ANALYSIS OF EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE LEVEL IN TEAM ROLES

The article describes results of emotional intelligence research within the teams of intellectual property developers. The relation between team roles and emotional intelligence level was the subject of analysis. The research object were entrepreneurship master degree program students teams, created on the self-determination approach for the purpose of intellectual property development. Methodology of research based on the modified R. Belbin typology of team roles and N. Hall model of EQ. Teams structure and content results in the confirmation of the hypothesis of link between perceptive role and EQ level. There are emotional profiles of each team role identified and presented inthe article. In spite of similar general distribution pattern of emotional intelligence, the obvious deviation from average for several team roles discovered. These deviations relate to emotional intelligence features: emotional awareness, empathy, emotion management, self-motivation regarding Team-worker, Monitor Evaluator, Specialist, Plant, Negotiator. Team-worker features the low level of self-motivation and emotion awareness; Negotiator – high level of empathy and emotion recognition. High level of emotion awareness and self-motivation is requisite for Specialist, Investigator and Strategist; moreover, Specialist needs to have highest level of emotion management skill. Plant role does not require a high level of empathy, and Evaluator role features the lowest level of emotional awareness. Therefore in self-organizing teams the emotional intelligence impact on team role adoption discovered.

emotional Intelligence, team roles, emotional management, team efficiency, self-organization, team emotional management, team role factors, team emotional intelligence, empathy, emotional awareness, emotional intelligence impact, horizontal management, self-organizing teams.

Dolgaya A. A. Analysis of emotional intelligence level in team roles // Business. Education. Law. 2019. No. 1 (46). Pp. 154–159. DOI: 10.25683/VOLBI.2019.46.170.