This document is a term paper submitted by Shiva Kakkar to Prof. Parvinder Gupta at the Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad on September 18th, 2014. The paper examines leadership from the perspective of emotions. It discusses how leaders influence followers and manage emotions, as well as how leaders regulate their own emotions. The paper analyzes emotion theories like appraisal theory and affective events theory to understand how leaders impact the emotional appraisal and affect of followers. Effective leaders are able to facilitate positive appraisals, minimize the impact of negative events, and shape the overall affective tone and climate of a group.

1. INDIAN INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT
AHMEDABAD
Term Paper Assignment
Leading with passion: Leadership from the perspective of emotions
Submitted to
Prof. Parvinder Gupta
In Partial fulfillment of the requirements of course
Organizational Behavior (Micro)
Submitted on: September 18th, 2014
By
Shiva Kakkar

2. This page is intentionally left blank

3. Leading with passion: Leadership from the perspective of emotions
Shiva Kakkar
Successful leaders are known to motivate people by stimulating them emotionally. In the words
of Ken Blanchard, “the key to successful leadership is influence, not authority”. Leaders have the
uncanny ability to understand emotions in other people and influence them. This ability is often
termed as ‘Emotional Intelligence’ (EI). While there is enough OB literature present on the
salient features of EI, very few studies have actually attempted to explain how EI is
operationalized into practice. The objective of this paper is to study this particular aspect i.e.
how leaders affect their followers and manage their emotional states. The comprehension and
management of emotions in others is in itself an emotionally challenging task for the leader.
Therefore, the second objective of the paper is to understand how leaders regulate their own
emotions. Lastly, we cover the topic of ‘Emotional Intelligence’ and try to get new insights into
the subject building upon the views proposed in the paper. The paper aims to synthesize
concepts from various leadership and emotion theories and provide a comprehensive
understanding of the subject.
‘What is the world, O soldiers?
It is I:
I, this incessant snow,
This northern sky;
Soldiers, this solitude
Through which we go
Is I.’
- ‘Napolean’ by Walter De La Mare
These words by Walter De La Mare convey the anguish and concern of a leader for his
followers. The poem is devoted to Napolean Bonaparte who was leading the French campaign
against Russia in 1812. The Russians used the tactic of ‘continuous retreat’ wherein they gave
resistance just enough for the cold winter to set in. The tactic worked and Bonaparte and his men
were left stranded and out of resources in the chilling Russian winter. Yet, Napolean kept on
motivating his men, reminding them of their duty and exhorting them to strive and survive.
Though Napolean had to retreat in the end, he and his men did survive the winter. The incident
shows us the humane side of leadership. Leadership is often considered to be a ‘tough’ job; one
requiring cold calculated logic and sharp resource planning. Yet, there is no other role which

4. provides the opportunity to connect with people like leadership. And it is this ‘connect’ that
brings forth the role of emotions in leadership. From Mahatma Gandhi to Nelson Mandela, the
one thing running common across these seemingly unintimidating individuals is their ability to
emotionally connect, understand, respond and get along with people. In the words of Peter F.
Drucker,
“Real leaders who work most effectively, it seems to me, never say ‘I'. And that's not because
they have trained themselves not to say ‘I'. They don't think ‘I'. They think ‘we'; they think ‘team'.
They accept responsibility and don't sidestep it, but ‘we' gets the credit. This is what creates
trust, what enables you to get the task done." (Drucker, 2007)
All of us some point of time had a brush with leadership either as a leader or a follower. The
objective of this paper is to understand leadership from the perspective of emotions and try to
gain new insights into the subject.
Role of emotions in the workplace
The field of emotions is one of the most understudied and underestimated fields in both social
and organizational contexts. Darwin (1873) forwarded the biological and evolutionary
perspective of emotions as a ‘build-up and discharge of nervous system for the purpose of
survival’. He suggested that emotions were not merely irrational or frivolous component of
human (and animal) behavior but an important aspect of adaptability (Ashkanasy, Hartel, &
Zerbe, 2000).
The world of business management has always seen emotions as an aberration to rational
behavior. The school of scientific management has traditionally had its roots firmly entrenched
into cognitivism and behaviorism. F.W. Taylor held a single-dimensional view that human
beings were inherently rational individuals who would unquestionably perform labor for
personal rewards and benefits (Ashkanasy et al., 2000). Subsequently, this lead to an
oversimplification of jobs aimed single-pointedly at increasing efficiency and boosting
production. The result was a highly mechanistic system which considered emotions as
unnecessary distractions hampering production and reducing efficiency (Muchinsky, 2000).

5. But in the last two decades the field has re-emerged due to its propensity to impact and direct
human behavior (Ashforth & Humphrey, 1995). Everyday emotions have a tremendous impact
on the behavior of people in organizations. A lot of work in organizations today involves
working in groups and teams where people need to deal with their own emotional state and the
emotional state of others. Another reason for the increasing interest in emotional research is due
to the emergence of ‘emotional labor’. Emotional labor, contrary to popular perception, is not
only practiced by front-line employees but by all regular employees of the organization including
leaders. In organizations today, the negative emotions are typically suppressed while positive
emotions are expressed by both leaders and followers (Rajah, Song, & Arvey, 2011). This
regulation of positive and negative emotions is extremely important and is termed as ‘emotional
labor’. Research suggests that leaders who are not able to regulate their negative emotions like
anxiety, disappointment and uncertainty are termed as ineffective and rated negatively by their
subordinates (Dasborough, 2006; Lewis, 2000 as cited in Rajah et al., 2011).
The real objective of a leader is to motivate people and motivation is highly dependent upon how
people feel about things – their ‘emotions’. Emotions motivate people to act (Popa & Salanta,
2013) and the role of a leader is also to motivate his followers to act in a certain way (Maddock
& Fulton, 1998). This duology of emotions and leadership is aptly explained by Maddock and
Fulton (1998) when they say ‘leadership is nothing but motivation and motivation is nothing but
emotion’.
The empathetic leader: An overview of emotion theories and their interaction
with leadership
All great leaders have one common trait – they inspire people (Biro, 2013). Effective leaders
identify, understand, empathize and create positive feelings among followers. This is because
intelligent leaders possess the unique quality of ‘empathy’. An empathetic leader is one who
observes, understands and responds to the needs of the followers in a sensitive manner. Great
leaders are able to inspire their followers because they possess the ability to empathize with their
followers. According to Salovey and Mayer (as cited in Kellett, Humphrey, & Sleeth, 2002)
empathy is the central characteristic of emotionally intelligent behavior. Empathetic leaders are

6. themselves optimists and through their influence breed optimism among their followers. (Avolio,
Gardner, Walumbwa, Luthans, & May, 2004).
A leader through his empathetic emotional skills is able to influence and minimize the negativity
surrounding an event by influencing the manner in which group members perceive the event.
The leader takes a strength based approach which shifts the attention of followers away from the
weaknesses as a group to the positive attributes of each individual and their relative strengths as
a team (Buckingham & Clifton, 2001; Buckingham & Coffman, 1999; Clifton & Harter, 2003 as
cited in Avolio et al., 2004). A good way to understand this is through the study of ‘appraisal
theory’ proposed by Magda Arnold.
Appraisal theory
According to Arnold, appraisal is the most important part in generation of emotions (Reeve,
2005). Arnold was the first to use the term ‘appraisal’ to explain the elicitation of emotions.
Appraisal is nothing but how people think about a particular event or object which results into
the production of emotions. Thus, appraisal precedes and leads to the elicitation of emotions. The
way a situation is interpreted results into the elicitation of a particular emotion (Scherer, 1999).
Depending upon the emotions experienced, the individual modifies his or her behavior with
respect to the situation. If the emotion is positive, the motivation to face the situation is
generated. If the emotion is negative the motivation to avoid the situation is generated (Reeve,
2005). It is interesting to note that it is the cognitive appraisal of the situation and not the
situation in itself that elicits emotions. Therefore, changing the appraisal would bring about a
change in emotions (Reeve, 2005).
Figure 1: Leadership influence on appraisal (adapted from Reeve, 2005)

7. In such a situation, the leader can play an important role to stimulate and facilitate a positive
appraisal of the event by his or her followers. In difficult times, the first step any leader should
take is to display positive emotions and be enthusiastic himself no matter how dire the situation
(Adair, 2006). A famous example of this is in the famous speech by Winston Churchill in which
he proclaimed ‘(the people of) Britain will keep fighting until the last drop of blood and the last
breath in the body’ The speech was given at a time when the England had been continuously
bombed by Nazi’s for more than 70 days and it was in complete shambles. In spite of the dire
situation, Churchill was able to galvanize the masses and eventually win the war through his
sheer grit and undying spirit (Axelrod, 2012). Secondly, the leader should continuously motivate
and monitor progress and take complete accountability (Adair, 2006). The leader’s influence is a
part of the extrinsic motivation provided by the environment.
While we attain a rudimentary understanding of the role of leadership in emotions from this, a
deeper analysis of the inter-linkages is presented later in the paper. To understand the impact of
leadership influence on emotions in more detail it is necessary to understand the framework of
‘Affective events theory’ (or AET) (Howard M. Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996).
Affective events theory
Affective events theory (AET) (Howard M. Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996) is an important
theoretical framework as it gives an opportunity to study emotions exclusively in the context of
the workplace. While Arnold’s appraisal theory acts as a pointer towards the impact of emotions
on action, AET goes in depth to explain the relation between emotions and job satisfaction,
which in turn determines the behavior of the individual in the workplace. From the perspective of
leadership, this is important as the perception and relationship with the leader directly effects an
individual’s perception about his/her job, thereby impacting his/her job satisfaction. It’s a
popular business saying that ‘people do not quit their jobs, they quit their bosses’ (Ellenbogen,
2014). AET is particularly useful in understanding this relationship between an employee and
his/her satisfaction with the job in which the supervisor (or boss) tends to act as a mediator.
According to Weiss and Cropanzano (1996) certain ‘events’ on the job trigger emotional
reactions (known as ‘affect’). The affect leads the person to form an overall judgment about the
job which determines the work attitude and behavior of the person on the job. In the words of
Harold M. Weiss,

8. ‘Recent affective experiences carry more weight in the judgment. People don’t seem to simply
add up their affective experiences. They provide some sort of meaning structure to the
experiences, and that is what influences a person’s overall judgment. Think of going to a very
sad movie. Throughout the movie you are in a negative affective state, yet your judgment at the
end is positive. Frequency of affective experiences is a better predictor of overall judgments than
intensity. Life satisfaction is higher with a history of small but frequent pleasant experiences
than it is with a history of infrequent, but intense pleasant experiences. Presumably, job
satisfaction works the same way’ (Weiss as cited in Latham, 2007).
It is important to understand that OB literature often tends to distinguish between emotions and
mood. According to Fridja (as cited in Howard M. Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996) the difference
between mood and emotions is in terms of object directedness and response. While emotions are
directed towards an object (say a person) moods often lack any objective target. Thus, it can be
said that emotions are contextual while mood lacks any context. Mood is often passive, less
intense and sustains for a longer time than emotions which are active, very intense but of a
shorter duration. ‘Affect’ is an umbrella term encapsulating both mood and emotions.
Based upon Weiss’ observation, it can be said that a leader can play an important role in the
interpretation of a situation and the formation of an affective reaction among the subordinates.
Negative events dent motivation and weaken the positive mood. Effective leaders find ways of
minimizing the impact of negative events on their teams (Pirola-Merlo, Härtel, Mann, & Hirst,
2002). This moderation is important because negative emotions carry much more impact on the
individual than positive emotions (Howard M. Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996). The most common
negative emotion encountered in the workplace is that of ‘pessimism’. Pessimism is a passive
emotion which gives rise to appraisal tendencies of uncertainty and low control (Connelly,
Gaddis and Helton-Fauth as cited in Thiel, Connelly, & Griffith, 2012). Pessimism leads to self-doubt,
lower motivation and skepticism about one’s actions leading to despair and ultimately
hopelessness (Thiel et al., 2012). This is accompanied by lower performance and decrease in
productivity. Thus, managing negative affect in group members is one of the most critical tasks
for any leader. This can be done by facilitating the cognitive appraisal process of the members of
the team in response to a negative event. Effective leaders are able to handle this situation by
managing the various aspects goal setting and goal clarification required in anxiety laden

9. situations (Pirola-Merlo et al., 2002). By goal setting and goal clarification, it is implied that
leaders are able to guide their subordinates by removing ambiguity surrounding the goals and lay
down clear-cut action plans. This reduces the perceived difficulty of achieving the goal, thereby
enhancing performance.
Figure 2: Leaderships' interaction with affective events
Group affect and leadership
The modern workplace extensively focuses on team work and coordination among a group of
people to get work done. Every group has a leader who is accountable for getting things done by
the group. Affect plays an important role in groups. According to Fridja (as cited in Lord,
Klimoski, & Kanfer, 2002) emotions play an important role in informing an individual how other
members of the group are feeling and how they appraise the situation. According to Bandura (as
cited in Lord et al., 2002) such processes are vicarious, i.e. members of the group get affected by
observing each other. As per Basch and Fischer (as cited in Lord et al., 2002) members of the
group are exposed to similar situations and hence, encounter similar events and would largely
produce the same kind of affective reactions by observing each other. This shared affect is
termed as the ‘affective group tone’ (George, 1990 as cited in Pirola-Merlo et al., 2002). The
affective group tone is also closely related to ‘team climate’. In addition to the characteristics of
affective group tone, team climate also includes the groups attitudes and expectations (Pirola-
Merlo et al., 2002). This again puts the spot light on the role of appraisal and how the leader can

10. influence a more positive appraisal. Effective leaders encourage a strong sense of team identity
and facilitate positive interpersonal relationships between members and avoid the impact of
negative events through such cohesiveness (Pirola-Merlo et al., 2002). The role of the leader is
important since in times of a critical or ambiguous event, the team members look up to the leader
for guidance. This may be due to the fact that the leader serves as a parental figure for the group
and is assumed to possesses the greatest amount of knowledge, experience, and understanding of
the situation (Pescosolido, 2002). The duty of the leader is to interpret ambiguous situations and
model an appropriate response so as to set a positive emotional tone for the group that reassures
and motivates the members to move forward (Pescosolido, 2002).
Another issue group leaders often need to face is group-conflicts occurring in the group. In a
research conducted by Pirola-Merlo et al. (2002) relationship problems between team members
was found to be one of biggest problems hindering team performance. To deal with all these
issues, leaders must develop emotion management skills, demonstrate a high level of emotional
awareness, intelligence and the ability to regulate their own emotions (self-regulation) (Tse,
Dasborough, & Ashkanasy, 2008). A leader should be able to manage his personal emotions in
order to think objectively without taking sides among the members (unbiased). According to
Humphrey (2002), leader’s management of the group members’ emotional states has a
tremendous impact on performance.
The LMX-AET-TMX triumvirate (Tse et al., 2008)
The Leader-member exchange theory (LMX) can be studied through the perspective of Affective
events theory (AET). LMX states that leaders form different relationships with each of the
subordinates in a team and such dyadic relationships can influence the subordinate’s
performance (Greenberg & Baron, 2008). Accordingly, members can have a high quality LMX
(strong relationship with the leader) or low quality LMX (weak relationship with the leader)
Team-member exchange (TMX) is an extension of LMX theory. It is concerned with the
relationship of an individual in the team with other members. TMX focuses on the willingness of
an individual member to give and seek support and recognition, as well as share ideas and assist
other members in the team (Seers, 1989 as cited in Tse et al., 2008). Such exchanges are
facilitated by the friendship of members with each other in the group (Tse et al., 2008).

11. Figure 3: Multi-level model of interpersonal relationships at work (Tse et al., 2008)
Building upon the affective events theory (Howard M. Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996), Tse and
Ashkanasy (2008) suggest that affective climate of the team plays an important role in
influencing friendship among the members. As explained earlier, emotions of members in a
group impact each other and contribute towards the affective climate of the team. According to
Tse and Ashkanasy (2008), the leader through his charisma and guidance can regulate the
affective climate so as to influence the perceptions of the team members. Teams with strong
affective climates foster synergy and enhance workplace friendship. Members experiencing a
high quality LMX relationship are more likely to develop friendships at work and bring aboard
the members experiencing a weaker relationship (Tse et al., 2008). The leader should encourage
the High LMX members to do so as it gives him/her the opportunity to improve his/her own
relationship with low LMX members. By forming friendships, high LMX members increase
group cohesiveness and aid the amalgamation of low LMX members, helping them contribute
more effectively. The affective climate acts as a moderator while the leader acts as a mediator in
the whole scheme. This ultimately enhances and reinforces the TMX relationship, ensuring better
understanding, coordination and support among members (As well as the leader) resulting into
high performance. The takeaway is that if the leader fosters a climate of co-ordination and
support among members rather than pitting them against each other, the team would act as a
cohesive lot.

12. Mood of the leader: effect on subordinates
The general mood of the leader has severe effects on the overall mood and performance of the
team. To recall, mood is a passive, less intense affective state that persists for a longer duration
of time and helps shape the general perception about the workplace environment (Howard M.
Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996). In a study of self-managing teams conducted by Sy, Côté, &
Saavedra (2005), leader’s mood was found to have several implications on the group members.
The authors chose self-managing groups as these groups have high autonomy and control and it
was thought that the impact of the leader’s mood on the members would be less. To the contrary,
the authors found that in order to work effectively, self-managed groups required high leadership
skills. Depending upon the complexity of the task and skills required, the member possessing the
requisite skills and competencies would be sworn in to provide leadership. The only difference is
that self-managed groups require a more flexible leadership rather than fixed leadership.
The study also found that the leader’s mood directly reflected upon the subordinates. Group
members having a positive leader were more positive themselves. The affective tone of the group
was more positive under a positive leader. It was also found that the more positive groups had to
expend fewer efforts on accomplishment of tasks than negative groups. The mood of the leader
was found to influence the co-ordination among members in the group. This lends further
evidence to the LMX-AET-TMX triumvirate which states that affective climate strengthens
group cohesiveness among the members and between the leader and the members (Tse et al.,
2008). The leader is one of the most important contributors to affective climate and perhaps the
biggest extrinsic motivator for members.
Another instance when the leader’s emotional state is explicitly manifested to the team is during
‘feedback’. Feedback is an important process which helps an individual align his or her efforts
with the sought goal and monitor his or her progress. In an organization, feedback generally
comes from the supervisor. The feedback is provided routinely or as part of the performance
appraisal process. Negative or failure feedback is often accompanied with strong emotional
experience for the members. It is necessary that feedback be provided by managers (or leaders)
in a calm, considerate and supportive manner (Gaddis, Connelly, & Mumford, 2004). This calls
for a positive affective state to be displayed by the leader. According to the study conducted by
Gaddis, Connelly, & Mumford (2004) leaders displaying anger, frustration and disgust (negative

13. affective states) were perceived by group members to be less effective and demotivating when
compared to leaders who displayed positive affective states like optimism and happiness.
Even worse, the groups wherein leaders displayed negative affective states while providing
failure feedback, performed more badly on subsequent tasks compared to groups that got failure
feedback from positive leaders (Gaddis et al., 2004). According to Fridja (as cited in Gaddis et
al., 2004) the leader’s negative state leads to arousal of negative emotions in the group members
like fear and anxiety. Due to this, the perceived gap between performance and goal seems larger
than it actually is, leading to greater amount of stress. Stress results into an increased amount of
emotional coping which leaves fewer emotional resources for task accomplishment (Howard M
Weiss & Beal, 2005; Howard M. Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996). Thus, it is important to
understand that being a leader requires an intelligent assessment of emotions both in oneself and
the members. Blaming the group members for lack of performance may end up worsening the
situation even further.
Self-regulation in leaders
In order to regulate emotions in the members of the group, a leader must first be able to regulate
his (or her) own emotions and behavior. This is known as ‘Self-regulation’. Self-regulation can
be defined as a person’s ability to alter behavior with respect to situational demands (Baumeister
& Vohs, 2007). ‘Self-regulation theory’ (Baumeister, Heatherton, & Tice, 1994) is major
theoretical framework which explains the how regulation takes place in an individual.
Baumeister (1994) lists three components essential for self-regulation:
1. Standards: Regulation is performed in order to achieve or fulfill a certain standard. Clear
and transparent standards are untenable for effective self-regulation.
2. Monitoring: Regulation is a continuous process and cannot be done unless there’s a
continuous monitoring and feedback system. Monitoring is required to check progress
and compliance to standards.
3. Strength: Strength indicates the will power to self-regulate. Strength is the tenacity and
steadfastness to meet the standard.

14. 4. Motivation: Motivation is the fuel for self-regulation. Closely related to will power,
motivation is the ability to not only remove negativity but creating a climate of hope and
positivity for oneself.
Emotional regulation can be understood as a component of self-regulation limited to the
management of moods and emotions. Gross (1998) defines emotional regulation as ‘the
processes by which individuals influence which emotions they have, when they have them, and
how they experience and express these emotions’. With reference to Pescosolido’s definition,
the above four components can be considered as steps towards modeling an emotional response.
The leader must himself be clear with standards that need to be achieved (for example, delivering
a task under deadline and the group’s ability and limitations in doing so). The leader needs to
continuously self-monitor (for ex. keep oneself calm and contained emotionally). Maintaining
standards and continuous monitoring requires a strong will power on part of the leader so as to
not fret or panic in challenging situations and maintain his/her calm emotional state. Lastly, the
leader stays motivated by being optimistic and hopeful. Motivation gives a higher sense of
controllability leading to more channelized efforts (Latham, 2007).
Self-regulation during failure
There is no leader who has never encountered failure. The greatest leaders in the world have had
times when they hit the rock bottom. What makes them a ‘leader’ is in their ability to bounce
back from failures and regain control of the situation. According to Boss & Sims Jr (2008),
regulation of emotions is extremely important in facilitating recovery. Gross (as cited in Boss &
Sims Jr, 2008) suggests that positively oriented leaders consider failing as a single ‘negative
situational outcome’ rather than attributing a loaded word like ‘failure’. Effectively, this means
that leaders tend to suppress negative appraisal of emotions. According to Boss & Sims Jr.
(2008) successful leaders self-regulate in such situations through a behavior focused approach
that has three characteristics:
1. Self-observation: Leaders keenly observe themselves and their behavior in organizational
context and evaluate their own behavior as positive or negative. This helps them in
devising strategies to deal with challenges and any negative situations occurring in the
future.

15. 2. Self-goal setting: Leaders set their own goals and timeframes to achieve objectives. They
are quick to chalk out plans to deal with failures and modify their strategy.
3. Self-rewarding: Leaders do not need external incentives or rewards to get motivated
towards success. The reward lies as much in success as in the learning gained from
failure.
Being positive in the situation doesn’t mean that the leader needs to be all joy and smiles. Rather,
being positive suggests that the leader is on a continuous lookout for opportunities to bounce
back and/or salvage the situation (Sonnenfeld & Ward, 2008). Leaders are quick to jump to
contingency plans. They derive support from their followers and use it as a support structure to
forward their plans.
Self-regulation for preventing team failure
While failure imparts important lessons, it is not at all a desirable situation to be in. As important
it is for leaders to bounce back from failure, it is equally important to prevent failures due to
errors or discrepancies in the team. For this, it may be required that a leader acts as a hard
taskmaster. In most situations a sense of congeniality works best for team work but in exigent
situations, occasional display of emotions like anger may actually work towards enhancing
overall team performance. Rebuke or anger for a leader is not a personal affair. Daniel Goleman
(2006) explained this well in the opening paragraph of his book ‘Emotional Intelligence’ by
quoting Aristotle who says,
‘Anybody can become angry - that is easy, but to be angry with the right person and to the right
degree and at the right time and for the right purpose, and in the right way - that is not within
everybody’s power and is not easy.’(Goleman, 2006)
Gross (1998) supports this position by saying that emotion regulation at times involves
increasing or initiating negative emotions and decreasing or stopping positive emotions. In many
professions like bill collectors, recovery agents, bouncers, individuals feign a heightened sense
of anger in order to present an intimidating image. The same is true for leaders. Sometimes, it
may be necessary for a leader to feign emotions like anger in order to jolt out group members of
their complacency or inertia. As Ronald Reagan once put it, ‘when you can't make them see the
light, make them feel the heat’. The point of interest here though is that good leaders don’t

16. ‘personalize’ issues. The relationship between a leader and subordinates may get emotionally
intense but never personal or inimical. The intensity of emotions is subject to the task at hand.
The moment the task is accomplished the emotional heat dwindles and the relationship reverts to
that of warm congeniality.
Emotional Intelligence
Though the concept of emotional intelligence was popularized by Daniel Goleman (2006) in his
book ‘Emotional Intelligence’, the concept was introduced first by Salovey and Mayer (as cited
in Kellett et al., 2002) who were influenced by the work of Howard Gardner on the multiple
intelligences theory. From the literature reviewed above, it can be understood that a good leader
is able to cognitively understand the moods and emotions of the followers and respond in a
manner so as to influence their perception. This convergence of cognitive ability with emotions
is termed as ‘Emotional Intelligence. In the words of Salovey and Mayer, ‘emotional intelligence
taps into the extent to which people’s cognitive capabilities are informed by emotions and the
extent to which emotions are cognitively managed.’ (as cited in Kellett et al., 2002)
The central tenet of emotional intelligence is ‘empathy’. In order to plan a cognitive action based
on emotional inputs, the leader must be able to comprehend the emotions of the followers and
experience them himself (Mayer & Geher, 1996). Researchers have tried to study the role of
empathy in a scientific manner to validate it. In a research by Cooper and Sawaf (as cited in
Kellett et al., 2002) the researchers found that the ability to empathize was the primary difference
between successful and unsuccessful leaders. The role of empathy doesn’t stop at merely
understanding the feelings of others. For a leader, the success lies in understanding the follower’s
emotional state and enabling the follower to deal with his or her emotional state. In the process,
the leader just acts as the enabler or facilitator who helps stabilize the follower’s emotional state
(Thiel et al., 2012). In order to achieve this, the leader himself must have a positive affective
state which requires effective self-regulation of personal emotions.

17. Conclusion
The literature reviewed above focuses on the leaders’ ability to drive the thinking, motivation
and response of his or her team. While a lot of research studies focus on the requirement of
emotional intelligence as an imperative, very few studies have tried to look into the factors that
enable a leader to operationalize his EI. By integrating the perspective of leadership with
appraisal theory and AET, we get a view of how effective leadership actually impacts the
thinking process (cognitive appraisal) of the followers in order to facilitate a positive appraisal.
Under an able leader the positive affect is reinforced while negative affect is diminished. Tse’s
multi-level analysis of team climate and interpersonal exchanges at work (the LMX-AET-TMX
triumvirate) acts as an excellent explanation of the impact of the leader on team climate and the
cohesiveness among members.
Secondly, not only is it necessary for the leader to manage the emotions of his or her team but
managing one’s own emotions is equally important. The self-regulation theory provides a robust
framework to guide emotional regulation in leaders. The flow and manifestation of emotions in
an effective leader is more task oriented rather than relationship oriented. To put it in rather
ornate words, such a leader can be happy without being complacent, sad without being depressed
and angry without being enraged. The leader’s emotional state is in accordance with the task at
hand. There is no scope for relationship conflicts between an effective leader and followers.
Last but not the least, the role of empathy in leadership should not be forgotten. To sense the
pulse of the people is a trait that runs common through successful leaders. Empathy is the driving
force behind emotional intelligence which enables a leader to understand influence other
individuals. In fact, it is the ability to empathize, understand and utilize the knowledge gained
through empathy that makes a leader out of common individuals. The question whether
leadership is an art that can be learnt is still far from being solved. But the awareness about the
aspects of leadership may give valuable lessons to managers on becoming better bosses and
effective team handlers.

18. References
Adair, J. E. (2006). Leadership and motivation: The fifty-fifty rule and the eight key principles of
motivating others: Kogan Page Publishers.
Ashforth, B. E., & Humphrey, R. H. (1995). Emotion in the workplace: A reappraisal. Human
relations, 48(2), 97-125.
Ashkanasy, N. M., Hartel, C. E. J., & Zerbe, W. J. (2000). Emotions in the workplace: Research,
theory and practice Westport: Quorum Books.
Avolio, B. J., Gardner, W. L., Walumbwa, F. O., Luthans, F., & May, D. R. (2004). Unlocking
the mask: A look at the process by which authentic leaders impact follower attitudes and
behaviors. The Leadership Quarterly, 15(6), 801-823.
Axelrod, A. (2012). Winston churchill, ceo: 25 lessons for bold business leaders: Sterling
Publishing Company, Incorporated.
Baumeister, R. F., Heatherton, T. F., & Tice, D. M. (1994). Losing control: How and why people
fail at self-regulation: Academic Press.
Baumeister, R. F., & Vohs, K. D. (2007). Self‐regulation, ego depletion, and motivation. Social
and Personality Psychology Compass, 1(1), 115-128.
Biro, M. (2013). Leadership is about emotion. Retrieved August 17, 2014, from
http://www.forbes.com/sites/meghanbiro/2013/12/15/leadership- is-about-emotion/
Boss, A. D., & Sims Jr, H. P. (2008). Everyone fails!: Using emotion regulation and self-leadership
for recovery. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 23(2), 135-150.
Darwin, C. (1873). The expression of the emotions. New York, 12, 667.
Drucker, P. F. (2007). The effective executive: Butterworth-Heinemann.
Ellenbogen, O. (2014). People don't quit their job, they quit their boss. Retrieved August 20,
2014, from http://www.infoq.com/presentations/5-tips-management-skill
Gaddis, B., Connelly, S., & Mumford, M. D. (2004). Failure feedback as an affective event:
Influences of leader affect on subordinate attitudes and performance. The Leadership
Quarterly, 15(5), 663-686.
Goleman, D. (2006). Emotional intelligence: Bantam Books.
Greenberg, J., & Baron, R. A. (2008). Behavior in organizations: Pearson Prentice Hall.

19. Gross, J. J. (1998). The emerging field of emotion regulation: An integrative review. Review of
General Psychology, 2(3), 271-299.
Humphrey, R. H. (2002). The many faces of emotional leadership. The Leadership Quarterly,
13(5), 493-504.
Kellett, J. B., Humphrey, R. H., & Sleeth, R. G. (2002). Empathy and complex task performance:
Two routes to leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 13(5), 523-544.
Latham, G. P. (2007). Work motivation: History, theory, research, and practice Thousand Oaks,
Calif.: Sage Publications.
Lord, R. G., Klimoski, R. J., & Kanfer, R. (2002). Emotions in the workplace: Understanding the
structure and role of emotions in organizational behavior New York: Jossey - Bass.
Maddock, R. C., & Fulton, R. L. (1998). Motivation, emotions, and leadership: The silent side of
management: Quorum.
Mayer, J. D., & Geher, G. (1996). Emotional intelligence and the identification of emotion.
Intelligence, 22(2), 89-113.
Muchinsky, P. M. (2000). Emotions in the workplace: The neglect of organizational behavior.
Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21(7), 801.
Pescosolido, A. T. (2002). Emergent leaders as managers of group emotion. The Leadership
Quarterly, 13(5), 583-599.
Pirola-Merlo, A., Härtel, C., Mann, L., & Hirst, G. (2002). How leaders influence the impact of
affective events on team climate and performance in r&d teams. The Leadership
Quarterly, 13(5), 561-581.
Popa, M., & Salanta, I. I. (2013). The emotions' role in the motivation process. Managerial
Challenges of the Contemporary Society(6), 42-47.
Rajah, R., Song, Z., & Arvey, R. D. (2011). Emotionality and leadership: Taking stock of the
past decade of research. The Leadership Quarterly, 22(6), 1107-1119.
Reeve, J. (2005). Understanding motivation and emotion: Wiley.
Scherer, K. R. (1999). Appraisal theory. Handbook of cognition and emotion, 637-663.
Sonnenfeld, J., & Ward, A. (2008). Firing back:: How great leaders rebound after career
disasters. Organizational Dynamics, 37(1), 1-20.

20. Sy, T., Côté, S., & Saavedra, R. (2005). The contagious leader: Impact of the leader's mood on
the mood of group members, group affective tone, and group processes. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 90(2), 295-305.
Thiel, C. E., Connelly, S., & Griffith, J. A. (2012). Leadership and emotion management for
complex tasks: Different emotions, different strategies. The Leadership Quarterly, 23(3),
517-533.
Tse, H. H. M., Dasborough, M. T., & Ashkanasy, N. M. (2008). A multi-level analysis of team
climate and interpersonal exchange relationships at work. The Leadership Quarterly,
19(2), 195-211.
Weiss, H. M., & Beal, D. J. (2005). Reflections on affective events theory. Research on emotion
in organizations, 1, 1-21.
Weiss, H. M., & Cropanzano, R. (1996). Affective events theory: A theoretical discussion of the
structure, causes and consequences of affective experiences at work. Research in
Organizational Behavior, 18, 1.

21. This page is intentionally left blank