Relationships between Employee Empowerment, Emotional

Intelligence and Managerial Style in Financial Organizations

Asta Stankevičienė, Julija Šarupičiūtė and Greta Naudžiūnaitė
Vilnius University, Lithuania
[email protected]
[email protected]
DOI: 10.34190/MLG.19.017

Abstract: The article aims at exploring the relationships between employee empowerment, emotional intelligence and
managerial style in financial sector organizations in Lithuania. Method: the anonymous survey of 116 financial sector
employees in Lithuania. The questionnaire was designed based on a 4-dimensional emotional intelligence model (16
items), a modified MLQ-Form 5X Short questionnaire (30 items), psychological empowerment questionnaire (15 items) and
structural empowerment questionnaire (18 items). Questionnaire items were measured on a 5-point Likert scale. Survey
data was analyzed using descriptive statistics, factor analysis, Mann-Whitney U tests Kruskal-Wallis h tests, correlations,
and multivariate regressions. Findings: the relationships between emotional intelligence, transformational style, and
employee empowerment were confirmed, however, the relationship between transactional style and empowerment was
not confirmed. The assessment of others’ emotions was identified as the strongest predictor of employee empowerment.
Moreover, employee empowerment was positively influenced by intellectual stimulation and negatively influenced by
management by exception (passive). Managerial implications: based on the results of the survey it is suggested that the
success of empowerment programs in the financial sector can be achieved by strengthening employees’ empathy, and by
training managers and team leaders to use intellectual stimulation, avoid passive management by exception, and switch
towards the transformational managerial style.

Keywords: employee empowerment; emotional intelligence; managerial style

1. Introduction
The literature on organizational psychology first addressed the phenomenon ‘employee empowerment’ in the
1970s. The concept of employee empowerment, based on McGregor’s X theory and Y theory, was developed
by Kanter (1977), and later followed by Thomas & Velthouse (1990), Spreitzer (1995), Menon (2001), as well as
other authors. The concept was further analyzed by Fernandez & Moldogaziev, 2013; Koy et al., 2015; Pradhan
et al., 2017 and others. Recent studies show that employee empowerment provides a certain level of
employee authority, as well as responsibility for decisions related to particular organizational goals (Fernandez
& Moldogaziev, 2013; Ganjinia et al. 2013). Nowadays, organizations seek employees who take initiatives and
show a creative approach to work challenges; thus, the importance of empowerment is growing not only at
the individual but also at the organizational level.

The latest studies in the field of organizational psychology disclose empowerment as one of the strategic
components of human resource management, alongside with employee training, knowledge sharing, fair
reward or recognition (Seibert et al., 2011). Empowerment provides employees autonomy of actions, and, as a
result, reveals their talent, enables effectively use their competences and knowledge, stimulates acquiring new
knowledge and skills, fosters initiatives and creativity (Koning, 2007). Furthermore, empowerment enhances
employees’ self-esteem, strengthens decision-making skills and individual responsibility.

Employee empowerment plays an important role at the organizational level: empowered employees tend to
be more satisfied with their job, committed, and effective (Orgambídez-Ramos and Borrego-Alés, 2014). This
helps create an empowering work environment, stimulates positive feelings and sustainable interrelationships,
and strengthens motivation across an organization. Ganjinia et al. (2013) suggest that employees who work in
an empowered environment are more likely to accept organizational changes, constantly improve, achieve and
surpass organizational goals, and make independent decisions. Thus, we propose that it is important for
modern organizations to take into account the relationships between various factors of human resource
management and employee empowerment.

Existing literature addresses 4 groups of factors influencing empowerment (Tvarijonavičius, 2014):

 Organizational-level factors: organizational structure, opportunities, resources, support, access to
information;

357
 Asta Stankevičienė, Julija Šarupičiūtė and Greta Naudžiūnaitė

 Managerial-level factors: manager’s style, empowering behavior of a manager;

 Job characteristic-level factors: a set of competencies, job identity, significance of the task, autonomy,
feedback;
 Employee-level factors: socio-demographic characteristics (gender, education, age, job experience,
position), psychological characteristics (personal traits, such as emotional intelligence).

This article focuses on human resource management factors of employee empowerment: managerial style
(managerial-level factor) and emotional intelligence (employee-level factor). The aim of this article is to
explore the relationships between employee empowerment, emotional intelligence and managerial style in
financial sector organizations in Lithuania. The financial sector has been chosen because work processes and
procedures are precise and rather restricted, therefore employees can be empowered in clearly defined
boundaries. This is the first study in Lithuania, addressing all three components: emotional intelligence,
managerial style, and employee empowerment. Moreover, recent studies in the financial sector (Sharma and
Kaur, 2011; Fock et al., 2013; Shahzad et al, 2018) present various results on the relationships or mediating
and moderating roles of the above-mentioned components, however, they have not been analyzed
altogether.

2. Theoretical background
A growing number of authors confirm that empowerment is more than a right to individually decide and work
(Fock et al., 2013). Empowerment stimulates the intellectual and emotional growth of employees who face
challenges and issues (Priyadharshany and Sujatha, 2015), as well as stimulates employee self-esteem and
motivates for better performance (Kumar and Kumar, 2017).

However, existing literature lacks conceptualization of factors influencing empowerment. Scholars agree that
employee empowerment is a complex condition, however, discussions on the structure of empowerment and
its elements continue to raise (Spreitzer, 1995; Menon, 2001). It is discussed whether empowerment is a
process that encourages employee performance (Thomas and Velthouse, 1990) or a certain condition of an
employee (Spreitzer, 1995; Koy et al., 2015; Pradhan et al., 2017). Various authors provide organizational,
managerial, job characteristic, and employee-level factors of employee empowerment (Tvarijonavičius, 2014).

Organizational-level factors of employee empowerment originate from the assumptions that levels of
empowerment vary across organization type and sector. Sharma and Kaur (2011) have found that employees
of public sector financial organizations are more empowered than employees of private financial sector
organizations, however, a study by Harley (1999) did not confirm differences in levels of empowerment among
public and private sectors. Hechanova et al. (2006) reported differences in employee empowerment across
sectors: employees who work at call centers were found to be less empowered in comparison to employees of
financial, hospitality, air transport services and fast-food firms.

Recently, a growing number of authors explore the role of social-demographic and psychological factors in
employee empowerment. Such factors as gender, education, age, job experience or position have been widely
studied, however, the results are not consistent. For instance, Kanter (1977) proposed that female employees
are less empowered due to their complex status in organizations. Harley (1999) found gender to have no
influence on empowerment, while Hechanova et al. (2006) concluded that male employees are more
empowered than female employees. Psychological factors are less analyzed in scientific literature
(Tvarijonavičius, 2014). Some studies address the importance of manager’s emotional intelligence to employee
empowerment. For instance, Lucas et al. (2008) found manager’s emotional intelligence to have a positive
influence on employee empowerment. Erkutlu, Chafra (2012) revealed that manager’s emotional intelligence
moderates the relationships between team proactivity and team empowerment. Emotional intelligence is
recognized as an important factor influencing managerial effectiveness: managers with higher levels of
emotional intelligence and emotional maturity, show more support for subordinates, as well as feel more
empowered (Wong et al., 2002; Li et al., 2016). Yang and Zhu (2016) found that subordinates’ emotional
intelligence impact leadership effectiveness with the moderating role of employee empowerment. However,
the literature lacks studies on the direct influence of subordinates’/employees’ emotional intelligence on
empowerment. Wong et al. (2002) proposed a conceptual model of emotional intelligence (based on works by
Salovey et al., 2003), that includes 4 dimensions: self-assessment of emotions (ability to understand own
emotions and naturally communicate them); assessment of others’ emotions (ability to detect and understand

358
 Asta Stankevičienė, Julija Šarupičiūtė and Greta Naudžiūnaitė

emotions of people around); use of emotions (ability to use own emotions for pursuing goals and self-
expression); regulation of emotions (ability to control own emotions and manage emotional distress). Lan et
al. (2017) found that emotional intelligence positively influences the relationships between employee
empowerment and work-related flow. It can be assumed that emotional intelligence is one of the
psychological factors, or conditions, leading to higher empowerment:

H1: Emotional intelligence has positive influence on employee empowerment.

Recent studies address the behavior of a direct manager as the key factor of employee empowerment (Zhang
and Bartol, 2010). Spreitzer (2008) found that the manager’s support and trust for the employees play an
important role in employee empowerment. Support and trust are often associated with transformational style:
Bass and Avolio (1992) characterized transformational managers by idealized impact (charisma (attributed
impact) and, as later specified by Xirasagar (2008), behavior); inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation
and individualized consideration. In contrast, transactional style is associated with rather tough and directional
management: Bass (1999) characterized transactional style by contingent reward (i.e. clearly specifying task
that have to be performed in order to receive a reward) and management by exception (later specified by
Xirasagar (2008) as active: taking immediate corrective actions if norms of employee’s task are not met; and
passive: avoiding intervention until issues cannot be ignored). Studies (Jauhari et al., 2017; Krishnan, 2012;
Pradhan et al., 2017; Shahzad et al., 2018) confirm positive relationships between transformational style and
employee empowerment. Pieterse et al. (2010) found that in particular conditions, transactional style can
negatively impact the innovative behavior of employees and lead to lower empowerment.

H2: Transformational style has positive influence on employee empowerment.

H3: Transactional style has negative influence on employee empowerment.

3. Methodology

3.1 Source of data

The method of quantitative survey was used to conduct the study. The online questionnaire was distributed
via an online survey portal www.apklausa.lt. Respondents were asked to fill in the questionnaire only if they
were working in the financial sector organizations in Lithuania. In total, 116 questionnaires were collected for
this study. Survey data was collected in November 2018.

3.2 Measures
The questionnaire consisted of 4 sections: demographic questions, emotional intelligence, managerial style,
and employee empowerment. The demographic section included multiple-choice questions identifying gender,
age, education and period of employment in the current financial sector organization. Questionnaire items in
emotional intelligence, managerial style, and employee empowerment sections were designed as statements,
measured in a 5-point Likert scale, from 1 ‘strongly disagree’ to 5 ‘strongly agree’.

The relationships between emotional intelligence, managerial style and employee empowerment were tested
with a multivariate regression, composed of the following variables:

Dependent variable: empowerment of employees in financial sector organizations. Respondents’

empowerment was measured with the 15-item psychological empowerment scale by Kuo et al. (2010), and 18-
item structural empowerment scale by Laschinger et al. (2001).

Independent variables:
 Emotional intelligence. In this study, respondents’ emotional intelligence was measured with adapted
Wong et. al. (2002) 16-item scale, based on the 4-dimensional emotional intelligence model (Salovey
et al., 2003), dividing emotional intelligence into 4 dimensions: 1) self-assessment of emotions; 2)
assessment of others’ emotions; 3) use of emotions; 4) regulation of emotions.
 Transformational style. Transformational style was measured with 10-item scale, developed by
Xirasagar (2008), based on MLQ-Form 5X Short questionnaire (Bass and Avolio, 2003).
Transformational style was divided into 5 dimensions, according to Bass and Avolio (1992) and Bass

359
 Asta Stankevičienė, Julija Šarupičiūtė and Greta Naudžiūnaitė

(1999): 1) idealized impact: attributed; 2) idealized impact: behavior; 3) inspirational motivation; 4)

intellectual stimulation; 5) individualized consideration.
 Transactional style. Transactional style was measured with 20-item scale, developed by Xirasagar
(2008), based on MLQ-Form 5X Short questionnaire (Bass and Avolio, 2003). Transactional style was
divided into 5 dimensions, according to Bass and Avolio (1992) and Bass (1999): 1) contingent reward;
2) management by exception: active; 3) management by exception: passive.

3.3 Construct validity

To assess construct validity, confirmatory factor analysis was performed. The 16 items measuring emotional
intelligence were proposed to load into 4 dimensions according to Salovey et al. (2003) 4-dimensional model
of emotional intelligence. In this study, the 4-factor model produced a significant result (χ²=679,839; p=0,000),
however, two items: ‘I always know when I am happy’ and ‘I understand my own emotions well’ were loaded
into the dimensions ‘identification and use of emotions’, in contrast to previous studies, where the above-
mentioned items belonged to ‘self-assessment of emotions’. The 20 items measuring transformational style,
were proposed to load into 5 dimensions according to Bass and Avolio (1992) and Bass (1999). In this study,
the 5-factor model produced a significant result (χ²=1242,324; p=0,000), and all of the items loaded into
similar dimensions as in previous studies. The 10 items measuring transactional style were proposed to load
into 3 dimensions according to Bass and Avolio (1992) and Bass (1999). In this study, the 3-factor model
produced a significant result (χ²=338,037; p=0,000), however, one item: ‘Manager clarifies what should I do in
order to receive a reward’ was loaded into the dimensions ‘management by exception: active’, in contrast to
previous studies, where this item belonged to the dimensions ‘contingent reward’.

3.4 Data analysis

Descriptive statistics were performed on all study variables. Reliability analysis was performed for the
dependent variable, independent variables, and the dimensions of independent variables. Correlation analyses
between the dependent variable and independent variables, as well as the dimensions of independent
variables, were performed. Multivariate linear regression analysis for the dependent variable and independent
variables was performed to test the hypotheses of the study. Multivariate linear regression analysis for the
dependent variable and dimensions of independent variables was performed to further disclose the influences
on the dependent variable.

4. Findings

4.1 Sample profile

The majority of respondents were male, aging below 30 years, with a university education, having no
subordinates and with an average period of employment in the current financial sector organization of 1-2
years (see Table 1).
Table 1: Demographic characteristics of the respondents
Demographic characteristics N %
Age:
Below 30 years 59 50,9
31-40 years 38 32,8
Over 40 years 19 16,4
Gender:
Male 76 65,9
Female 40 34,1
Education:
College or lower education 19 16,4
Higher university education 97 83,6
Number of subordinates:
none 96 82,8
1 or more subordinates 20 17,2

4.2 Descriptive statistics

Overall, respondents report their empowerment as rather high (mean=3,870; s=0,435). Emotional intelligence
was also indicated as rather high (mean=3,780, s=0,452), and the dimension ‘self-assessment of emotions’ was
evaluated the highest among all 4 dimensions of emotional intelligence. Mean value for transformational style

360
 Asta Stankevičienė, Julija Šarupičiūtė and Greta Naudžiūnaitė

of respondents’ managers was higher than transactional style (mean=3,710 and 3,200 accordingly), therefore,
the respondents were found to be more likely to identify their managers as transformational. Moreover,
‘idealized impact: behavior’ had highest mean value among all the dimensions of transformational style.

Among dimensions of transactional style, ‘contingent reward’ had highest mean value in transactional style,
while other dimensions were evaluated lowest among all the dimensions of managerial styles (mean=2,396
and 2,194 accordingly).
Table 2: Descriptive statistics of the study
Variable (N=116) Mean Standard Cronbach’s
deviation alpha
Employee empowerment 3,870 0,435 0,923
Emotional intelligence: 3,780 0,452 0,881
Self-assessment of emotions 4,066 0,559 0,741
Assessment of others’ emotions 3,547 0,587 0,760
Use of emotions 3,495 0,624 0,831
Regulation of emotions 3,962 0,607 0,813
Transformational style: 3,710 0,636 0,947
idealized impact: attributed 3,624 0,605 0,607
idealized impact: behavior 3,835 0,715 0,843
inspirational motivation 3,849 0,705 0,844
intellectual stimulation 3,772 0,782 0,811
individualized consideration 3,481 0,749 0,838
Transactional style: 3,200 0,478 0,650
Contingent reward 3,552 0,705 0,773
Management by exceptions: active 2,396 0,732 0,683
Management by exceptions: passive 2,194 0,957 0,860

Furthermore, statistical tests were used to identify whether employee empowerment, emotional intelligence,
transformational style, and transactional style vary across the demographic factors: age, gender, education,
and the number of subordinates. To test differences by gender, education, and the number of subordinates,
Mann-Whitney U tests were used. To test differences by age, Kruskal-Wallis H test was used. The differences
were statistically significant at p<0,05.

The analysis revealed that employees who have subordinates report higher levels of empowerment in
comparison to employees who do not have subordinates (U=353,500; p=0,010). No statistically significant
differences in the levels of empowerment by age, gender and education were found. Emotional intelligence
was also found to be higher among employees who have subordinates (U=3258,000; p=0,045) in comparison
to employees who do not have subordinates, however, no differences in emotional intelligence by age, gender
and education were found. No statistically significant differences across demographic factors in respondents’
evaluations of transformational style were found. However, in terms of transactional style, male respondents
were found to evaluate their managers' transactional style higher in comparison to female respondents
(U=2514,000; p=0,030).

In addition, the above-mentioned statistical tests were performed for each of the dimensions of emotional
intelligence, transformational style and transactional style. Female respondents reported better use of
emotions (U=529,000; p=0,010) in comparison to male respondents. Employees aged over 40 years, showed
higher self-assessment of emotions (U=11,318; p=0,003), and better regulation of emotions (h=6,187; p=0,045)
in comparison to younger employees. Employees aged 31-40 were more likely to identify their managers as
transformational in terms of idealized impact: behavior (h=6,589; p=0,037) and intellectual stimulation
(h=7,832; p=0,020) in comparison to other age groups.

4.3 Correlation analysis

The correlations between employee empowerment, emotional intelligence, transformational style, and
transactional style, as well as each of the dimensions of emotional intelligence, transformational style, and
transactional style, were explored.

361
 Asta Stankevičienė, Julija Šarupičiūtė and Greta Naudžiūnaitė

Table 3: Correlation analysis of employee empowerment

Employee empowerment
Spearman’s Sig.
rho
Emotional intelligence: 0,408 0,000
Self-assessment of emotions 0,389 0,000
Assessment of others’ 0,256 0,014
emotions
Use of emotions 0,326 0,002
Regulation of emotions 0,109 0,303*
Transformational style: 0,548 0,000
idealized impact: attributed 0,411 0,000
idealized impact: behavior 0,387 0,000
inspirational motivation 0,520 0,000
intellectual stimulation 0,491 0,000
individualized consideration 0,398 0,000
Transactional style: 0,130 0,221*
Contingent reward 0,358 0,000
Management by exceptions: -0,263 0,012
active
Management by exceptions: -0,329 0,001
passive
*correlations were not significant given significance level p<0,05

The results showed that emotional intelligence and transformational style had moderate positive correlations
with employee empowerment, however, no statistically significant correlations between transactional style
and employee empowerment were found.

Moreover, one of the dimensions of emotional intelligence: regulation of emotions, did not statistically
significantly correlate with employee empowerment. However, the assessment of others’ emotions showed a
weak statistically significant correlation, while self-assessment of emotions and use of emotions showed
moderate correlations with empowerment. Furthermore, all the dimensions of the transformational style
showed moderate positive correlations with employee empowerment. Dimensions of transactional style also
showed statistically significant correlations with empowerment, however, the only contingent reward was
correlated positively, while management by exception: active, and management by exception: passive showed
weak to moderate negative correlations.

Hence, the correlation analysis showed the relationships between dimensions of emotional intelligence,
managerial styles, and employee empowerment. Moreover, dimensions of transformational style showed
positive correlations, while dimensions of transactional style showed both, positive and negative correlations
with empowerment.

4.4 Regression analysis

To test study hypotheses, regression analysis was performed.

The backward method of multinomial linear regression was applied, allowing to gradually remove items that
showed high multicollinearity (VIF>4) and items that were not statistically significant. Independent variable
‘transactional style’ showed no statistical significance and was excluded from the final model.

The final multinomial linear regression model achieved a goodness-of-fit of R2=0,380, adjusted R2=0,364,
therefore, the model explained 34% of the total variance. ANOVA analysis revealed that final regression model
was statistically significant (p=0,000). Table 4 presents factors, coefficients, significance and collinearity
statistics for the final model.

As Table 4 suggests, emotional intelligence has positive influence on employee empowerment (=0,320).
Therefore, Hypothesis 1 of this study is confirmed. It also shows that transformational style has positive
influence on employee empowerment (=0,258). Therefore, Hypothesis 2 of this study is confirmed. However,

362
 Asta Stankevičienė, Julija Šarupičiūtė and Greta Naudžiūnaitė

transactional style showed no statistical significance and was excluded from the final model. Thus, Hypothesis
3 in this study was rejected.
Table 4: Coefficients of the final multinomial regression model of employee empowerment
Model Beta coefficient t sig. Collinearity statistics: VIF
(constant) 1,074 4,432 0,000
Emotional intelligence 0,320 3,661 0,000 1,011
Transformational style 0,258 4,158 0,000 1,011

To further disclose the influence of emotional intelligence and managerial styles on employee empowerment
in financial sector organizations, regression analysis with the dimensions of independent variables was
performed.

The backward method of multinomial linear regression was applied, allowing to gradually remove items that
showed high multicollinearity (VIF>4) and items that were not statistically significant. Hence, 3 out of 4
dimensions of emotional intelligence, as well as 4 out of 5 dimensions of transformational style and 2 out of 3
dimensions of transactional style showed no statistical significance and were excluded from the final model.

The final multinomial linear regression model achieved a goodness-of-fit of R2=0,343, adjusted R2=0,320,
therefore, the model explained 32% of the total variance. ANOVA analysis revealed that final regression model
was statistically significant (p=0,000). Table 5 presents factors, coefficients, significance and collinearity
statistics for the final model.
Table 5: Coefficients of the final multinomial regression model of employee empowerment
Model Beta t sig. Collinearity
coefficient statistics: VIF
(constant) 2,503 8,149 0,000
Emotional intelligence: assessment of others’ 0,252 4,132 0,000 1,105
emotions
Transformational style: Intellectual stimulation 0,191 3,753 0,000 1,116
Transactional style: management by exception: -0,106 -2,535 0,013 1,128
passive

The final model was constructed as follows:

Employee empowerment = 2,503 + 0,252*(emotional intelligence: assessment of others’ emotions) +

0,191*(transformational style: intellectual stimulation) – 0,106* (transactional style: management by
exception: passive)

The regression analysis revealed that employee empowerment in financial sector organizations is influenced
by the assessment of others’ emotions, intellectual stimulation, and management by exception: passive. The
largest predictor of employee empowerment is the assessment of others’ emotions (=0,252), which is one of
the dimensions of emotional intelligence. Intellectual stimulation, which is associated with transformational
managerial style, is the second largest predictor or employee empowerment. Furthermore, management by
exception: passive, which is associated with the transactional managerial style, had a negative influence on
employee empowerment.

5. Discussion
Our study confirmed a hypothesis about the positive influence of transformational style on employee
empowerment. This corresponds to a recent study by Shahzad et al. (2018), stating that the transformational
style helps enhance employee empowerment through direct actions of a manager. Furthermore, our study
confirmed the positive influence of emotional intelligence on employee empowerment. The results support
findings by Wong et al. (2002): higher emotional intelligence and higher emotional maturity lead to more
support from managers and higher empowerment. However, in contrast to previous studies (i.e. Pieterse et
al., 2010), our study did not confirm the negative influence of transactional style on employee empowerment
However, in contrast to previous studies (i.e. Pieterse et al., 2010), our study did not confirm the negative
influence of transactional style on employee empowerment. It is suggested that in the financial sector,

363
 Asta Stankevičienė, Julija Šarupičiūtė and Greta Naudžiūnaitė

transactional style (or attributes of it) is beneficial in precise and strictly-defined work procedures; hence, it
does not create a negative impact.

The results of this study show that the assessment of others’ emotions and intellectual stimulation are positive
predictors of employee empowerment, while management by exception: passive, is a negative predictor of
empowerment. The assessment of others’ emotions is the strongest predictor of employee empowerment.
This result is rather similar to previous findings by Lucas et al. (2008); Lan et al. (2017); Wong et al. (2002):
emotional intelligence helps understand and manage others’ emotions in interpersonal relationships, as well
supports freedom of decision-making. The dimension of transformational style: intellectual stimulation is the
second strongest predictor of empowerment. This result supports findings by Krishnan (2012) that
transformational leaders use discussions of new ideas, innovation, and variety of opinions to motivate
employees and at the same time to increase their empowerment. While the hypothesis on the negative
influence of transactional style on employee empowerment was not confirmed, one dimension of
transactional style: management by exception: passive, found to be a negative predictor of employee
empowerment. Thus, it can be stated that passive managers who tend to ignore issues and take no actions in
the face of problems are rather a barrier for employee empowerment.

6. Limitations of the study

The first limitation is the bias of study respondents: only employees were surveyed in this study. It is suggested
to further explore the relationships between employees’ emotional intelligence, managerial style, and
empowerment, asking managers to assess their managerial style rather than perceptions of employees on
managerial style their managers use. The second limitation is the study sample: this study included 116
employees from the financial sector in Lithuania. It is suggested to conduct similar studies with a larger sample
and with respondents from different countries. Finally, only direct relationships between emotional
intelligence, managerial style, and employee empowerment were measured in this study. It is suggested to
include moderating and mediating factors, such as demographic characteristics of employees and managers,
organizational settings, or job characteristic-level factors in future studies.

7. Conclusions
In this study, the relationships between emotional intelligence, transformational style, and employee
empowerment were confirmed. However, no relationships between transactional style and empowerment
were found. Furthermore, the prognostic model of employee empowerment revealed that the ability to assess
others’ emotions is the strongest predictor of employee empowerment, while manager’s passive behavior and
tendency to ignore issues are barriers for employee empowerment.

Based on the results of the study, it is suggested to develop employees’ empathy by enhancing their ability to
address others’ emotions and feelings. Moreover, it is recommended for managers to share positive outcomes
of empowerment with employees. It is advised to strengthening managerial skills and behavior that are
common to transformational style: encouraging the variety of opinions and ideas; developing mutual
understanding, trust, support, and respect; active support in problem-solving and awareness of issues that
employees face.

References
Bass, Bernard M; Avolio, B. J. (1992). Transformational Leadership : 1992 and Beyond. Journal of European Industrial
Training, 14 (5): 21–27.
Bass, B. M. (1999). Two Decades of Research and Development in Transformational Leadership. European Journal of Work
and Organizational Psychology, 8(1), 9–32.
Erkutlu, H.; Chafra, J. (2012). The impact of team empowerment on proactivity: The moderating roles of leader's emotional
intelligence and proactive personality. Journal of health organization and management, 26 (5): 560-577.
Fernandez, S.; Moldogaziev, T. (2013). Employee Empowerment, Employee Attitudes, and Performance: Testing a Causal
Model. Public Administration Review, 73 (3): 490–506.
Fock, H.; Hui, M. K.; Au, K.; Bond, M. H. (2013). Moderation Effects of Power Distance on the Relationship Between Types
of Empowerment and Employee Satisfaction. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 44 (2): 281–298.
Ganjinia, H.; Gilaninia, S.; Poorali, R.; Sharami, M. (2013). Overview of Employees Empowerment in Organizations. Arabian
Journal of Business and Management Review (OMAN Chapter), 3 (2): 38–43.
Harley B. (1999). The myth of empowerment: work orgnanization, hierarchy and employee authonomy in contemporary
Australian workplaces, Work, Employment & Society, 13-1: 41–66.

364
 Asta Stankevičienė, Julija Šarupičiūtė and Greta Naudžiūnaitė

Hechanova M. R. M.; Alampay R. B. A.; Franco E. P. (2006). Psychological empowerment, job satisfaction and performance
among Filipino service workers. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 9-1: 72–78.
Jauhari, H.; Singh, S.; Kumar, M. (2017). How does transformational leadership influence proactive customer service
behavior of frontline service employees? Examining the mediating roles of psychological empowerment and affective
commitment. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 30 (1): 30–48.
Kanter, Rosabeth Moss (1977). Men and women of the corporation. New York: Basic Books.
Krishnan, V. R. (2012). Transformational leadership and personal outcomes: empowerment as mediator. Leadership &
Organization Development Journal, 33 (6): 550–563.
Kumar, P.; Kumar, A. (2017). Employee Empowerment–An Empirical Study. Global Journal of Management and Business
Research: A Administration and Management, 17 (4): 58-64.
Koy, V., Boonyanurak, P.; Chaiphibalsarisdi, P. (2015). Effect of Nursing Workplace Empowering Model on Quality of
Nursing Work Life as Perceived by Professional Nurses in a Governmental Hospital, Cambodia. International Journal of
Research in Medical Sciences, 3 (11): 3357–3362.
Koning, J. (2007). The Request Project rapport: Empowerment and the empowering environment. UK: Request. Prieiga per
internetą: http://www.vrijbaan.nl/upload/alinea_455.pdf (žiūrėta 2019 m. vasario 27 d.).
Kuo, Tsung‐Hsien; Ho, Li‐An; Lin, Chinho; Lai, Kuei‐Kuei (2010). Employee empowerment in a technology advanced work
environment, Industrial Management & Data Systems, 110 (1):.24-42.
Lan, J.; Wong, C. S.; Jiang, C.; Mao, Y. (2017). The effect of leadership on work-related flow: a moderated mediation model.
Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 38 (2): 210–228.
Laschinger, H. K. S., Finegan, J., Shamian, J., & Wilk, P. (2001). Impact ofstructural and psychological empowerment on job
strain in nursing worksettings: Expanding Kanter’s model. Journal of Nursing Administration, 31: 260–272.
Lucas, V.; Spence H.K.; Laschinger, H. K.; Wong, C. A. (2008). The impact of emotional intelligent leadership on staff nurse
empowerment: the moderating effect of span of control. Journal of nursing management, 16 (8): 964-973.
Menon S. T. (2001). Employee Empowerment: An Integrative Psychological Approach. Applied psychology: an international
review, 50-1: 153–180.
Orgambídez-Ramos, A.; Borrego-Alés, Y. (2014). Empowering employees: Structural empowerment as antecedent of job
satisfaction in university settings. Psychological Thought, 7 (1): 28-36.
Pieterse, A.N.; Van Knippenberg D.; Schippers, M. and Stam, D. (2010). Transformational and transactional leadership and
innovative behavior: the moderating role of psychological empowerment, Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31 (4):
609-623.
Pradhan, R. K..; Panda, M.; Jena, L.K. (2017).Transformational leadership and psychological empowerment: The mediating
effect of organizational culture in Indian retail industry. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 30 (1): 82-95.
Priyadharshany, A. J.; Sujatha, S. (2015). Does Structural Empowerment Impact on Job Satisfaction via Psychological
Empowerment? A Mediation Analysis. Global Management Review, 10 (1): 23–42.
Sharma M.; Kaur G. (2011). Workplace empowerment and organizational effectiveness: an empirical investigation of Indian
banking sector, Academy of Banking Studies Journal, 10-2: 105–120.
Seibert, S. E.; Wang, G.; Courtright, S. H. (2011). Antecedents and consequences of psychological and team empowerment
in organizations: A meta-analytic review. Journal of applied psychology, 96 (5): 981.
Shahzad, I.A.; Farrukh, M.; Ahmed, N.O.A.; Lin, L.; Kanwal, N. (2018). The role of transformational leadership style,
organizational structure and job characteristics in developing psychological empowerment among banking
professionals. Journal of Chinese Human Resource Management, 9 (2): 107-122.
Spreitzer G. M. (1995). Psychological empowerment in the workplace: dimensions, measurement, and validation. Academy
of Management Journal, 38: 1442–1465.
Spreitzer, G. M. (2008). Taking stock: A review of more than twenty years of research on empowerment at work. Handbook
of organizational behavior, 1: 54-72.
Salovey, P., Mayer, J. D., Caruso, D., & Lopes, P. N. (2003). Measuring emotional intelligence as a set of abilities with the
Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test. In S. J. Lopez & C. R. Snyder (Eds.), Positive psychological
assessment: A handbook of models and measures (pp. 251-265). Washington, DC, US: American Psychological
Association.
Thomas K. W.; Velthouse B. A. (1990). Cognitive Elements of Empowerment: An „Interpretive" Model of Intrinsic Task
Motivation. Academy of Management Review, 15-4. 666–681.
Tvarijonavičius, M. (2014). Psichologinis darbuotojų įgalinimas: jo prielaidos ir vaidmuo organizacijoje (Doctoral
dissertation, Vilnius University).
Wong, C.-S., & Law, K. S. (2002). The effect of leader and follower emotional intelligence on performance and attitude: An
exploratory study. Leadership Quarterly, 13: 243–274.
Xirasagar, S. (2008). Transformational, transactional and laissez-faire leadership among physician executives. Journal of
Health, Organisation and Management, 22 (6): 599–613.
Yang, Z., Zhu, J. (2016). Charismatic leadership behavior and leadership effectiveness: The moderating role of subordinates’
emotional intelligence and the mediating role of psychological empowerment. Revista de Cercetare si Interventie
Sociala, 55: 158-184.
Zhang X., Bartol K.M. (2010). Linking empowering leadership and employee creativity: the influence of psychological
empowerment, intrinsic motivation, and creative process engagement. Academy of Management Journal, 53 (1): 107–
128.

365
Copyright of Proceedings of the European Conference on Management, Leadership &
Governance is the property of Academic Conferences & Publishing International Ltd. and its
content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the
copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email
articles for individual use.