al.) factors. The current investigation found that the strongest association with transformational leadership styles was found for extraversion followed by conscientiousness which presented higher correlations than in previous studies (Table 25). These three studies, Bono and Judge (2004), Judge et al. (2002), and the current study, rank extraversion as the domain with strongest association to transformational leadership styles. Judge and Bono (2000) using the rater questionnaire for subordinates, found that agreeableness emerged as the strongest and most consistent predictor of transformational leadership behaviorwe were surprised by the strength of the association (p. 760). The authors attempted to explain the result by stating, If subordinates were asked to evaluate the desired traits in a leader, it seems possible that Agreeableness was related to subordinate ratings of transformational leadership because subordinates value agreeable leaders and therefore evaluate them more positively (p. 761). Extraversion and openness to experience also emerged in their study as domains

117 that were significantly correlated to transformational leadership styles, but neither neuroticism nor conscientiousness were related to transformational leadership styles. Table 25 Comparison of Correlations Between Personality Domains and Transformational Leadership Personality Domain Neuroticism Extraversion Openness to experience Agreeableness Conscientiousness Judge et al.(2002) -.24 -.31 -.24 -.08 -.28 Bono & Judge (2004) -.17 -.24 -.15 -.14 -.13 DAlessio (2006) -.19 -.43 -.20 -.06 -.39

Note. Studies by Judge et al. (2002) and Bono and Judge (2004) were meta-analyses. Low values of neuroticism and a relatively strong negative correlation between neuroticism and transformational leadership styles were obtained in this study. Costa and McCrae (1992) concluded, the most pervasive domain of personality scales contrasts adjustment or emotional stability with maladjustment or neuroticism (p. 14). A leader needs to be emotionally stable and low neuroticism is predictive of leadership potential. Relatively high values of extraversion and a strong positive correlation between extraversion and transformational leadership styles were obtained in this study. Extraversion, as opposed to introversion, describes friendly, social, assertive, and talkative individuals who emerge as leaders in groups. Extraversion showed the strongest correlation with transformational leadership styles in all studies except in the study by

118 Judge and Bono (2000) in which the relation with agreeableness was the strongest; however, the latter used a raters questionnaire that was completed by subordinates. Relatively high values of openness to experience and a relatively strong positive correlation between openness to experience and transformational leadership styles were obtained in this study. Openness to experience describes creative, lateral thinking, curious, and imaginative individuals, and the measure displays a correlation with intelligence. This finding emphasizes creativity as an important skill associated with effective leaders. Relatively high values of agreeableness and no association between agreeableness and transformational leadership styles were observed in this study. Agreeableness describes kind, gentle, modest, altruistic, and trustworthy individuals and is one of the personality domains. Judge et al. (2002) indicated that the possible relationship between agreeableness and leadership styles is ambiguous. High values of conscientiousness and a strong relationship between conscientiousness and transformational leadership styles were observed in this study. Conscientiousness describes purposeful and determined individuals; tenacity and persistence are both characteristics of the measure and display correlations with overall job performance and leader effectiveness. The current investigation has provided some indications that life and work experience, represented by conscientiousness, play an important role in the development of leadership behaviors. Educational settings, such as the university attended for undergraduate and graduate studies, could favor the possibility that transformational leadership behaviors are learned.

119 Investigation of the relationships between personality and transformational leadership behaviors have been performed in other developed countries but using different types of instruments. Hetland and Sandal (2003) in Norway using Cattells 16 PF for personality and MLQ rater instruments, both translated into Norwegian, concluded that, the relatively weak associations with personality give rise to optimism that these leadership behaviours may be learned (p. 167). Globalizations cultural aspects, both the similarities and differences, with respect to leadership need to be researched. Kornor and Nordvik (2004) in Norway using the NEO PI-R, translated into Norwegian, and the Change, Production, and Employee (CPE) for leadership found that extraversion and conscientiousness were the strongest predictors of leadership and emphasized the importance of self-reports for personality and leadership because people tend to be consistent in their self-reports regardless of context and that leadership styles are related to personality traits (p. 54). McCormack and Mellor (2002) in Australia, using the NEO PI-R and the Australian Army Evaluation and Development Report-Officers (EDRO) for leadership, found that effective leaders in the Australian Army were characterized by high conscientiousness and openness to experience and by low extraversion. Neuroticism and agreeableness were not found to be related in their findings. Bradley et al. (2002) in Canada using their own military instruments, in English and French, for both personality and leadership studies concluded that measures of personality are associated with leadership development in the military (p. 92). Personality domains have an important influence on leadership styles. Some researchers criticize the five-factor model for providing too coarse a description of personality, some call for fewer domains, and most personality psychologists who

120 criticize the number of factors do so on the basis of too few factors (Judge et al., 2002, p.768). This study found seven components with eigenvalues higher than one that explained 64.1% of the total variance. Critical Thinking and Leadership Critical thinking has been studied most frequently in educational settings. Gadzella and Baloglu (2003), using the WGCTA Form A, found that the best predictors for educational psychology course grades were the inference and deduction subtests scores. Yang and Lin (2004) concluded that, the genesis of thinking styles may partially be explained by the nature of the relationship between thinking styles and personality types (p. 42). The current investigation found relatively low values for critical thinking, given that inference demonstrated the lowest value and recognition of assumptions the highest value. No significant correlation was found between critical thinking and transformational leadership styles. A lack of research addressing relationships between critical thinking and personal attributes such as personality, emotional intelligence, and leadership measures calls for further research in order to investigate these aspects. Emotional Intelligence and Leadership Barling, Slater, and Kelloway (2000) suggested that, individuals higher in emotional intelligence are seen by their subordinates as displaying more leadership behaviors (p. 159). These authors found that emotional intelligence was associated with idealized influence, inspirational motivation, and individualized consideration and called for further investigation due to the absence of a relationship between emotional intelligence and intellectual stimulation. These authors stated, current research supports

121 the idea that managers can be trained to use transformational leadership (p. 160). The MLQ and Bar-Ons (1997) self-report Emotional Intelligence Inventory were the instruments used in their research. Gardner and Stough (2002) found that emotional intelligence correlates highly with all components of transformational leadership. The authors used the SUEIT and MLQ instruments. Weinberger (2003) stated, There is no relationship between emotional intelligence of managers and their leadership style as perceived by subordinates. Nor is there any relationship between emotional intelligence of these managers and their perceived leadership effectiveness, satisfaction or extra effort (p. 141). The MSCEIT and MLQ were the instruments used in their research. The current investigation found a weak positive correlation between emotional intelligence and transformational leadership but when a combined analysis was performed, the personality domains neutralized the influence of emotional intelligence on transformational leadership styles. Further research is recommended in order to assess if emotional intelligence merits consideration as a personal attribute important to managerial activity and whether emotional intelligence has a clear influence on leadership styles. Combined Analysis of the Variables Palmer, Gardner, and Stough (2003) studied the relationship between emotional intelligence, personality, and effective leadership using three separate samples. The instruments used to perform their research were the SUEIT, NEO FFI, and MLQ respectively. These authors concluded that their findings supported the usefulness of the SUEIT as a workplace measure of emotional intelligence and that, While there were

122 some moderate correlations between the SUEIT and facets of the NEO, the SUEIT was found to account for variance in effective leadership over and above personality (p. 140). Murensky (2000) investigated the relationships between emotional intelligence, personality, critical thinking ability, and organizational leadership performance at upper levels of management. The ECI, NEO PI-R, and WGCTA were the instruments used for the first three personal traits. A leaders performance was obtained using the Balance Scorecard. Results suggested that emotional intelligence was independent of the cognitive abilities associated with critical thinking and overlapped with the five domains of personality. Critical thinkings cognitive competencies were not found to be related to any of the scorecard performance perspectives. Some personality facets were significantly but negatively related to the managers scorecard performance. The present study found that extraversion, conscientiousness, openness to experience, and neuroticism were significantly related to transformational leadership styles. No significant associations were found between transformational leadership styles and agreeableness. No significant associations were found for critical thinking. Emotional intelligence presented a weak correlation with transformational leadership styles, but when the combined analysis was performed the variable was removed of the model. The research conducted suggests that personality domains have the predominant influence on transformational leadership styles. Conclusions This investigation was the first attempt to examine relationships between the concepts of personality, critical thinking, emotional intelligence, and leadership, thereby

123 filling a void in the literature. This study was also the first attempt to develop such an analysis in a developing country using well-known instruments that had been translated into Spanish. The Peruvian managers personality domains of extraversion and conscientiousness were the strongest and most consistent correlates to transformational leadership styles, followed by openness to experience and neuroticism. The final model obtained indicated that agreeableness, critical thinking, and emotional intelligence had no significant effects with respect to transformational leadership styles. Personality traits were the most important aspects influencing transformational leadership styles. Extraversion indicates that these managers are predisposed to the experience of positive emotions and are expressive persons. Conscientiousness indicates self-disciplined, as well as a strong interest in job performance and task achievement. These two personality traits, extraversion and conscientiousness, may be the most important for the emergence of individual leadership. Inspirational motivation and idealized influence behaviors were the most relevant factors observed in the Peruvian managers transformational leadership styles. Inspirational motivation and idealized influence combined in practice represent personal charisma. Charisma and extraversion are associated, which confirms that the personal attributes of the sample managers may allow them to emerge as potential leaders. The values observed for passive-avoidant factors were very low, which indicates that nonleadership is not a characteristic of the group of Peruvian managers who participated in this study. Moreover, their transformational leadership factors values were higher than those for transactional leadership.

124 The nine leadership factors were reduced to the three general leadership styles: transformational, transactional, and passive-avoidant. Results obtained showed that for the Peruvian management sample, leadership factors can be reduced to the three leadership styles. This is an interesting contribution to leadership research not found in previous studies. Although this study was focused on transformational leadership styles, contingent reward was found to be closer to transformational leadership styles than to the active management-by-exception or to the passive-avoidant styles of leadership. This result confirms that the managerial activity could demonstrate both transformational and transactional leadership styles simultaneously. Emotional intelligence demonstrated a weak positive association with transformational leadership, however when the combined effects of personality domains and emotional intelligence were included in the model of transformational leadership, the influence of neuroticism, extraversion, openness to experience, and conscientiousness on transformational leadership styles obscured any significant effect of emotional intelligence. Critical thinking did not appear to have an association with transformational leadership. Extraversion, openness to experience, conscientiousness, emotional intelligence, demonstrated a positive relationship to transformational leadership, whereas neuroticism demonstrated a negative relationship to transformational leadership. Results did not support a relationship between either agreeableness or critical thinking and transformational leadership styles. When all independent variables were analyzed in terms of the degree of influence they exerted upon transformational leadership styles,

125 emotional intelligence could be removed from the equation without changing the result, thus leaving only the personality domains. The Peruvian managers sample showed results consistent with the literature as indicated by the dominance of the extraversion and conscientiousness domains of personality on transformational leadership behaviors. The sample used showed to be a mature and well-educated group of managers having typical extroverted Latin Americans personal characteristics that make them charismatic persons with the potential to have followers. The social status of persons attending the Consortium of universities gives those persons more chances to get good corporate positions in Peru. Critical thinking and emotional intelligence were excluded as related to transformational leadership for this sample. The educational methodology used in schools and universities in Latin America dominated by memorization learning processes and lacking of modern educational facilities are possible causes of these exclusions. The improvement of competencies related to critical thinking and emotional intelligence as well as in openness to experience could be helpful to develop greater strategic thinking and tolerance for calculated risk. Peruvian managers of firms legally constituted in Peru demonstrated personal attributes that are related to transformational leadership styles. Based on the results of this study, the failure of firms does not appear to be related to a lack of leadership among firm managers. Companies failures need to be investigated further because these failures are likely to be related to diverse environmental factors.

126 Implications Leadership will remain an elusive aspect of human nature, and the nature/nurture debate as to whether leaders are born or made will therefore continue. Leaders seem to be born, by virtue of the strength of the personality domains, but learning would also seem to be an important consideration for an individuals developing into a transformational leader. Graduate business schools are the educational settings that could fulfill this task. The implications for leadership in organizations have been a matter of concern. Further research is important so that cultural aspects can be taken into account in the actual global and competitive arena. The results of this investigation could be added to the body of leadership-knowledge literature, as it is the first attempt to explore the individual and combined influences of personality domains, critical thinking, and emotional intelligence on transformational leadership styles. Based on this research personality domains influence leadership potential, particularly for transformational leadership styles. The understanding of leadership reached in Western countries calls for further research in Eastern countries where persons show different personality traits as being more introverted. Recommendations The study of the personality domains and their influence on other personal traits, mainly leadership, has been permanently under discussion. Growing globalization demands that the study of leadership be broadened to include different cultures in order to examine if the results present similarities and differences with Western cultures. Future research might also address whether more than five factors may more accurately represent the personality and the facets composing those factors. Critical thinking and

127 emotional intelligence and their relationship to leadership styles also require further study. Given the weak positive association between emotional intelligence and transformational leadership, further examination of the relationships among each of the nine components of leadership and emotional intelligence is also needed. Studies of leadership in Western cultures have been conducted mostly in the United States and Anglophone countries, such as Australia and Canada, and some European countries. This study has been developed in Peru, a Latin American country, and needs to be replicated in other cultures, particularly in Eastern cultures where more introverted persons may not respond to transformational leadership styles in the same way as in Western cultures. Leadership will continue to be an important aspect in business and play a crucial role in firms productivity to compete in the actual global arena.

128 REFERENCES Ajzen, I. (2002). Attitudes, personality, and behavior. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press. Antonakis, J. (2003). Why "emotional intelligence" does not predict leadership effectiveness: A comment on Prati, Douglas, Ferris, Ammeter, and Buckley (2003). The International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 11(4), 355-361. Apoyo (2005). Perfil del Mercado Educativo: Postulantes 2005 [Profile of the Educational Market: Candidates 2005]. Lima: Apoyo Opinin y Mercado [Apoyos Opinion and Market]. Ashkanasy, N. M., & Dasborough, M. T. (2003). Emotional awareness and emotional intelligence in leadership training. Journal of Education for Business, 79(1), 1822. Avolio, B. J., & Bass, B. M. (2004). Multifactor leadership questionnaire. Manual and sampler test (3rd ed.). Redwood City, CA: Mind Garden. Bailin, S., Case, R., Coombs, J. R., & Daniels, L. B. (1999). Conceptualizing critical thinking. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 31(3), p.285-302. Barling, J., Slater, F., & Kellowat, E. K. (2000). Transformational leadership and emotional intelligence: An exploratory study. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 21(3), 157-161. Bar-On, R. (1997). Bar-On Emotional Quotient Inventory: Technical manual. New York: Multi-Health Systems. Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York: The Free Press.

129 Bass, B. M. (1990). Bass & Stogdill's handbook of leadership: Theory, research, and managerial applications (3rd ed.). New York: The Free Press. Bass, B. M., Avolio, B. J., Jung, D. I., & Berson, Y. (2003). Predicting unit performance by assessing transformational and transactional leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(2), 207-218. Bennis, W. G., & O'Toole, J. (2005). How business schools lost their way. Harvard Business Review, 83(5), 96-104. Black, T. R. (2003). Doing quantitative research in the social sciences: An integrated approach to research design, measurement, and statistics. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. (Original work published 1999) Bono, J. E., & Judge, T. A. (2003). Self-concordance at work: Toward understanding the motivational effects of transformational leaders. Academy of Management Journal, 46(5), 554-571. Bono, J. E., & Judge, T. A. (2004). Personality and transformational and transactional leadership: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(5), 901-910. Bowerman, J. K. (2003). Leadership development through action learning: An executive monograph. International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance Incorporating Leadership in Health Services, 16(4), vi-xiii. Brackett, M. A., & Salovey, P. (2004). Measuring emotional intelligence with the MayerSalovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT). In G. Geher (Ed.), Measuring emotional intelligence (pp. 181-196). Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science Publishers.

130 Bradley, J. P., Nicol, A. A. M., Charbonneau, D., & Meyer, J. P. (2002). Personality correlates of leadership development in Canadian forces officer candidates. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 34(2), 92-103. Braun, N. M. (2004). Critical thinking in the business curriculum. Journal of Education for Business, 79(4), 232-236. Brody, K.N., Koenigseder, L.A., Ishee, J.H., & Williams, B.G. (2001). Psychometric properties of the California Critical Thinking Tests. Journal of Nursing Measurement, 9(3), 309-328. Burns, J.M. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper & Row. Byrne, B. M. (2001). Structural equations modeling with AMOS. Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Cable, D. M., & Judge, T. A. (2003). Managers' upward influence tactic strategies: The role of manager personality and supervisor leadership style. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24(2), 197-214. Caruso, D. R., Mayer, J. D., & Salovey, P. (2002). Relation of an ability measure of emotional intelligence to personality. Journal of Personality Assessment, 79(2), 306-320. Cavanagh, J. (Ed.). (2005). The top 10,000 companies in Peru. Lima, Peru: Top Publications. Cellar, D. F., Sidle, S., Goudy, K., & O'Brien, D. (2001). Effects of leader style, leaders sex, and subordinate personality on leader evaluations and future subordinate motivation. Journal of Business and Psychology, 16(1), 61-72.

131 Cherniss, C., & Goleman, D. (Eds.). (2001). The emotionally intelligent workplace. How to select for measure and improve emotional intelligence in individuals, groups, and organizations. New York: Jossey-Bass. CITI Course. (2005). The protection of human research subjects. Miami, FL: University of Miami. Conger, J. A. (1999). Charismatic and transformational leadership in organizations: An insiders perspective on these developing streams of research. Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 145-179. Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). NEO-PI-R-Professional Manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources. Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1995). Domains and facets: Hierarchical personality assessment using the Revised NEO Personality Inventory. Journal of Personality Assessment, 64(1), 21-50. Costa, P., T., & McCrae, R. R. (1997). Stability and change in personality assessment: The revised NEO Personality Inventory in the year 2000. Journal of Personality Assessment, 68(1), 86-94. Crant, J. M., & Bateman, T. S. (2000). Charismatic leadership viewed from above: The impact of proactive personality. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21(1), 6368. Creative Organizational Design. (2003). Campbell Leadership Index. Retrieved October, 15, 2005 from http://www.creativeorgdesign.com/testpages/cli.htm Creswell, J. W. (2002). Educational research. Planning, conducting and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson

132 Education. Dearborn, K. (2002). Studies in emotional intelligence redefine our approach to leadership development. Public Personnel Management, 31(4), 523-530. DeLoach, S. B., & Greenlaw, S. A. (2005). Do electronic discussions create critical thinking spillovers? Contemporary Economic Policy, 23(1), 149-163. Dowdy, S., Weardon, S., & Chilko, D. (2004). Statistics for research (3rd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Interscience. Dulewicz, V., & Gay, K. (1997, Spring). Personal competences for board of directors: The main dimensions and role comparisons. Competency Journal, 4, 3-15. Dulewicz, V., & Higgs, M. J. (2000). Emotional intelligence: A review and evaluation study. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 15(4), 341-368. Dulewicz, V., & Higgs, M. (2003). Leadership at the top: The need for emotional intelligence in organizations. The International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 11(3), 193-210. Energy Information Administration (EIA). (2005, April). Peru: Country analysis briefs. Retrieved October, 25, 2005, from http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/peru.html Ekvall, G., & Arvonen, J. (1991). Change-centred leaders: Empirical evidence of a third dimension of leadership. Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 12(6), 162-172. Ekvall, G., & Arvonen, J. (1994). Leadership profiles, situation and effectiveness. Creativity and Innovation Management, 3(3), 139-161. Elmuti, D., Minnis, W., & Abebe, M. (2005). Does education have a role in developing leadership skills? Management Decision, 43(7/8), 1018-1031.

133 Felfe, J., Tartler, K., & Liepmann, D. (2004). Advanced research in the field of transformational leadership. German Journal of Human Resource Research, 18(3), 262-288. Gadzella, B. M., & Baloglu, M. (2003). Psychometric properties of Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal for a sample of education majors. Psychological Reports, 92, 1249-1254. Gardner, L., & Stough, C. (2002). Examining the relationship between leadership and emotional intelligence in senior level managers. Leadership & Organizational Development Journal, 23(1/2), 68-78. Garman, A. N., Davis-Lenane, D., & Corrigan, P. W. (2003). Factor structure of the transformational leadership model in human service teams. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24(6), 803-812. Goleman, D. (1998). Working with emotional intelligence. New York: Batman. Goleman, D. (2000). Leadership that gets results. Harvard Business Review, 78(2), 7890. Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R., & McKee, A. (2002). Primal leadership: Realizing the power of emotional intelligence. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Goodwin, V. L., Wofford, J. C., & Whittington, J. L. (2001). A theoretical and empirical extension to the transformational leadership construct. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22(7), 759-774. Greenlaw, S. A., & DeLoach, S. B. (2003). Teaching critical thinking with electronic discussion. Journal of Economic Education, 34(1), 36-52.

134 Hair, J. F., Jr., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariate data analysis (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Hanbury, G. L., Sapat, A., & Washington, C. W. (2004). Know yourself and take charge of your own destiny: The "fit model" of leadership. Public Administration Review, 64(5), 566-576. Harland, L., Harrison, W., Jones, J. R., & Reiter-Palmon, R. (2005). Leadership behaviors and subordinate resilience. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 11(2), 2-14. Hay Group. (2005). Emotional Competences Inventory Accreditation. Retrieved October, 15, 2005, from http://ei.haygroup.com/products_and_services/default_ECI_Accreditation.html Hay Resources Direct. (2005). Leadership Competency Inventory (LCI). Overview. Retrieved October, 15, 2005, from http://www.hayresourcesdirect.haygroup.com/ Hetland, H., & Sandal, G. M. (2003). Transformational leadership in Norway: Outcomes and personality correlates. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 12(2), 147-170. Higgs, M. J., & Dulewicz, V. (2002). Making sense of emotional intelligence (2nd ed.). Windsor, UK: NFER-Nelson. Hogan, R., Curphy, G. J., & Hogan, J. (1994). What we know about leadership: Effectiveness and personality. American Psychologist, 49(6), 493-504. Howell, J. M., & Shamir, B. (2005). The role of followers in the charismatic leadership process: Relationships and their consequences. Academy of Management Review, 30(1), 96-112.

135 Indecopi. (2005).Instituto Nacional de Defensa de la Competencia y de Proteccin de la Propiedad Intelectual. [National Institute for the Consumer Defense and Protection of the Intellectual Property]. Retrieved May 10, 2005, from http://www.indecopi.gob.pe INEI. (2006). Instituto Nacional de Estadstica e Informacin. [National Institute of Statistic and Information]. Census 2005. Retrieved April 25, 2006, from http://www.inei.gob.pe Judge, T. A., & Bono, J. E. (2000). Five-factor model of personality and transformational leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(5), 751-765. Judge, T. A., Bono, J. E., Ilies, R., & Gerhardt, M. W. (2002). Personality and leadership: A qualitative and quantitative review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4), 765780. Jung, D. I. (2000-2001). Transformational and transactional leadership and their effects on creativity in groups. Creativity Research Journal, 13(2), 185-195. Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1996). The balance scorecard. Translating strategy into action. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Kark, R., Shamir, B., & Chen, G. (2003). The two faces of transformational leadership: Empowerment and dependency. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(2), 246-255. Kejriwal, A., & Krishnan, V. R. (2004). Impact of Vedic worldwide and Gunas on transformational leadership. Vikalpa, 29(1), 29-40. Kets de Vries, M. F. R. (2005). Global executive leadership inventory. Participant workbook. San Francisco: John Wiley.

136 Kienzler, D. (2001). Ethics, critical thinking, and professional communication pedagogy. Technical Communication Quarterly, 10(3), 319-339. Kline, P. (2002). An easy guide for factor analysis. London: Routledge. Kline, R. B. (2005). Principle and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). New York: The Guilford Press. Kobe, L. M., Reiter-Palmon, R., & Rickers, J. D. (2001). Self-reported leadership experiences in relation to inventoried social and emotional intelligence. Current Psychology: Developmental * Learning * Personality * Social, 20(2), 154-163. Kornor, H., & Nordvik, H. (2004). Personality traits in leadership behavior. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 45(1), 49-54. Leahcim T. Semaj & Company. (2005). The JobBank Descriptive Guide for the EQ MAP. Retrieved October, 15, 2005 from http://www.jobbank-ja.com/tas/eqmap.asp Lim, B. C., & Ployhart, R. E. (2004). Transformational leadership: Relations to the fivefactor model and team performance in typical and maximum contexts. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(4), 610-621. Lussier, R., & Achua, C. (2001). Leadership: Theory, application, skill development. Cincinnati, OH: South-Western College. Mardia, K. V., Kent, J. T., & Bibby, J. M. (2003). Multivariative analysis. London: Academic Press. (Original work published 1979) Margaret, J. (2003, September). Leadership style and its relationship to individual differences in personality, moral orientation and ethical judgmentA Ph.D. proposal. The Journal of American Academy of Business, Cambridge, 104-112.

137 Mayer, J. D., & Salovey, P. (1993). The intelligence of emotional intelligence. Intelligence, 17, 443-442. Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P., & Caruso, D. R. (2002). Mayer-Salovey-Caruso emotional intelligence test (MSCEIT). User's manual. North Tonawanda, NY: Multi-Health Systems. Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P., Caruso, D. R., & Sitarenios, G. (2001). Emotional intelligence as a standard intelligence. Emotion, 1(3), 232-242. Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P., Caruso, D. R., & Sitarenios, G. (2003). Measuring emotional intelligence with the MSCEIT v. 2.0. Emotion, 3(1), 97-105. McCormack, L., & Mellor, D. (2002). The role of personality in leadership: An application of the five-factor model in the Australian military. Military Psychology, 14(3), 179-197. McCrae, R. R., Zonderman, A. B., Costa, P. T., Jr., Bond, M. H., & Paunonen, S. V. (1996). Evaluating replicability of factors in the revised NEO Personality Inventory: Confirmatory factor analysis versus procrustes rotation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(3), 552-566. Mellahi, K. (2000). The teaching of leadership on UK MBA programmes: A critical analysis from an international perspective. The Journal of Management Development, 19(3/4), 297-308. Mind Garden, Inc. (2005). MLQ for Researchers. Retrieved October, 15, 2005 from http://www.mindgarden.com/products/mlqr.htm Moore, T. (2004). The critical thinking debate: How general are general thinking skills? Higher Education Research & Development, 23(1), 3-18.

138 Mueller, S. L., & Goic, S. (2002). Entrepreneurial potential in transition economies: A view from tomorrow's leaders. Journal of Developmental Entrepreneurship, 7(4), 399-414. Multi-Health System Inc. (2005). Emotional Intelligence MSCEIT. Retrieved October, 15, 2005 from http://www.emotionalintelligencemhs.com/Msceit.asp Murensky, C. L. (2000). The relationship between emotional intelligence, personality, critical thinking ability and organizational performance at upper levels of management. Dissertation Abstracts International, 151 . (UMI No. 9962991) Neuman, W. L. (2003). Social research methods. Qualitative and quantitative approaches, Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Palmer, B. R., Gardner, L., & Stough, C. (2003, Supplement). The relationship between emotional intelligence, personality and effective leadership. Australian Journal of Psychology, 55, 140-145. Palmer, B., & Stough, C. (2001). Workplace SUEIT: Swinburne University Emotional Intelligence TestDescriptive Report. Organization Psychology Research Unit. Australia: Swinburne University. Palmer, B., Walls, M., Burgess, Z., & Stough, C. (2001). Emotional intelligence. Leadership & Organizational Development Journal, 22(1), 5-10. Paul, R. & Elder, L. (2001). Critical thinking: Tools for taking charge of your learning and your life. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2002). Critical thinking. Tools for taking charge of your professional and personal life. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

139 Pearson Assessments. (2005a). 16PF Fifth Edition. Retrieved October, 15, 2005 from http://www.pearsonassessments.com/tests/sixtpf_5.htm Pearson Assessments. (2005b). MIPS Revised (Millon TM Index of Personality Styles Revised). Pearson Assessments. Retrieved October, 15, 2005 from http://www.pearsonassessments.com/tests/mips.htm Pithers, R. T., & Soden, R. (2000). Critical thinking in education: A review. Educational Research, 42(3), 237-249. Ployhart, R. E., Lim, B., & Chan, K. (2001). Exploring relations between typical and maximum performance ratings and the five-factor model of personality. Personnel Psychology, 54(4), 809-843. Prati, L.M., Douglas, C., Ferris, G.R., Ammeter, A.P., & Buckley, M. R. (2003a). Emotional intelligence, leadership effectiveness, and team outcomes. The International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 11(1), 21-40. Prati. L. M., Douglas, C., Ferris, G. R., Ammeter, A. P., & Buckley, M. R. (2003b). The role of emotional intelligence in team leadership: Reply to the critique by Antonakis. The International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 11(4), 363-369. Pressbox. (2004). BFO Power up Wileys Global Executive Leadership Inventory. Retrieved October, 15, 2005 from http://www.pressbox.co.uk/Detailed/23688.html Ricketts, J. C. (2003). The efficacy of leadership development, critical thinking dispositions, and student academic performance on the critical thinking skills of selected youth leaders. Dissertation Abstracts International, 130. (UMI No. 3095110)

140 Roach, R. (2003). Database publisher releases top 10 dissertation list. Black Issues in Higher Education, 20(19), 33. Roberts, R. D., Zeidner, M., & Matthews, G. (2001). Does emotional intelligence meet traditional standards for an intelligence? Some new data and conclusions. Emotion, 1(3), 196-231. Rosete, D., & Ciarrochi, J. (2005). Emotional intelligence and its relationship to workplace performance outcomes of leadership effectiveness. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 26(5), 388-399. Sala, F. (2002). Emotional Competence Inventory (ECI). Technical Manual. Retrieved October, 15, 2005 from http://www.eiconsortium.org/research/ECI_Tech_Manual.pdf Salovey, P., & Mayer, J.D. (1990). Emotional intelligence. Imagination, Cognition and Personality, 9 (3), 185-211. Schermerhorn, J. R., Hunt, L. G., & Osborn, R. N. (2004). Organizational Behavior. (9th ed).. Somerset, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons. Shriberg, A., Shriberg, D. L., & Lloyd, C. (2002). Practicing leadership. Principles and applications (2nd ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons. Shriberg, A., Shriberg, D. L., & Kumari, R. (2005). Practicing leadership. Principles and applications (3rd ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons. Sigma Assessment Systems. (2005). Neo Personality Inventory-Revised. Retrieved October, 15, 2005 from http://www.sigmaassessmentsystems.com/assessments/neopir.asp

141 SPSS Inc. (2005). SPSS Base 14.0 Users Guide [Computer software and manual]. Retrieved April, 2006, from http://www.ts.vcu.edu/manuals/spss/guides/SPSS%20Base%20Users%20Guide% 2014.0.pdf Stewart, P. J. (2000). The role of psychological type and critical thinking in doctoral student achievement. Dissertation Abstracts International, 73. (UMI No. 3004948) Thompson, B. (2004). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis: Understanding concepts and applications. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. UNM College of Nursing. (2005). Critical Thinking. Evaluation & Measurement. Retrieved October, 15, 2005 from http://hsc.unm.edu/consg/conct/meas_eval.shtml van Gelder, T. (2005). Teaching critical thinking: Some lessons from cognitive science. College Teaching, 53(1), 41-46. Watkins, M. (2003). The first 90 days: Critical success strategies for new leaders at all levels. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Watson, G., & Glaser, E. M. (1980a). Watson-Glaser critical thinking appraisal. San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation. Watson, G., & Glaser, E. M. (1980b). Watson-Glaser ManualForms A and B. San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation. Weinberger, L. A. (2003). An examination of the relationship between emotional intelligence, leadership style and perceived leadership effectiveness (Swanson &

142 Associates, p. 209). St. Paul, MN: Human Resources Development Research Center. Yang, S. C., & Lin, W. C. (2004). The relationship among creative, critical thinking and thinking styles in Taiwan high school students. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 31(1), 33-45. Zenger, J. H., & Folkman, J. (2002). The extraordinary leader: Turning good managers into great leaders. New York: McGraw-Hill. Zenger, J. H., & Folkman, J. (2004). The handbook for leaders: 24 lessons for extraordinary leadership. New York: McGraw-Hill.

143 APPENDIX A: INFORMED CONSENT Dear MBA Student, During the present cycle, we will develop the application of a series of tests in order to know your traits and personal characteristics, with the purpose of conducting research about Peruvian managers leadership. An objective of Centrum Catlica is to contribute to the countrys economic development, educating capable professionals in the administrative sciences, and developing in them abilities and personal attitudes to face the competitive challenge of the current global economy. This research will be conducted using the following questionnaires: 1. The NEO Personality Inventory Revised (PI-R) Revised Form S. This test attempts to establish a persons personality features. It was developed by Paul T. Costa, Jr., and Robert R. McCrae in 1992. It was obtained from Psychological Assessment Resources Inc. 2. The Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal (WGCTA-A) Form A. This test attempts to establish the characteristics of critical thought. It was developed by Goodwin Watson and Edgard M. Glaser in 1980. It was obtained from Harcourt Assessment, Inc. 3. The Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) Leader Form 5x-Short. This test seeks to determine the multiple factors that constitute peoples leadership traits. It was developed by Bernard M. Bass and Bruce J. Avolio in 1993. It was obtained from Mind Garden, Inc. 4. The Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT)

144 This is a self-evaluation tool used to identify features and personal characteristics of emotional intelligence. It was developed by J. Mayer, P. Salovey and D. Caruso in 1990 . It was obtained from Multi-Health Systems, Inc. This research is attempting to find relationships among personal attributes of personality, critical thinking, and emotional intelligence as related to leadership factors, as well as the combined influences of personality, critical thinking, and emotional intelligence on these leadership styles. It is important to complete the demographic information questionnaire on the enclosed in order to help the researcher develop the required correlations for the present investigation. After knowing the purpose of the investigation that will be carried out by Centrum Catlica and the institutional and personal benefits of the same, I __________________________________________________________ identified with National Identity Document Number ____________________, agree to participate in the investigation that Fernando DAlessio, Professor of Centrum Catlica is carrying out, whose objective is to evaluate personality, critical thinking, and emotional intelligence and assess how the characteristics of each one of these aspects are related to a managers leadership. In addition, I am aware that although this study will be published in academic reports, every participants information will be maintained in confidence and that the results of the research will be reported in terms of group and subgroup characteristics and correlations. For this purpose, each student will be given a personal code, which must be recorded in the demographic section of the questionnaire. .

145 Centrum commits to communicate to each student his or her results. Therefore, I give my consent that the results of the questionnaires be used in the above indicated investigation. Lima, , 2006

________________ Signature

146 DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION Program: ______________________________________________________ First and Last (Family) Name: _______________________________________ Age: ____________________ Code: ___________________ Gender: (please tick the applicable box) M F

Place of Birth: _____________________________________________ Profession:_______________________________________________________ University (City):_________________________________________________ Academic Degree: ________________________________________________ Years of Working Experience: ______________________________________ Present Position: ________________________ Number of people subordinate to you: 0-5 6 - 20 21 50 50 or more

147 Spanish Version Estimado alumno del MBA, Durante el presente ciclo, desarrollaremos una serie de pruebas tendientes a conocer sus rasgos y caractersticas personales con el fin de desarrollar una investigacin especficamente sobre el liderazgo de los gerentes Peruanos. Un objetivo de Centrum Catlica es el de contribuir al desarrollo econmico del pas, formando profesionales capaces en las ciencias administrativas, y desarrollar en ellos habilidades y actitudes personales para enfrentar el reto de la competitividad en la economa globalizada que vivimos. La presente investigacin desarrollar las siguientes pruebas: 1. El cuestionario NEO Personality Inventory Revised (PI-R) Revised Form S. Esta prueba intenta evaluar en una persona sus rasgos de personalidad. Fue desarrollada por Paul T. Costa, Jr., y Robert R. McCrae en 1992. Fue obtenida de Psycological Assesment Resources Inc. 2. El cuestionario Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal (WGCTA-A) Form A. Esta prueba busca evaluar caractersticas de pensamiento crtico. Fue desarrollada por Goodwin Watson y Edgard M. Glaser en 1980. Fue obtenida de Harcourt Assessment, Inc. 3. El cuestionario Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) Leader Form 5x-Short. Esta prueba busca determinar los factores mltiples que constituyen el liderazgo en las personas. Fue desarrollada por Bernard M. Bass y Bruce J. Avolio en 1993. Fue obtenida de Mind Garden, Inc.

148 4. El cuestionario Mayer, Salovey, Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT). Esta es una herramienta de auto-evaluacin para medir rasgos y caractersticas personales de inteligencia emocional. Fue desarrollada por J. Mayer, P. Salovey y D. Caruso en 1990. Fue obtenida de Multi-Health Systems, Inc. Esta investigacin busca encontrar las posibles relaciones que existen entre los atributos personales de personalidad, pensamiento crtico, e inteligencia emocional con relacin al liderazgo, as como las influencias combinadas de personalidad, pensamiento crtico, e inteligencia emocional en los estilos de liderazgo. Igualmente, es importante llenar la informacin demogrfica en la hoja adjunta ya que eso ayudar a desarrollar las correlaciones necesarias para la presente investigacin. Luego de conocer el propsito de la investigacin que ser realizada por Centrum Catlica y los beneficios institucionales y personales de dicha investigacin, Yo __________________________________________________________ identificado con Documento Nacional de Identidad ____________________, acepto participar en la investigacin que realizar Fernando DAlessio, Profesor de Centrum Catlica, cuyo objetivo es evaluar la personalidad, el pensamiento critico, la inteligencia emocional, y como se relacionan estas caractersticas de cada uno se relacionan con el liderazgo de los gerentes. Asimismo, tomo conocimiento que este estudio ser publicado en medios acadmicos guardndose la confidencialidad debida de cada participante y que los resultados de la investigacin sern reportados en trminos de caractersticas y correlaciones de grupo y subgrupo. Para este propsito, cada estudiante recibir un cdigo, el cual ser registrado en la seccin demogrfica del cuestionario.

149 Centrum se compromete a comunicarles individualmente sus resultados. Por lo tanto, doy mi consentimiento para que los resultados sean usados en la investigacin mencionada. Lima, de 2006 Firma

_________________

150 INFORMACIN DEMOGRFICA Programa: ______________________________________________________ Nombre y apellidos: ______________________________________________ Edad: ____________________ Cdigo: __________________ Gnero: (Marque el cuadrado respectivo) M F

Lugar de nacimiento: _____________________________________________ Profesin: _______________________________________________________ Universidad de procedencia (indique la ciudad): ______________________ Grado acadmico: ________________________________________________ Aos de experiencia laboral: _______________________________________ Cargo que desempea en su centro de labores: ________________________ Nmero de personas a su cargo: 0-5 6 - 20 21 50 50 a ms

151 APPENDIX B: AUTHORIZATIONS The original authorization statements were signed between the corresponding licensee and Fernando A. DAlessio. Those permissions indicated the conditions of use for the tests. The original permissions have been kept safe and are summarized in this appendix. Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO PI-R) The license form the Psychological Assessment Resources (PAR) does not require an agreement to reproduce the NEO PI-R since the Spanish booklets are printed. They only require as condition of sale that the purchaser agrees not to reproduce or adapt the materials in any way. This clause is written on all the invoices sent by PAR. This agreement allows reproductions/administration of the NEO PI-R Watson Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal This permission agreement was effective on May 31, 2005, and signed between Hardcourt Assessment, Inc, at 19500 Bulverde Road, San Antonio, Texas 78259 (by Aurelio Prifitera, Ph.D, Publisher) and Centum Catlica. Calle 9. Los Alamos de Monterrico, Surco, Lima, Per (by Fernando A. DAlessio, General Director and Dean). This agreement allows reproductions/administration of the Watson Glaser Critical Thinking AppraisalForm A. Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire This permission agreement was effective on April 25, 2005. Permission was granted to Fernando A. DAlessio to reproduce the required amount of copies for one year from date of purchase. This permission was authorized by Bernard Bass and Bruce Avolio, and distributed by Mind Garden, Inc., at 1690 Woodside Road Suite 202,

152 Redwood City, California 94061, USA. This agreement allows reproductions/administrations of the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire. Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT) This permission agreement was effective on May 30, 2005. Multi-Health Systems (MSH) granted to Fernando A. DAlessio (Licensee) the right to use the MSCEITTM for research study purposes only. MHS granted the licensee permission to reproduce the necessary amount of forms for the European Spanish MSCEIT Item Booklets. The first amendment to the MSCEIT License Agreement, dated May 30th 2005, was effective on August 31, 2005, by and between MHS, an Ontario corporation at 3770 Victoria Park Avenue, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, M2H 3M6 and Fernando A. DAlessio (Licensee), The required numbers of copies of the MSCEIT European Spanish Item booklet to be used during the Research Study will be reproduced. Both the License Agreement and First Amendment Agreement were signed by both Steven Stein (MHS authorized representative) and Fernando A. DAlessio. These agreements allow reproductions/administrations of the Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test MSCEITTM.

153 APPENDIX C: PERSONALITY TESTS NEO Personality Inventory TestRevised (NEO-PI-R) Form S The NEO-PI-R was designed by Paul T. Costa, Jr., Ph.D. and Robert R. McCrae, Ph.D., in order to provide a general description of a normal personality relevant to clinical, counseling, and educational situations. Based on the five-factor model of personality, the NEO-PI-R is comprised of 243 items; the 240-facet and domain items are rated on a 5-point scale (three validity items are also included). Form S is designed for self-reports. Form R is designed for observer reports, and is written in the third person for peer, spouse, or expert ratings. Versions include several languages such as English, Spanish, French, and German. The administration may be appropriately used with individuals who are 17 years of age or older. The test is usually completed within 40 minutes. NEO-PI-R items and materials are designed to be easily read and understood. The five domains (factors) measured by the NEO-PI-R provide a general description of personality, while the facet scales allow more detailed analysis. These five factors and their facet scales include the following: (a) neuroticismanxiety, hostility, depression, self-consciousness, impulsiveness, and vulnerability; (b) extraversion warmth, gregariousness, assertiveness, activity, excitement-seeking, and positive emotions;(c) openness to experiencefantasy, aesthetics, feelings, actions, ideas, and values;(d) agreeablenesstrust, modesty, compliance, altruism, straightforwardness, tender-mindedness; and (e) conscientiousnesscompetence, self-discipline, achievement-striving, dutifulness, order, and deliberation.

154 Internal consistency coefficients range from .86 to .95 for domain scales, and from .56 to .90 for facet scales. Stability coefficients ranging from .51 to .83 have been measured in three-year, six-year, and seven-year longitudinal studies of the original NEO-PI factors. The NEO-PI-R has been validated against other personality inventories and projective techniques (Sigma Assessment Systems, 2005). The Cattell Personality Factor Questionnaire 16PF Fifth Edition (16PF) Since its introduction more than 40 years ago, the 16PF has been widely used for a variety of applications, including treatment planning and couples' counseling and providing support for vocational guidance, hiring, and promotion recommendations. Designed by Raymond B. Cattell, Ph.D., A. Karen Cattell, and Heather E.P. Cattell, Ph.D., the 16PF includes significant enhancements to the earlier editions that did not change the tests' basic structure, such as (a) global factors that combine related primary scales into global factors of personality; (b) updated language and simpler, shorter questions; (c) reduced administration time; (d) consistent response format; and (e) a normative sample that reflects contemporary U.S. Census statistics on sex, age, and race. Psychologists and counselors can use the 16PF assessment to (a) provide information for general vocational guidance in order to help determine occupations for which the individual is best suited; (b) assist with personnel selection and career development through the measurement of five primary management dimensions frequently identified to forecast management potential and style; and (c) assist with clinical diagnosis, prognosis and therapy planning because the 16PF helps provide clinicians with a measurement for neurosis, anxiety, adjustment, and behavioral problems; (d) helps identify personality factors that may predict marital compatibility and

155 satisfaction, and results also highlight existing or potential problem areas; and (e) helps identify students with potential academic, emotional, and social problems. The instruments key features are the following: (a) The 16PF assessment is easy to administer, requiring only 35 to 50 minutes to complete; (b) five distinct report options give the 16PF test usefulness in a wide variety of settings; and (c) because the relationship between the test items and the traits measured are not obvious, it is difficult for the test-taker to deliberately tailor responses to achieve a desired outcome. The instrument can be administered to individuals of 16 years and older and consists of 16 bipolar dimensions of personality, five global factors and three validity scales. The 16 bipolar dimensions of personality are the following: warmth (reserved versus warmfactor A), reasoning (concrete versus abstractfactor B), emotional stability (reactive versus emotionally stablefactor C), dominance (deferential versus dominantfactor E), liveliness (serious versus livelyfactor F), rule-consciousness (expedient versus rule-consciousfactor G), social boldness (shy versus socially bold factor H), sensitivity (utilitarian versus sensitivefactor I), vigilance (trusting versus vigilantfactor L), abstractedness (grounded versus abstractedfactor M), privateness (forthright versus privatefactor N), apprehension (self-assured versus apprehensive factor O), openness to change (traditional versus open to changefactor Q1), selfreliance (group-oriented versus self-reliantfactor Q2), perfectionism (tolerates disorder versus perfectionisticfactor Q3), and tension (relaxed versus tensefactor Q4). The five global factors include the following: extraversion, anxiety, toughmindedness, independence, and self-control. The criterion scores are the following: selfesteem, emotional adjustment, social adjustment, emotional expressivity, emotional

156 sensitivity, emotional control, social expressivity, social sensitivity, social control, empathy, leadership potential, creative potential, creative achievement, and dyadic adjustment. The three validity scales are the following: impression management, infrequency, and acquiescence. The leadership scores are four, namely, assertive, facilitative, permissive, and leadership style (Pearson Assessments, 2005a). Million Index of Personality Styles Revised (MIPS-R) A brief, well-rounded personality measure was designed by Theodore Millon to assess normal personality styles for adults. The newly updated MIPS-R test helps address the need for a theoretically grounded instrument that is administered by a broad range of professionals, including human resource specialists, social workers and career counselors, and private practice clinicians. While brief to administer, the MIPS-R test provides a comprehensive, up-to-date evaluation that surpasses the scope of many other normal personality assessments. The MIPS-R addresses three key dimensions of normal personalities: (a) Motivating styles, which helps to assess the person's emotional style in dealing with his/her environment; (b) thinking styles, which helps to examine the person's mode of cognitive processing; and (c) behaving styles, which helps to assess the person's way of interrelating with others. There are three motivating styles: (1A) Pleasure-enhancing and (1B) painavoiding; (2A) actively modifying and (2B) passively accommodating; and (3A) selfindulging and (3B) other-nurturing. Four thinking styles are included: (4A) externally focused and (4B) internally focused; (5A) realistic/sensing and (5B) imaginative/intuiting; (6A) thought-guided and (6B) feeling-guided; and (7A)

157 conservation-seeking and (7B) innovation-seeking. Five behaving styles are included: (8A) Asocial/withdrawing and (8B) gregarious/outgoing; (9A) anxious/hesitating and (9B) confident/asserting; (10A) unconventional/dissenting and (10B) dutiful/conforming; (11A) submissive/yielding and (11B) dominant/controlling; and (12A) dissatisfied/complaining and (12B) cooperative/agreeing. The instrument possesses four validity indexes: (a) positive impression, (b) negative impression, (c) consistency, and (d) clinical index. This widely used test offers a convenient tool to help professionals assist ostensibly normally functioning adults who may be experiencing difficulties in work, family, or social relationships. It may also be helpful in career counseling or employment settings. In addition, the test's clinical index is useful for helping to screen for the possible presence of mental disorders in persons who present as normal. The test can be administered to individuals who are 18 years and older, and it has proven to be useful in a variety of settings, including (a) employee selection, as a preoffer screening tool; (b) employee assistance programs; (c) leadership and employee development programs; (d) career planning for high school and college students; (e) the curriculum for college courses in psychological testing; (f) relationship, premarital, and marriage counseling; and (g) individual counseling. Several benefits are associated with this test: (a) Scale names and the profile display have been updated to provide administrators with better information for interpreting test results; (b) with only 180 true/false items, the test can be completed in less than 30 minutes on average; (c) while clinically and theoretically grounded, the MIPS-R test does not require administration by an advanced-degreed professional; and (d) the MIPS-R test has separate male and female norms (Pearson Assessments, 2005b).

158 Table C1 presents a summary of the three instruments used to measure personality. The NEO PI-R is the most widely used instrument, as indicted by the literature review.

159

Table 26 Personality Tests Neo Personality Inventory Revised Form S (NEOPI-R) The NEO-PI-R was designed to provide a general description of normal personality relevant to clinical, counseling, and educational situations. It is based on the five-factor model of personality. The Cattell Personality Questionnaire 16PF (5th ed.) Millon Index of Personality Styles Revised (MIPS) The newly updated MIPS-R test helps address the need for a theoretically grounded instrument that can be administered by a broad range of professionals including human resource specialists, social workers and career counselors, and private practice clinicians. Authors: P. T. Costa and R. R. McCrae Authors: R. B. Cattell, A. K. Cattell and H. E. P. Cattell. Areas: neuroticism, extraversion, openness to experience, agreeableness, and conscientiousness. Areas: global factors: extraversion, anxiety, tough- mindedness, independence, and self-control. Areas: motivating styles, thinking styles, and behaving styles. Author: T. Millon

The 16PF has been widely used for a variety of applications including treatment planning and couples' counseling and also provides support for vocational guidance, hiring, and promotion recommendations.

Items: 240

Items: 185

Items: 108

160 APPENDIX D: CRITICAL THINKING TESTS Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal (WGCTA) Form A The development of the WGCTA was driven by the conceptualization of critical thinking as a composite of attitudes, knowledge, and skills. The WGCTA attempts to provide an estimate of the individuals standing on this composite by means of five subtests, each designed to tap a somewhat different aspect of the composite. A high level of competency in critical thinking, as measured by the WGCTA, may be operationally defined as the ability to perform the domain task represented by the five subtests correctly. The test was developed by Goodwin Watson and Edward M. Glaser. The test consists of five areas: (a) inferencediscriminating between the degree of truth or falsity of inferences drawn from given data; (b) recognition of assumptions recognizing stated assumptions or presuppositions in given statements or assertions, (c) deductiondetermining whether certain conclusions necessarily follow from information in given statements or premises, (d) interpretationweighing evidence and deciding if generalizations or conclusions based on the given data are warranted, and (e) evaluation of argumentsdistinguishing between arguments that are strong and relevant and those that are weak or irrelevant to a particular question. The test is composed of an 80-item tool that measures a persons general critical thinking ability. Split-half reliability coefficients range from .69 to .85 (Brody, Koenigseder, Ishee, & Williams, 2001; UNM College of Nursing, 2005). The California Critical Thinking Skills Test (CCTST) This test was developed by the University of Tennessee in 2001 and 2002 and has the following characteristics: (a) It measures five core skillsanalysis, evaluation,

161 inference, deductive reasoning, and inductive reasoning; (b) it is a norm referenced, theory based test with alternative forms (internal consistency Kuder-Richardson (KR) 20 = .70 for form A and .71 for form B; (c) it has 34 multiple-choice, short-problem statements and scenarios that are discipline neutral; (d) it has questions about a persons ability to assess his or her individual abilities and stability and reliability, especially in the analysis subscale; (e) the concurrent, content, and construct validity was reported in 1994; (f) the CCTST demonstrated strong positive correlations with grade point average (GPA), scholastic aptitude test (SAT) scores for verbal and math skills, and graduate record examination (GRE) and its scale scores. The purpose of the CCTST is to assess an individual or group's critical thinking and reasoning skills in order to gather data for program evaluation and research on critical thinking skills development, and the test may be administered to adults at community college, undergraduate, graduate, and professional school levels. Some special characteristics are shown in this test: (a) test items present informational content in diagrammatic and in text-based formats; (b) questions invite test takers to draw inferences, to make interpretations, to analyze information, to identify reasons, and to evaluate those reasons;(c) three forms existForm 2000, Form A (published in 1990), and Form B (published in 1992); (d) 11 forms are in a 34-item multiple-choice format; (d) test items supply the content and contexts for applying one's thinking skills; (f) Cap Scores service supports test scoring, data management, and analysis; and (g) overall and subtest norms and percentile norms exist.

162 The concurrent validity for the CCTST correlates with the GRE: quantitative, analytic, and verbal; the WGCTA; the SAT verbal and math scores; the Nelson-Denny Reading Test; and the College GPA. The California Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory (CCTDI) This test was developed specifically to measure peoples dispositions to use critical thinking as separate from cognitive skills. The test measures seven traits: truthseeking, open-mindedness, analyticity, systematicity, critical thinking self-confidence, inquisitiveness, and maturity. The test was theoretically generated and evolved from an empirical analysis process. The test is a 75-item tool and uses a 6-point Likert-scale questionnaire with agree-disagree responses. The construct validity has a highly significant correlation with the CCTST (r = .66, .67; p < .001). The test is believed to show an acceptable level of reliability but needs to be tested for validity evidence. Table D1 presents a summary of these three instruments used to measure critical thinking. The WGCTA is the most widely used instrument, as found in the literature review.

163

Table 27 Critical Thinking Tests

Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal (WGCTA) Form A The WGCTA attempts to provide an estimate of the individuals standing with respect to this composite by means of five subtests, each designed to tap a somewhat different aspect of the composite. 80 items

The California Critical Thinking Skills Test (CCTST) The purpose of the CCTST is assess an individual's or group's critical thinking and reasoning skills in order to gather data for program evaluation and research on critical thinking skills development. 34 items

The California Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory (CCTDI) This test was developed specifically to measure a persons disposition to use critical thinking as separate from cognitive skills 75 items

Authors: G. B. Watson and E. Glaser Areas: inference, recognition of assumptions, deduction, interpretation, and evaluation of arguments

Author: The University of Tennessee. Areas: analysis, evaluation, inference, deductive reasoning, and inductive reasoning

Author: The University of Tennessee. Areas: truth-seeking, open-mindedness, analyticity, systematicity, critical thinking self -confidence, inquisitiveness, and maturity Items: 75

Items: 80

Items: 34

164 APPENDIX E: EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE TESTS Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT) The authors of the MSCEIT test, Mayer, Salovey and Caruso (2002), defined emotional intelligence as the ability to perceive emotions, to access and generate emotions to assist thought, to understand emotions and emotional knowledge, and to reflectively regulate emotions so that they promote emotional and intellectual growth. The MSCEIT test is an ability-based scale that measures how well people perform tasks and solves emotional problems as opposed to relying on an individuals subjective assessment of his or her perceived emotional skills. The 141-item test has several versions in languages such as English, Spanish, and so forth. The four-branches of emotional intelligence in the model are the following: (a) perceiving emotions is the ability to perceive emotions in oneself and others as well as in objects, art, stories, music, and other stimuli;(b) facilitating thought is the ability to generate, use, and feel emotion as necessary and to communicate feelings or employ them in other cognitive processes; (c) understanding emotions is the ability to understand emotional information, how emotions combine and progress through relationship transitions, and to appreciate such emotional meaning; and (d) managing emotions is the ability to be open to feelings and to modulate them in oneself and others so as to promote personal understanding and growth. The test can be administered to individuals of 17 years of age and older, and it is a self-report test that takes between 30 to 45 minutes to complete. The MSCEIT test may easily be administered and scored by professionals with advanced training in psychological assessment and professionals from related disciplines that adhere to the

165 relevant assessment standards. Individuals without formal psychological training and professional affiliations need to be trained and certified to use the MSCEIT (Multi-health Systems, 2005). Emotional Competency Inventory (ECI) The ECI is a multi-rater tool designed to assess emotional intelligence: the ECI is based on the seminal work of Dr. Daniel Goleman and Dr. Boyatzis and builds on the Hay Groups 35 years of competency research and field-proven assessment technology. The result is an assessment and development tool of excellent precision and authenticity. Sala (2002) presented four areas of assessment: (a) self-awareness, (b) selfmanagement, (c) social awareness, and (d) relationship management. Table E1 shows the ECI clusters. Table 28 Emotional Competency Inventory Areas of Assessment
ECI Cluster Self-Awareness Competency Emotional self-awareness Accurate self-assessment Self-confidence Self-control Trustworthiness Conscientiousness Adaptability Achievement orientation Initiative Empathy Organizational awareness Service orientation Developing others Leadership Influence Communication Change catalyst Conflict management Building bonds Team work and collaboration

Self-Management

Social-Awareness

Social Skills

166 The ECI can evaluate both the individuals within an organization (individual feedback reports) as well as the organization as a whole (workforce audits). These audits can provide an organizational profile for any sized group within the company. Executive coaches can use the ECI to provide clients with precise and focused feedback on their strengths and limits. Based on the feedback from a variety of rater groups (i.e. self, manager, direct reports, peers, and others), the ECI indicates the specific emotional competencies and where development is needed in order to enhance the individual's emotional intelligence. For organizations, internal and external consultants can use the ECI to diagnose an entire unit, profiling its overall strengths and development opportunities. Pooling the individual assessments of an entire work unit provides a comprehensive profile of the organization's emotional intelligence. This workforce audit can reveal key emotional gaps that may be limiting performance effectiveness (Hay Group, 2005). The Emotional Quotient (EQ) Map The EQ Map Questionnaire is a self-evaluation test (specially directed to directors); that is to say, it contains the keys so that the individual who responds to the questionnaire obtains its measurement. The test was created by a team led by Esther Orioli and Robert K. Cooper and was based on a model developed in the book Executive EQ by Cooper and Sawaf. This test requires the individual to spend 30 minutes of undisturbed time circling responses to questions that ask how well statements describe current behavior, intentions, actions, or thoughts. Honest responses to all the items are required.

167 The individual is rated on 20 scales, and the scores are translated into performance zones. These zones represent varying levels of skill or competency in the areas being mapped. The areas are the following: (a) Optimal represents the strongest EQ strengthsin these areas exist great strength, effectiveness, and creativity, even when under pressure; (b) proficient means steady, balanced effectiveness is shown in most situations; (c) vulnerableoverall EQ performance is unsteady and may fluctuate from situation to situation, and some skills and competencies are demonstrated but difficulty is experienced with bringing EQ into everyday life; and (d) cautionEQ ability is compromised or needs enhancement and may prove difficult to use without concentrated attention. The scales used to measure emotional intelligence are the following: (a) Scale 1 life pressures, (b) Scale 2life satisfactions, (c) Scale 3emotional self-awareness, (d) Scale 4emotional expression, (e) Scale 5emotional awareness of others, (f) Scale 6 intentionality, (g) Scale 7creativity, (h) Scale 8resilience, (i) Scale 9 interpersonal connections, (j) Scale 10constructive discontent, (k) Scale 11outlook, (l) Scale 12compassion, (m) Scale 13intuition, (n) Scale 14trust radius, (o) Scale 15personal power, (p) Scale 16integrated self, (q) Scale 17general health, (r) Scale 18quality of life, (s), Scale 19relationship quotient, and (t) Scale 20optimal performance. Combinations of the EQ scales may be used to produce various measures. These include the following: (a) general healthScales 1, 2, 3, 4 and 8; (b) quality of life Scales 2, 9, 11, 14, 15, and 16; (c) relationship quotientScales 3, 6, 9, 12, and 16; (d) optimal performanceScales 3, 7, 8, 10, 13, 14, and 16; (e) increasing effectiveness

168 under pressureScales 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 17, and 20; (f) building trusting relationshipsScales 5, 9, 12, 14, 16, and 19; and (g) creating the futureScales 6, 7, 10, 11, 13, 15, and 18. (Leahcim T. Semaj & Company, 2005). Table E2 presents a summary of the three instruments used to measure emotional intelligence. The MSCEIT and the ECI are the most popular instruments, as demonstrated by the literature review. Mayer and Salovey (1993) introduced the concept of emotional intelligence that is why their instrument was chosen for this research.

169

Table 29 Emotional Intelligence Tests Mayer Salovey Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT) The MSCEIT is an ability-based scale that measures how well people perform tasks and solves emotional problems as opposed to relying on an individuals subjective assessment of their perceived emotional skills. Authors: J. Mayer, P. Salovey, and D. Caruso. Areas: perceiving emotions, facilitating thought, understanding emotions, and managing emotions

Emotional Competency Inventory (ECI) The ECI is a multi-rater tool designed to assess emotional intelligence.

The EQ Map This questionnaire is a self-evaluation test (specially directed to directors); that is to say, it contains the keys so that the individual who responds to it obtains its measurement. Authors: E. Orioli and R. K. Cooper Areas: life pressures, life satisfaction, emotional self-awareness, emotional expression, emotional awareness of others, intentionality, creative, resilience, interpersonal connections, constructive discontent, outlook, compassion, intuition, trust radius, personal power, integrate self, general health, quality of life, relation quotient, and optimal performance. Items: Not found

Authors: D. Goleman and R. Boyatzis Areas: self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, and relationship management

Items: 141

Items: 63

170 APPENDIX F: LEADERSHIP TESTS Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) Bernard M. Bass and his associates developed the MLQ in order to determine the degree to which leaders exhibited transformational and transactional leadership and the degree to which their followers were satisfied with their leader and their leader's effectiveness. The MLQ has undergone many revisions during the past 20 years. The MLQ was designed to assess two transactional and three transformational leadership factors. The test was designed by Bruce J, Avolio and Bernard M. Bass. Versions in several known languages exist. Seven areas are covered by this 45-item Likert scale, self-scored, and 360-way test. The first four areas related to transformational leadership and the three following ones to transactional leadership. First, charisma or idealized influence assess the degree to which the leader instills pride in others, displays power and confidence, makes personal sacrifices or champions new possibilities, considers the ethical or moral consequences of decisions, and talks about the importance of having a collective sense of mission. Two types of idealized influence exist: idealized influence attributes (IA) and idealized influence behaviors (IB). Second, inspirational motivation (IM) assesses the leader's ability to articulate a compelling vision of the future as well as the degree to which he or she sets challenging standards and takes a stand on controversial issues. Third, intellectual stimulation (IS) concerns the leader's vision and those behaviors that increase followers understanding of the problems they face. Transformational leaders use intellectual stimulation to point out the problems in current situations and contrast them with their visions of the future. Fourth, individualized consideration (IC) concerns the

171 extent to which leaders treat followers as individuals and how much of a mentoring or coaching orientation leaders have with respect to their followers. Fifth, contingent reward concerns the extent to which leaders set goals, make rewards contingent upon performance, obtain necessary resources, and provide rewards when performance goals have been met. Sixth, management-by-exception concerns the degree to which managers focus on negatives instead of positives and the degree to which they intervene when mistakes occur. There are two types of management-by-exception: (a) active management-by-exception occurs when managers closely monitor follower performance and keep track of mistakes, and (b) passive management-by-exception occurs when managers are unaware of performance problems until these are brought to their attention. Management-by-exception is characterized by negative feedback and punishment. Finally, laissez-faire leadership is neither transactional nor transformational. Leaders who avoid responsibilities, fail to make decisions, are absent when needed, or fail to follow up on requests would receive higher scores on the laissez-faire leadership factor (Mind Garden, 2005). Leadership Competency Inventory (LCI) The LCI is a self-scoring questionnaire that measures an individual's use of the four competencies essential to effective leadership. Research has shown that those who can convey an inspiring vision to others demonstrate specific behaviors. The LCI enables participants to assess the degree to which they exhibit leadership competencies as perceived by themselves, colleagues, and people who directly report to them. Scoring grids in the interpretive notes are used to illustrate the person's demonstration of detailed levels of behavior and provide an overall profile of the four

172 major competencies. The test was designed by the Hay Group and exists in several languages. The test covers the following four competencies: (a) Information seeking is the ability to gather information from a variety of sources in order to gain full comprehension of all possibilities; (2) conceptual thinking is the ability to capture a clear, crisp image of a complex situation from an assortment of information; (c) strategic orientation is the ability to develop a long-term strategic focus toward a goal and link daily events or current actions to a final objective; and (d) customer service orientation is the ability to identify and focus on the long-term best interests of the customer. The test is a 38-item self-scored, paper-based, 360-way test, and the test takes between 30 to 60 minutes to complete (Hay Resources Direct, 2005). Global Executive Leadership Inventory (GELI) This instrument was created by an internationally renowned business scholar Manfred F.R. Kets de Vries. This in-depth leadership development tool was designed for coaches, human resource practitioners, and training professionals who are looking to develop leadership programs that improve individual, team, and organizational performance. The 100-item assessment is an ideal tool for multinational organizations looking to attract, train, and retain the best and brightest next-generation leaders. This tool offers guidance for understanding a persons leadership abilities and shows how to take steps to improve his or her leadership abilities. Twelve areas are covered by the test: visioning, empowering, energizing, designing and aligning, rewarding and feedback, team building, outside orientation, global mindset, tenacity, emotional intelligence, life balance, and resilience to stress.

173 The inventory consists of 100 action- and behavior-based questions designed to measure a persons competency. The inventory includes an effective self-assessment tool as well as a 360-degree component that allows one to obtain feedback from subordinates, colleagues, and superiors. The Participant Workbook provides feedback and helps to create a development plan. As a result of the GELI process, when this workbook is completed, a person will be able to state the advantages of and concerns about 360-degree feedback, identify 12 key characteristics of successful global leaders, evaluate his or her strengths and weaknesses on each of the 12 key characteristics, and develop an action plan that specifies what her or she will do to improve his or her leadership competences (Kets de Vries, 2005; Pressbox, 2004). Campbell Leadership Index (CLI) The CLI Instrument helps measure personal characteristics that are directly related to the nature and demands of leadership. One of the basic assumptions underlying the use of this instrument is that effective leaders should have an accurate perception of how they are viewed by others. For this purpose, the CLI instrument quantifies the perceptions of the leader and selected observers such as subordinates or peers. This instrument is used as an integrated component of leadership development programs in which individuals can focus on the characteristics and qualities of effective leadership. The CLI instrument offers the following: (a) the ability to gather feedback from those who closely observe an individuals leadership characteristics within the context of the organization, including direct reports, peers, and managers; (b) graphs and interpretive data that present the differences between

174 a leaders self-perception and observer ratings; and (c) a development planning guide for each participant that encourages commitment to an action plan for improvement. The test covers the following leadership aspects: ambition, daring, dynamic, enterprising, experienced, farsighted, original, and persuasive. The test also covers energy. The four aspects of affability are affectionate, considerate, entertaining, and friendly. The four aspects of dependability are credible, organized, productive, and thrifty. Finally, the two aspects of resilience are calm and flexible (Creative Organizational Design, 2003). Table F1 presents a summary of the four instruments used to measure leadership. MLQ is the most widely used instrument, as demonstrated by the literature review.

175

Table 30 Leadership Tests Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) (5x) Short This questionnaire is use to determine the degree to which leaders exhibit transformational and transactional leadership and the degree to which their followers are satisfied with their leaders and their leaders effectiveness. Authors: B. J. Avolio & B. M. Bass Area of the test: transformational leadership, and transactional leadership.

Leadership Competency Inventory (LCI) This questionnaire measures an individuals use of four competencies essential to effective leadership.

Global Executive Leadership Inventory (GELI) This instrument was designed for coaches, human resource, practitioners, and training professionals who are looking to develop leadership programs that improve individual, team, and organizational performance. Author: Manfred F.R. Kets de Vries Areas: visioning, empowering, energizing, designing and aligning, rewarding and feedback, team building, outside orientation, global mindset, tenacity, emotional intelligence, life balance, and resilience to stress. Items: 100

Campbell Leadership Index The CLI helps measure personal characteristics that are directly related to the nature and demands of leadership

Author: HayGroup

Author: David Campell

Areas: information seeking, conceptual thinking, strategic orientation, customer service, and orientation.

Areas: leadership, energy, affability, dependability, and resilience.

Items: 45

Items: 38

Items: 16 supplemental items can be added to the survey.

176 APPENDIX G: STATISTICAL TERMS DEFINITIONS ANOVA. Univariate analysis of variance. Statistical technique used to determine, on the basis of one dependent measure, whether samples are from populations with equal means (Hair, Anderson, Tatham, & Black, 1998, p. 3). Coefficient of determination (R-square). Measure of the proportion of the variance of the dependent variable about its mean that is explained by the independent, or predictor, variables (Hair et al., 1998, p. 143). Confirmatory factor analysis. Type of factor analysis that is appropriately used when the researcher has some knowledge of the underlying latent variable structure. Based on the knowledge of the theory, empirical researches, or both, he or she postulates relations between the observed measures and the underlying factors a priori and then tests this hypothesized structure statistically (Byrne, 2001, p. 6). In this method, based upon previous studies or on relevant theory, factor loadings for the variables are hypothesized. Confirmatory factor analysis then proceeds to fit these loadings in the target matrix, as it is called, as closely as possible (Kline, 2002, p. 10). Correlation coefficient. An index of the strength of a relationship between two variables. It ranges between + 1.00 to 1.00 and can be positive or negative (Salkind, 2003, p. 304). Pearsons product moment correlation coefficient is used for interval or ratio variables and Spearmans rank correlation coefficient correlation is used for ordinal variables. Eingenvalues. Area-world, variance-accounted-for statistics that characterize the amount of information present in a given factor or function, are called characteristics roots (Thompson, 2004, p. 179).

177 Exploratory factor analysis. A type of factor analysis that is designed for the situations where links the observed and latent variables are unknown or uncertain. The analysis thus proceeds in an exploratory mode to determine how and to what extent the observed variables are linked to their underlying factors (Byrne, 2001, p. 5). In exploratory analysis the aim is to explore the field, to discover the main constructs or dimensions (Kline, 2002, p. 7). Factor analysis. Factor analysis consists of a number of statistical techniques the aim of which is to simplify complex set of data (Kline, 2002, p. 3). Factor rotation. Graphic visual or mathematical movement of the axes measuring the factor space used in exploratory factor analysis so that the factors can be more readily interpreted (Thompson, 2004, p. 179). Factor scores. The latent variables computed on each factor that may then be used in statistical analyses in place of the measured variable (Thompson, 2004, p. 179). Factor structure. The factor structure of a test indicates the number of discrete entities it plausibly measures (Brackett & Salovey, 2004, p. 186). Least squares. Estimation procedure used in simple and multiple regression whereby the regression coefficients are estimated so as to minimize the total sum of the squared residuals (Hair et al., 1998, p. 145). Multicollinearity. Multicollinearity refers to the correlation among three or more independent variables, evidenced when one is regressed against the others (Hair et al., 1998, p. 156).

178 Multiple regression. Multiple regression is the appropriate method of analysis when the research problem involves a single metric dependent variable presumed to be related to two or more metric independent variables (Hair et al., 1998, p. 14). Post hoc test. Statistical test of mean differences performed after the statistical tests for main effects have been performed (Hair et al., 1998, p.329) Procrustean rotation. A method that rotates a pattern coefficient matrix to bestfit position with a theoretical or actual pattern coefficient matrix (Thompson, 2004, p. 180). Reliability. Internal consistency, calculated as coefficient alpha, can be roughly understood as the degree to which items in a scale measure the same thing (Costa & McCrea, 1992, p. 44). Significance level. The amount of risk one is willing to take that the null hypothesis is true even though it is rejected (Salkind, 2003, p. 311). Validity. The term validity refers broadly to the success with which a scale measurement the construct it purports to (Costa & McCrae, 1992, p. 45).