The Impact of Perceived Leadership Effectiveness and Emotional Intelligence on Employee Satisfaction in the Workplace

Abstract

In recent years, the role of leadership in increasing employee satisfaction (ES) has received significant attention, with emotional intelligence (EI) emerging as a key factor in promoting effective leadership (EL) in organizations. Although research has demonstrated the positive impact of EI on workplace outcomes, the interplay between perceived LE, EI, and ES remains underexplored. This research is part of this theme and aims to investigate the influence of the perceived levels of LE and EI of SE leaders in the work environment. This study highlights the importance of integrating emotionally intelligent leaders into organizational structures to improve SE, which subsequently contributes to organizational success. A quantitative methodology was used, with data collected through the application of three questionnaires: one to assess the perception of LE, another to measure EI, and a third to assess SE. The results indicated a positive correlation between all constructs. Employees with more favorable perceptions of their leaders’ EI levels and leadership effectiveness reported greater workplace satisfaction. We also found that LE and EI significantly predicted ES. These findings emphasize the need to foster leadership that is not only competent, but also emotionally intelligent to increase workplace satisfaction and productivity.

1. Introduction

In recent years, Human Resource (HR) management in the organizational context has become increasingly significant, largely due to the realization that the success or failure of an organization ultimately depends on its people [1]. Employees are no longer regarded as mere costs to companies, but rather as a vital investment. Organizations have come to recognize the importance of ensuring employee satisfaction in the workplace as a means of retaining talent and preventing the loss of top professionals [2]. The role of the leader in this process has become increasingly pivotal, as research has demonstrated that emotionally intelligent leadership is a crucial factor in promoting organizational satisfaction and well-being. In turn, these factors are reflected in employee performance, productivity, and commitment levels [3].

The current state of the art in leadership research highlights the critical role of EI in shaping effective leadership. Emotional intelligence, defined by Mayer and Salovey [4] as the ability to perceive, use, understand, and manage emotions adaptively, is widely recognized as a key predictor of organizational success [5]. Goleman [6] also emphasized the importance of EI skills, such as empathy, self-regulation, and social skills, in creating positive work environments and promoting collaboration. Numerous studies (e.g., [7,8,9]) have established that leaders with high levels of EI positively influence employee satisfaction, well-being, and organizational performance [10].

Despite these advances, there are still significant gaps in the literature. Although the relationship between EI and workplace outcomes is well documented, limited research has explored the nuanced interplay between perceived EI, EI, and ES. Most studies focus on isolated constructs rather than investigating their combined effects. Furthermore, the extent to which employees’ perceptions of their leaders’ EI and LE influence their satisfaction remains understudied, especially in diverse organizational contexts. This represents a critical gap, as perceptions often drive workplace behavior and dynamics.

The novelty of this study lies in its integrative approach, which examines both NE and EI as predictors of SE. By focusing on employee perceptions, this research provides a more comprehensive understanding of how observable leadership behaviors impact workplace satisfaction.

This research therefore addresses a critical gap in the literature by exploring the combined influence of perceived LE and EI on SE. It aims to contribute to the ongoing dialogue on effective leadership by demonstrating the importance of promoting emotionally intelligent and strategically competent leaders. These findings not only advance theoretical understanding, but also provide practical recommendations for organizations seeking to increase employee satisfaction and productivity.

2. Literature Review and Hypotheses Formulation

Leadership, defined as the capacity to influence, motivate, and direct subordinates towards the attainment of organizational objectives, is widely acknowledged as a pivotal determinant of organizational success [11]. However, contemporary leadership is more intricate than the straightforward act of issuing directives [12]. As suggested by Almeida et al. [13], effective leadership entails a series of social and dynamic processes that necessitate the ability of leaders to adapt their management style to the ever-changing landscape of the labor market. Consequently, the effectiveness of leadership is inextricably linked to the leader’s capacity to align their management style with the evolving needs of their employees and the ever-changing context in which they operate [14]. It is this ability to adapt that distinguishes effective leaders, as they recognize that their success hinges on harmonizing individual employee objectives with the broader organizational goals [15].

One area of growing interest in leadership studies is the role of EI in leader behavior and how it influences LE [8]. Mayer and Salovey [4] were pioneers in conceptualizing EI, defining it as the ability to perceive, use, understand, and manage emotions in an adaptive way. This ability allows individuals not only to effectively manage their own emotional states, but also to positively influence the emotions of others. In an organizational context, EI proves to be a critical competence for leadership, as emotionally intelligent leaders are better able to create a positive work environment where employees feel valued, motivated, and satisfied [16]. Goleman [6], one of the foremost proponents of EI, argues that an emotionally intelligent leader can not only identify the emotions of their subordinates, but also shape these emotions to foster a collaborative and productive work environment. These behaviors foster trust among team members, motivate employees, and create an environment conducive to collaboration and satisfaction. The dynamic interplay between EI and LE becomes evident as emotionally intelligent leaders adapt their approaches to align with their teams’ needs, thereby enhancing perceptions of their effectiveness [17].

While employees’ perceptions of their leader’s EI represent only a subset of the leader’s comprehensive emotional capabilities, these visible expressions of EI are critical in shaping organizational outcomes [8]. Such observed emotional behaviors directly impact employees’ perceptions of leadership effectiveness and play a pivotal role in fostering collaboration, satisfaction, and a sense of belonging [3]. For instance, leaders who display empathy and emotional regulation are more likely to be perceived as approachable and supportive, which enhances their effectiveness and strengthens organizational commitment [17]. Based on these premises, the first hypothesis was formulated:

Hypothesis 1: 

Employees’ perceptions of the leader’s EI levels are correlated with LE.

EI comprises five primary dimensions: self-awareness, self-regulation, self-motivation, empathy, and social skills [13]. These dimensions are integral to understanding how EI influences LE and, in turn, ES [18].

Self-awareness refers to the leader’s ability to recognize their own emotional states and understand the impact these have on others [19]. Leaders with high levels of self-awareness are more likely to make thoughtful decisions and adjust their behavior according to the emotional needs of their team [20]. This skill is particularly important in stressful or conflict situations, where the ability to manage one’s emotions can be the determining factor between success and failure in problem-solving. Moreover, Ashkanasy and Daus [21] assert that self-awareness enhances leaders’ ability to act authentically, fostering trust and credibility among employees.

Self-regulation, on the other hand, involves controlling emotional impulses and the ability to adjust emotions constructively [22]. A leader who can self-regulate is more resilient and less likely to react impulsively under pressure, which helps maintain a stable and focused work environment. Antonopoulou [23] suggests that self-regulation enables leaders to remain calm and composed, creating an atmosphere of psychological safety that contributes to employee well-being and satisfaction.

Self-motivation, which refers to the leader’s ability to internally motivate themselves to achieve their goals regardless of adversity, is another essential component of EI [24]. Highly motivated leaders are more persistent and resilient, serving as role models for their employees and encouraging them to stay motivated even in difficult times. Herzberg’s [25,26] two-factor theory aligns with this perspective, indicating that intrinsic motivation in leaders positively impacts employee satisfaction through enhanced workplace morale.

Empathy, one of the most important competencies in emotionally intelligent leadership, refers to the leader’s ability to recognize and understand the emotions of others [27]. Empathetic leaders can build stronger connections with their subordinates, fostering an environment of trust and collaboration. Studies by Fianko et al. [28] demonstrate that empathetic leaders are better equipped to address employee concerns and create a supportive work environment, thereby enhancing satisfaction.

Lastly, social skills refer to the leader’s ability to build and maintain effective relationships in the workplace, facilitating cooperation and conflict resolution [29]. Leaders who excel in social skills promote team cohesion and foster open communication channels, which are essential for creating a harmonious and productive workplace environment [30]. These competencies enable leaders to mediate conflicts and align team efforts toward shared organizational goals.

The relationship between a leader’s EI and ES has been widely studied, and the literature reveals a positive association between these two variables. Longitudinal studies have shown that leaders with high levels of EI can directly influence their subordinates’ satisfaction, promoting a more harmonious and productive work environment [31,32]. According to Alwali and Alwali [33], emotionally intelligent leaders enhance ES by effectively managing workplace stressors and ensuring that employees feel valued and supported. A leader’s ability to manage emotions—both their own and those of their employees—allows them to create a more positive work environment, which increases workers’ satisfaction and commitment levels [34]. This is supported by the findings of Krén and Séllei [35], which indicate that EI in leaders has a significant impact on employee performance, satisfaction, and retention. These effects are consolidated by the leader’s ability to promote a culture of respect and inclusion, reinforcing positive dynamics in the work environment. Based on this evidence, the second hypothesis was outlined:

Hypothesis 2: 

The perception of the leader’s EI influences ES.

ES, in turn, is a determining factor for organizational performance. Phuong and Tran [36] define this construct as the set of emotional responses that connect the worker to their professional activity. Organizations that can foster ES tend to increase productivity and reduce turnover rates [25,37].

Leaders who establish a close relationship with their subordinates, valuing their work and showing interest in their needs and expectations, can create a work environment where employees feel more committed and motivated to achieve organizational goals [17]. The literature indicates that ES is strongly influenced by employees’ perception of LE, where greater trust in leadership leads to higher employee commitment toward organizational objectives [38]. Based on the aforementioned literature, the third hypothesis was formulated:

Hypothesis 3: 

The perception of LE influences ES.

The leader’s EI not only directly impacts ES, but also has an indirect effect on organizational performance. When employees perceive that the leader is emotionally intelligent, they are more willing to collaborate, share ideas, and work as a team to achieve organizational goals [39,40]. The ability to manage emotions and foster a positive work environment also has a direct impact on the health and well-being of employees, reducing stress and anxiety levels and promoting a higher quality of life [41]. On the other hand, leaders lacking adequate emotional skills may face significant challenges in managing their teams. When leaders focus exclusively on results and neglect the emotional well-being of their employees, the work environment can become toxic, leading to increased dissatisfaction, absenteeism, and turnover [42]. Leaders with low levels of EI are less likely to create a collaborative work environment and are more likely to manage rather than lead, which can result in lower employee engagement and performance [43].

Another important aspect of the discussion on EI and effective leadership is its positive impact on teamwork [44]. Emotionally intelligent leaders foster an environment of mutual support and trust, where employees feel more comfortable sharing ideas and collaborating on projects, which is reflected in higher performance and satisfaction levels. Navas and Vijayakumar [45] argue that EI is one of the main factors contributing to team cohesion, as it allows the leader to establish an emotional connection with their subordinates, creating a sense of belonging and commitment. When employees perceive that the leader is emotionally intelligent and cares about their well-being, they are more likely to engage in organizational citizenship behaviors, such as helping colleagues, sharing knowledge, and contributing to the team’s success [46,47].

Given the impact of EI on LE and ES, it becomes clear that organizations should invest in developing the emotional competencies of their leaders [48,49]. Emotionally intelligent leaders are better equipped to create a positive work environment, foster cooperation, and motivate their employees to achieve organizational goals [34]. Conversely, the lack of EI can lead to increased dissatisfaction, absenteeism, and turnover, compromising organizational performance [42]. Therefore, organizations that aim for long-term success should invest in developing the emotional competencies of their leaders, promoting effective and emotionally intelligent leadership that places employee well-being at the center of the organizational strategy [3]. Based on this evidence, the fourth research hypothesis was formulated:

Hypothesis 4: 

The likelihood of employees being more satisfied with their job varies according to their perception of LE and the leader’s EI levels.

The relationship between the variables under study and the respective research hypotheses is graphically represented in Figure 1.

3. Materials and Methods

In this investigation, a quantitative approach anchored in a hypothetico-deductive perspective was adopted. It is a cross-sectional study in which data were collected from a convenience sample. Additionally, the snowball sampling method was employed, wherein participants invited their contacts to participate in the study. This procedure allowed for the expansion of the sample and access to individuals who otherwise would not have been identified [39].

The target population consisted of employees working under an employment relationship and aged over 18 years. All individuals meeting these criteria were included in this study, ensuring that the sample was representative of this specific group.

The statistical analysis was conducted using SPSS version 29. The tests performed included two-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) to examine interactions between variables and multiple regression analysis to assess the predictive influence of IV on the DV. These methodologies ensured a robust examination of the data, providing a comprehensive understanding of the relationships between the constructs under study.

3.1. Sample

This study included 518 employed individuals, aged between 19 and 60 years (M = 39.57; SD = 10.36), with 70.7% being male.

Table 1. Sociodemographic characterization of participants (N = 518).

Variables	N	%
Sex
Male	366	70.7
Female	152	29.3
Age group (M = 39.57; SD = 10.36)
30 years old and below	120	23.2
Between 31 and 40 years old	135	26.1
Between 41 and 50 years old	187	36.1
51 years old and over	76	14.7
Education Level
Less than bachelor’s degree	154	29.7
Bachelor’s degree	206	39.8
Higher than bachelor’s degree	158	30.5
Seniority (M = 11.61; SD = 8.12)
Less than or equal to 5 years	147	28.4
Between 6 and 10 years	113	21.8
Between 11 and 15 years	116	22.4
Greater than or equal to 16 years	142	27.4

Note. M = mean; SD = standard deviation. Source: Authors’ own work.

presents the personal and professional characteristics of the sample.

3.2. Measures

Leadership effectiveness. This was assessed using ten items developed by Reis and Lopes [50] (e.g., My direct supervisor instills confidence in me). The results were calculated by summing all items, with higher average scores indicating a more positive perception of LE by the employees.

Emotional intelligence. To measure EI, the questionnaire developed by Schutte et al. [51] was used. This instrument includes 33 questions that assess four dimensions: (i) perceiving emotions (e.g., My direct supervisor/leader is aware of their emotions); (ii) managing one’s own emotions (e.g., My direct supervisor/leader is able to control their emotions); (iii) managing others’ emotions (e.g., My direct supervisor/leader easily trusts other people); and (iv) using emotions (e.g., My direct supervisor/leader shares their emotions with others). In this study, Goleman’s [6] proposed nomenclature was adopted, specifically: self-awareness, self-regulation, empathy, and social skills.

Employee satisfaction. The degree of ES in the workplace was assessed using ten items developed by Reis and Lopes [50] (e.g., I have an optimistic outlook on the company). The result was calculated by summing up all items, with higher scores indicating greater employee satisfaction.

Following Lozano et al.’s [52] recommendation, a seven-point Likert scale was used across all instruments. According to the authors, increasing the number of response options improves the internal consistency of the instruments.

3.3. Procedure

The link to the questionnaire was sent to the researchers’ professional contacts. The email contained a brief summary of the study, information about informed consent, and a guarantee that anonymity and confidentiality would be maintained. Participants were informed about the purpose of the research and their right to withdraw at any stage without any consequences. Data collection was conducted between September and November 2024.

It is important to note that prior to data collection, a pilot test was conducted with 15 individuals to assess the adequacy and clarity of the items, including the instructions and the response scale used. This study was previously reviewed and approved by the Ethics Committee of ISG/CIGEST ensuring compliance with ethical guidelines for research involving human participants. This approval underscores the study’s commitment to ethical standards, including participant confidentiality, informed consent, and voluntary participation.

4. Results

The results revealed that all constructs are positively correlated (

Table 2. Analysis of the correlation between the variables under study.

	M	SD	1	2	3
Employee satisfaction in the workplace	1.97 1	0.79	(0.89)
Employee perception about LE	2.02 1	0.83	0.815 **	(0.97)
Employee perception about EI	2.05 1	0.83	0.369 **	0.196 **	(0.86)

Note. N = 243; ** p < 0.001; M = mean; SD = standard deviation. ¹ Scale ranging from 1 to 7; Cronbach’s Alpha is in brackets. Source: Authors’ own work.

), suggesting that the more positive the perception of LE and the leader’s EI levels, the greater the ES in the workplace. Hypothesis 1, which posited the existence of a positive correlation between the leader’s EI levels and LE, was supported by the results obtained (r = 0.196, p < 0.001).

To validate the second, third, and fourth research hypotheses, multiple linear regression analyses were conducted using the Enter method. This approach allowed us to determine the percentage of the dependent variable (DV) that is explained by the independent variables (IVs), as well as the contribution of each IV in predicting the variation of the DV. The objective was to assess the influence of perception regarding the leader’s EI levels and LE on ES in the workplace. It was found that the linear model is significant [F_{(3, 514)} = 7.967, p < 0.001], with 55.5% of the variation in the DV being explained by the two IVs included in the model. Furthermore, it was concluded that employees’ perception of the leader’s EI levels positively influences their job satisfaction (β = 0.246, t = 8.207, p < 0.001), thereby supporting Hypothesis 2. A β value of 0.246 for EI indicates that for every one standard deviation increase in employees’ perception of the leader’s EI, there is a 0.246 standard deviation increase in ES.

Additionally, it was found that the perception of LE positively influences ES (β = 0.657, t = 21.920, p < 0.001), validating Hypothesis 3. These results suggest that the more positive employees’ perceptions of LE and the leader’s EI levels, the higher their satisfaction in the workplace. A β value of 0.657 for LE shows that leadership effectiveness has a stronger impact, with a 0.657 standard deviation increase in ES for every standard deviation increase in perceived LE.

The comparison between EI and LE highlight that while both significantly impact ES, LE has a notably stronger effect. This suggests that while EI is critical for effective leadership, the perception of overall leadership effectiveness encompasses a broader set of factors that more substantially influence employee satisfaction. A modest increase in a leader’s perceived EI could result in measurable improvements in ES, particularly in fostering trust, collaboration, and well-being among employees.

On the other hand, initiatives aimed at improving leadership effectiveness—through better communication, decision-making, or adaptability—may yield even greater improvements in workplace satisfaction.

Lastly, we sought to evaluate whether job satisfaction varies as a function of employees’ perceptions of LE and the leader’s EI levels, and it was observed that the interaction effect is significant [F_{(4, 509)} = 1.681, p < 0.001], which enabled the validation of Hypothesis 4. Regarding the main effects, it was found that both employees’ perceptions of LE [F_{(2, 509)} = 249.261, p < 0.001] and the leader’s EI levels [F_{(2, 509)} = 34.229, p < 0.001] have a significant effect on ES (Figure 2). The model explains 57.6% of the variation in ES (adjusted R² = 0.576), with the perception of LE being the factor that contributes the most to this variation (partial eta² = 0.049).

Significant differences in job satisfaction were found, stemming from employees’ perceptions of the leader’s EI levels, when leadership is perceived as effective or highly effective. Among individuals who perceive leadership as effective or highly effective, those who perceive the leader’s EI levels as low have a significantly different opinion compared to those who perceive the leader as having moderate (p < 0.001) or high (p < 0.001) EI levels. In both cases, employees who perceive the leader as having high EI levels are more satisfied with their work. However, among employees who perceive leadership as ineffective, no significant differences were found in their job satisfaction, regardless of their perception of the leader’s EI levels.

Harman’s single-factor test was performed to assess the potential influence of Common Method Bias (CMB). The results indicated that the unrotated solution accounted for 31.8% of the total variance, which is well below the recommended threshold of 50.0% [53]. This finding confirms that CMB is unlikely to have significantly influenced the results, ensuring the robustness of this study’s findings.

5. Discussion

The aim was to analyze the extent to which ES varies as a function of perceptions of LE and the EI levels of the leaders. The results suggest that the more positive employees’ perceptions of their leaders’ EI levels are, the higher their satisfaction with LE, which supports Hypothesis 1. Similar findings were reported in the study by Lee and Chelladurai [29], which indicated that LE is strongly associated with the leader’s EI levels. These conclusions are also consistent with those found by Gopinath and Chitra [18], who demonstrated that when employees perceive their leader as emotionally intelligent, they rate their leadership as more effective, which increases their satisfaction levels and consequently their efforts to achieve organizational goals. Batista et al. [3] reinforce this idea, asserting that the emotional competencies of the leader, the effectiveness in managing subordinates, and ES are positively related.

Hypothesis 2 was also corroborated through the analysis, as it was observed that perceptions of the leader’s EI levels influence ES. These conclusions align with those of Tudor [54], who found that an emotionally intelligent leader, in addition to caring about employee well-being, can recognize, understand, and manage emotions, thereby contributing to increased employee satisfaction. In this context, Tagoe and Quarshie [55] assert that higher EI levels in leaders result in higher ES. Top et al. [56] add that when a leader can perceive their own emotions and those of others, they build closer relationships with their employees, fostering a pleasant work environment where employees feel satisfied.

Hypothesis 3, which posited that LE influences ES in the workplace, was also validated. These findings are identical to those obtained in the study by Nascimento and Bryto [57], which revealed that when employees have a positive perception of their superior’s leadership, they tend to feel more committed to the organization and are less likely to leave, as they are satisfied with it. Nascimento et al. [58] confirm this premise, adding that the success of any organization depends on LE, as it is closely linked to ES. Similar considerations were found in the study by Bussler et al. [59], which revealed that perceptions of leader performance are reflected in their ES levels and in their efforts to achieve organizational goals.

Finally, it was found that ES varies according to employees’ perceptions of LE and the leader’s EI levels, confirming Hypothesis 4, as the interaction effect between the two independent variables was significant. These results suggest that when employees perceive leadership as effective, they feel more satisfied, but that satisfaction is even greater when they perceive their leader as emotionally intelligent, as seen in studies by Lee and Chelladurai [40]. These conclusions are also compatible with those found by Gerpott et al. [46], who showed that when perceptions of effective leadership are positive, employees feel more committed to the organization and satisfied with their work. According to Batista et al. [3], when a leader is emotionally intelligent, their professional performance is more effective, and when both variables are interlinked, satisfaction levels tend to increase.

6. Conclusions

This study aimed to investigate the influence of perceived LE and leaders’ EI levels on ES in the workplace. The results confirmed that the objectives were achieved, demonstrating that higher levels of LE and EI are positively associated with greater ES. Employees who perceive their leaders as emotionally intelligent and effective report significantly higher satisfaction levels, underscoring the pivotal role of leadership in shaping workplace dynamics.

HR are considered the most important assets of any organization, and therefore, it is essential to maintain high levels of satisfaction, as this is the only way to retain the best talents and achieve a competitive advantage over competitors [2]. Consequently, it becomes crucial to identify the factors that influence this satisfaction, among which the relationship with the immediate supervisor stands out. When employees perceive that their supervisor is concerned with their challenges and aspirations, they feel valued and are less likely to leave the organization [2]. This study provides valuable insights into the dynamic interplay between perceived EI, LE, and ES. The results revealed that both EI and LE significantly influence ES, with LE exhibiting a stronger effect. These findings reinforce the importance of fostering leadership that is not only strategically competent, but also emotionally intelligent. Emotionally intelligent leaders create environments that promote trust, collaboration, and well-being, directly contributing to employee satisfaction and organizational success.

The leader serves as a link between employees and the organization, making EL extremely important for achieving organizational goals [55]. When employees perceive that the leader possesses high levels of EI, this fosters greater proximity to the leader, and their satisfaction tends to increase [20]. The results revealed a positive correlation between perceptions of EL, the leader’s EI levels, and ES. These findings suggest that when employees perceive their leader as emotionally intelligent and view their leadership as effective, they are more satisfied with their work.

Both LE and EI were found to have significant predictive effects on ES, with LE exhibiting a stronger influence. This highlights the importance of fostering leadership competencies that are not only strategically effective, but also emotionally attuned to the needs of employees. The findings reinforce the necessity of integrating emotionally intelligent leaders into organizational structures to create environments that promote trust, collaboration, and well-being.

These conclusions contribute to the broader understanding of the dynamic interplay between leadership and employee satisfaction, offering actionable insights for organizations aiming to enhance workplace outcomes. Future studies are encouraged to expand on these findings by exploring cross-cultural contexts, longitudinal analyses, and diverse sample compositions to further validate and generalize the results.

6.1. Theoretical and Practical Contributions

This research highlights the importance of promoting the development of leaders’ EI levels, as they are in direct contact with employees and must understand their behaviors to tailor their decisions to specific situations. It also raises awareness among leaders that their role cannot be limited solely to task performance or productivity, as leadership is only truly effective when it is underpinned by interpersonal relationship skills, support, and cooperation. Hence, it is necessary to invest in training programs focused on EI development, as better emotional perception and usage enhance leadership effectiveness.

A modest increase in a leader’s perceived EI could result in measurable improvements in EI, particularly in promoting trust, collaboration, and well-being among employees. On the other hand, initiatives aimed at improving leadership effectiveness—through better communication, decision-making, or adaptability—can produce even greater improvements in workplace satisfaction. By incorporating these elements, we aim to provide a clearer understanding of how variations in EI and LE directly impact SE, offering actionable insights for academics and practitioners alike.

6.2. Study Limitations and Suggestions for Future Research

The main limitation of this study lies in the sample characteristics, as most participants possess higher education degrees, which prevented the understanding of perceptions among individuals with lower education levels. Furthermore, the data were collected from a convenience sample, which made it impossible to generalize the results. While these limitations affect the generalizability of the results, they do not undermine the exploratory nature of this study, which aims to examine the relationships between perceived leadership effectiveness, emotional intelligence, and employee satisfaction within a specific context.

It is also worth noting the absence of questions that could identify the respondents’ roles, which would allow for an understanding of whether perceptions of LE differ between leaders and subordinates. Based on this, future studies are encouraged to include this distinction. A further limitation is the absence of data pertaining to the sector of activity and the size of the organizations, which precludes an analysis of potential variations in the perception of EI across different organizational contexts. It is recommended that future studies consider these variables to achieve a more detailed and comprehensive understanding. Additionally, it is recommended that a qualitative study, such as a focus group or interviews with leaders, be conducted to compare their perceptions with those of employees. Additionally, it would be pertinent to incorporate questionnaires that assess quality of life in the workplace and its impact on employees’ physical and psychological well-being.

To make the conclusions scalable to other countries, future research should include diverse samples from various cultural and socio-economic contexts. Cross-cultural studies could help identify whether the findings are influenced by cultural norms, education systems, or organizational structures specific to certain regions. Including international samples with varying levels of education, sectors, and organizational sizes would enable the development of universally applicable insights. Moreover, examining global frameworks of leadership and emotional intelligence, along with their localized interpretations, would provide a more comprehensive understanding that transcends national boundaries.