Emotional intelligence: The key to mitigating stress and fostering trust among software developers working on information system projects

International Journal of Information Management 48 (2019) 139–150

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Information Management journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijinfomgt

Emotional intelligence: The key to mitigating stress and fostering trust among software developers working on information system projects

T

⁎

Azadeh Rezvania, , Pouria Khosravib a b

The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, 4072, Australia Queensland University of Technology, 2 George Street, Brisbane, Queensland, 4000, Australia

A R T I C LE I N FO

A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Stress Trust Emotional intelligence Information system development project IT projects Performance System developers

The successful accomplishment of information systems development (ISD) activities is reliant on the efforts of developers, who are largely responsible for creating the required system artefacts. Developers encounter numerous obstacles in their efforts to successfully complete activities, such as the need to develop software within highly-complex broad-ranging projects. These problems increase levels of stress, which subsequently affect developers’ ability to self-regulate their feelings and understanding. However, only scant attention has been paid to their personal skills and competency in overcoming these issues. This study therefore aimed to bridge this gap by exploring the impact of developers’ emotional intelligence on stress, trust, and performance. Our empirical results show that emotional intelligence mitigates stress and fosters trust among software developers working on information system projects. Additionally, role ambiguity increases the effect of stress on performance.

1. Introduction Information Systems Development (ISD) projects are experiencing increased rates of failure (Dwivedi et al., 2015; Hung, Hsu, Su, & Huang, 2014; Windeler, Maruping, & Venkatesh, 2017). For example, only one out of every eight ISD-related projects is completed within the set deadline, within the budget, and according to the pre-determined specifications (Gingnell, Franke, Lagerström, Ericsson, & Lilliesköld, 2014; Hughes, Dwivedi, Rana, & Simintiras, 2016). The lack of success in such projects has proved to be highly detrimental to numerous organisations (Aladwani, 2016). It is estimated that project failures across the European Union led to an expenditure of €142 billion in 2004 (McManus & Wood-Harper, 2007). The successful accomplishment of ISD activities is heavily reliant on developers, who are largely accountable for creating the required system artefacts. Of significant concern is the fact that developers encounter numerous obstacles in their efforts to successfully complete such activities, such as the need to develop software for highly-complex broad-ranging projects (Gupta, George, & Xia, 2019). These problems increase levels of stress among developers. This subsequently impacts their ability to self-regulate their feelings and understanding (Hancock & Szalma, 2008) with a resulting negative impact on their effectiveness. The capacity to successfully build a system requires developers to maintain constructive relationships with their peers in order to obtain

⁎

their input and collaboration while simultaneously meeting the project goals (Ozer & Vogel, 2015). Our review of the literature showed that only scant attention is paid to developers’ personal skills and competency within ISD projects. More specifically, there is limited information on the effect or influence of the skills and competency of software developers in terms of stress, trust, and performance. Among those studies that have been conducted, Windeler et al. (2017) investigated the influence of empowerment leadership on IS software developers, while Cruz, da Silva, and Capretz (2015) explored the influence of IS developers’ personality factors on the performance of pair programming teams. Rezvani, Dong, and Khosravi (2017) also examined the extent to which the personal characteristics of senior management influenced team performance. However, Rezvani, Khosravi, and Ashkanasy (2018) later found that organisational theories and practices applicable to small teams, such as those involved in pair programming and small projects, may not generalise to larger teams and projects. Additionally, the effectiveness of the personal skills and competency of software developers was overlooked. This is an important issue to investigate, as Hsu, Li, and Sun (2017) highlighted the importance of teamwork in ISD projects. To address the aforesaid gaps, our first research objective was to develop a theoretical rationale regarding the influence that individual characteristics and skills of software developers, such as emotional intelligence, have on performance. Growing evidence from IS projects

Corresponding author. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (A. Rezvani), [email protected] (P. Khosravi).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.02.007 Received 14 January 2019; Received in revised form 24 February 2019; Accepted 24 February 2019 0268-4012/ © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

International Journal of Information Management 48 (2019) 139–150

A. Rezvani and P. Khosravi

doing, it answers calls for better contextualisation within such projects (Tsang & Williams, 2012). Secondly, we develop and empirically test a model of the influence emotional intelligence has on stress, trust, and performance among a sample of software developers working on ISD projects. Thus, our work extends the IS literature by highlighting the theoretical mechanisms by which software developers’ skills and competency mitigate the negative influence of stress and foster the positive influence of trust on performance. Thirdly, by identifying trust and stress as mediators between emotional intelligence and performance within ISD projects, this study establishes the underlying mechanism by which a critical component of software developers’ skill – emotional intelligence – is linked to performance. Fourthly, we explored the moderating influence of role ambiguity on the relationship between stress and performance. Thus, our research adds to an increasing body of literature on the emotional, behavioural, and attitudinal implications of emotional intelligence within ISD projects. Understanding the effect of emotional intelligence on both stress and trust means that more effective approaches to stress management and trust development can be incorporated into social support systems. Moreover, top managers can aid software developers in understanding, managing and regulating emotions to mitigate stress through the development of management strategies. These will prevent the adverse effect of stress before it can escalate and harm software developers’ wellbeing, ISD project outcomes, staffing levels, and software quality.

shows that emotionally intelligent individuals have the potential to improve performance (e.g., Maqbool, Sudong, Manzoor, & Rashid, 2017; Rezvani Khosravi et al., 2018). Emotional intelligence may therefore be particularly appropriate for comprehending the personal attributes and abilities of software developers. This is relevant because ISD projects incorporate increased levels of technical risk and may elevate stress and increase lack of trust (Cram & Wiener, 2018; Hsu, Hung, Chen, & Huang, 2013). Christie, Jordan, and Troth (2015) found that emotional intelligence augments the ability of a team to develop effective solutions when unexpected problems arise and is significantly correlated with team productivity and performance (Ashkanasy & Dorris, 2017; Rode et al., 2007). However, the mechanism underlying the relationship between emotional intelligence and performance within ISD projects remains unexplored. Scholars calling for a greater focus on the relationship between the competency of software developers and team performance also emphasise the need to explore the likely moderators and mediators of this relationship (Rezvani Khosravi et al., 2018; Windeler et al., 2017). Therefore, drawing upon affective events theory (AET; Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996), role theory (Merton, 1957), and conservation of resources (COR; Hobfoll, 2001) theory, our second objective was to examine these mediator and moderator variables. For instance, based on COR theory (Hobfoll, 2001), we argue that stress mediates the relationship between emotional intelligence and performance. COR theory (Hobfoll, 2001) posits that people aim to keep, safeguard, and construct resources. Resources are defined as objects, conditions, personal abilities, and attributes or energies in which the individual places value (Hobfoll, 2001). These can either be valued in themselves or facilitate the achievement of specified objectives (Hobfoll, 2001). A setting that drives an individual to anticipate a possible or actual loss of resources, or the application of resources without the potential to acquire further resources, can therefore generate stress (Hobfoll, 1989, 2001). However, the advancement of personal aptitudes or competencies serves as a buffer to any loss of resources in such scenarios (Hobfoll & Shirom, 2001; Holmgreen, Tirone, Gerhart, & Hobfoll, 2017). We therefore propose that emotional intelligence represents an interpersonal support resource that can be used to moderate the negative influence of work-related stress on software developers within ISD projects. Furthermore, in accordance with the principles of AET theory, we argue that trust mediates the association between emotional intelligence and performance. Central to AET (Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996) is the claim that an individual’s affective and emotional experiences determine their attitudes and subsequent behaviours (Ashkanasy & Dorris, 2017). In this context, emotional experiences refer to employees’ positive and negative emotions, while attitudes and behaviours are an evaluative, cognitive judgment based on emotional experiences (Ashkanasy & Daus, 2005). By adopting AET as a theoretical lens through which to examine the relationship between emotional intelligence, trust, and performance, we propose that trust is an attitude that arises out of emotional experiences and may enhance performance. Scholars have also highlighted the negative influence of role ambiguity throughout the system development cycle (Liu & Chiu, 2016; Liu, Chiang, Yang, & Klein, 2011). Research has shown that uncertainty and an insufficient definition of specified responsibilities and roles within ISD projects are key concerns for team managers and software developers (Liu et al., 2011). Given such role ambiguity, we attempt to reconcile this perspective with the significant role played by stress in software projects (Liu & Chiu, 2016). Role theory (Merton, 1957) argues that each employee is subject to particular expectations and social status. We therefore argue that role ambiguity, as a moderator, furthers our understanding in terms of its adverse effects on the relationship between stress and performance within ISD projects. This study contributes to theory and practice in various ways. First, it contributes to the IS literature by revealing the influence of software developers’ emotional intelligence on performance in ISD projects. In so

2. Theory and hypotheses 2.1. Emotional intelligence Although various definitions of emotional intelligence have been proposed in the literature, the most broadly acknowledged and widely accepted definition is that proposed by Mayer and Salovey (1997), cited in Ashkanasy & Daus, 2005). They define emotional intelligence as “the ability to monitor one’s own and others’ emotions, to differentiate between them, and to use the information to guide one’s thinking and actions”. Ashkanasy and Daus (2005) identified three different “streams” of research on emotional intelligence. The first stream involves the utilisation of the Mayer-Salovey emotional intelligence test (MSCEIT) (Mayer, Salovey, Caruso, & Sitarenios, 2003). The second stream involves the application of a self-report measure founded on Mayer and Salovey (1997) definition of emotional intelligence (e.g. Schutte et al., 1998; Wong & Law, 2002). The third stream incorporates additional measures of emotional intelligence that do not correspond with Mayer and Salovey’s definition. This stream was best described by Goleman (2000), who defined emotional intelligence as a broad range of capabilities and expertise that includes personality-related items which may have no direct association with emotional intelligence, such as social responsibility (Ashkanasy & Daus, 2005). Those who advocate Mayer and Salovey’s model (Streams 1 & 2) assert that emotional capabilities are acquired skills that can be nurtured and enhanced. The conceptualisation of emotional intelligence as a capability, a view adopted by Mayer and Salovey (1997)), means it is perceived as a form of intelligence that comprises four aspects, which are the ability to: 1) observe emotion precisely, 2) utilise emotion to facilitate thought, 3) comprehend emotion, and 4) control emotion. Mayer et al. (2003) contend that these facets inform each other so that, when they are combined, they form an overall concept of emotional intelligence, a claim that has been supported empirically in the literature (Ashkanasy & Daus, 2005). In the current study, the second stream approach will be adopted, as this research will try to determine the capability for perceiving, using, understanding, and regulating emotions among the members of a project team. Additionally, the ability model comprises the important attributes of understanding and controlling one’s own emotions as well as the emotions of others, which facilitates the establishment of respected thinking and ways of acting (Mayer, Roberts, & Barsade, 2008; Rezvani Khosravi et al., 2018). 140

International Journal of Information Management 48 (2019) 139–150

A. Rezvani and P. Khosravi

implemented. This can cause agitation, exasperation, and increased stress (Lindsjørn et al., 2016). Stress also interferes with the self-regulation of emotions, cognition, and motivation to complete a task and thus negatively influences the success of projects (Graziotin, Fagerholm, Wang, & Abrahamsson, 2017; Nakata, 2017). Studies have found that stress among developers is common and highly problematic (Chilton, Hardgrave, & Armstrong, 2005; Windeler et al., 2017). It is manifested in symptoms such as poor communication, low morale, hostility, anger and frustration, redoing of software programs, and a decrease in problem-solving, coordination, and cooperation among developers (Arsenio & Loria, 2014; Liu et al., 2011; Lovallo, 2015). Coping with stress throughout the system development cycle is therefore imperative to the success of ISD projects. However, current empirical evidence on the impact of personal skills and characteristics in mitigating stress is inconclusive.

Emotional intelligence can facilitate cohesiveness and collaboration among team members and is essential to project performance (Troth, Jordan, Lawrence, & Tse, 2012). Previous research has tended to ignore emotional intelligence as it unfolds in specific contexts (2010, Müller & Turner, 2007). Jordan, Dasborough, Daus, and Ashkanasy (2010) argued that testing the impact of emotional intelligence and its influence on various outcomes across different contexts is important. In the context of ISD, when software developers are confronted with a particular scenario, their competence in managing and regulating their emotions enables them to control their feelings and behaviours by observing and evaluating the emotions and feelings of other team members (e.g. testers, systems analysts, and managers). Because emotions are a pivotal factor in cooperative behaviours, a person’s capacity to comprehend and manage their own emotions can be highly beneficial in forming effective relationships with other people (Ashkanasy & Dorris, 2017). This factor is extremely significant in ISD-related projects because software developers operate in highly complex networks of peers and clients (Liu & Wang, 2016). Because of their specific features, project teams often experience negative or positive emotions. Positive emotions enable project team members to perform better in a work environment where uncertainty and ambiguity are high. Conversely, negative emotions such as interpersonal tensions, anger, and frustration can often obstruct real-time communication of information which leads to poor performance (Troth et al., 2012; Rezvani et al., 2016). Thus, the ability to communicate and cooperate effectively with others is especially important in enhancing user satisfaction and team and business performance (Windeler et al., 2017).

2.3. Trust Trust is pivotal to the success of most relationships between professionals, businesses and stakeholders (Pinto, Slevin, & English, 2009; Serrador & Pinto, 2015). It has been demonstrated that trust strengthens both communication and relationships among stakeholders, which can often improve project performance (Wu, Liu, Zhao, & Zuo, 2017). An analysis of the literature on trust reveals that both its definition and fundamental meaning have been widely debated (Jiang, Lu, & Le, 2016). For instance, Moorman, Deshpande, and Zaltman (1993) contended that trust indicates partners are willing to depend on and place confidence in each other. Conversely, Jiang, Zhang, and Le, (2011) claim that trust represents a trustor’s preparedness to accept their vulnerability towards a trustee whose behaviour they cannot control. Hence, trust consists of the potential for loss (risk) and dependence on another person (interdependence). Puusa and Tolvanen (2006) extended this argument further by claiming that there are three different levels of trust: individual, team, and organisational. Individual trust implies that the confidence individuals have in their team members can enhance collaborative efforts and instigate improved methods of completing tasks that augment individual performance (Rezvani et al., 2016). Individual trust can also be present between members of the team and the leader. Consequently, this form of trust transitions upwards from the team member to his/her leader. Team level trust is perceived to be a collective phenomenon (Costa & Anderson, 2011; Hogg & Terry, 2014). Organisational trust passes upwards from the personnel to the organisation based on perceptions of the different policies and procedures that have been implemented. Although the present study recognises the significance of trust for leadership and organisational effectiveness, the primary focus will be on interpersonal trust. In accordance with previous studies (e.g. Buvik & Tvedt, 2017; Rezvani Khosravi et al., 2018), the authors contend that when a high level of interpersonal trust exists and members of a team believe their colleagues are helpful and sincere, there is an increased likelihood that software developers will collaborate and communicate in an effective manner. If there are increased levels of vagueness, doubt, and interdependency in software development projects, the vulnerability of software developers to the actions of other parties is likely to increase and they will show trust in their peers by sharing knowledge and information (Park & Lee, 2014; Stephens & Carmeli, 2016). The literature also shows there are positive correlations between trust and the following elements: productive communication within project teams, the ability to solve problems, an individual’s willingness to take risks, collaboration, and performance levels (e.g. Rezvani et al., 2016; Wu et al., 2017). If team members trust each other, they are more likely to acknowledge and comply with the contrasting viewpoints and ideas of others (Hogg & Terry, 2014). In a trusting environment, there is an increased likelihood of cooperation and communication among project teams (Barczak, Lassk, & Mulki, 2010; Jiang et al., 2016). This means they will collaborate closely and engage in effective partnerships

2.2. Stress Stress is defined as the reaction to a threat and has both cognitive and emotional aspects (Lazarus, 1966). It is dependent on a person’s understanding of his/her capacity to perform a work-related activity involving a specific level of complexity or challenge. Stress emerges as a result of a disparity between a person’s perception of their capability and his/her actual ability to effectively manage their responsibilities (Blascovich, 2008). There is also a negative correlation between relationships and employment satisfaction, organisational dedication, and the performance of a team. Stress is positively correlated with nonproductive work attitudes, disengagement, alcohol and drug consumption, the intent to seek new employment, and depressive behaviours (Bowen et al., 2014; Harris, Brett, Johnson, & Deary, 2016; Windeler et al., 2017). Similarly, the prolonged effects of stress on physical, psychological, and behavioural outcomes have been widely documented (Anthony‐McMann, Ellinger, Astakhova, & Halbesleben, 2017; Bell, Rajendran, & Theiler, 2012; Bowen et al., 2014; McCraty, Atkinson, & Tomasino, 2003). For example, when the stress-response system is activated for prolonged periods without an effective resolution, the physiologically heightened alert response can lead to various cardiovascular, immune, and metabolic diseases as well as a cognitive decline in memory, learning, and functioning (Khamisa, Oldenburg, Peltzer, & Ilic, 2015; Krysinska & Lester, 2010). Further negative outcomes include poor psychological health, depression, instances of suicide ideation, and increases in substance abuse as a means of coping (Eddy, Wertheim, Kingsley, & Wright, 2017; Matthews & Gump, 2002). ISD projects place constraints on a project team member’s behaviour and emotions resulting in increased stress (Windeler et al., 2017). For instance, members are frequently allocated a variety of different responsibilities, which can subsequently cause problems when i) attempting to prioritise tasks and allocate resources appropriately, and ii) reporting structures that can be complex and cause conflicts (Liu et al., 2011). Moreover, ISD projects create significant interdependencies among software developers (Lindsjørn, Sjøberg, Dingsøyr, Bergersen, & Dybå, 2016). It may be necessary for software developers to communicate with other departments in order to access or share resources and collate, enhance, and distribute new data when modifications are 141

International Journal of Information Management 48 (2019) 139–150

A. Rezvani and P. Khosravi

related to performance.

when faced with challenges and problems, which are important factors when attempting to deliver positive results that generate enhanced levels of performance (Barczak et al., 2010). If there is a deficit of trust within ISD project teams, this can lead to defensive behaviours, reduced cooperation, extra transaction expenditures, and can also obstruct the dissemination of information (Colquitt, Scott, & LePine, 2007). Furthermore, although it is still possible to communicate and collaborate, this will not be optimal (Rezvani Khosravi et al., 2018).

2.5. Emotional intelligence and stress An individual’s ability to understand, manage, and regulate their emotions as well as those of others is likely to impact the degree of stress software developers experience within the workplace. This is important because a correlation has been established between occupation-related stress within software firms and a lack of satisfaction, depressive symptoms, and increased absence among software developers, as well as various medical conditions related to heart rate and blood pressure (Eddy et al., 2017; Matthews & Gump, 2002). We argue that the personal abilities and competencies of software developers can impact stress in two ways. Firstly, they enable software developers to develop certain coping mechanisms when faced with stressful situations (Bolger & Zuckerman, 1995). Secondly, personal abilities and competencies can, according to Lazarus and Folkman’s stress theory, influence the “personal appraisal process” which is directly related to the level of stress he/she will experience. A personal appraisal process refers to an intricate combination of biological, cognitive and individual characteristics as well as sociocultural attributes that affect an individual’s perception of their present condition (Hobfoll, 2001). As suggested by Lazarus and Folkman (1984), this process comprises both threat and challenge elements that have a separate impact on the manner in which stress occurs. Furthermore, software developers with increased levels of emotional intelligence can help avert undesirable scenarios, as emotional intelligence is a component of situation selection and alteration. Emotional intelligence can also foster the ability to cope with stress as this is predominantly manifested as an emotional reaction to stimuli in the workplace. Thus, if software developers have the ability to comprehend, control, and regulate their feelings by not reacting when provoked, their stress levels within the workplace will be reduced. Research into healthcare professionals has shown that there is a negative correlation between emotional intelligence and stress (Landa, López-Zafra, Martos, & del Carmen Aguilar-Luzón, 2008; Por, Barriball, Fitzpatrick, & Roberts, 2011). Additionally, based on COR theory, the development of personal skills and competencies can act as a buffer against resource loss in highly stressful situations (Hobfoll & Shirom, 2001; Holmgreen et al., 2017). This means that individuals with high emotional intelligence are more likely to build a strong relationship with their coworkers and team members (Ashkanasy & Dorris, 2017). Robust social relationships are a key medium through which constrained resources within the self can be disseminated to the external environment. Investments made in robust emotional relationships within the work environment have the potential to enhance resource gains and communication and can additionally ameliorate levels of stress and agitation among personnel (Rezvani Khosravi et al., 2018). Therefore, we hypothesise that:

2.4. Emotional intelligence and performance One of the primary concerns for senior managers and leaders is how to enhance developers’ performance because both profits and business success are heavily reliant on software developers (Subramanian, Jiang, & Klein, 2007). Troth et al. (2012) identified emotional intelligence as a pivotal factor in developing a positive supportive environment, productive communication, and high-performance teams. In this context, it is plausible to conclude that software developers who exhibit increased emotional intelligence have the ability to enhance teamwork within ISD project teams. This in turn presents certain challenges for members of the team, such as the management of resources, how to combine individual objectives into a common mission, the resolution of complicated tasks in periods of crisis, the ability to communicate effectively, and coordinating the transferral of information between individuals. In this respect, Rezvani Khosravi et al. (2018) established that individual emotional intelligence (which corresponds to a capacity to manage and comprehend the temperament, feelings, and emotions of team members) is a crucial aspect that determines the performance of large-scale construction projects. This is because people with increased emotional intelligence can foster a supportive emotional environment that promotes higher levels of performance (Troth et al., 2012). Jordan et al. (2010) also found that the performance of a team has a direct correlation with team members’ emotional skill levels because, when allocating resources and materials, increased emotional intelligence will encourage empathetic and supportive perceptions that subsequently improve the level of collaboration within the team (see also Ayoko, Callan, & Härtel, 2008; Greenidge, Devonish, & Alleyne, 2014; Jordan & Troth, 2004; Law, Wong, & Song, 2004; Rezvani, Barrett & Khosravi, 2018). Sheldon, Dunning, and Ames (2014) also claimed that the perception of diminished emotional intelligence can lead to a reduction in team performance as well as causing conflict within the team. These outcomes indicate that emotional intelligence is an extremely vital ability, as members of a team utilise their emotional intelligence to collect and share information with respect to their objectives and exceed expectations when fulfilling their responsibilities to enhance overall performance levels (Barczak et al., 2010). Based on the AET, Weiss and Cropanzano (1996) argued that the job-related attitudes and behaviours of employees can vary according to their flow of emotional experiences. In the workplace, it is common for employees to experience both positive and negative feelings (Ashkanasy & Dorris, 2017). In general, positive feelings have a positive impact and enable employees to improve their work performance (Troth et al., 2012; Sy et al., 2006) whereas negative feelings such as exasperation, annoyance, and hostility can make employees feel less enthusiastic and subsequently leads to decreased performance (Glinow, Shapiro, & Brett, 2004). Software developers with high levels of emotional intelligence are more likely to experience, manage, and express their emotions in a positive manner. This will potentially augment levels of enthusiasm among software developers, thus facilitating effective communication with other members of the team. It will also foster a creative environment conducive to resolving complex problems (Rezvani et al., 2016). Thus, in line with AET theory and previous research, we conclude that emotional intelligence is a major driver of performance. We therefore hypothesise that:

H2. Emotional intelligence among software developers is negatively associated with stress.

2.6. Emotional intelligence and trust Research studies (e.g. Barczak et al., 2010; Rezvani Khosravi et al., 2018) have consistently reported that emotional intelligence has a significant effect on trust between individuals. For instance, evidence indicates that personnel with increased emotional intelligence are more effective at dealing with emotional changes in the workplace than peers with lower emotional intelligence. A connection has also been established between emotions and the development of improved social relationships with other people (Barczak et al., 2010; Christie et al., 2015). Compared to those who experience feelings such as dismay, depression, and annoyance, positive emotions are also linked to enhanced trust and dependence levels (Jordan et al., 2006; Rezvani

H1. Emotional intelligence among software developers is positively 142

International Journal of Information Management 48 (2019) 139–150

A. Rezvani and P. Khosravi

Shirom, Fried, and Cooper (2008) suggests that stress undermines performance by re-directing an individual’s emotional and cognitive performance resources towards efforts that enable them to cope in the workplace. The ultimate outcome of this redistribution of resources is withdrawal behaviour and diminished performance (Gilboa et al., 2008). ISD projects generally aggravate problems of stress due to the presence of various stakeholders (Khosravi, Rezvani, & Ahmad, 2013). Because these projects have a high level of interdependence, the stress a developer experiences will have an impact on the work that is distributed between interdependent team members (Windeler et al., 2017). In such projects, different members will have a variety of expectations in regard to the duties of a particular team member. This could, therefore, augment the unclear nature of an individual’s duties, as different people will interpret the responsibilities related to a given role in different ways. This issue is exacerbated by the fact that, when the individual’s level of stress rises, their ability to communicate, coordinate, and engage is reduced (Khamisa, Peltzer, Ilic, & Oldenburg, 2016). Deficiencies in communication and engagement could lead to uncertainty among team members regarding comprehension of their position within the team and this represents a threat to team performance (Anthony‐McMann et al., 2017). It also can cause strain and frustration to the extent that a project member leaves the team which, in turn, may jeopardise the performance of an entire project. Thus, we hypothesise that:

Khosravi et al., 2018). For example, Dunn and Schweitzer (2005) found that positive emotions enhance confidence in others, whereas negative emotions (like anger) have the opposite effect. In regard to negative emotions, Tyler Boden and Berenbaum (2007) found that a lack of emotional awareness causes workers to become more suspicious and frustrated. Because emotional awareness is considered an integral part of emotional intelligence (Mayer & Salovey, 1997), there should also be a connection between emotional intelligence and team members’ perceived trust in other people. Finally, several researchers (e.g., Sy et al., 2006; Christie et al., 2015; Rezvani Khosravi et al., 2018) have also investigated the effect of emotional intelligence on work behaviours and found that perceptions of trust have a direct correlation with emotional abilities. We therefore hypothesise that: H3. Emotional intelligence among software developers is positively related to trust. 2.7. Trust and performance According to AET theory (Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996), attitudes in the workplace (such as trust) have the capacity to elevate i) the expectation that an individual’s dependence on and confidence in others will result in improved performance and ii) the perception that constant effort will yield advantageous behavioural results. Rezvani Khosravi et al. (2018) extended this concept by suggesting that having confidence and trust in their colleagues and leaders motivates people to contribute towards achieving common goals and thus their work performance will increase. This is because trust mediates interactions among software developers through the provision of functional horizontal work relationships, particularly in uncertain and ambiguous situations such as those which frequently exist in ISD projects. In such conditions, trust in their co-workers will improve developer’s skills in communication, problem-solving, and organisational backing (Diallo & Thuillier, 2005). Previous research into IS project management has revealed that communication and collaboration among software developers is a critically important factor (Hertel, Niedner, & Herrmann, 2003; Licorish & MacDonell, 2017). Furthermore, such activities are largely dependent on trust (Rezvani Khosravi et al., 2018). McEvily, Perrone, and Zaheer (2003) also suggest that developers require confidence and assurance in other people in order to distribute risks and provide resources. This enables others to collaborate in efforts towards the development and delivery of products or services that would not be achievable working alone. Conversely, distrust among developers can cause them to act defensively and could obstruct the delivery of information that facilitates productive communication, collaborative relationships, and problem-solving assignments (Mayer & Gavin, 2005; Moe & Šmite, 2008). Furthermore, Rezvani Khosravi et al. (2018) found that distrust can initiate flawed and selfish behaviours within the team, causing team members to focus their efforts on identifying indicators of opportunism and decreased performance within the team instead of making positive efforts that can enhance overall performance. Thus, we hypothesise that:

H5. Stress among software developers is negatively related to performance. 2.9. Mediating role of stress The underlying principles of COR theory (Hobfoll, 2001) posit that the objective of individuals is to maintain, preserve, and construct resources. Consequently, conditions in which the individual anticipates a possible or real resource loss, or where resources are invested without the potential to acquire any further resources, can generate stress (Hobfoll, 1989, 2001). Resources are defined as situations, personal abilities, and attributes or energies in which the individual places value, which can be valued themselves, or which facilitate the achievement of specific objectives (Hobfoll, 2001). According to COR theory, the enhancement of personal abilities and competencies can serve as a buffer against the loss of resources when extremely stressful situations arise (Hobfoll & Shirom, 2001; Holmgreen et al., 2017). This means that individuals with strong emotional intelligence have an increased likelihood of forming robust relationships with their colleagues and other team members (Ashkanasy & Dorris, 2017). Robust social relationships act as a medium through which constrained, internal resources are disseminated more widely to those with whom the individual engages. It is thus likely that any investments made in emotional relationships in the work environment will generate more productive resource gains and communication and can also prevent employees from experiencing stress and worry (Rezvani Khosravi et al., 2018). COR theory emphasises that, when there are no alternative resources, an established social network presents a valuable resource to those team members who are experiencing stress. This is because it generates a resource gain that can be utilised as a buffer against stress. We argue that software developers who exhibit better understanding and have the ability to manage their emotions will be empathetic, sympathetic, and considerate to others in order to form constructive relationships within the work environment. Thus, emotional intelligence can be regarded as a key factor that can facilitate resource gain and attenuate the loss of resources (Rezvani Khosravi et al., 2018). Therefore, understanding, managing, and regulating emotions in the self and others is expected to affect the level of stress experienced by software developers at work. This is important given that such stress is related to dissatisfaction, depression, and absenteeism, which in turn is

H4. Interpersonal trust among software developers is positively related to performance. 2.8. Stress and performance According to stress theory (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984), stress diminishes performance as a result of its impact on the personal appraisal process. This process comprises an intricate combination of biological, cognitive, affective and sociocultural characteristics that impact an individual’s perception of his/her present condition (Hobfoll, 2001). The process of personal appraisal comprises elements of threat and challenge that have a separate impact on the manner in which stress affects performance (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984). For example, Gilboa, 143

International Journal of Information Management 48 (2019) 139–150

A. Rezvani and P. Khosravi

technical ISD risk factors. Secondly, previous studies have shown that role ambiguity has a detrimental impact on performance as it can negatively impact individuals’ work capabilities and is related to a sense of powerlessness and a lack of control (Liu & Chiu, 2016; Liu et al., 2011). Hence, examining role ambiguity can facilitate an understanding of how stress negatively impacts performance. Finally, according to role theory, role ambiguity increases the demands placed on members of a team and can also impact their perceptions of the role and their position. Role ambiguity thus contravenes the tenets of role theory by reducing the clarity of information that flows and incorporating expectations from different sources (Liu & Chiu, 2016). People who are uncertain regarding their duties and position are less likely to accept and engage in efforts to foster interaction: they will be more likely to assume a defensive stance to avert the possibility of dealing with potentially challenging clients and diminish the threat of lost resources (Liu et al., 2011). Within ISD projects, a variety of resources may be introduced that members of the project team must manage in order to achieve predetermined aims and objectives. In line with role theory, such projects can aggravate stress due to the increased demands and constraints placed on the developers. These projects often have reporting frameworks that are highly complex. This subsequently worsens the problems of role ambiguity as members of the project team experience challenges when determining from whom they should seek direction (Liu & Chiu, 2016). Additionally, role ambiguity is more likely to occur in ISD projects in circumstances where different members of the team are fulfilling the duties of a given role (Liu et al., 2011). This could, therefore, exacerbate the uncertainty surrounding particular responsibilities, as different team members could interpret these in different ways. This issue is aggravated by the fact that each team member has a reduced capacity to solve problems, communicate, and engage with others (Liu et al., 2011), which ultimately reduces overall team performance. Insufficient communication and engagement could lead to increased ambiguity among members of the project team regarding their understanding of their responsibilities (Liu & Chiu, 2016). In such circumstances, team members will find it challenging to embrace shared norms and values. It is plausible to conclude that the level of stress is likely to escalate when there is a lack of clarity about individual responsibilities and roles. Therefore, we hypothesise that:

related to low performance (Graziotin et al., 2017; Windeler et al., 2017). The development of high-quality interpersonal relationships is therefore likely to increase as a result of understanding, managing and regulating negative emotions during stressful situations. This will result in effective communication, troubleshooting cooperation, and enhanced performance (Rezvani et al., 2016). Therefore, we hypothesise that: H6. The relationship between emotional intelligence and performance among software developers is mediated by stress. 2.10. Mediating role of trust AET (Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996) proposes that interpersonal trust, which results from team members’ emotional experiences, acts as a mediator between emotional intelligence and performance. However, different characteristics such as trust and workplace behaviour are impacted when individuals experience emotions such as joy, irritation, fatigue, exasperation, gratification, and eagerness. These emerge as a result of actions that generate emotional responses in the workplace. Consequently, individuals who feel these emotions are likely to exhibit certain behaviours in the work environment (Ashkanasy & Dorris, 2017; Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996). Christie et al. (2015) and Rezvani Khosravi et al. (2018) concluded that emotional intelligence is a pivotal individual competence and a fundamental aspect of establishing trust with other people and improving social relationships. Consequently, such trust can potentially facilitate interactions among software developers through the production of constructive workplace relationships. In the context of ISD projects, which are fundamentally uncertain in nature, social interactions, communication, and collaboration can potentially be improved if individuals have confidence in their team (De Clercq, Haq, & Azeem, 2018; Nakata, 2017; Ostberg, Graziotin, Wagner, & Derntl, 2017). To make reliable deductions regarding the dependability of other team members, individuals must base their perceptions on communicative abilities and social interactivity, which are known to have a direct correlation with emotional intelligence (Christie et al., 2015). This means that software developers with high emotional intelligence are more likely to engage in increased cooperation and communication which will enhance the level of trust within the team (Barczak et al., 2010; Christie et al., 2015; Graziotin et al., 2017). Software developers who can effectively manage interpersonal relationships will gradually improve shared perceptions of the dependability and trust of the team (Mayer et al., 2008; Nakata, 2017). Thus, team members should be more inclined to organise such interaction and communication as this will enhance the level of participation and feeling of belonging among team members. This in turn will foster the distribution of resources with the aim of achieving shared objectives (Christie et al., 2015; Rezvani Khosravi et al., 2018). Hence, we hypothesise that:

H8. A higher level of role ambiguity among software developers increases the negative influence of stress on performance. 3. Methodology 3.1. Measurements Emotional intelligence: In this study, we used the Wong and Law EI measure (WLEIS; Wong & Law, 2002). WLEIS contains four branches: awareness of emotion in self; awareness of emotion in others; use of emotion; and emotion regulation. (See Appendix for list of measurements)

H7. The relationship between emotional intelligence and ISD performance among software developers is mediated by trust.

3.1.1. Trust The five items of interpersonal trust scale developed by Cook and Wall (1980) was used to reflect trust in the team. This scale was used since it is the most widely used measure of interpersonal trust indicating good psychometric properties (e.g. Costa & Anderson, 2011). Role ambiguity: Seven items developed by House, Schuler and Levanoni (1983) were used to measure role ambiguity.

2.11. Moderating influence of role ambiguity Role ambiguity is defined as the extent to which the expectations of a team member’s responsibilities are not clarified. In this paper, role ambiguity is investigated as a potential moderator between stress and performance on the basis of three factors: a) ISD projects are essentially team-focused, b) previous literature, and c) the guiding theory (role theory). Firstly, because ISD projects are completed by development teams, role ambiguity may have an impact on the association between stress and performance. This is because the level of interdependency within ISD projects requires developers to depend on unambiguous roles, duties, and expectations when performing their tasks and, as will be demonstrated, the perceptions of these roles are formed as a result of

3.1.2. Stress We used 8 items developed by Stanton, Balzer, Smith, Parra, and Ironson (2001) to assess workplace stress. Performance: To assess performance, we asked participants’ perception regarding time, cost and quality of the project. For all items, we used the Likert scale. 144

International Journal of Information Management 48 (2019) 139–150

A. Rezvani and P. Khosravi

Table 1 Participants’ information. Demographics

Age Experience

Table 3 Discriminant validity and correlation among constructs.

Male (N = 323)

Female (N = 40)

Total (N = 363)

Mean

S.D.

Mean

S.D.

Mean

36.41 11.49

6.83 6.88

38.31 7.65

6.63 4.63

37.36 9.5

Frequency

Education Diploma College Undergraduate Postgraduate

EI Performance Role Conflict Stress Trust

2

3

4

5

0.888 0.299 −0.306 −0.399 0.425

0.730 −0.457 −0.347 0.408

0.741 0.343 −0.626

0.733 −0.328

0.718

Frequency (%)

Male

Female

Total (N = 163)

7 (2.2%) 57 (17.6%) 220 (68.1%) 39 (12.1%)

0 (0%) 3 (7.5%) 29 (72.5%) 8 (20%)

7 (1.9%) 60 (18.5%) 249 (68.6%) 47 (12.8%)

validity. In order to validate discriminant validity, we inspected whether the square root of AVE for each construct was greater than its correlation with other constructs (Chin, 1998; Fornell & Larcker, 1981). As Table 3 shows our analysis confirms strong discriminant validity. 4. Result

3.2. Participants and procedure

Hypothesis 1 suggested that software developers’ emotional intelligence is positively related to performance. Our result showed a significant, positive relationship between emotional intelligence and performance (β = .31, p < .001). Therefore, Hypothesis 1 was supported. Hypotheses 2 proposed a negative association between software developers’ emotional intelligence and stress. As predicted, emotional intelligence was negatively associated with stress (β = -0.40, p < .001). Thus Hypothesis 2 was supported. Hypothesis 3 suggested that software developers’ emotional intelligence is positively associated with trust. The result showed a significant, positive relationship between emotional intelligence and trust (β = .42, p < .001). Hypothesis 4 proposed a positive association between software developers’ interpersonal trust and performance. As predicted, trust was positively associated with performance (β = .14, p < .05). Hypothesis 5 proposed a negative association between software developers’ stress and performance. As predicted, stress was negatively associated with performance (β = -0.18, p < .01). Therefore, Hypotheses 3, 4 and 5 are supported. To test the mediation effect for Hypotheses 6 and 7 we employed parallel multiple mediator analysis as suggested by (Preacher & Hayes, 2008) and compared the results with and without the mediators included. This method reduces the possibility of parameter bias due to absent variables (Preacher & Hayes, 2008). We used an extension of the simple mediation model recommended by MacKinnon and Luecken (2008) to test the multiple mediators in our study. The positive association between software developers’ emotional intelligence and performance (without mediators) has established in H1 (β = .31, p < .001). After including stress and trust the path coefficients between emotional intelligence and performance became non-significant (β = .07, p = .10). Therefore, Hypotheses 6 and 7 are supported (see Fig. 1). We also employed the Bootstrapping procedure which provides a powerful method for gaining confidence limits for mediation relationships (Preacher & Hayes, 2008). As Table 4 shows, the direct effect of emotional intelligence to performance is not significant and the lower and upper bounds does include zero while the indirect paths are significant. These findings confirm the mediation effect of stress and trust. We also tested education, age, gender and work experience as control variables and found no significant influences. To test the moderation effect of role ambiguity (Hypothesis 8) we employed the product indicator approach suggested by Henseler and Chin (2010). First, we obtained R2 and path coefficient between role ambiguity and performance (β = -0.27, p < 0.001). Second, the moderator variable (role ambiguity) was included in the model. We obtained the interaction effect by carrying out the bootstrap procedure (Henseler & Chin, 2010). As Table 5 shows, role ambiguity negatively moderates the effect of stress on performance (β = -.15, p < 0.001). Therefore, only hypothesis 8 is supported. Fig. 2 shows the moderation effect of role conflict on the

The target group for the study was 630 software developers working in both large and medium-sized organisations in Australia. The questionnaires were pre-tested prior to their formal implementation. To improve the clarity of the questionnaires, six software engineers were invited to review the draft questionnaires. Paper-based surveys were administered among the participants. Participants received survey packs conveyed by a letter describing the aim of the study and ensuring voluntary and anonymous participation. We received 368 surveys. Incomplete questionnaires were excluded due to missing or incomplete data, the final sample comprised 363 respondents. The overall response rate was 53.17%. Of 363 respondents, 89% (n = 323) were male. The mean age of respondents was 35.6 years ranging from 22 to 54 years with 9.5 years of work experience on average (see Table 1). 3.3. Data analysis This study employed a Partial Least Square – Structural Equation Modelling (PLS-SEM), to test the theoretical framework for several reasons. First, it offers accurate estimates of the paths among constructs by analysing the structural and measurement models simultaneously (Chin, 1998). Second, Hair et al. (2011- p. 144) explained unlike SEM which is suitable for theory testing, PLS-SEM is an appropriate statistical method for exploratory studies, analysing complicated relationships and testing moderation effects (Chin, Marcolin, & Newsted, 2003; Ringle et al., 2012; Sarstedt, Ringle, & Hair, 2017). Finally, PLS-SEM has been widely used in information system studies to test complicated relationships like our research model (e.g. Rezvani et al., 2017). 3.4. Measurement model We assessed the measurement model by checking convergent and discriminant validity. For convergent validity we checked: Cronbach’s alpha, Composite Reliability (CR) and Average Variance Extracted (AVE). As Table 2 shows both CR and Cronbach’s alpha scores are beyond the cut off value of 0.70 and AVE is above the cut off value of 0.5 (Fornell & Larcker, 1981) which demonstrate strong reliability and Table 2 Convergent validity.

EI Performance Role Conflict Stress Trust

1

Cronbach’s Alpha

CR

AVE

0.877 0.712 0.862 0.855 0.815

0.897 0.820 0.894 0.889 0.863

0.789 0.533 0.548 0.537 0.514

145

International Journal of Information Management 48 (2019) 139–150

A. Rezvani and P. Khosravi

Fig. 1. Result.

better performance. We thus extend the literature on skills and competency of software developers by linking them to trust, stress, role ambiguity and performance. Thus, the objective of this research was to examine how emotional intelligence as an important competency and skills influences developers’ stress, trust and performance, the mechanisms by which this occurs, and how role ambiguity can increase the negative effects of stress on performance in ISD projects. Drawing on the AET, COR and role theory (Hobfoll, 2001; Merton, 1957; Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996), we hypothesized that emotional intelligence which reflects the ability to manage, understand and control the positive and negative emotions fosters trust and mitigates stress which results in increased performance. Trust and stress were also suggested to mediate the relationship between emotional intelligence and performance in ISD projects. Role ambiguity was also hypothesized to contribute to developers’ stress. The results indicate that enhancing developers’ skills and competency in particular emotional intelligence reduced the adverse effect of stress on performance and increased trust and reliance among software developers. Finally, the results show that role ambiguity increased developers’ stress in ISD projects.

Table 4 Bias-corrected bootstrap. Relationships

Bias-corrected bootstrap

P-Value

EI → Performance EI → Stress EI → Trust Stress → Performance Trust → Performance

Lower −.020 −.497 .337 −.301 .029

.107 .000 .000 .002 .020

Upper .186 0.30 .511 −.061 .268

Table 5 Moderating effect of role ambiguity. Row

Independent variables

Dependent variable

1 2 5 6 7 8 9 10

Role ambiguity Role ambiguity*Stress R2 ΔR2 Control variables Gender Age Education

−.27*** (t = 3.68) −.15*** (t = 4.49) .300 .070 (23%) .02 .06 .04

5.1. Theoretical implications Our first motivation to conduct the present study was to find the implications of emotional intelligence on developer stress and performance in ISD project. We contribute to the ISD projects by extending research on personal skills and competency of software developers and performance by identifying the direct influence of emotional intelligence on stress and performance. This gap in the IS literature is noteworthy, due to the negative influence of stress on performance and software quality (Windeler et al., 2017). Our work unites the project management, stress and emotional intelligence literature to shed light on the theoretical mechanisms by which software developers’ competency and skills can reduce stress. Generally, developers’ well-being is a significant element in ISD project performance and should be closely evaluated by managers. By leveraging the COR as the overarching theoretical lens for the relationship between emotional intelligence, stress and performance, this research provides insight not only on the influences of emotional intelligence on performance but also on the role of emotional intelligence as a pre-emptive approach to manage stress. Our results show that emotionally intelligent software developers are effective in managing the adverse effect of stress. Specifically, emotional intelligence mitigates stress which results in increased performance in a team, thereby shedding light on the factors that increase performance and decrease poor wellbeing in ISD project. It may not possible to eliminate stress but understanding the skills and competency of software developers by which they influence stress offers practitioners a preemptive approach to manage stress. Second, we extend the AET theory (Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996), advanced by Rezvani et al. (2016), by examining how emotionally intelligent software developers foster positive work attitude such as trust. In doing so, this study follows a change toward a social actor approach

Fig. 2. Moderation effect.

relationship between stress and performance. As Fig. 2 shows there are differences between the Low and High level of role conflict. When stress is high performance is lower than when stress is low, however, the high levels of role ambiguity have a lower level of performance. Role ambiguity, therefore, appears to make differences in high and low levels of stress. 5. Discussion By focusing on the technical skills of software developers on project outcome, prior work has overlooked developers’ social and emotional skills. This is challenging because ISD project success depends on the ability of software developers to manage several inputs to achieve 146

International Journal of Information Management 48 (2019) 139–150

A. Rezvani and P. Khosravi

takes into account the impact of role ambiguity on the project results and places emphasis on the necessity to manage this impact. These conclusions are the initial step in determining the particular facets of role ambiguity that have the potential to cause stress for software developers. It is also suggested that there is a positive correlation between role ambiguity and stress among software developers, which should be an indication to management teams that they should identify the kinds of role expectations that can lead to stressful scenarios. Based on this knowledge, managers can make more informed decisions in terms of the focus of their interventions targeted at managing stress. For example, instead of directing such interventions at all software developers within a team, it is possible to pinpoint those who are at greatest risk of developing stress by investigating the project environment and role demands in regard to each individual software developer.

in IS research. This study, therefore, contributes to better understanding of the skills and competency of software developers more specifically emotional intelligence on developers’ trust and performance in ISD project. By focusing on how personal skills and competency of software developers influence positive work attitude and performance, we shed light on how the ability to manage, understand and control positive and negative emotions in self and others affect developers’ performance. This positive association also concurs with the outcomes of prior studies on the subject of emotional intelligence and workplace attitudes in the food and defence sectors (e.g. Rezvani et al., 2016; Sy et al., 2006, Wong & Law, 2002). The conclusions of the present study will help to elucidate on this pivotal organisational procedure that has received minimal focus in terms of theoretical and empirical research. Due to the fact that it has been demonstrated that emotional intelligence can be influential in regard to trust and performance in the implementation of an ISD project, these findings can facilitate future research that intends to determine the possible performance-enhancing impacts of amalgamating emotional intelligence and positive workplace attitudes in the context of ISD projects. Third, the present research makes a valuable contribution to the literature on IS through the identification of the mediators (i.e., trust and stress) that enable emotional intelligence to impact performance levels in ISD projects. By viewing the issue from the theoretical perspective of AET and COR (Hobfoll, 2001; Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996), we contended that there is a relationship between emotional intelligence and performance and deduced that this association can be mediated through two paths. It was argued that trust is an attituderelated variable, which indicates that there is an emotional connection that links performance and emotional intelligence. Hence, trust is developed by software developers who have strong emotional intelligence with their colleagues by forming an emotional connection, and this relationship subsequently has a positive impact on performance in terms of their ability to communicate, troubleshoot, coordinate and work collaboratively. Additionally, on the basis of COR theory (Hobfoll, 2001), the results of the current study indicate that emotional intelligence is a pivotal factor in the process of reducing stress as well for enhanced performance in ISD projects. It has also been determined that emotional intelligence has both a direct and indirect impact on performance through decreasing stress and elevating trust. Although a certain degree of stress is expected when many workers collaborate on a project, emotional intelligence can enable software developers to create more effective work conditions, while also ensuring that their colleagues are supportive in the efforts to satisfy client demands and user specifications. Finally, further to comprehending the mediating role that stress and trust play between emotional intelligence and performance, it is also necessary to examine why stress negatively impact on performance in the context of ISD projects. Consequently, this was the driver behind our fourth motivation to comprehend the procedure through which stress impacts on performance. This will facilitate the process of determining aspects of intervention. Based on role theory, it is hypothesised in the present research that performance is influenced more by stress when there is role ambiguity is high. Thus, this indicates the significance of clarifying developers’ roles and expectations. In the circumstance that there is ambiguity among developers in terms of their responsibilities and accountabilities regarding the expected output, certain problems can emerge. This can cause one of the most significant issues in the process of software management and also enhances the possibility of ineffective performance and lack of success if there is no clarity or definition for every team members’ role (Liu et al., 2011). This concurs with the empirical findings of research that has examined the ramifications of role ambiguity in various contexts (e.g. Bowling et al., 2017; Qian, Wang, Han, Wang, & Wang, 2015). This work contributes to the literature on project management by determining the detrimental impact of role ambiguity on the stress and performance levels of developers. The present research builds on role theory, which

5.2. Practical implications The findings of this study have various important ramifications for the management of ISD projects. Firstly, this discussion began by emphasising the significance of emotional intelligence as a pro-active means of managing stress. The conclusions drawn here are the first stage in determining the particular competencies and abilities that software developers possess that have the potential to diminish stress in ISD projects. It is also suggested that emotional intelligence has a negative association with the stress of developers, which should alert the attention of management staff and team leaders to the kinds of abilities and competencies that are necessary when faced with stressful scenarios in ISD projects. Armed with this knowledge, managers can be more focused when targeting inventions aimed at controlling stress. Managers can be pro-active in their approach to implementing stress management interventions for software developers involved in ISD projects. This study has found that the ability to understand, manage, and regulate one’s own emotions as well as those of others are specific abilities and competencies that allow developers with the potential to induce stress to cope with the resulting pressure. Research has demonstrated that revenue growth can be augmented when trust is enhanced (Mohr & Puck, 2007). Positive attitudes in the work environment, including trust, can be developed by nurturing software developers’ levels of emotional intelligence. The study findings imply that when implementing ISD projects, consideration should be given to hiring developers who exhibit increased positivity in terms of work behaviours. It is also possible to enhance emotional intelligence through in-service training (Herpertz, Schütz, & Nezlek, 2016). In regard to the development of human resources, increased focus should be applied to the development of software developers’ emotional intelligence, as it appears to be a crucial component of social environments, creating the sense of trust and cooperation with external project teams. Specifically in working conditions that induce extreme stress like large-scale ISD projects. Lastly, role ambiguity seems to cause stress by asserting a detrimental impact on software developers’ perceptions of their roles as well as by generating conflicts in terms of role expectations. The ability to understand this connection between role ambiguity, stress and performance are particularly beneficial in the context of interventions by managers. Managers can be certain in the establishment of definite boundaries, which means that software developers will understand the scope of their duties. When running a project, it is also important that managers carefully assess the different tasks allocated to the individual team members in order to guarantee that there is no task conflict. Indeed, for projects with increased scope and complexity, it will be necessary for managers to review and revise these project expectations on a regular basis during the project duration. Additionally, if it is not possible to prevent role ambiguity from emerging, companies will be required to implement systems that enable managers to approach and find solutions to the problem of role ambiguity. 147

International Journal of Information Management 48 (2019) 139–150

A. Rezvani and P. Khosravi

Podsakoff, 2012) were employed. In addition, to increase the certain level of validity and decrease the method effect this study assured the anonymity of participants. Moreover, Harman’s single factor and marker variable were employed as suggested by prior studies to statistically test the CMB. Harman’s test showed more than one factor accounted for the majority of covariance. As suggested by Rönkkö and Ylitalo (2011) PLS marker variable analysis, was employed to check CMB. The model was tested with and without PLS marker variable. We found no significant differences among paths coefficient that suggesting CMB in this study, is not an issue.

5.3. Limitations and future research directions There are some limitations in our study that suggest the potential research opportunities for future studies. First, while this study justified specific mediators (stress and trust) between emotional intelligence–performance relationships, it was acknowledged that other mediators such as project managers’ leadership style, organisational culture and climate may amplify or reduce the influence of emotional intelligence on performance. In addition, future research may wish to find other drivers of stress and trust among software developers such as their project leader’s or team members’ technical skills. Second, consistent with extant theoretical and empirical evidence, we modelled role ambiguity as a moderator of the relationship between stress and performance in ISD project. An alternative perspective could view role ambiguity as an outcome of stress, as another avenue for future study. In addition, future research may wish to test other moderators. For instance, culture may amplify or reduce the influence of stress on performance. Third, defining project success/performance is a challenging task as it lies in the eye of beholder (Dwivedi et al., 2015; Hughes, Dwivedi, & Rana, 2017; Rezvani & Khosravi, 2018). In this regard, Hughes, Rana, and Dwivedi (2019) identified a list of critical success factors in IS projects such as use of skilled resources and stakeholders satisfaction. In this study, we measured time, cost and quality as a measure of performance. Future research may wish to test our model by including various success indicators. Forth, we only collected data from developers in this study. Future research may wish to collect data from various stakeholders and find out whether the role of EI is more important for performing specific tasks or it is more important for a specific role in ISD projects. Finally, the self-report measures were used to make the findings of this study subject to the common method bias. In order to decrease the Common Method Bias (CMB), the statistical and procedural techniques proposed by (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, &

6. Conclusions We presented and tested a model of emotional intelligence of software developers in ISD projects with the objective of understanding how emotional intelligence influences stress, trust and performance among software developers. We also examined the influence of role ambiguity as a moderator of the relationship between stress and performance. Our results showed that emotionally intelligent software developers are more likely to manage the negative influence of stress and are more likely to trust in other team members which result in increased performance. We also found that role ambiguity increases the negative influence of stress on performance in ISD projects. Our findings have implications for skills and competency of software developers as an intervention to mitigate stress and foster interpersonal trust in the ISD project. We encourage organizations to empower developers with emotional intelligence skills by providing an appropriate training program that associated with decreased stress and development of trust between software developers because studies have shown a pre-emptive approach to mitigate stress and foster trust among employees lead to revenue growth and productivity (Mohr & Puck, 2007).

Appendix A. Measurements

Emotional intelligence (Wong & Law, 2002) I have a good sense of why I have certain feelings most of the time I have good understanding of my own emotions I really understand what I feel I always know whether or not I am happy I always know my team members’ emotions from their behaviour I am a good observer of my team members’ emotions I am sensitive to the feelings and emotions of my team members I have good understanding of the emotions of my team members around me I always set goals for myself and then try my best to achieve them I always tell myself I am a competent person I am a self-motivated person I would always encourage myself to try my best I am able to control my temper and handle difficulties rationally I am quite capable of controlling my own emotions I can always calm down quickly when I am very angry I have good control of my own emotions Trust (Cook & Wall,1980) If I got into difficulties at work I know my team members would try and help me out I can trust my team members I work with to lend me a hand if I needed it Have full confidence in the skills of my team members Most of my team members can be relied upon to do as they say they will do I can rely on my team members not to make my job more difficult by careless work Performance Finish project within the budget Finish project on time Met quality standards Enable continuous improvement Stress (Stanton et al., 2001) Problems associated with my job have kept me awake at night. My job is emotionally exhausting. I feel burnt out because of my job My job frustrates me. I feel worn out at the end of a working day I have felt fidgety or nervous as a result of my job.

148

International Journal of Information Management 48 (2019) 139–150

A. Rezvani and P. Khosravi Emotional intelligence (Wong & Law, 2002) I am exhausted in the morning at the thought of another day at work I feel that every working hour is tiring for me Role ambiguity (House, Schuler, & Levanoni, 1983) My authority matches the responsibilities assigned to me within this team My responsibilities in the team are clearly defined I feel certain about how much authority I have within this team I have clear planned goals and objectives for my work in this team The planned goals and objectives for my work in this team are not clear Within this team, I know what is expected of me Within this team, I know what my responsibilities are

Dwivedi, Y. K., Wastell, D., Laumer, S., Henriksen, H. Z., Myers, M. D., Bunker, D., et al. (2015). Research on information systems failures and successes: Status update and future directions. Information Systems Frontiers, 17(1), 143–157. Eddy, P., Wertheim, E. H., Kingsley, M., & Wright, B. J. (2017). Associations between the effort-reward imbalance model of workplace stress and indices of cardiovascular health: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 83, 252–266. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. Journal of Marketing Research, 382–388. Gingnell, L., Franke, U., Lagerström, R., Ericsson, E., & Lilliesköld, J. (2014). Quantifying success factors for IT projects—An expert-based bayesian model. Information Systems Management, 31(1), 21–36. Gilboa, S., Shirom, A., Fried, Y., & Cooper, C. (2008). A meta‐analysis of work demand stressors and job performance: Examining main and moderating effects. Personnel Psychology, 61(2), 227–271. Glinow, M. A. V., Shapiro, D. L., & Brett, J. M. (2004). Can we talk, and should we? Managing emotional conflict in multicultural teams. Academy of Management Review, 29(4), 578–592. Goleman, D. (2000). Leadership that gets results. Harvard Business Review, 78(2), 4–17. Graziotin, D., Fagerholm, F., Wang, X., & Abrahamsson, P. (2017). Unhappy developers: Bad for themselves, bad for process, and bad for software product. MayProceedings of the 39th International Conference on Software Engineering Companion. IEEE Press362–364. Greenidge, D., Devonish, D., & Alleyne, P. (2014). The relationship between ability-based emotional intelligence and contextual performance and counterproductive work behaviors: A test of the mediating effects of job satisfaction. Human Performance, 27(3), 225–242. Gupta, M., George, J. F., & Xia, W. (2019). Relationships between IT department culture and agile software development practices: An empirical investigation. International Journal of Information Management, 44, 13–24. Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2011). PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet. The Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 19(2), 139–152. Hancock, P. A., & Szalma, J. L. (Eds.). (2008). Performance Under Stress. Ashgate Publishing, Ltd.. Harris, M. A., Brett, C. E., Johnson, W., & Deary, I. J. (2016). Personality stability from age 14 to age 77 years. Psychology and Aging, 31(8), 862. Henseler, J., & Chin, W. W. (2010). A comparison of approaches for the analysis of interaction effects between latent variables using partial least squares path modeling. Structural Equation Modeling, 17(1), 82–109. Herpertz, S., Schütz, A., & Nezlek, J. (2016). Enhancing emotion perception, a fundamental component of emotional intelligence: Using multiple-group SEM to evaluate a training program. Personality and Individual Differences, 95, 11–19. Hertel, G., Niedner, S., & Herrmann, S. (2003). Motivation of software developers in Open Source projects: An Internet-based survey of contributors to the Linux kernel. Research Policy, 32(7), 1159–1177. Hobfoll, S. E. (1989). Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualizing stress. The American Psychologist, 44(3), 513. Hobfoll, S. E. (2001). The influence of culture, community, and the nested‐self in the stress process: Advancing conservation of resources theory. Applied Psychology, 50(3), 337–421. Hobfoll, S. E., & Shirom, A. (2001). Conservation of resources theory: Applications to stress and management in the workplace. In R. T. Golembiewski (Ed.). Handbook of organization behavior (pp. 57–81). (2nd ed.). New York: Dekker. Hogg, M. A., & Terry, D. J. (2014). Social identity processes in organizational contexts. Psychology Press. Holmgreen, L., Tirone, V., Gerhart, J., & Hobfoll, S. E. (2017). Conservation of resources theory. The handbook of stress and health: A guide to research and practice, 443–457. House, R. J., Schuler, R. S., & Levanoni, E. (1983). Role conflict and ambiguity scales: Reality or artifacts? Journal of Applied Psychology, 68(2), 334–337. Hsu, J. S., Hung, Y. W., Chen, Y. H., & Huang, H. H. (2013). Antecedents and consequences of user coproduction in information system development projects. Project Management Journal, 44(2), 67–87. Hsu, J. S. C., Li, Y., & Sun, H. (2017). Exploring the interaction between vertical and shared leadership in information systems development projects. International Journal of Project Management, 35(8), 1557–1572. Hughes, D. L., Dwivedi, Y. K., & Rana, N. P. (2017). Mapping IS failure factors on PRINCE2® stages: An application of interpretive ranking process (IRP). Production Planning and Control, 28(9), 776–790. Hughes, D. L., Dwivedi, Y. K., Rana, N. P., & Simintiras, A. C. (2016). Information systems project failure–analysis of causal links using interpretive structural modelling. Production Planning and Control, 27(16), 1313–1333. Hughes, D. L., Rana, N. P., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2019). Elucidation of IS project success factors: An interpretive structural modelling approach. Annals of Operations Research,

References Aladwani, A. M. (2016). Corruption as a source of e-Government projects failure in developing countries: A theoretical exposition. International Journal of Information Management, 36(1), 105–112. Anthony‐McMann, P. E., Ellinger, A. D., Astakhova, M., & Halbesleben, J. R. (2017). Exploring different operationalizations of employee engagement and their relationships with workplace stress and burnout. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 28(2), 163–195. Arsenio, W. F., & Loria, S. (2014). Coping with negative emotions: Connections with adolescents’ academic performance and stress. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 175(1), 76–90. Ashkanasy, N. M., & Daus, C. S. (2005). Rumors of the death of emotional intelligence in organizational behavior are vastly exaggerated. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26(4), 441–452. Ashkanasy, N. M., & Dorris, A. D. (2017). Emotions in the workplace. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 4, 67–90. Ayoko, O. B., Callan, V. J., & Härtel, C. E. (2008). The influence of team emotional intelligence climate on conflict and team members’ reactions to conflict. Small Group Research, 39(2), 121–149. Barczak, G., Lassk, F., & Mulki, J. (2010). Antecedents of team creativity: An examination of team emotional intelligence, team trust and collaborative culture. Creativity and Innovation Management, 19(4), 332–345. Bell, A. S., Rajendran, D., & Theiler, S. (2012). Job stress, wellbeing, work-life balance and work-life conflict among australian academics. E-Journal of Applied Psychology, 8(1). Blascovich, J. (2008). Challenge, threat, and health. In J. Y. Shah, & W. L. Gardner (Eds.). Handbook of Motivation Science (pp. 481–493). New York, NY: US: The Guilford Press. Bolger, N., & Zuckerman, A. (1995). A framework for studying personality in the stress process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(5), 890. Bowen, K. S., Uchino, B. N., Birmingham, W., Carlisle, M., Smith, T. W., & Light, K. C. (2014). The stress-buffering effects of functional social support on ambulatory blood pressure. Health Psychology, 33(11), 1440. Bowling, N. A., Khazon, S., Alarcon, G. M., Blackmore, C. E., Bragg, C. B., Hoepf, M. R., et al. (2017). Building better measures of role ambiguity and role conflict: The validation of new role stressor scales. Work and Stress, 31(1), 1–23. Buvik, M. P., & Tvedt, S. D. (2017). The influence of project commitment and team commitment on the relationship between trust and knowledge sharing in project teams. Project Management Journal, 48(2), 5–21. Chilton, M. A., Hardgrave, B. C., & Armstrong, D. J. (2005). Person-job cognitive style fit for software developers: The effect on strain and performance. Journal of Management Information Systems, 22(2), 193–226. Chin, W. W. (1998). The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. Modern methods for business research, 295(2), 295–336. Chin, W. W., Marcolin, B. L., & Newsted, P. R. (2003). A partial least squares latent variable modeling approach for measuring interaction effects: Results from a Monte Carlo simulation study and an electronic-mail emotion/adoption study. Information Systems Research, 14(2), 189–217. Christie, A. M., Jordan, P. J., & Troth, A. C. (2015). Trust antecedents: Emotional intelligence and perceptions of others. The International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 23(1), 89–101. Cook, J., & Wall, T. (1980). New work attitude measures of trust, organizational commitment and personal need non-fulfilment. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 53, 39–52. Colquitt, J. A., Scott, B. A., & LePine, J. A. (2007). Trust, trustworthiness, and trust propensity: A meta-analytic test of their unique relationships with risk taking and job performance. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(4), 909. Costa, A. C., & Anderson, N. (2011). Measuring trust in teams: Development and validation of a multifaceted measure of formative and reflective indicators of team trust. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 20(1), 119–154. Cram, W. A., & Wiener, M. (2018). Perceptions of control legitimacy in information systems development. Information Technology and People, 31(3), 712–740. Cruz, S., da Silva, F. Q., & Capretz, L. F. (2015). Forty years of research on personality in software engineering: A mapping study. Computers in Human Behavior, 46, 94–113. De Clercq, D., Haq, I. U., & Azeem, M. U. (2018). Self-efficacy to spur job performance: Roles of job-related anxiety and perceived workplace incivility. Management Decision, 56(4), 891–907. Diallo, A., & Thuillier, D. (2005). The success of international development projects, trust and communication: An African perspective. International Journal of Project Management, 23(3), 237–252. Dunn, J. R., & Schweitzer, M. E. (2005). Feeling and believing: The influence of emotion on trust. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88(5), 736.

149

International Journal of Information Management 48 (2019) 139–150

A. Rezvani and P. Khosravi

medium-scale businesses. Oncotarget, 8(32), 53041. Ostberg, J. P., Graziotin, D., Wagner, S., & Derntl, B. (2017). Towards the assessment of stress and emotional responses of a salutogenesis-enhanced software tool using psychophysiological measurements. MayProceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Emotion Awareness in Software Engineering. IEEE Press22–25. Ozer, M., & Vogel, D. (2015). Contextualized relationship between knowledge sharing and performance in software development. Journal of Management Information Systems, 32(2), 134–161. Park, J. G., & Lee, J. (2014). Knowledge sharing in information systems development projects: Explicating the role of dependence and trust. International Journal of Project Management, 32(1), 153–165. Pinto, J. K., Slevin, D. P., & English, B. (2009). Trust in projects: An empirical assessment of owner/contractor relationships. International Journal of Project Management, 27(6), 638–648. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2012). Sources of method bias in social science research and recommendations on how to control it. Annual review of psychology, 63, 539–569. Por, J., Barriball, L., Fitzpatrick, J., & Roberts, J. (2011). Emotional intelligence: Its relationship to stress, coping, well-being and professional performance in nursing students. Nurse Education Today, 31(8), 855–860. Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40(3), 879–891. Puusa, A., & Tolvanen, U. (2006). Organizational identity and trust. EJBO-Electronic Journal of Business Ethics and Organization Studies. Qian, J., Wang, H., Han, Z. R., Wang, J., & Wang, H. (2015). Mental health risks among nurses under abusive supervision: The moderating roles of job role ambiguity and patients’ lack of reciprocity. International Journal of Mental Health Systems, 9(1), 22. Rezvani, A., & Khosravi, P. (2018). A comprehensive assessment of project success within various large projects. The Journal of Modern Project Management, 6(1). Rezvani, A., Barrett, R., & Khosravi, P. (2018). Investigating the relationships among team emotional intelligence, trust, conflict and team performance. Team Performance Management: An International Journal. Rezvani, A., Khosravi, P., & Ashkanasy, N. M. (2018). Examining the interdependencies among emotional intelligence, trust, and performance in infrastructure projects: A multilevel study. International Journal of Project Management, 36(8), 1034–1046. Rezvani, A., Chang, A., Wiewiora, A., Ashkanasy, N. M., Jordan, P. J., & Zolin, R. (2016). Manager emotional intelligence and project success: The mediating role of job satisfaction and trust. International Journal of Project Management, 34(7), 1112–1122. Rezvani, A., Dong, L., & Khosravi, P. (2017). Promoting the continuing usage of strategic information systems: The role of supervisory leadership in the successful implementation of enterprise systems. International Journal of Information Management, 37(5), 417–430. Rode, J. C., Mooney, C. H., Arthaud‐Day, M. L., Near, J. P., Baldwin, T. T., Rubin, R. S., et al. (2007). Emotional intelligence and individual performance: Evidence of direct and moderated effects. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 28(4), 399–421. Rönkkö, M., & Ylitalo, J. (2011). PLS marker variable approach to diagnosing and controlling for method variance. ICIS 2011 Proceedings8. Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., & Hair, J. F. (2017). Partial least squares structural equation modeling. Handbook of Market Research, 1–40. Schutte, N. S., Malouff, J. M., Hall, L. E., Haggerty, D. J., Cooper, J. T., Golden, C. J., et al. (1998). Development and validation of a measure of emotional intelligence. Personality and individual differences, 25(2), 167–177. Serrador, P., & Pinto, J. K. (2015). Does Agile work?—A quantitative analysis of agile project success. International Journal of Project Management, 33(5), 1040–1051. Sheldon, O. J., Dunning, D., & Ames, D. R. (2014). Emotionally unskilled, unaware, and uninterested in learning more: Reactions to feedback about deficits in emotional intelligence. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 99(1), 125. Stanton, J. M., Balzer, W. K., Smith, P. C., Parra, L. F., & Ironson, G. (2001). A general measure of work stress: The stress in general scale. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 61(5), 866–888. Stephens, J. P., & Carmeli, A. (2016). The positive effect of expressing negative emotions on knowledge creation capability and performance of project teams. International Journal of Project Management, 34(5), 862–873. Subramanian, G. H., Jiang, J. J., & Klein, G. (2007). Software quality and IS project performance improvements from software development process maturity and IS implementation strategies. Journal of Systems and Software, 80(4), 616–627. Troth, A. C., Jordan, P. J., Lawrence, S. A., & Tse, H. H. (2012). A multilevel model of emotional skills, communication performance, and task performance in teams. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 33(5), 700–722. Tsang, E. W., & Williams, J. N. (2012). Generalization and induction: Misconceptions, clarifications, and a classification of induction. MIS Quarterly, 729–748. Tyler Boden, M., & Berenbaum, H. (2007). Emotional awareness, gender, and suspiciousness. Cognition and Emotion, 21(2), 268–280. Weiss, H. M., & Cropanzano, R. (1996). Affective events theory: A theoretical discussion of the structure, causes and consequences of affective experiences at work. Windeler, J. B., Maruping, L., & Venkatesh, V. (2017). Technical systems development risk factors: The role of empowering leadership in lowering developers’ stress. Information Systems Research, 28(4), 775–796. Wong, C. S., & Law, K. S. (2002). The effects of leader and follower emotional intelligence on performance and attitude: An exploratory study. The Leadership Quarterly, 13(3), 243–274. Wu, G., Liu, C., Zhao, X., & Zuo, J. (2017). Investigating the relationship between communication-conflict interaction and project success among construction project teams. International Journal of Project Management, 35(8), 1466–1482.

1–32. Hung, Y. W., Hsu, S. C., Su, Z. Y., & Huang, H. H. (2014). Countering user risk in information system development projects. International Journal of Information Management, 34(4), 533–545. Jiang, W. P., Zhang, Q., & Le, Y. (2011). Occurrence and influence of trust in construction projects from the view of clients. Journal Engineering Management, 25(2), 177–181. Jiang, W. P., Lu, Y. J., & Le, Y. (2016). Trust and project success: A twofold perspective between owners and contractors. Journal Engineering Management, 32(6). Jordan, P. J., Dasborough, M. T., Daus, C. S., & Ashkanasy, N. M. (2010). A call to context. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 3(2), 145–148. Jordan, P. J., & Troth, A. C. (2004). Managing emotions during team problem solving: Emotional intelligence and conflict resolution. Human Performance, 17(2), 195–218. Khamisa, N., Peltzer, K., Ilic, D., & Oldenburg, B. (2016). Work related stress, burnout, job satisfaction and general health of nurses: A follow‐up study. International Journal of Nursing Practice, 22(6), 538–545. Khamisa, N., Oldenburg, B., Peltzer, K., & Ilic, D. (2015). Work related stress, burnout, job satisfaction and general health of nurses. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 12(1), 652–666. Khosravi, P., Rezvani, A., & Ahmad, M. N. (2013). Does Organizational Identification Lead to Information System Success? World Applied Sciences Journal, 21(3), 402–408. Krysinska, K., & Lester, D. (2010). Post-traumatic stress disorder and suicide risk: A systematic review. Archives of Suicide Research, 14(1), 1–23. Landa, J. M. A., López-Zafra, E., Martos, M. P. B., & del Carmen Aguilar-Luzón, M. (2008). The relationship between emotional intelligence, occupational stress and health in nurses: a questionnaire survey. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 45(6), 888–901. Lazarus, R. S. (1966). Psychological stress and the coping process. New York, NY: US: McGraw-Hill. Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Coping and adaptation. The handbook of behavioral medicine 282325. Licorish, S. A., & MacDonell, S. G. (2017). Exploring software developers’ work practices: Task differences, participation, engagement, and speed of task resolution. Information & Management, 54(3), 364–382. Lindsjørn, Y., Sjøberg, D. I., Dingsøyr, T., Bergersen, G. R., & Dybå, T. (2016). Teamwork quality and project success in software development: A survey of agile development teams. The Journal of Systems and Software, 122, 274–286. Liu, J. Y. C., & Chiu, G. C. T. (2016). Influence of project partnering on stakeholder role ambiguity and project manager risk perception in information system projects. Project Management Journal, 47(6), 94–110. Liu, S., & Wang, L. (2016). Influence of managerial control on performance in medical information system projects: The moderating role of organizational environment and team risks. International Journal of Project Management, 34(1), 102–116. Liu, J. Y., Chiang, J. C., Yang, M. H., & Klein, G. (2011). Partnering effects on user–developer conflict and role ambiguity in information system projects. Information and Software Technology, 53(7), 722–729. Lovallo, W. R. (2015). Stress and health: Biological and psychological interactions. Sage publications. MacKinnon, D. P., & Luecken, L. J. (2008). How and for whom? Mediation and moderation in health psychology. Health Psychology, 27(2S) S99. Maqbool, R., Sudong, Y., Manzoor, N., & Rashid, Y. (2017). The impact of emotional intelligence, project managers’ competencies, and transformational leadership on project success: An empirical perspective. Project Management Journal, 48(3), 58–75. Matthews, K. A., & Gump, B. B. (2002). Chronic work stress and marital dissolution increase risk of posttrial mortality in men from the Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial. Archives of Internal Medicine, 162(3), 309–315. Mayer, J., & Salovey, P. (1997). What is emotional intelligence? In P. Salovey, & D. Sluyter (Eds.). emotional development and emotional intelligence: Implications for educators. (pp. 3–31). New York: Basic Books. Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P., Caruso, D. R., & Sitarenios, G. (2003). Measuring emotional intelligence with the MSCEIT V2.0. Emotion, 3, 97–105. Mayer, J. D., Roberts, R. D., & Barsade, S. G. (2008). Human abilities: Emotional intelligence. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 507–536. Mayer, R. C., & Gavin, M. B. (2005). Trust in management and performance: who minds the shop while the employees watch the boss? Academy of Management Journal, 48(5), 874–888. McCraty, R., Atkinson, M., & Tomasino, D. (2003). Impact of a workplace stress reduction program on blood pressure and emotional health in hypertensive employees. The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine, 9(3), 355–369. McEvily, B., Perrone, V., & Zaheer, A. (2003). Trust as an organizing principle. Organization Science, 14(1), 91–103. McManus, J., & Wood-Harper, T. (2007). Understanding the sources of information systems project failure. Merton, R. K. (1957). The role-set: Problems in sociological theory. The British Journal of Sociology, 8(2), 106–120. Moorman, C., Deshpande, R., & Zaltman, G. (1993). Factors affecting trust in market research relationships. Journal of Market, 57(1), 81–101. Moe, N. B., & Šmite, D. (2008). Understanding a lack of trust in Global Software Teams: A multiple-case study. Software Process: Improvement and Practice, 13(3), 217–231. Mohr, A. T., & Puck, J. F. (2007). Role conflict, general manager job satisfaction and stress and the performance of IJVs. European Management Journal, 25(1), 25–35. Müller, R., & Turner, J. R. (2007). Matching the project manager’s leadership style to project type. International Journal of Project Management, 25(1), 21–32. Müller, R., & Turner, R. (2010). Leadership competency profiles of successful project managers. International Journal of Project Management, 28(5), 437–448. Nakata, A. (2017). Long working hours, job satisfaction, and depressive symptoms: A community-based cross-sectional study among Japanese employees in small-and

150