Emotional intelligence was coined to denote individual capacity to reason with and about emotions in relation to four interconnected abilities: (1) Perceiving emotions accurately in oneself and others through interpretation of clues such as facial expressions, body language, and tone; (2) Using emotions strategically to facilitate decision making and enhance problem-solving by optimizing mood-thinking relationships; (3) Understanding typical origins, evolution, and outcomes of emotions; and (4) Managing emotions effectively in oneself and others to achieve desired hedonic and instrumental outcomes (Mayer and Salovey, 1997). In addition to research on EI as a set of mental abilities applied to emotional subject matter, organizational behavior scholars studied how individuals perceive their emotional abilities. These self-perceptions are akin to emotional self-efficacy (Kirk et al., 2008; Wong and Law, 2002). Both EI ability and self-perceptions have been related to outcomes related to relationship effectiveness, performance, and well-being (Miao et al., 2016, 2017, 2018; O'Boyle et al., 2011; Sánchez-Álvarez et al., 2016).

Recent theory has pointed to the difference between individual potential and enacted behavior (Ivcevic et al., 2025; Levitats et al., 2025). This distinction is important because internal attributes such as ability and self-perceptions are not the most proximal influences on relevant outcomes in the organizational contexts. They are both attributes describing potential for particular behavior. The most direct influence on work outcomes is exerted by enacted behavior (Boyatzis, 2018; Ivcevic et al., 2025; Levitats et al., 2025). For this reason, the present research focuses on emotionally intelligent behavior (EIB) by assessing supervisor perceptions of their own actions and employee perceptions of how their supervisors act.

Supervisor EIB is related to employee experience of work (perceived ability to grow, greater experience of positive emotions) and their performance (e.g., creative behavior at work; Ivcevic et al., 2021). Supervisor EIB also mediates the relationship between contextual variables, such as EI-focused human resource practices and employee well-being-related outcomes (Levitats et al., 2022). The present study goes a step further and acknowledges that EIB is enacted in a social context. Supervisors interpret their own behavior and their subordinates perceive it, with similarities and differences between them having implications for relevant employee outcomes.

Self-Other Agreement theory (Atwater and Yammarino, 1992, 1997) emphasizes the importance of comparing supervisors’ self-ratings with others’ perceptions, since supervisor self-ratings often diverge from subordinate ratings (Atwater et al., 2005). The theory delineates four patterns of supervisor-subordinate perceptions: Two congruence patterns: in-agreement good (high ratings from both self and other) and in-agreement poor (low ratings from both sources); and two incongruence patterns: supervisor underestimation (supervisors’ self-ratings lower than other-ratings) and supervisor overestimation (supervisors’ self-ratings higher than other-ratings) (Atwater et al., 2005). Agreement generally yields better outcomes (e.g., supervisor effectiveness, subordinate well-being) than disagreement, by fostering mutual understanding and expectations (Amundsen and Martinsen, 2014; Hasson et al., 2019). When perceptions diverge, over-raters show poorer outcomes as they fail to recognize and address others’ concerns, while under-raters demonstrate mixed outcomes due to their competence and drive for improvement (Atwater et al., 2005).

In the context of supervisors’ EIB, congruence can take one of two forms. In high–high cases, supervisors believe they effectively notice, interpret, and respond to subordinates’ emotions, and subordinates experience these behaviors similarly. In low–low cases, both parties recognize that the supervisor does not consistently display emotionally intelligent behaviors. Incongruence may occur as overestimation, when supervisors believe they acknowledge staff emotions, provide support, and handle sensitive situations well, while subordinates experience them as inattentive or dismissive of emotional cues. Alternatively, incongruence can arise when supervisors underestimate their EIB, rating themselves as less effective emotionally even though subordinates perceive them as empathetic, supportive, and skilled at managing emotional dynamics. To the best of our knowledge, the framework has not yet been applied to EI research, making the present study a novel extension of SOA theory into the EI domain.

The Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) model (Bakker and Demerouti, 2017, 2024) categorizes workplace characteristics into two elements: demands and resources. Job demands require ongoing exertion and create physiological and psychological strain, while job resources facilitate goals, minimize demands, and enable development through elements like supportive relationships (Demerouti et al., 2001). Demands and resources trigger a health-impairment process and a motivational process, respectively. Persistent demands lead to burnout by depleting energy through continuous coping, while resources foster engagement in two ways: intrinsically, by supporting personal development and growth, or extrinsically, by helping achieve work objectives (Bakker and Demerouti, 2017; Demerouti and Bakker, 2023). Beyond these distinct processes, the model explains how demands and resources interact. Resources can buffer the negative effects of demands on well-being, attenuating their energy-depleting impact when resources are abundant (Bakker et al., 2005; Shin and Hur, 2021a, 2021b). Additionally, challenging demands can amplify resources’ positive impact on engagement (Breevaart and Bakker, 2018; Tadić et al., 2015), making resources more motivating when work is complex.

Through the lens of the JD-R model (Bakker and Demerouti, 2007, 2024), supervisors’ EIB can function as a critical job resource. High-EI supervisors contribute to supportive work environments where subordinates are better equipped to manage emotional demands, access social support, and exercise autonomy (Bakker, 2015; Côté, 2007). Their ability to accurately interpret and respond to subordinate emotional cues (Côté, 2014, 2017) enables them to provide constructive feedback, resolve interpersonal challenges (Morrison, 2008), and guide subordinate growth and development (Clore et al., 1994; Schwarz, 2012). Moreover, supervisors who behave in emotionally intelligent ways foster engagement not only through strategic leadership behaviors, such as articulating vision and providing recognition, but also through interpersonal behaviors like team building and empowerment (Guillen and Florent-Treacy, 2011). By effectively managing emotional dynamics, they help subordinates cope with emotional challenges and promote positive affective states (Momeni, 2009), which can reduce burnout and enhance engagement. Consistent with these mechanisms, subordinates who perceived their managers as high in EIB reported greater growth opportunities, more positive emotions, and higher creativity and innovation at work (Ivcevic et al., 2021).

Conversely, low managerial EIB may function as a job demand. When supervisors lack emotional awareness and regulation skills, subordinates are more likely to experience emotional strain, reduced trust (Dunn and Schweitzer, 2005), and depleted personal resources as they navigate difficult supervisory relationships (Levitats et al., 2019). Indeed, evidence suggests that subordinates’ own self-reported EI is positively associated with engagement only when they perceive their supervisors as demonstrating high EIB, highlighting the pivotal role of managerial EIB in shaping the emotional climate of their workplace (Levitats et al., 2019). Together, these findings position supervisor EIB as a key contextual factor that can either buffer against or exacerbate job stressors, depending on its presence or absence.

Beyond the theoretical role EI ability plays in subordinate well-being, we draw on SOA theory and the JD-R model (Bakker and Demerouti, 2017, 2024), to propose that subordinate engagement and burnout vary across the various types of (in)congruence between supervisor and subordinate perceptions of supervisor EIB. The hypothesized differential effects of supervisor-subordinate congruence and incongruence in ratings of EI-relevant behavior are presented in Figures 1, 2 and discussed next.

Congruence occurs when the supervisor’s self-ratings align with subordinates’ ratings. In the context of EIB, supervisor-subordinate congruence indicates shared perceptions of the supervisor’s behavior indicating the capacity to recognize, understand, and regulate one’s own emotions and those of others. Agreement on high supervisor EIB (i.e., in-agreement good) represents the upper end of the congruence continuum, whereas agreement on low EIB (i.e., in-agreement poor) represents its lower end.

SOA theory shows that mutual perceptions of the supervisor are positively associated with desirable subordinate outcomes (Fleenor et al., 2010). Applied here, supervisor-subordinate agreement on supervisor EIB should be related to subordinates’ well-being. We propose that the match itself is the critical mechanism, as perceptual congruence reflects reduced partner uncertainty as well as subordinates’ increased sense of predictability and efficacy in dealing with the environment. Subordinates’ enhanced perceived efficacy may serve as a job resource that fosters their engagement and reduces burnout, by allowing them to develop realistic expectations and coping strategies. This logic is consistent with the JD-R model (Bakker and Demerouti, 2017, 2024), which identifies reduced uncertainty as a job resource and heightened uncertainty as a job demand (Bakker and Demerouti, 2017, 2024; Usman et al., 2023), thereby enhancing engagement and reducing burnout. Likewise, these shared perceptions may initiate a resource gain spiral (Hobfoll et al., 2018; Westman et al., 2004) where supervisor EIB generates additional resources and enhances well-being. The above reasoning leads us to hypothesize:

According to SOA theory (Atwater and Yammarino, 1992, 1997) incongruence occurs when supervisors’ self-ratings diverge from subordinate ratings of the supervisor’s behavior, manifesting in two forms: underestimation and overestimation. Subordinates experience distinct outcomes when working under managers who either overestimate or underestimate themselves, with overestimation creating more challenging work conditions (Tsai et al., 2022). Research on supervisor-subordinate perceptual gaps shows that subordinate outcomes are particularly negative when team members identify a problem that their supervisor fails to recognize, compared to situations where supervisors perceive problems that teams do not (Bashshur et al., 2011; Hasson et al., 2019).

Through the lens of the JD-R model (JD-R; Bakker and Demerouti, 2017, 2024), subordinates working with EIB-overestimating supervisors are likely to face both increased demands and depleted resources. Overestimating supervisors are characterized by inflated self-perception and low awareness (Sheldon et al., 2014). When supervisors overestimate their EIB, the gap between expected and delivered EI-related behavior creates repeated unmet expectations. Over time, this discrepancy may lead subordinates to experience partner uncertainty and to feel disillusioned or disappointed. Consequently, subordinates must expand additional emotional and cognitive resources managing interactions where emotion-relevant behavior is expected but not delivered. This combination of depleted emotional resources and heightened demands typically results in increased burnout and decreased work engagement (Bakker and Demerouti, 2017, 2024), as subordinates exhaust personal resources attempting to fill the emotional gap left by their supervisors.

Subordinates working with underestimating supervisors are also likely to experience partner uncertainty, which is expected to be associated with higher burnout and lower engagement. However, their outcomes are likely to be more favorable than in the case of overestimating supervisors, because under-estimators tend to generate job resources that may buffer the negative effects of uncertainty. Underestimating supervisors are typically more self-critical and therefore more motivated to improve (Tekleab et al., 2008), leading them to invest greater effort in exercising behaviors that utilize their emotional abilities. As a result, they may exercise EIB, such as active feedback-seeking, careful attention to emotional cues (Ashkanasy and Humphrey, 2011), and effective emotion regulation (Liu and Liu, 2013). These resource-enhancing behavior helps subordinates cope with work demands, reducing burnout (Chen and Chen, 2018) and fostering positive emotional states that promote engagement (Ouweneel et al., 2012). Thus, although partner uncertainty is present, subordinates of underestimating supervisors may experience better well-being outcomes than those whose supervisors overestimate their EIB. This reasoning leads to the following hypotheses:

Following ethical approval, the survey was administered to all staff, physicians, and residents (N = 16,166; n = 871 supervisors and n = 15,295 subordinates) working in five hospitals in Ontario, Canada. Hospitals were selected as the research setting because they offer a uniquely valuable context for studying EIB alignment. These environments are emotionally intense, with staff routinely encountering life-and-death situations, patient suffering, and distressed families, as well as regulatory and funding challenges—factors that can impact subordinate well-being (Grandey et al., 2012). A total of 6,272 people (492 supervisors and 5,780 subordinates) provided informed consent and responded to the survey, with average response rate across hospitals of 38.80% (56.49% for supervisors and 37.79% for subordinates). Total response rates were similar across hospitals (between 36.13 and 52.35%). In the above counts, supervisors were considered those with at least one direct report, and subordinates had zero direct reports. Notably, the analyses controlled for middle managers who are included as both subordinates and supervisors. The supervisor and subordinate samples are mutually exclusive. The subordinate count including both non-managing employees and middle managers is 6,187. The distinction of subordinate /supervisor levels are noted in the demographics and controlled for in the analyses.

Careless responders were screened for using three instructed response items (i.e., ‘select strongly agree for this item’; Huang et al., 2015). Following prior studies (e.g., Cho and Allen, 2012; Shockley et al., 2016), 45 supervisors (9.15%) and 896 subordinates (14.48%) who failed at least two of these checks were removed. Additionally, participants without matching supervisor-subordinate data (i.e., subordinates without a supervisor participating and supervisors without participating subordinates) were excluded as analyses required both ratings. Supervisors who did not complete the EI ability measure were excluded as well. The final sample included 202 supervisors and 2,055 subordinates.

For the final sample of supervisors, there were 129 females and 73 males. On average, supervisors were 48.18 years old (SD = 9.40) with 12.71 years of job tenure (SD = 10.44). One hundred eighty supervisors reported they were White/Caucasian, seven reported they were Asian, two reported they were African, and 13 reported they were Mixed/Other. On average, supervisors had 10.17 direct reports (SD = 11.12, Median = 6). One hundred seventy-five supervisors were in middle management positions (they were subordinates to another supervisor and had their own subordinates), whereas 27 were in senior management positions (they only had subordinates).

For the final sample of subordinates, there were 1,572 females and 483 males. On average, subordinates were 42.20 years old (SD = 11.32) with 11.40 years of job tenure (SD = 9.81). One thousand seven hundred one subordinates reported they were White/Caucasian, 110 reported they were Asian, 59 reported they were African, and 170 reported they were Mixed/Other (15 were missing). There were 1,854 participants who were solely subordinates and 201 who were middle managers.

This study offers several theoretical contributions by applying and extending Self–Other Agreement theory (Atwater and Yammarino, 1992, 1997) and the Job Demands–Resources model (Bakker and Demerouti, 2017, 2024) to the context of EI in supervisor–subordinate relationships. Whereas prior research tended to examine supervisors’ EI ability, subordinates’ perceptions of supervisor EIB, or supervisors’ perceptions of their EIB in isolation, our study shifts the focus toward the relational nature of EI — specifically, the (mis)alignment between supervisors’ and subordinates’ perceptions of supervisor EI-relevant behavior—and demonstrates its relevance to subordinate well-being. The present study does not focus on supervisor individual attributes (whether self-perceived or attributed by others), but instead focuses on perceptions of enacted behavior, which is a more proximal influence on subordinate outcomes (compared to internal attributes; Ivcevic et al., 2025; Levitats et al., 2025).

A key contribution of this study concerns the role of perceptual (mis)alignment in shaping subordinate well-being. We foreground the relational nature of EIB, demonstrating that (mis)alignment between supervisors’ and subordinates’ perceptions has important implications for subordinate engagement and burnout. Consistent with SOA theory, we show that alignment and misalignment in perceptions have distinct and opposing associations with subordinate well-being, regardless of supervisors’ actual EI ability. Our findings suggest that a shared understanding of supervisor EIB functions as a psychologically stabilizing force in the workplace and may trigger resource gain spirals (Hobfoll, 2001; Westman et al., 2004), amplifying engagement and protecting against burnout.

These findings resonate with evidence showing that perceptual (in)congruence within workplace relationships meaningfully shapes subordinate well-being. In a study of perceptual (in)congruence on qualitative job insecurity between individuals and their teammates, Roczniewska and Richter (2022) demonstrate that alignment, whether at low or high levels, tends to stabilize subordinates’ engagement, whereas perceptual incongruence can undermine both engagement and recovery. Additional evidence comes from research on supervisor-subordinate dyads; for example, Zhao et al. (2024) found that congruence between supervisor and subordinate evaluations of supervisor transformational leadership behavior strengthened the positive effects of subordinate-rated leadership on team performance compared to incongruence, demonstrating that alignment itself creates a beneficial relational condition.

Beyond the general benefits of perceptual alignment, our findings highlight important differences between forms of supervisor–subordinate incongruence in perceptions of supervisor EIB. Prior research conceptualizes supervisors’ low EI-related attributes as job demands and high EI-related attributes as job resources (Ivcevic et al., 2021; Levitats et al., 2019). We find that subordinates with underestimating supervisors showed higher engagement levels and lower burnout levels compared to those working with overestimating supervisors. This pattern supports our prediction drawn from the JD-R model (Bakker and Demerouti, 2017, 2024) that supervisor EIB overestimation creates a particularly demanding work environment. It seems that when supervisors overestimate their EIB, subordinates encounter dual resource depletion: they both have to interact with supervisors who show insufficient recognition, understanding, and regulation of emotions and have the additional burden of regulating their behavior not to indicate to the supervisors that their EIB is ineffective. Although subordinates working under EIB underestimating supervisors are not “in-sync” with their supervisors’ perceptions either, they report higher engagement and lower burnout. A plausible explanation is that underestimating supervisors’ self-critical orientation motivates efforts toward self-improvement (Tekleab et al., 2008), leading them to enact emotionally intelligent behaviors that generate compensatory job resources for subordinates, thereby fostering engagement and buffering against burnout.

Finally, our findings suggest that the meaning of EIB emerges through a relational and contextual lens. By showing that supervisor-subordinate congruence on perceived supervisor EIB has meaningful implications for subordinate burnout and engagement, beyond their EI ability, our findings speak directly to calls to expand EI research toward understanding how EIB is interpreted in practice. It should be noted that these findings do not diminish the relevance of supervisors’ EI ability but rather reinforce the importance of further studying how EIB is socially interpreted within dyadic relationships. EI ability remains a foundational component that represents the potential to reason about emotions. However, it does not automatically translate into behavior (Ivcevic et al., 2025; Levitats et al., 2025; Lopes, 2016).

Our findings offer several practical implications for organizations seeking to enhance subordinate well-being. First, since perceptual alignment itself benefits subordinate well-being, organizations should promote open dialogue and feedback mechanisms to foster mutual understanding between supervisors and subordinates about how they act to show perceiving, using, understanding, and regulating emotions. Tools such as 360-degree feedback, structured check-ins, and team reflection sessions may help supervisors reconcile their self-perceptions with subordinates’ experiences of their emotional leadership. Evidence from prior work illustrates this point. For example, Nielsen et al. (2022) integrated SOA theory into leadership training programs and demonstrated that feedback-driven development can improve supervisor-subordinate agreement on the supervisor’s leadership behaviors.

The example above emphasizes how structured feedback can serve as a mechanism for enhancing self–other agreement. Building on this insight, leadership development programs should focus on helping supervisors who overestimate their EIB recognize and address these perceptual gaps by adopting practical behaviors aligned with the four core components of EI (Mayer and Salovey, 1997). Recent theoretical work (Levitats et al., 2025) and work aimed at practitioners (Ivcevic et al., 2025) outlines influences on such behavior and provides guidance for developing this behavior in supervisors. Finally, because perceptual alignment influences subordinate well-being independently of actual EI ability, organizations may benefit from incorporating alignment-focused assessments, such as supervisor–subordinate perceptual gap analyses, into performance evaluations.

This study provides important insights into the relationship between supervisor-subordinate perceptual alignment of supervisor EIB and subordinate well-being. Yet, it has several constraints that suggest directions for further investigation. A central limitation of this study is its cross-sectional design, which restricts our ability to infer causality. Both predictor and outcome measures were administered at the same time, with only supervisor EI ability administered at a different time. Though reverse causation does not seem theoretically meaningful, it remains possible that subordinate well-being also influences how subordinates perceive their supervisor’s EI. Future research could build on this work and employ longitudinal or time-wave approaches, to help disentangle the temporal ordering of these processes by tracking changes in perceptual alignment and well-being across time. Repeated measures would also allow researchers to capture dynamic alignment patterns, such as whether recurrent misalignment is more harmful than temporary discrepancies.

A second limitation concerns the contextual specificity of the study. The hospital environment provides a unique setting for examining EI alignment, yet its generalizability may be limited. Healthcare organizations are characterized by strong professional cultures, hierarchical structures, and highly emotional work, all of which distinguish them from many other organizational contexts. While the observed patterns may extend to other high-stakes or service-oriented environments, further research in non-clinical settings is needed to determine whether the effects of EI alignment manifest differently.