Leader Emotional Intelligence Scale (LEIS)

Abstract

The Leader Emotional Intelligence Scale (LEIS)—originally developed and published in Portuguese as the Escala de Inteligência Emocional de Líderes (EIEL) by Almeida, do Nascimento, Landeira-Fernandez, and Borsa (2023)—is a psychometric instrument designed to evaluate trait emotional intelligence specifically within organizational leadership contexts. Grounded theoretically in the trait emotional intelligence framework formulated by K. V. Petrides and colleagues, the LEIS conceptualizes emotional intelligence as a constellation of emotional self-perceptions and behavioral dispositions located at the lower levels of established personality hierarchies. The instrument comprises 48 items categorized across four correlated latent dimensions: Emotionality, Self-Control, Sociability, and Well-Being. Responses are recorded on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (“Totally disagree”) to 5 (“Totally agree”). During its psychometric development with Brazilian managerial cohorts, the instrument demonstrated rigorous content validity through high content validity coefficients (RVC = 1.0 among five expert judges; RVC ≥ 0.900 among 40 lay judges). Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) demonstrated a coherent four-factor architecture accounting for 34.5% of the total variance, which was subsequently corroborated by Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) exhibiting robust global goodness-of-fit indices: χ²(1121) = 1570.442, χ²/df = 1.40, CFI = 0.970, GFI = 0.968, SRMR = 0.035, and RMSEA = 0.035 (90% CI [0.031, 0.039]). Internal consistency analyses indicated high reliability across dimensions, with Cronbach’s alpha (α) and McDonald’s omega (Ω) coefficients reaching 0.858 and 0.859 for Emotionality, 0.860 and 0.859 for Self-Control, 0.851 and 0.854 for Sociability, 0.777 and 0.777 for Well-Being, and 0.810 (α) and 0.738 (Ω) for the global scale. The LEIS serves as an empirically substantiated diagnostic and evaluative tool for executive assessment, organizational development, and leadership research.

Keywords

Emotional Intelligence, Leader Emotional Intelligence Scale, Trait Emotional Intelligence, Leadership Assessment, Emotionality, Self-Control, Sociability, Well-Being, Psychometrics, Factorial Validity, Organizational Leadership, Confirmatory Factor Analysis

Authors

The Leader Emotional Intelligence Scale (EIEL / LEIS) was developed and validated by a research team affiliated with the Department of Psychology at the Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio de Janeiro (PUC-Rio), Brazil:

• Paloma Pereira de Almeida: Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio de Janeiro (PUC-Rio), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Email: [email protected].
• Rodrigo Leão Ferreira do Nascimento: Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio de Janeiro (PUC-Rio), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Email: [email protected].
• J. Landeira-Fernandez, Ph.D.: Department of Psychology, Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio de Janeiro (PUC-Rio), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Email: [email protected].
• Juliane Callegaro Borsa, Ph.D.: Department of Psychology, Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio de Janeiro (PUC-Rio), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Email: [email protected].

Purpose

The primary purpose of the Leader Emotional Intelligence Scale (LEIS) is to provide an empirically validated, context-sensitive psychometric inventory designed to measure trait emotional intelligence specifically within organizational leaders and managers. In modern organizational systems, leadership effectiveness is governed not merely by cognitive capacity, technical acumen, or strategic intellect, but fundamentally by the leader’s capability to perceive, regulate, deploy, and communicate affective information. Leaders operate in high-complexity, dynamic environments where their emotional states and interpersonal styles exert systemic downstream effects on subordinate engagement, organizational climate, psychological safety, and turnover intention.

While generic measures of emotional intelligence exist in the psychological literature, many fail to capture the behavioral nuances, occupational demands, and stressors inherent in managerial roles. General instruments often assess broad emotional self-efficacy without contextualizing how these traits manifest when guiding multidisciplinary teams, navigating executive crises, delivering difficult performance evaluations, or sustaining strategic optimism under market instability. The LEIS was engineered to bridge this psychometric gap by operationalizing emotional intelligence directly through the functional lenses of organizational leadership.

In applied organizational contexts, the LEIS serves multiple diagnostic and developmental functions:

• Executive Coaching and Talent Development: The scale enables organizational psychologists and executive coaches to profile a leader’s intra- and interpersonal competencies, pinpointing structural deficits in emotional regulation, stress endurance, or social influence to tailor targeted executive coaching interventions.
• Leadership Succession and Assessment Centers: As a standardized trait measure, the LEIS can supplement multi-method selection protocols by assessing stable behavioral tendencies that predict relational leadership styles, transformational behaviors, and crisis-management resilience.
• Organizational Health and Team Interventions: Applied at aggregate executive levels, the LEIS aids human resource strategists in diagnosing the affective architecture of leadership cohorts, evaluating whether managerial teams possess the requisite socio-emotional resources to mitigate workplace burnout and foster supportive organizational cultures.
• Empirical Organizational Research: The LEIS offers academic researchers a robust instrument to investigate structural relationships among leader trait emotional intelligence, transformational leadership, organizational citizenship behaviors (OCB), authentic leadership, employee subjective well-being, and enterprise-level performance metrics.

Psychological Construct

The Leader Emotional Intelligence Scale measures trait emotional intelligence (trait EI)—alternatively designated as trait emotional self-efficacy—configured specifically around the operational realities of managerial roles. Distinct from ability-based models that treat emotional intelligence as cognitive-emotional performance, the trait construct captures individuals’ self-perceptions of their emotional capabilities, behavioral tendencies, and typical response styles in everyday professional functioning. The LEIS operationalizes this overarching construct through four correlated latent dimensions:

1. Emotionality

The Emotionality dimension measures a leader’s self-perceived capacity to recognize, express, and understand emotional states in themselves and others, as well as to cultivate meaningful interpersonal bonds within the workplace. In leadership execution, high emotionality reflects empathetic responsiveness, relational transparency, and the ability to accurately decipher affective cues communicated by team members during collaborative tasks or interpersonal conflicts. Conversely, low scores in this domain denote difficulties in establishing emotional resonance, emotional detachment, or an inability to articulate internal emotional states to subordinates, potentially hindering the development of relational trust and authentic leadership.

2. Self-Control

The Self-Control dimension evaluates a leader’s propensity to regulate their own emotional impulses, tolerate ambiguity, manage acute and chronic occupational stress, and maintain cognitive-behavioral composure under severe organizational pressure. Leadership roles expose individuals to high-stakes decision-making, aggressive deadlines, operational failures, and external scrutiny. High trait self-control equips managers to inhibit disruptive emotional reactions, resist reactive decision-making, and project a stabilizing presence during organizational crises. Leaders with compromised self-control are prone to emotional volatility, premature escalation of conflict, defensive decision-making, and heightened vulnerability to executive burnout.

3. Sociability

The Sociability dimension assesses a leader’s perceived social competence, interpersonal influence, assertiveness, and capacity to actively manage the affective dynamics of groups. Distinct from basic extraversion, managerial sociability within the trait EI framework emphasizes the purposeful modulation of the emotional climate within a team. Leaders with elevated sociability demonstrate persuasiveness, inspirational communication, adept negotiation skills, and confidence in navigating high-stakes networking environments or cross-functional team tensions. They are skilled at reading political and social currents in organizational systems and deploying emotional influence to align divergent stakeholder interests.

4. Well-Being

The Well-Being dimension encompasses dispositional optimism, self-esteem, life satisfaction, and generalized positive affectivity as experienced within the professional domain. In leadership paradigms, subjective well-being is not merely an internal hedonic state; it functions as an emotional resource that shapes leadership style. Optimistic, resilient leaders with solid professional self-regard project an encouraging, constructive vision of the future, mitigating demoralization among followers during organizational transformations. A leader high in well-being buffers their followers against organizational cynicism, whereas a leader exhibiting low well-being can inadvertently transmit anxiety, pessimism, and emotional exhaustion throughout the team hierarchy.

Theoretical Framework

The LEIS is anchored theoretically in the Trait Emotional Intelligence Theory pioneered by K. V. Petrides and colleagues (e.g., Petrides & Furnham, 2000, 2001; Petrides et al., 2016). This conceptual model establishes a definitive psychometric distinction between two operational paradigms in emotional intelligence research: ability EI and trait EI.

Trait EI vs. Ability EI Dichotomy

Ability EI—exemplified by the theoretical work of Mayer, Salovey, and Caruso—conceptualizes emotional intelligence as a standard mental capacity akin to cognitive ability, requiring maximum-performance testing through objective questions with veridical (correct versus incorrect) answers. However, empirical studies have underscored severe psychometric challenges in scoring maximum-performance emotional tests, including subjective scoring criteria, cultural relativity in emotional correctness, and modest convergent validity with downstream organizational behaviors.

In contrast, Petrides’ trait EI framework reclassifies emotional intelligence as a constellation of emotion-related self-perceptions and behavioral dispositions evaluated via self-report inventories. Rather than testing whether an individual can solve an abstract emotional puzzle, trait EI measures whether the individual typically acts with emotional competence in real-world scenarios. Psychometrically, trait EI integrates into established structural models of human personality, demonstrating incremental validity over the Five-Factor Model (Costa & McCrae) and the Giant Three (Eysenck).

Integration with Leadership Models

The LEIS integrates Petrides’ trait EI taxonomy with core organizational theories, particularly Transformational Leadership Theory (Bass & Avolio) and Affective Events Theory (Weiss & Cropanzano):

• Transformational Leadership Alignment: The four dimensions of the LEIS directly underpin transformational leadership components: Idealized Influence and Inspirational Motivation require high Sociability and Well-Being; Individualized Consideration relies upon acute Emotionality; and Intellectual Stimulation requires the cognitive stability afforded by Self-Control.
• Affective Events Theory: This theory posits that workplace events trigger affective reactions in leaders and subordinates, which subsequently dictate work attitudes and job performance. Leaders with high trait EI act as effective “emotional shock absorbers” within their units, managing their own cognitive-affective appraisals to insulate followers from toxic workplace stressors.

Validity

The construct validation of the Leader Emotional Intelligence Scale followed a rigorous multi-stage psychometric protocol conducted by Almeida et al. (2023), evaluating content validity, internal structure, and factorial stability.

Content Validity

The initial item pool was developed through a comprehensive review of trait EI literature, existing leadership competence frameworks, and occupational role demands. To ensure that each item accurately reflected the targeted theoretical dimension, content validity was formally quantified using the Content Validity Coefficient (RVC / CVC) developed by Hernández-Nieto:

• Expert Panel Assessment: A committee of five expert judges specializing in psychometrics and organizational psychology evaluated each item for conceptual clarity, dimensional relevance, and theoretical congruence. The expert agreement yielded a perfect Content Validity Coefficient (RVC = 1.0), demonstrating universal consensus regarding the alignment of the items with their designated psychological constructs.
• Lay Panel Evaluation: The scale was subsequently administered to a group of 40 lay judges representing the target demographic (active professionals and organizational supervisors) to assess linguistic clarity, comprehensibility, and ecological relevance. All retained items demonstrated substantial agreement indices, maintaining RVC values equal to or exceeding 0.900 (RVC ≥ 0.900).

Construct and Factorial Validity

Construct validity was primarily established through both exploratory and confirmatory factor-analytic paradigms administered to a representative sample of Brazilian organizational leaders across diverse industrial and corporate sectors:

• Structural Evidence: The initial Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) demonstrated that a four-factor solution was the most parsimonious and theoretically coherent model, explaining 34.5% of the total cumulative variance. Each factor demonstrated clean structural differentiation matching the hypothesized dimensions: Emotionality, Self-Control, Sociability, and Well-Being.
• Confirmatory Evidence: Subsequent Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) tested this 48-item, four-factor oblique measurement model. The resulting global fit indices confirmed excellent model-data correspondence: the chi-square to degrees of freedom ratio was χ²/df = 1.40 (χ² = 1570.442, df = 1121), which is well below the conservative threshold of 2.0 or 3.0. The Comparative Fit Index (CFI = 0.970) and Goodness-of-Fit Index (GFI = 0.968) both exceeded the standard 0.95 benchmark for superior model fit. Absolute error indices demonstrated precision, with a Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR) of 0.035 (benchmark < 0.08) and a Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) of 0.035 with a narrow 90% confidence interval ranging from 0.031 to 0.039. (Note: While the Tucker-Lewis Index [TLI] was reported as 0.067 in the primary published study, this value reflects an editorial or software typographical anomaly relative to the otherwise exceptional CFI, GFI, and RMSEA metrics; the overarching structural fit unequivocally validates the four-dimensional construct).

Reliability

The reliability of the Leader Emotional Intelligence Scale was evaluated through dual internal consistency estimation methods: Cronbach’s alpha (α) and McDonald’s omega (Ω). In contemporary psychometrics, McDonald’s omega is widely recognized as a more robust estimator than Cronbach’s alpha, as it does not presuppose essential tau-equivalence (equal factor loadings across all items) and provides an unbiased estimate of scale reliability in congeneric measurement models.

The statistical analyses yielded strong reliability coefficients across all four subscales and the global composite inventory:

As demonstrated by these indices, the primary factors—Emotionality (α = 0.858, Ω = 0.859), Self-Control (α = 0.860, Ω = 0.859), and Sociability (α = 0.851, Ω = 0.854)—all exceed the stringent 0.80 benchmark recommended for diagnostic assessment. The Well-Being dimension (α = 0.777, Ω = 0.777) comfortably exceeds the conventional 0.70 threshold. The concordance between alpha and omega coefficients reinforces the conclusion that the items within each subscale display balanced factor loadings, minimizing standard measurement error across evaluations.

Factor Analysis

The factorial validation of the LEIS was executed in two sequential phases: an exploratory extraction phase followed by a confirmatory structural equation modeling phase.

Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA)

During the EFA phase, the initial item pool was analyzed using robust extraction techniques suitable for ordinal Likert data. The analysis yielded a four-factor solution accounting for 34.5% of the total cumulative variance. While variance explained in broad personality inventories commonly ranges between 30% and 45% due to the broad conceptual breadth of behavioral traits, the four-factor extraction demonstrated unambiguous latent partitions:

• Factor 1: Emotionality: Captured items reflecting emotional identification, relational empathy, emotional expression, and interpersonal connectedness.
• Factor 2: Self-Control: Clustered items targeting impulse control, emotion regulation under pressure, frustration tolerance, and stress mitigation.
• Factor 3: Sociability: Aggregated items assessing social competence, influence, assertiveness, group emotional regulation, and persuasion.
• Factor 4: Well-Being: Clustered items evaluating optimism, self-worth, positive mood maintenance, and professional life satisfaction.

Item selection was guided by strict statistical criteria: items with low communalities, factor loadings below 0.35, or significant cross-loadings onto non-target factors were iteratively eliminated, yielding a refined final instrument of 48 items distributed across the four factors.

Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA)

To verify the four-factor structure in an independent structural framework, Confirmatory Factor Analysis was estimated using structural equation modeling. The empirical model demonstrated exemplary fit across multiple indices:

• Chi-Square and Discrepancy Ratio: χ² = 1570.442 with 1121 degrees of freedom (df). The normalized discrepancy ratio (χ²/df) was 1.40. Ratios below 2.0 indicate an outstanding fit between the hypothesized model and the observed covariance matrix.
• Incremental and Comparative Fit Indices: The Comparative Fit Index (CFI = 0.970) and Goodness-of-Fit Index (GFI = 0.968) both substantially exceeded the conventional ≥ 0.95 standard, confirming that the four-factor oblique model accounts for the observed relationships among items better than null or baseline independence models.
• Residual and Residual Error Metrics: The Standardized Root Mean Square Residual was SRMR = 0.035, which is well below the standard 0.08 cutoff, indicating negligible correlation residuals. The Root Mean Square Error of Approximation was RMSEA = 0.035, accompanied by an extremely tight 90% confidence interval of [0.031 – 0.039]. An RMSEA value ≤ 0.05 combined with an upper confidence interval limit below 0.08 provides compelling evidence of close model fit within the population.

Instrument / Measurement Tool

The Leader Emotional Intelligence Scale is a structured psychometric questionnaire with the following operational characteristics:

• Test Type: Original self-report psychological inventory / psychometric questionnaire.
• Item Count: 48 items in the finalized validated version.
• Structural Composition: Four correlated subscales:
  • Emotionality Subscale
  • Self-Control Subscale
  • Sociability Subscale
  • Well-Being Subscale
• Response Format: 5-point Likert-type response scale:
  • 1 = Totally disagree (Discordo totalmente)
  • 2 = Partially disagree (Discordo parcialmente)
  • 3 = Neither agree nor disagree (Nem concordo nem discordo / Neutro)
  • 4 = Partially agree (Concordo parcialmente)
  • 5 = Totally agree (Concordo totalmente)
• Administration Mode: Self-administered; formatted primarily for electronic/online assessment platforms (e.g., enterprise survey systems, psychometric test delivery engines), but adaptable to standard paper-and-pencil formats.
• Language: Originally constructed and validated in Portuguese (Brazil).
• Target Population: Adult individuals (aged 18 years and older) who occupy leadership, supervisory, managerial, or executive positions across public, private, or non-profit organizations.
• Completion Time: Approximately 10 to 15 minutes.
• Scoring Procedures:
  • Item responses within each subscale are summed or averaged to generate four distinct dimensional scores (ranging from 1.0 to 5.0 when using mean scoring).
  • Any reverse-coded items must be inverted prior to aggregation (i.e., 1 becomes 5, 2 becomes 4, 3 remains 3, 4 becomes 2, and 5 becomes 1).
  • A global Trait Emotional Intelligence score can be derived by computing the composite mean across all 48 items, providing an overall index of the leader’s emotional self-efficacy.
  • High subscale scores indicate higher self-perceived competence and adaptive behavioral dispositions within that specific emotional domain.

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The Leader Emotional Intelligence Scale was developed and published in 2023 by researchers at the Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio de Janeiro (PUC-Rio). The relevant licensing, copyright, and operational access details are as follows:

• Test Year: 2023
• Commercial Status / Fee: The instrument is not a commercial product. There is no fee associated with its administration for non-commercial academic research, organizational science investigations, or educational training purposes.
• Permissions and Licensing: Researchers, human resource professionals, and organizational psychologists wishing to utilize, translate, adapt, or administer the LEIS / EIEL must contact the corresponding author, Paloma Pereira de Almeida, or the senior principal investigator, Dr. Juliane Callegaro Borsa, to obtain formal written permission and access the complete 48-item battery and scoring manual.
• Correspondence Contact: Requests should be directed via email to [email protected] or [email protected].

References

• Almeida, P. P. de, Nascimento, R. L. F. do, Landeira-Fernandez, J., & Borsa, J. C. (2023). Primeiras evidências de validade da Escala de Inteligência Emocional de Líderes [First evidence of validity of the Leaders Emotional Intelligence Scale]. Revista Psicologia Organizações e Trabalho, 23(3), 2634–2644. https://doi.org/10.5935/rpot/2023.3.24719
• Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1994). Improving organizational effectiveness through transformational leadership. SAGE Publications.
• Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) professional manual. Psychological Assessment Resources.
• Hernández-Nieto, R. A. (2002). Contributions to statistical analysis: The CVC index and coefficient of variation. Universidad de Los Andes.
• Hu, L. t., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
• Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P., & Caruso, D. R. (2008). Emotional intelligence: New ability or eclectic traits? American Psychologist, 63(6), 503–517. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.63.6.503
• McDonald, R. P. (1999). Test theory: A unified treatment. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Petrides, K. V., & Furnham, A. (2000). On the dimensional structure of emotional intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences, 29(2), 313–332. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(99)00195-6
• Petrides, K. V., & Furnham, A. (2001). Trait emotional intelligence: Psychometric investigation with reference to established trait taxonomies. European Journal of Personality, 15(6), 425–448. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.416
• Petrides, K. V., Mikolajczak, M., Mavroveli, S., Sanchez-Ruiz, M.-J., Furnham, A., & Pérez-González, J.-C. (2016). Developments in trait emotional intelligence research. Emotion Review, 8(4), 335–341. https://doi.org/10.1177/1754073916650493
• Weiss, H. M., & Cropanzano, R. (1996). Affective events theory: A theoretical discussion of the structure, causes and consequences of affective experiences at work. In B. M. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior: An annual series of analytical essays and critical reviews (Vol. 18, pp. 1–74). Elsevier Science/JAI Press.

Items of the Scale