The Direct and Cascading Impacts of School Leaders’ Emotional Intelligence on Teachers and Students: A Systematic Review

Abstract

Emotional intelligence (EI) is increasingly recognised as being essential for effective school leadership. However, the direct and cascading effects of school leaders’ EI on teachers and students remain underexplored, particularly in diverse global contexts. This systematic review examined how school leaders’ EI competencies impact teachers’ performance and students’ learning outcomes across contexts. This study synthesised 28 studies published between 2011 and 2024, following the PRISMA guidelines. The findings revealed that self-awareness, empathy, and relationship management emerged as core EI competencies for school leaders across contexts, and principals with high EI positively impacted teachers’ emotional reframing, instructional delivery, and collective efficacy. This study also shows that teacher well-being, instructional leadership practices, and school climate mediated the cascading effects on student outcomes. In addition, this study revealed that cultural and contextual factors modulate EI expression in leadership and that EI metrics showed limitations in cross-cultural applicability. While school leaders’ EI enhances teacher performance and student outcomes through direct and indirect pathways, this review highlights that EI manifestation and efficacy depend on alignment with cultural norms and systemic priorities. Based on these findings, we propose the development of culturally responsive EI frameworks and assessment tools for cultivating emotionally intelligent leadership across global educational contexts.

1. Introduction

The contemporary school system evolves at a fast pace, and school leadership is becoming increasingly complex. This turn of events has shown that school leaders face unprecedented challenges in managing rapidly changing educational policies and increasing stakeholder expectations. In the face of these challenges, traditional leadership models appear inadequate, necessitating the exploration of new leadership dimensions (Balasi et al., 2023). For instance, the COVID-19 pandemic has exposed the deficiencies of traditional leadership models in crisis and stress management. The pandemic presented new challenges that required a new approach to leadership that transcended the mere allocation of job roles (Harris, 2020) to teachers, including the instrumentation of empathy and social awareness. The unprecedented challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic underscored the importance of emotional intelligence (EI) in school leadership, revealing a gap in our understanding of how EI competencies can best support leaders in managing crises, ensuring teacher well-being, and adapting to rapid changes in educational delivery methods (Chatzipanagiotou & Katsarou, 2023). Emotional intelligence is the ability to recognise, understand, and manage one’s own and others’ emotions (Goleman, 1998; Salovey & Mayer, 1990). Drawing from the seminar works of Goleman (1995), Salovey and Mayer (1990), and Goleman and Boyatzis (2017), the concept of EI in school leadership connotes school leaders ability to become aware of their emotions and how such emotions impact members of the school community, including the teachers, non-teaching staff, the students and even the parents. According to these scholars, EI is a multidimensional concept that encompasses multidimensional constructs including self-awareness, self-regulation, motivation, empathy, and social skills.

The literature reveals an ongoing debate among scholars on how school leaders’ emotional intelligence (EI) directly impacts teacher performance and student outcomes, with studies reporting divergent findings based on contextual and methodological factors (Al Jaberi et al., 2024; Chen & Guo, 2020; Hen & Sharabi-Nov, 2014; M. Li et al., 2018; Wu, 2023). While some research demonstrates positive correlations between principal EI and improved teacher efficacy (Chen & Guo, 2020) or better management of curriculum reforms (Grobler et al., 2017), others suggest limited direct effects, noting that EI’s influence is often mediated by organizational culture or situational variables (Potter, 2011). Systematic reviews highlight these inconsistencies, attributing them to cultural differences in EI application (Ansari & Asad, 2023), varying definitions of EI constructs, and methodological limitations including self-report biases (Gómez-Leal et al., 2022; Kareem & Kin, 2019). Consequently, Karakus et al. (2021) argue that EI’s impacts remain context-dependent, resisting universal generalizations.

Recent studies suggest that school leaders’ emotional intelligence (EI) contributes to effective leadership in addition to traditional leadership skills (Blaik et al., 2023). On the one hand, studies have shown that school leaders who are deficient in emotional competencies have challenges in understanding the emotional dynamics that inform their behaviour and performance as well as that of their subordinates (Beatty, 2000). In contrast, leaders with high EI competencies tend to experience improved decision-making, enhanced interpersonal relationships (Collazos Ugarte et al., 2024), and effective organisational management (Goleman, 1998; Salovey & Mayer, 1990). In addition, emotionally intelligent school leaders tend to positively impact school climate, teacher satisfaction, and student outcomes (Berkovich & Eyal, 2017).

Previous studies have indicated that high EI among school leaders is associated with effective teaching and positive student-learning outcomes. For example, research shows that school leaders with high EI create a supportive school climate that positively impacts teachers’ instructional delivery and students’ learning outcomes (Ansari & Asad, 2023; Sun & Leithwood, 2015). It was also observed that such principals often foster collective teacher efficacy, commitment, trust, and organisational citizenship behaviours (Sun & Leithwood, 2015). Chen and Guo (2020) investigated the effects of school principals’ EI on teachers’ instructional strategies. Their findings showed that principals’ EI and instructional leadership behaviour positively influenced teachers’ instructional strategies. In addition, emotionally intelligent school leaders have been shown to model and promote social–emotional learning (SEL), which culminates in improved academic performance (Durlak et al., 2011).

While existing research has begun to acknowledge the significance of EI in school leadership, evidence is still nascent with varying results on the direct and indirect impacts of school leaders’ EI competencies on teachers’ performance and students’ outcome. Moreover, current assessments of school leaders’ EI largely depend on Western-centric metrics, which may not capture the various ways EI is manifested and valued in diverse school systems worldwide. For example, school leadership styles significantly differ from the Western models in Pakistan and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) (Ansari & Asad, 2023; Al Shehhi et al., 2021). Hence, the absence of context-specific or culturally adaptable EI assessment tools implies that the role of school leaders’ EI in navigating educational reforms, managing teacher performance, and improving student outcomes remains inadequately addressed. This implies a critical need to develop and validate culturally sensitive EI metrics that can accurately reflect the EI competencies crucial for leadership effectiveness in different cultural contexts.

In view of the identified gaps, this study systematically reviews studies on school leaders’ EI and the cascading impacts on teachers’ job performance and student outcomes across national contexts. Specifically, this study exemplified the core school leaders’ EI competencies essential for effective school leadership, the influence of leaders’ EI competencies on teachers’ well-being and instructional delivery, the impacts of school leaders’ EI on student outcomes, and the effect of cultural and contextual factors in modulating EI in school leadership. It also reviews the metrics often adopted to measure school leaders’ EI competencies. This study contributes to the existing body of knowledge by systematically synthesising global evidence that helps us understand how school leaders’ emotional intelligence directly and indirectly enhances teacher performance and student outcomes. It also provides valuable insights into the multifaceted role of EI in school leadership and its policy and practice implications.

Research Questions

The following research questions guided this study:

• What are the core attributes of emotional intelligence that contribute to effective school leadership?
• How does a school leader’s emotional intelligence affect teachers’ performance?
• What are the cascading impacts of school leaders’ EI on school climate and student outcomes?
• How do cultural and contextual factors modulate EI manifestations among school leaders?
• How effective are traditional metrics in measuring and developing EI among school leaders in all contexts?

2. Materials and Methods

Given the complexity of assessing EI across diverse educational contexts, this review adhered to the PRISMA guidelines to ensure a comprehensive and methodologically sound approach (Page et al., 2021). We formulated a search strategy to identify relevant studies from multiple databases. We established inclusion criteria to select studies that specifically addressed the research questions and met predefined quality standards. A rigorous selection process was implemented, involving an independent review by the authors to minimise bias and ensure the selection of appropriate studies for analysis. This study drew on qualitative, quantitative, mixed-methods, and bibliometric studies, as well as systematic reviews, to fully understand the role of EI in educational leadership.

2.1. Search Strategy

The search was conducted between November 2024 and January 2025. A structured and replicable search strategy was employed to ensure a comprehensive and unbiased collection of studies. The search was conducted in multiple high-impact academic databases to ensure reliable results. The databases searched were Scopus and ERIC (Education Resources Information Center). We included Taylor and Francis Online and SAGE Online Journals as supplementary publisher platforms to ensure the coverage of discipline-specific studies that may not be indexed in multidisciplinary databases. The search was limited to peer-reviewed articles published in English between 2011 and 2024. Restricting systematic reviews to English-language publications has been shown to have a minimal impact on pooled effect estimates and overall conclusions. A study of ten empirical investigations found that language restrictions altered statistical significance in only 9% of meta-analyses and rarely changed the review conclusions (Dobrescu et al., 2021). Hence, restricting the selected studies’ language to English does not negatively impact the credibility of the review’s findings. Multiple databases and a diverse set of search terms were used to ensure a thorough and inclusive review of the existing research in this field (Bramer et al., 2016, 2017). The search strategy employed the following key terms: “emotional intelligence”, “school leadership”, “principal”, “teacher effectiveness”, “student outcomes”, “educational leadership”, “instructional leadership”, “teacher morale”, “school climate”, and “cultural factors”. Boolean operators (AND, OR) and truncation were used to ensure the inclusion of a comprehensive range of relevant articles. These search terms were specifically chosen to identify the literature that explored the relationships between emotional intelligence, school leadership, and various educational outcomes. The search terms were adjusted according to the requirements of each of the databases. Filters were used to limit the search to articles published in peer-reviewed journals.

2.1.1. Inclusion Criteria

Several parameters were defined as inclusion criteria for this study. Studies were selected based on their investigation of emotional intelligence (EI) in school leadership, focusing on its effects on teacher performance, school climate, and student outcomes. Additionally, studies examining the correlation between EI and school leadership effectiveness were included. The temporal range was restricted to publications between 2011 and 2024 to ensure the selection of relevant literature for this review. Only peer-reviewed articles published in English were included in this study. Additionally, studies exploring the cross-cultural or contextual elements influencing the application of EI were included to provide various educational settings and leadership scenarios for the analysis.

2.1.2. Exclusion Criteria

The exclusion criteria ensured the relevance and quality of the studies included in the review. Studies were omitted if they focused on non-educational environments, such as corporate or military leadership settings, because of the significant differences between these contexts and educational institutions’ contexts. Furthermore, opinion pieces, editorials, and non-peer-reviewed sources were omitted to maintain the integrity of the study findings. Studies lacking methodological rigour or sufficient data for comprehensive analysis were excluded, as they would not contribute meaningfully to the research objectives. Studies written in languages other than English were excluded.

2.1.3. Study Selection and Screening

We carried out literature research following PRISMA guidelines on Scopus (n = 261), ERIC (n = 25), Taylor and Francis (n = 158), and Sage Online (n = 111), resulting in a total of 555 records as shown in Figure 1. Subsequently, duplicate records (n = 33) were removed, leaving 522 unique records for title and abstract selection. Two independent reviewers applied predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria, and 471 studies were eliminated at this stage because they did not align with the focus of this study. Specifically, these articles were excluded if they lacked a direct focus on school leaders’ emotional intelligence, showed no clear linkage to teacher performance or student outcomes, or failed to account for relevant cultural and contextual factors. Additional exclusions were made for studies with conceptual misalignment or methodological weaknesses, such as insufficient data transparency. This exclusion resulted in 51 studies proceeding to full-text retrieval and eligibility assessment.

Subsequently, a full-text evaluation of the 51 retrieved articles was performed based on the established inclusion and exclusion criteria. Of these, 23 studies were excluded for various reasons: one study was discarded because it did not address measurable results in leadership or emotional intelligence outcomes; two studies were excluded due to their focus on higher education or corporate leadership rather than school leadership; a non-English study was removed; eight studies were eliminated due to the inaccessibility of the full text; one study was dismissed for being solely theoretical; and ten studies were excluded because they did not have a central focus on school leadership (n = 1) or emotional intelligence (n = 9). Finally, 28 studies met all the eligibility criteria and were included in the final synthesis, representing a mixture of peer-reviewed empirical research (qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods), review articles, and bibliometric studies that directly addressed emotional intelligence within school leadership contexts.

The implementation of independent dual screening significantly reduced bias during the review process. The reasons for exclusion were systematically recorded and strictly adhered to, with a view to ensure reproducibility. However, while we acknowledge that reliance on database-derived studies may have inadvertently overlooked unpublished or grey literature, which may introduce bias, the systematic review methodology employed in this study counteracts this, as it provides a solid foundation for understanding the current state of knowledge in this field.

2.2. The Quality Assessment Protocol

Systematic reviews often draw on studies across the quality spectrum to map the full landscape of evidence and reveal research gaps (Gazley & Guo, 2020). In domains lacking rigorous or large amounts of studies, moderate- or low-quality studies are necessary to inform preliminary conclusions (Connolly et al., 2015). Moreover, including less robust work generates hypotheses and highlights methodological weaknesses, warranting future enquiry (Weißmüller & Zuber, 2023). To maintain transparency, we applied standardised appraisal tools (L. Li et al., 2022) to report the quality of the reviewed studies (Ara et al., 2017; Gazley & Guo, 2020). The quality of the included studies was rigorously evaluated using two validated assessment tools: the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) and A MeaSurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR). The MMAT was chosen for its versatility in appraising qualitative, quantitative, and mixed-methods studies using a comprehensive set of criteria (Hong et al., 2018). This tool is particularly valuable in this study because it allows for a standardised assessment across diverse research methodologies, ensuring a fair and consistent evaluation of study quality. This study included two systematic literature review articles and one bibliometric article, necessitating the use of AMSTAR, a tool specifically designed to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews (Shea et al., 2017). The inclusion of AMSTAR complements the MMAT by providing a focused evaluation of the systematic review methodology, which is crucial, given the nature of the included studies.

The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) and A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) were chosen for the methodological quality assessment because of their versatility and comprehensive criteria. The MMAT was applied to evaluate studies with diverse designs, including qualitative, quantitative, and mixed-method approaches (Hong et al., 2018; Yusop et al., 2022). It focuses on core methodological criteria, allowing for efficient appraisal across different study types (Hong et al., 2018). AMSTAR, particularly its updated version, AMSTAR 2, was used to assess the quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses (Faggion, 2015; L. Li et al., 2022). AMSTAR 2 evaluates critical domains such as a priori protocols, risk of bias assessment, and meta-analysis methods (L. Li et al., 2022). Both tools have good face and content validity (Faggion, 2015). However, some limitations were noted, such as AMSTAR’s potential to assess reporting quality rather than methodological quality in specific items (Faggion, 2015) and AMSTAR 2’s stringent rating rules, which lead to low-quality ratings, even for potentially high-quality studies (L. Li et al., 2022). Despite these challenges, these tools have been selected for their widespread use and ability to provide structured and comprehensive quality assessments across various study designs and review types (Faggion, 2015).

The studies were categorised as high medium, or low-quality based on their respective scores. For studies evaluated using the MMAT, which consists of five criteria, the quality categorisation is high quality for scores of 4–5, medium quality for a score of 3, and low quality for scores of 0–2. Two systematic literature reviews (SLRs) and two bibliometric studies were assessed using 11 of the 15 AMSTAR criteria. The quality categorisation for SLRs and bibliometric studies was determined as follows: high quality for scores of 8–11, medium quality for scores of 5–7, and low quality for scores of 0–4. High-quality studies employ rigorous methodologies, such as large samples, validated instruments, and advanced statistical analyses, to provide strong evidence of EI’s impact. Medium-quality studies offer valuable insights but may have limitations in terms of sample size. Low-quality studies have significant methodological flaws that limit their conclusions and applicability. Nevertheless, they contribute to understanding EI’s role in school leadership by providing a range of evidence from different contexts and methodological approaches. Notably, efforts were made to ensure that the number of low-quality studies included was less than four percent of the total number of reviewed studies, thereby making them have no significant effect on the findings. The resulting quality assessment is shown in

Table 1. Summary of included studies with quality appraisal.

Author(s), Year	Study Focus	Study Design	Sample Size	Data Collection Instrument	Region	Quality Rating	Quality Appraisal Notes
Al Shehhi et al. (2021)	EI of principals and school climate	Quantitative (Correlational)	20 principals, 200 teachers	MSCEIT, R-SLEQ	UAE (Asia)	Medium	Self-report bias; moderate sample size.
Ansari and Asad (2023)	Authoritarian leadership and EI in Pakistan	Qualitative Case Study	5 school heads, 10 teachers	Interviews, shadowing, EI tests	Pakistan (Asia)	Medium	Small sample size and reliance on self-reported data.
Asmamaw and Semela (2023)	Leader EI and faculty engagement in Ethiopia	Qualitative (Interviews)	11 faculty members	Semi-structured interviews	Ethiopia (Africa)	Medium	Rich qualitative data but limited generalisability.
Belessova et al. (2023)	Social intelligence and leadership in Kazakhstan	Mixed-Methods	70 students	Surveys, analysis	Kazakhstan (Asia)	Medium	Small sample size; exploratory focus.
Blaik Hourani et al. (2021)	EI and professional standards in Abu Dhabi	Quantitative (Survey)	123 school leaders	EIQ-Leadership	UAE (Asia)	High	Robust statistical analysis; validated instrument.
Blaik Hourani et al. (2023)	EI attributes in Abu Dhabi leaders	Qualitative (Interviews)	27 participants	Semi-structured interviews	UAE (Asia)	Medium	Small sample size; context-specific insights.
Brinia et al. (2014)	EI in Greek primary education leadership	Mixed-Methods	337 educators	Questionnaires, factor analysis	Greece (Europe)	Medium	Cross-sectional design limits causal inferences.
Cai (2011)	EI in school turnarounds	Literature Review	N/A	Theoretical analysis	Global	Medium	Theoretical review; no empirical data were obtained.
Chen and Guo (2020)	Principals’ EI and instructional leadership in China	Quantitative (SEM)	534 teachers	Wong’s Emotional Intelligence Scale (WEIS)	China (Asia)	High	Strong structural equation modelling; large sample size.
Gibson (2024)	EI in British-style IB schools in China	Mixed-Methods	24 teachers + leaders	Interviews, surveys	China (Asia)	Medium	Culturally adaptive focus; small sample size.
Grobler (2014)	Teachers’ perceptions of EI in South Africa	Quantitative (Survey)	2386 teachers	Structured questionnaires	South Africa (Africa)	High	Large sample size; contextual relevance.
Grobler et al. (2017)	EI in managing curriculum changes in South Africa	Quantitative (Survey)	600 teachers	Questionnaires	South Africa (Africa)	High	Large sample; practical implications for policy reforms.
Karakus et al. (2021)	Emotions in Asian education research (bibliometric review)	Bibliometric Review	862 articles	Bibliometric analysis	Asia	Medium	Broad scope but limited to bibliometric trends only.
Kareem and Kin (2018)	Principal Change Leadership EI model (PCLEI) in Malaysia	Quantitative (Rasch Analysis)	731 principals	PCLEI Questionnaire	Malaysia (Asia)	High	Rigorous validation; large sample size.
Z. Li et al. (2024)	Distributed leadership and student social–emotional outcomes in China	Multi-Level SEM	7246 students	Surveys (EI and leadership scales)	China (Asia)	High	Large-scale data; robust multi-level analysis.
Mahfouz and Gordon (2021)	Social–emotional competencies in U.S. principals	Qualitative (Interviews)	Not specified	Interviews	USA (N. America)	Medium	Thematic insights but lacks demographic diversity.
Noori et al. (2024)	Transformational leadership and teacher EI in Afghanistan	Cross-Sectional Survey	395 teachers	Questionnaires (EI and leadership scales)	Afghanistan (Asia)	Medium	Context-specific relevance and self-report limitations.
Pierce (2014)	Principal EI and collective teacher efficacy in the USA	Quantitative (Correlational)	129 teachers	Emotional and Social Competency Inventory (ESCI)	USA (N. America)	Medium	Focus on observable EI behaviours; cross-sectional design.
Potter (2011)	EI in educational leadership (qualitative exploration)	Qualitative	8 leaders	Emotional Skills Assessment Profile (ESAP)	USA	Low	Very small sample size; exploratory design.
Singh and Dali (2013)	EI in South African leadership programs	Qualitative (Focus Groups)	60 principals	Focus group interviews	South Africa (Africa)	Medium	Contextual insights; moderate sample size.
Tai and Abdull Kareem (2019)	EI and teacher attitudes toward change in Malaysia	Quantitative (SEM)	1195 teachers	PCLEI and TATC Scales	Malaysia (Asia)	High	Large sample; culturally contextualised metrics.
J. Tian et al. (2022)	Transformational leadership and teacher burnout in China	Quantitative (SEM)	539 teachers	Surveys	China (Asia)	High	Strong causal modelling; large sample size.
Y. Tian and Guo (2022)	EI and teacher burnout in China	Quantitative (SEM)	539 teachers	Surveys	China (Asia)	High	Replicable design and robust statistical analysis.
Venter et al. (2024)	EI and instructional leadership in South Africa	Quantitative (Correlational)	75 principals	Emotional Intelligence Appraisal Scale (EIAS)	South Africa (Africa)	Medium	Practical focus; limited to self-reported data.
Wang (2021)	Principals’ self-leadership in Canada	Qualitative	18 principals	Interviews	Canada (N. America)	Medium	Thematic insights; small sample size.
Gómez-Leal et al. (2022)	Systematic review of EI in school leadership	Systematic Review	35 articles	PRISMA guidelines	Global	Medium	Comprehensive but limited to secondary analyses.
Berkovich and Eyal (2017)	Principals’ emotion regulation and teacher stress in Israel	Experimental Vignettes	113 teachers	Vignettes, surveys	Israel (Asia)	High	Innovative experimental design with strong causal implications.
Karakus et al. (2024)	Educational leadership and teachers’ subjective well-being	Bibliometric analysis and literature review	345 studies	VOS Viewer	Global	High	Broad scope; rigorous bibliometric methods; limitations in WoS database coverage (e.g., language and regional bias).

, which provides a comprehensive overview of the studies included.

The authors independently assessed the studies to enhance the reliability and objectivity of the quality assessments. This approach aligns with the best practices in systematic reviews, as it minimises individual bias and increases the robustness of the quality evaluation (Higgins et al., 2019). Identified review discrepancies were resolved through discussions between the authors, ensuring a consensus-based final quality rating for each included study. This collaborative approach to quality assessment strengthens the review’s overall methodological rigour and enhances the credibility of its findings.

2.3. Data Analysis

Narrative Synthesis and Thematic Analysis

Given the heterogeneity in study designs and outcome measures, a narrative synthesis approach was employed to analyse and integrate the findings (Popay et al., 2006). According to Popay et al. (2006), the narrative synthesis approach involves four main steps: conducting a preliminary synthesis to organise and describe study findings, exploring relationships within and between studies to explain patterns, and assessing the robustness of the synthesis process and conclusions. It uses textual and interpretive techniques, such as tabulation, thematic grouping, and conceptual mapping, to make sense of diverse study data. This approach is suitable for reviews involving heterogeneous evidence or mixed methods studies. The included studies were thematically grouped according to research questions, following established methods for thematic synthesis in qualitative and mixed-methods research (Thomas & Harden, 2008). The synthesis focused on identifying patterns, consistencies, and discrepancies among studies (Higgins et al., 2019).

2.4. Descriptive Analysis of Studies Reviewed

We developed a data extraction protocol to ensure consistency and precision in capturing key information from the included studies. Data elements, including author(s), year, study focus, study design, sample size, data collection instrument, region, quality rating, and quality appraisal notes, were extracted, as shown in Table 1.

The distribution of articles across journals as shown in Figure 2 reveals significant concentration in two primary outlets: Educational Management Administration & Leadership dominates with 7 articles (25% of the total), followed by the International Journal of Leadership in Education with 5 articles (14.3%). The remaining journals each contributed only 1–2 articles, collectively accounting for 60.7% of publications. This pattern highlights a strong thematic alignment with leadership/educational management journals, while the rest of the journals (53.6% of outlets) appear just once, indicating broad but fragmented dissemination across the field.

Figure 3 presents the graphical representations of the studies on emotional intelligence (EI) and leadership in education included in this study. It summarises their key characteristics, including study design, regional distribution, quality rating, and publication years.

Table 2. Statistical representation of included studies.

Variable	Category	Number of Studies	Percentage
Study Design	Quantitative	13	46.4%
	Qualitative	7	25.0%
	Mixed-Methods	3	10.7%
	Review	4	14.3%
	Experimental	1	3.6%
Region	Asia	16	57.1%
	Africa	5	17.9%
	Europe	1	3.6%
	N. America	4	14.3%
	Global	2	7.1%
Quality Rating	High	10	35.7%
	Medium	17	60.7%
	Low	1	3.6%
Publication Year	2011–2015	6	21.4%
	2016–2020	5	17.9%
	2021–2024	17	60.7%

presents the frequencies, percentages, and statistics of the included studies.

The table offers an overview of the 28 studies exploring emotional intelligence and its impacts on educational leadership, shedding light on their methodological, geographical, and quality-based distributions. Over 46% of the studies employed quantitative methods, reflecting a strong inclination towards numerical analysis, while qualitative approaches accounted for 25%, and mixed methods and reviews together made up approximately 25%, with experimental designs being rare (3.6%). Regionally, Asia stands out, with 57.1% of the studies, driven by significant contributions from countries such as China and the UAE. Africa and North America followed, with 17.9% and 14.3%, respectively, and Europe was scarcely represented at 3.6%. Quality-wise, the majority (60.7%) are rated as medium, often due to practical constraints such as limited sample sizes, while 35.7% earn high marks for their thoroughness. The timeline shows a clear uptick in research interest, with 60.7% of the studies published between 2021 and 2024, possibly spurred by recent global events, which highlight the increased leadership needs.

3. Findings

This section presents the findings as evidence from a review of the 28 studies. The studies were drawn from diverse cultural and institutional contexts and utilised a range of methodologies, including quantitative, qualitative, mixed-methods, and review approaches.

• Research Question 1: What are the core attributes of emotional intelligence that contribute to effective school leadership?

3.1. Predominant Emotional Intelligence Competencies for Effective School Leadership

The review identified a link between five key emotional intelligence (EI) competencies and effective school leadership: self-awareness, self-regulation, social awareness (empathy), relationship management, and motivation. Their impacts on school climate, student outcomes, supporting studies and the contexts are succinctly captured in

Table 3. Predominant EI competencies in school leadership.

EI Competency	Key Competencies	Impacts on Climate/ Outcomes	Supporting Studies	Countries Covered
Self-Awareness	Reflection; Authenticity	Climate ↑; Leadership effectiveness ↑; Engagement ↑	Blaik Hourani et al. (2021); Brinia et al. (2014); Chen and Guo (2020)	UAE, Greece, China
Self-Regulation	Composure; Adaptive coping	Staff resistance ↓; Stability ↑; Resilience ↑	Grobler et al. (2017); Blaik Hourani et al. (2023); Gibson (2024)	South Africa, UAE, China
Social Awareness/Empathy	Perspective-taking; Sensitivity	Trust ↑; Inclusion ↑; Disengagement ↓	Asmamaw and Semela (2023); Ansari and Asad (2023); Brinia et al. (2014)	Ethiopia, Pakistan, Greece
Relationship Management	Networking; Conflict resolution	Teacher efficacy ↑; Morale ↑; Collaboration ↑	Pierce (2014) Noori et al. (2024); Al Shehhi et al. (2021)	USA, Afghanistan, UAE
Motivation	Goal setting; Perseverance	Reforms ↑; Crisis response ↑; Initiative ↑; Growth ↑	Kareem and Kin (2018); Blaik Hourani et al. (2023); Ansari and Asad (2023); Cai (2011)	Malaysia, UAE, Pakistan, Global

NOTE: Up Arrow (↑) implies increase, Down Arrow (↓) implies decrease.

. While these competencies are universally relevant, they manifest uniquely in accordance with cultural norms and systemic challenges.

3.1.1. Self-Awareness

The review revealed that self-awareness contributes significantly to emotionally intelligent leadership. Self-awareness means taking cognisance of one’s emotional dynamics, particularly how emotions inform behaviour (Boyatzis et al., 2000). Self-aware principals engage in critical reflection of their practices and understand their effects on others. In the UAE, Blaik Hourani et al. (2021) found that self-aware principals foster positive school climates by aligning their values with institutional goals. Similarly, Brinia et al. (2014) reported that Greek school principals used self-awareness to enhance interpersonal dynamics through authentic communication. Another study by Chen and Guo (2020) demonstrated that self-awareness in Chinese leaders strengthened instructional leadership by bridging personal values with pedagogical actions. This competency underpins authenticity and self-directed growth, suggesting that school leaders who are aware of their strengths and limitations are better equipped to demonstrate integrity and adaptability at work.

3.1.2. Self-Regulation

Self-regulation, the ability to manage emotional responses, has emerged as an essential skill for navigating high-stakes school environments. In South Africa, Grobler et al. (2017) documented how principals regulated emotions during mandated curriculum changes, mitigating staff resistance through calm and composed decision-making. Similarly, Blaik et al. (2023) emphasised the role of empathy in reducing leadership stress in UAE schools, where principals balanced accountability and empathetic engagement. Gibson (2024) illustrated this in Chinese international schools, where self-regulation enabled leaders to harmonise Confucian respect for authority with Western collaborative philosophies. By maintaining emotional equilibrium, leaders can transform crises into growth opportunities.

3.1.3. Social Awareness and Empathy

Empathy, a subset of social awareness, is critical for fostering trust and reducing interpersonal tension. In Ethiopia, Asmamaw and Semela (2023) linked empathetic leadership to heightened faculty engagement, as leaders addressed workload concerns and institutional barriers. Conversely, Ansari and Asad (2023) revealed that the lack of empathy among authoritarian Pakistani leaders exacerbated teacher disengagement, underscoring the cultural risks of neglecting empathy. In Greece, Brinia et al. (2014) noted that empathetic principals create inclusive environments in which teachers feel safe to innovate and experiment with their teaching methods. The cross-cultural resonance of this competency highlights its role in aligning leadership practices with stakeholders’ needs.

3.1.4. Relationship Management

The review revealed relationship management, the ability to build and sustain constructive relationships, as one of the most frequently emphasised leadership EI competencies. Pierce (2014) found that U.S. principals with strong relational skills elevated collective teacher efficacy, directly correlating with student achievement gains. In Afghanistan, Noori et al. (2024) observed that transformational leaders using relationship management enhanced teacher morale and commitment to school goals, even during political instability. As noted by Al Shehhi et al. (2021), principals in the UAE leveraged EI skills to navigate multicultural staff dynamics and foster collaboration in innovation-driven reforms. Evidently, effective relationship management serves as the fulcrum of a cohesive and resilient school culture.

3.1.5. Motivation

Intrinsic motivation propels leaders to pursue visionary goals and sustain their resilience in the face of challenges (Cai, 2011). Kareem and Kin’s (2018) PCLEI model in Malaysian schools integrated motivation as a catalyst for navigating institutional reforms, while Blaik Hourani et al. (2023) linked motivated UAE leaders to proactive crisis management (PCM). Conversely, Ansari and Asad (2023) highlighted how unmotivated Pakistani leaders adopt passive, compliance-driven approaches that stifle innovation. The role of motivation in transformational leadership is clear: it fuels perseverance, aligns teams around shared visions, and turns obstacles into stepping stones for systemic improvements.

Thus, the interdependence of EI competencies was a recurring theme in this study. For instance, Grobler et al. (2017) illustrated how self-regulation among South African principals enhanced empathetic engagement, demonstrating how intrapersonal skills bolster interpersonal competencies. In resource-constrained settings such as Pakistan, the absence of empathy and motivation perpetuates rigid hierarchies (Ansari & Asad, 2023), whereas in Ethiopia, empathetic leadership fosters collective resilience (Asmamaw & Semela, 2023). These findings position EI as an integrated framework applicable to diverse cultural and institutional contexts.

Additionally, the reviewed studies revealed methodological limitations, such as a reliance on self-reported EI data (Blaik Hourani et al., 2021; Pierce, 2014), which have the potential to inflate leader perceptions, and cross-sectional designs that limit insights into the long-term impact of EI. Cultural validity gaps were evident, as Western-centric tools such as the MSCEIT (Al Shehhi et al., 2021) misaligned with hierarchical contexts such as Pakistan, where deference to authority shapes EI expression (Ansari & Asad, 2023). While empathy and self-regulation are universally valued, their operationalisation varies: Ethiopian leaders prioritise communal resilience (Asmamaw & Semela, 2023), whereas UAE leaders emphasise technical compliance (Al Shehhi et al., 2021). In addition, systemic inequities, as observed in underfunded South African schools (Grobler et al., 2017), and the EI roles of mid-level leaders remain unexplored.

• Research Question 2: How does a school leader’s emotional intelligence impact a teacher’s job performance?

3.2. The Impacts of School Leaders’ Emotional Intelligence on Teacher Job Performance

This study revealed that school leaders’ emotional intelligence (EI) boosts teacher job performance through five interconnected pathways: enhancing their emotional well-being, instructional practices, collective efficacy, motivation and engagement, and stress and conflict. These pathways are supported by distinct EI competencies that exhibit cross-cultural variations in their application.

3.2.1. School Leaders’ EI and Teacher Emotional Well-Being

We found that emotionally intelligent school leaders prioritise empathy and social awareness which foster psychological safety and reduce burnout. In Ethiopian higher education, leaders who demonstrated genuine concern for faculty needs through active listening and addressed workload concerns mitigated disengagement and improved morale (Asmamaw & Semela, 2023). Conversely, authoritarian leaders in Pakistan with low social awareness exacerbate emotional exhaustion among teachers, eroding their motivation and job satisfaction (Ansari & Asad, 2023). Principals in British-style international schools in China alleviated teacher anxiety during cultural clashes by balancing Confucian and Western educational philosophies and emphasising empathy and ethical judgment (Gibson, 2024). According to J. Tian et al. (2022) and Karakus et al. (2024), supportive principal–teacher relationships in the context of transformational leadership indirectly reduce burnout among teachers, as mediated by social–emotional competence. Altogether, these studies underscore the importance of empathy and social awareness in creating a positive psychosocial school climate in which teachers feel valued and emotionally secure in their work environment.

Table 4. Synthesis of evidence on the impacts of school leaders’ emotional intelligence on teacher job performance.

EI Competency (Pathway)	Key Competencies	Impacts on Climate/Outcomes	Supporting Studies
Enhancing Teacher Emotional Well-Being	Empathy; Social Awareness; Active Listening	Psychological safety ↑; Burnout ↓; Morale ↑; Engagement ↑	Asmamaw and Semela (2023); Ansari and Asad (2023); Gibson (2024); J. Tian et al. (2022)
Improving Instructional Practices	Self-Awareness; Self-Regulation; Relationship Management	Feedback quality ↑; Reform buy-in ↑; Instructional consistency ↑; Learning ↑	Chen and Guo (2020); Grobler et al. (2017); Blaik Hourani et al. (2021); Venter et al. (2024)
Fostering Collective Efficacy and Collaboration	Relationship Management; Social Awareness; Motivation	Teacher confidence ↑; Teamwork ↑; Student achievement ↑; SEL growth ↑	Pierce (2014); Noori et al. (2024); Z. Li et al. (2024)
Motivating and Sustaining Engagement	Motivation; Optimism; Vision Articulation	Persistence ↑; Resilience ↑; Innovation ↑; Student outcomes ↑	Blaik Hourani et al. (2021); Potter (2011); Y. Tian and Guo (2022)
Managing Stress and Conflict	Self-Regulation; Conflict Sensitivity; Empathic Communication	Tensions ↓; Focus ↑; Climate stability ↑	Berkovich and Eyal (2017); Grobler et al. (2017)

NOTE: Up Arrow (↑) implies increase, Down Arrow (↓) implies decrease.

presents the pathways through which school leaders’ emotional intelligence impacts teachers’ emotional well-being.

3.2.2. Improving Instructional Practices

Leaders’ EI enhances classroom quality through emotionally informed instructional leadership. In Chinese primary schools, principals’ EI predicts their ability to provide constructive feedback, directly improving teachers’ pedagogical strategies (Chen & Guo, 2020). Similarly, South African principals who regulated emotions during mandated curriculum reforms secured teacher buy-in, ensuring a consistent implementation of new practices (Grobler et al., 2017). In Abu Dhabi, leaders with high self-awareness and social skills tailored professional development to individual teachers’ needs, aligning emotional support with their instructional goals (Blaik Hourani et al., 2021). Venter et al. (2024) further demonstrated that EI strengthened principals’ capacity to supervise instruction, coordinate curricula, and monitor student progress, directly impacting teaching efficacy. Collectively, these studies illustrate how EI bridges the gap between emotional support and pedagogical accountability.

3.2.3. Fostering Collective Efficacy and Collaboration

Effective relationship management by leaders strengthens teachers’ shared beliefs in their collective capabilities. U.S. principals with strong relational skills, such as transparency and trust-building, elevate collective efficacy, which mediates gains in student achievement (Pierce, 2014). In Afghanistan, transformational leaders who model mutual respect have enhanced teachers’ EI and commitment to school goals (Noori et al., 2024). Z. Li et al. (2024) emphasized that EI-oriented distributed leadership fosters student-centred teaching practices and teacher self-efficacy, which indirectly boost adolescent social–emotional competence. These findings highlight trust and relational transparency as catalysts of collective actions.

3.2.4. Motivating and Sustaining Teacher Engagement

Leaders’ intrinsic motivation and optimism are catalysts for teacher persistence. In Abu Dhabi, principals who articulated hopeful visions inspired their staff to adopt challenging reforms, linking individual efforts to institutional success (Blaik Hourani et al., 2021). North American leaders frame setbacks as growth opportunities, fostering resilience amid resource constraints (Potter, 2011). Y. Tian and Guo (2022) identified self-efficacy as a mediator between transformational leadership and reduced burnout, moderated by teachers’ own EI, highlighting the reciprocal nature of motivation. The reviewed evidence consistently links leaders’ optimism to teachers’ sustained efforts and innovation.

3.2.5. Managing Stress and Conflict

Leaders’ emotional regulation and conflict sensitivity buffer workplace stress. In Israel, principals’ empathic listening and reframing strategies (e.g., normalising stress) improved teachers’ emotional states and instructional focus (Berkovich & Eyal, 2017). Berkovich and Eyal (2017) experimentally validated that empathic communication and empowering messages reduce emotional distress, emphasising the role of EI in crisis management. Similarly, principals in South African schools navigating curriculum changes utilise self-regulation and social leadership skills to de-escalate tensions, fostering collaboration (Grobler et al., 2017). These studies position emotional regulation as critical for maintaining stability in high-pressure environments.

Although the evidence robustly links EI to teacher performance, several gaps and contextual limitations have been identified. First, the reviewed studies predominantly focused on principals, neglecting mid-level leaders, such as department heads, who play pivotal roles in daily teacher interactions. For instance, Wang (2021) highlighted principals’ self- and interpersonal leadership strategies but did not explore how assistant principals or curriculum coordinators utilise EI to support teachers in their work. This oversight limits the understanding of EI’s hierarchical application and its diffusion across leadership tiers. Second, the cultural nuances of EI applications remain largely unexplored. Gómez-Leal et al. (2022) noted that collectivist societies (e.g., East Asia) prioritise communal harmony, and individualist cultures (e.g., the U.S.) emphasise personal resilience, but direct comparisons are absent. For example, Pakistani leaders’ authoritarian styles (Ansari & Asad, 2023) contrast with Ethiopian leaders’ empathetic approaches (Asmamaw & Semela, 2023); however, the reasons behind these differences—whether cultural, institutional, or systemic—have not been interrogated. Karakus et al. (2021) mapped emotional intelligence research trends in Asia but did not contrast these with Western findings, leaving a gap in understanding how cultural values shape EI prioritisation. Third, the relationship between EI and systemic inequities is rarely studied. Mahfouz and Gordon (2021) argued for prioritizing social–emotional competencies in leadership training to mitigate stress in underfunded schools, yet no studies examined how EI buffers teachers in resource-poor settings. For instance, South African principals managing curriculum changes (Grobler et al., 2017) operate in challenging environments, but the role of EI in navigating systemic barriers (e.g., overcrowded classrooms and limited materials) has not been explicitly analysed. Finally, methodological limitations persist in these studies. As reported by Potter (2011), self-reported EI assessments risk bias, with principals often rating themselves higher than teachers (Pierce, 2014). Additionally, cross-sectional designs dominate the literature, which limits causal inferences. Longitudinal studies, such as those tracking EI training outcomes, such as that of Venter et al. (2024), are rare but necessary to establish EI’s sustained impact.

Overall, emotionally intelligent school leadership enhances teacher performance by addressing the emotional, instructional, and relational dimensions of work. The interdependence of these pathways, such as stress management, sustains collective efficacy, while motivation fuels instructional risk-taking, underscoring EI’s holistic role in teachers’ job performance.

• Research Question 3: What are the cascading effects of school leaders’ emotional intelligence on school climate and student outcomes?

3.3. Cascading Impacts of School Leader EI on School Climate and Student Outcomes

This review reveals that school leaders’ emotional intelligence (EI) permeates school ecosystems through interpersonal dynamics, organizational practices, and systemic interactions, ultimately shaping school climate and student outcomes. The cascading effects manifest in two interrelated pathways: (1) fostering adaptive, collaborative school climates and (2) mediating student achievement through teachers’ well-being and instructional effectiveness.

3.3.1. Cascading Effects on School Climate

The review indicates that emotionally intelligent leadership contributes to developing school environments characterised by trust, resilience, and innovation. These qualities are deemed essential for effectively addressing institutional challenges. Grobler et al. (2017) highlighted that South African school principals who demonstrate strong EI competencies, particularly in self-regulation and social leadership, are better equipped to manage mandated curriculum changes. Their approach fostered collaboration among the teaching staff and reduced resistance to change. This suggests that EI competencies in school leadership play a crucial role in shaping positive school climates and facilitating organizational changes. Similarly, Abu Dhabi principals with strong communication and relationship management skills reduced staff turnover and amplified participatory engagement, creating environments in which teachers felt safe to experiment with pedagogical strategies (Blaik Hourani et al., 2021). These findings align with Tai and Abdull Kareem’s (2019) investigation of Principal Change Leadership Emotional Intelligence (PCLEI), which demonstrated that emotionally intelligent leaders improved teachers’ attitudes towards change, particularly in high- and mediocre-performing schools in Malaysia. By modelling empathy and resolving conflicts constructively, such leaders institutionalise collaborative problem-solving, stabilise the school culture, and prepare institutions for sustained improvement.

Notably, the impact of leaders’ EI extends beyond staff interactions, indirectly shaping students’ experiences. Our findings show that principals who articulate shared visions with emotional clarity inspire teachers to reflect on these values in their classroom practices. For example, in Chinese schools, leaders who balanced Confucian and Western educational philosophies mitigated cultural friction and fostered inclusive environments that aligned institutional goals with daily pedagogy (Gibson, 2024). This alignment ensures that emotionally intelligent leadership cascades from administrative decisions to classroom interactions, embedding resilience and mutual respect into the school ethos.

3.3.2. Cascading Effects on Student Outcomes

The cascading impacts of EI on student achievement are mediated by teachers’ well-being, instructional quality, and systemic alignment. These pathways and their documented outcomes are summarised in

Table 5. Cascading impacts of school leader EI on school climate and student outcomes.

EI Pathway	Key Competencies	Impacts on Climate/Student Outcomes	Supporting Studies
Adaptive, Collaborative School Climates	Self-Regulation; Communication; Relationship Management; Empathy; Conflict Resolution	Trust ↑; Resilience ↑; Innovation ↑; Staff turnover ↓; Participatory engagement ↑	Grobler et al. (2017); Blaik Hourani et al. (2021); Tai and Abdull Kareem (2019); Gibson (2024)
Mediated Student Outcomes via Teacher Well-Being and Instructional Efficacy	Emotion Recognition; Empathy; Distributed Leadership; Instructional Oversight; Transparency	Teacher burnout ↓; Instructional consistency ↑; Student engagement ↑; Self-efficacy ↑; Achievement ↑; Learning quality ↑	J. Tian et al. (2022); Berkovich and Eyal (2017); Z. Li et al. (2024), Venter et al. (2024); Pierce (2014)

NOTE: Up Arrow (↑) implies increase, Down Arrow (↓) implies decrease.

, which highlights how different EI competencies of school leaders translate into improved climates and student outcomes. A key pathway to mitigating teacher burnout is to have principals with high EI recognise the early signs of stress and deploy resources empathetically, preserving instructional consistency. For example, transformational leaders in China indirectly reduce teacher burnout by enhancing social–emotional competence and fostering supportive student–teacher relationships (J. Tian et al., 2022). Similarly, Israeli principals’ emotion recognition skills improved teachers’ ability to reframe challenges as growth opportunities, which correlated with resilient classroom environments and increased student engagement (Berkovich & Eyal, 2017).

The review suggests that distributed leadership models further illustrate EI’s systemic influence on how school leaders operationalise EI. Principals who balance emotional oversight with decentralised authority empower teachers to adopt student-centred pedagogies. For instance, in China, EI-oriented distributed leadership enhances teacher self-efficacy, enabling educators to tailor instructions to diverse learner needs (Z. Li et al., 2024). This pedagogical flexibility fosters student agency as classrooms evolve into spaces where adaptive practices resonate with learners’ cultural and cognitive contexts. Additionally, EI-driven instructional leadership, such as curriculum coordination and student progress monitoring, ensures that administrative decisions align with classroom realities. For instance, South African principals with high EI improved teaching quality by emotionally navigating bureaucratic pressures without compromising their pedagogical priorities (Venter et al., 2024). Moreover, Pierce (2014) found that collective teacher efficacy, nurtured through transparent communication and equitable resource allocation, amplifies student outcomes. The study found that U.S. principals who prioritised relational transparency and trust-building elevated teachers’ shared beliefs in their instructional effectiveness, which mediated gains in student achievement. This cycle of high expectations and academic rigor underscores EI’s role in bridging policy and practice.

Nevertheless, while the reviewed studies affirm EI’s cascading effects, methodological and contextual limitations may hinder its generalisability in many ways. First, the predominance of correlational designs as shown in (J. Tian et al., 2022; Blaik Hourani et al., 2021) restricts causal inferences. In addition, self-reported EI measures, as seen in the studies of U.S. principals by Pierce (2014), risk overestimating leaders’ perceived competence. Second, the findings show that cultural variability in the cascading impacts of school leaders on school climate and student outcomes remains unexplored. For instance, while Karakus et al. (2021) mapped EI trends in Asian contexts, direct comparisons with Western findings are unexplored, leaving gaps in understanding how collectivist and individualist values shape EI prioritisation. In addition, studies such as Gómez-Leal et al.’s (2022) review of EI in school leadership noted cultural differences in EI application but did not analyse their implications for student outcomes. Furthermore, systemic inequities that might shape school leaders’ EI expression are rarely addressed in the reviewed studies. Although South African principals have navigated curriculum changes in resource-constrained settings (Grobler et al., 2017), the role of EI in mitigating structural barriers (such as overcrowded classrooms) has not been explicitly examined in the studies reviewed to date. This gap suggests that future research should employ longitudinal and mixed-method approaches to unravel the temporal and contextual nuances that impact the cascading effect of school leaders’ EI on school climate and student outcomes. In addition, incorporating objective metrics, such as standardised test scores or socio-emotional development indices, could strengthen claims about EI’s impacts on students’ outcomes.

In summary, these findings show that the cascading effects of school leaders’ EI underscore its transformative potential as a relational and strategic competence. This reveals that emotionally intelligent principals indirectly scaffold student success through empowered teachers and aligned instructional practices based on trust, resilience, and innovation. However, realising this potential requires frameworks that adapt to cultural, demographic, and systemic contexts. This implies that school leaders need to cultivate EI, given the necessity of dealing with equity imperatives and curriculum reform demands. This cultivation emerges as a leadership toolkit and a prerequisite for creating sustainable, student-centred ecosystems.

• Research Question 4: Do cultural and contextual factors influence the expression of emotional intelligence (EI) among school leaders?

3.4. Cultural and Contextual Determinants of Emotional Intelligence Competencies in School Leadership

This section examines how the cultural and contextual determinants of emotional intelligence competencies impact school leadership.

3.4.1. Cultural Variations in EI Application in School Leadership

The review suggests that cultural norms modulate the prioritisation and operationalisation of EI competencies across contexts. For instance, in hierarchical societies such as Pakistan, school leaders’ reliance on authoritarian styles rooted in respect for authority clashes with EI principles such as collaborative decision-making and empathy. This misalignment intensified teacher stress and disengagement, as leaders with low social awareness skills failed to address staff needs (Ansari & Asad, 2023). Similarly, systemic gaps in leadership preparation in the UAE prioritise technical skills over relational competencies, resulting in principals with low EI levels and suboptimal school climates (Al Shehhi et al., 2021).

Conversely, we found that collectivist contexts, such as Ethiopia and Kazakhstan, demonstrated the transformative potential of EI when aligned with communal values. In Ethiopia, school leaders have leveraged empathy and self-management to foster trust and collective resilience, thereby mitigating conflicts even in resource-limited settings (Asmamaw & Semela, 2023). In Kazakhstan, leaders who blended cognitive, emotional, and communicative skills were reported to navigate multicultural stakeholder dynamics effectively, aligning with the evolving educational policies in Central Asia (Belessova et al., 2023). These studies highlight how EI’s efficacy depends on its resonance with indigenous leadership traditions.

3.4.2. Contextual Modulation of School Leaders’ EI

The relevance of EI in school leadership varies depending on whether a country’s educational system is traditional or modern. These cultural and contextual determinants, along with their impacts on leadership practices, are summarised in

Table 6. Cultural and contextual determinants of EI competencies.

Context	Disposition	Impacts on Leadership	Representative Studies
Hierarchical (Pakistan, UAE)	Authoritarian decision-making, low social awareness, and deference to authority	↑ Teacher stress, ↓ Collaboration, ↓ Psychological safety	Ansari and Asad (2023); Al Shehhi et al. (2021)
Collectivist (Ethiopia, Kazakhstan)	Communal empathy, strong self-management, and integrated cognitive-emotional response	↑ Trust; ↑ Collective resilience; ↓ Conflict; ↑ Group cohesion	Asmamaw and Semela (2023); Belessova et al. (2023)
Confucian-Influenced (China)	Emphasis on hierarchical harmony, respect-based empathy, and ethical decision-making	↑ Inclusivity, balanced pedagogy; ↓ and Cultural friction	Gibson (2024)
Innovation-Driven (UAE)	Prioritisation of technical proficiency and accountability over relational competencies	↓ Staff morale, ↓ Participatory engagement, suboptimal climate despite high-stakes reforms	Al Shehhi et al. (2021); Tai and Abdull Kareem (2019)

NOTE: Up Arrow (↑) implies increase, Down Arrow (↓) implies decrease.

. In innovation-driven systems, such as the UAE, high-stakes accountability reforms undermine relational skills, with principals prioritising standardised outcomes over emotional regulation (Al Shehhi et al., 2021). In contrast, participatory systems, such as that of Ethiopia, have integrated EI into leadership practices to strengthen institutional cohesion, even in the face of systemic resource constraints (Asmamaw & Semela, 2023).

The review also suggests that cultural reinterpretations of EI competencies determine contextual adaptability. Gibson (2024) found that EI was reframed in China to emphasise hierarchical harmony and collective goal alignment implying a divergence from Western models that stress individual empowerment. This study also shows that British-style International Baccalaureate school principals balanced Confucian respect for authority with Western pedagogical philosophies to navigate cultural clashes through empathy and ethical judgment. This duality underscores the need for localised EI frameworks that reconcile global competencies with regional values. These findings suggest that leadership training programs should be tailored to the cultural context of schools to maximise their effectiveness.

While empathy, self-regulation, and social awareness are universally recognised (Gómez-Leal et al., 2022; Singh & Dali, 2013), their manifestations are culturally contingent. For instance, collectivist settings may prioritise communal conflict resolution, whereas individualist systems might emphasise personal resilience. However, methodological limitations, including a reliance on self-reported EI data (Al Shehhi et al., 2021) and Western-centric assessment tools, restrict the cross-cultural generalisability of these findings.

Overall, these findings suggest that cultural and contextual factors are not passive backdrops but active sculptors of EI’s efficacy in school leadership. Notably, although EI remains a robust predictor of positive organisational climates, its transformative potential hinges on alignment with local values, systemic goals, and community needs. Hence, future research could employ mixed-methods designs to capture the dynamic interplay between EI and cultural norms, particularly in rapidly evolving countries such as the UAE or under-resourced contexts such as Ethiopia. Moreover, culturally validated assessment tools and longitudinal studies are critical for advancing contextually grounded, EI-oriented leadership frameworks.

• Research Question 5: How effective are traditional metrics in measuring and developing EI among school leaders in different contexts?

3.5. Measurement, Assessment, and Development of Emotional Intelligence in Educational Leadership

Here, we synthesised evidence from the studies included to evaluate the efficacy of EI assessment tools and their applicability in diverse educational contexts. These findings highlight the strengths, limitations, and contextual adaptability of commonly used instruments, which are summarised in

Table 7. EI measurement tools and contextual challenges.

Instrument	Strengths	Limitations	Representative Studies
ESAP	Comprehensive coverage	Too lengthy; self-report bias	Potter (2011)
PCLEI	Validated change-management factors	Inflated self-ratings	Kareem and Kin (2018); Ansari and Asad (2023)
MSCEIT	Ability-based scenarios	Culturally narrow stimuli	Al Shehhi et al. (2021)
WEIS	Collectivist-oriented	Social desirability bias	Chen and Guo (2020); Pierce (2014)
ESCI	360° behavioural feedback	Western bias	Pierce (2014); Ansari and Asad (2023)
EIAS	Real-world scenario appraisal	Static framework	Venter et al. (2024)

.

3.5.1. Emotional Skills Assessment Process (ESAP)

The ESAP is a psychometric tool grounded in Nelson et al.’s (1998) framework, which evaluates interpersonal, leadership, self-management, and intrapersonal skills through 213 self-reported items (Nelson et al., 2017). Potter’s (2011) application of the ESAP in U.S. schools distinguished high-achieving leaders by identifying competencies such as stress management and assertiveness. For instance, leaders who scored highly on “comfort” and “decision-making” demonstrated greater resilience in crisis situations. However, the tool’s lengthy format and reliance on self-reporting introduce a risk of response bias, particularly in hierarchical cultures, where leaders may overstate their relational skills to align with perceived expectations.

3.5.2. Principal Change Leadership Emotional Intelligence (PCLEI) Model

The PCLEI model was developed through a survey of 731 Malaysian principals (Kareem & Kin, 2018) to identify four validated components critical for change management: emotional perception/expression, utilisation, understanding, and regulation. The structural equation model of the model revealed that principals with high emotional perception scores were better equipped to navigate reform resistance. However, its self-report design may inflate leaders’ perceived competencies, especially in contexts such as Pakistan, where authoritarian norms discourage honest self-assessments (Ansari & Asad, 2023; Kareem & Kin, 2019).

3.5.3. Mayer–Salovey–Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT)

The MSCEIT is an ability-based test that assesses leaders’ proficiency in perceiving, using, understanding, and regulating emotions through scenario-based tasks. Al Shehhi et al. (2021) applied this tool in UAE public schools, linking emotion regulation to improved conflict resolution. However, its Western-centric stimuli, such as interpreting facial expressions from predominantly Caucasian faces, lack cultural validity in contexts such as the UAE, where deference to authority and indirect communication styles recalibrate EI expression. For example, Emirati principals prioritised technical compliance over empathetic engagement, reflecting systemic gaps in leadership training programs.

3.5.4. Wong’s Emotional Intelligence Scale (WEIS)

The WEIS was designed to align with collectivist values and measures self-emotion, others’ emotion appraisal, emotion use, and emotion regulation. Chen and Guo (2020) utilised WEIS in Chinese primary schools to investigate the impacts of principals’ emotional intelligence on teaching strategy mediated by instructional leadership. The findings suggest that principals’ self-awareness and social skills directly predict their ability to influence teachers’ instructional strategies. Nevertheless, the scale’s self-report nature poses a risk of social desirability bias, where principals could rate their relationship management skills higher than teachers (Pierce, 2014).

3.5.5. Emotional and Social Competency Inventory (ESCI)

The ESCI employs a 360-degree approach to evaluate observable EI behaviours, including self-awareness, self-management, and social awareness. Pierce (2014) linked ESCI-assessed relationship management skills to enhanced collective teacher efficacy in U.S. schools, demonstrating its utility in aligning EI with transformational leadership. However, its emphasis on Western leadership ideals, such as individual empowerment, overlooks the cultural nuances of hierarchical systems, such as Pakistan, where collaborative decision-making conflicts with traditional authority structures (Ansari & Asad, 2023).

3.5.6. Emotional Intelligence Appraisal Scale (EIAS)

The Emotional Intelligence Appraisal Scale (EIAS), a grounded framework, evaluates self-management and social awareness through practical scenarios. Venter et al. (2024) demonstrated its validity in South Africa in a study that examined school principals’ instructional leadership through an emotional intelligence lens. The results suggest that leaders’ emotional resilience enhances their capacity to oversee instructional activities and support educators. Nevertheless, its static framework encounters difficulties in addressing dynamic challenges, such as the demands of post-pandemic leadership, which necessitate adaptability beyond predefined competencies.

The analysis of the limitations of emotional intelligence (EI) assessment tools for educational leaders reveals several challenges. First, the cultural validity of Western-developed instruments, such as the MSCEIT and ESCI, may not apply to non-Western contexts (Al Shehhi et al., 2021; Asmamaw & Semela, 2023; Karakus et al., 2024). These disparities underscore the necessity of assessment tools that reflect local values, such as the emphasis on hierarchical harmony in Confucian systems (Gibson, 2024). Second, self-report bias presents a substantial limitation in tools such as the ESAP and WEIS (Pierce, 2014). Third, the contextual rigidity of static frameworks, such as the EIAS, fails to accommodate evolving systemic challenges (Venter et al., 2024). Therefore, the development of culturally adaptive tools is crucial for addressing these concerns.

Overall, while instruments such as the ESAP and PCLEI offer valuable insights, their effectiveness depends on cultural and contextual adaptation. Developing culturally responsive, triangulated, and dynamic assessment and training models is crucial for cultivating leaders who can navigate the complexities of 21st-century educational environments.

4. Discussion

This systematic review examined the direct and cascading effects of school leaders’ emotional intelligence (EI) on teachers and students in diverse global contexts. The findings revealed that self-awareness, empathy, and relationship management emerged as core EI competencies that enabled leaders to foster trust, mitigate burnout (Arbués et al., 2025), and inspire collective efficacy among educators. These competencies catalyse a ripple effect: principals’ EI improves teachers’ instructional strategies and emotional resilience, mediating an enhancement of school climate and student achievement. However, the operationalisation and efficacy of EI are significantly modulated by sociocultural norms, with hierarchical systems prioritising deference and collectivist contexts emphasising harmony.

The review identified five key pathways through which school leaders’ EI impacts teachers and students. They manifest by enhancing teachers’ emotional well-being, improving instructional practices, fostering collective efficacy and collaboration, motivating and sustaining teacher engagement, and managing stress and conflict. Emotionally intelligent principals create psychologically safe environments in which teachers feel valued and supported, leading to reduced burnout and increased morale (Asmamaw & Semela, 2023; J. Tian et al., 2022). Leaders’ self-awareness and social skills directly predict their ability to provide constructive feedback and influence teachers’ pedagogical strategies (Chen & Guo, 2020). Strong relationship management skills elevate collective teacher efficacy, which mediates gains in student achievement (Pierce, 2014). Principals who articulate hopeful visions inspire their staff to persist in the face of challenges (Blaik Hourani et al., 2021). Additionally, leaders’ emotional regulation buffers workplace stressors, maintaining instructional focus during reforms (Berkovich & Eyal, 2017; Grobler et al., 2017).

However, this review highlights significant cultural variations in the manifestation of EI in school leadership. In hierarchical societies such as Pakistan, authoritarian leadership styles rooted in respect for authority clash with the EI principles of collaborative decision-making, intensifying the stress of teachers (Ansari & Asad, 2023). Conversely, in collectivist contexts such as Ethiopia, leaders leverage empathy to foster trust and collective resilience, even in resource-limited settings (Asmamaw & Semela, 2023). Thus, the efficacy of EI depends on its resonance with indigenous leadership traditions and systemic priorities. For instance, in innovation-driven systems such as the UAE, high-stakes accountability reforms can undermine relational skills as principals’ priorities emphasised outcomes over emotional engagement (Al Shehhi et al., 2021).

The review also revealed the limitations of the current EI measurement approaches. Western-centric assessment tools, such as the MSCEIT, lack cultural validity in non-Western contexts and fail to capture the nuanced expressions of EI shaped by local values (Al Shehhi et al., 2021). Self-report measures risk inflating leaders perceived competencies, especially in hierarchical cultures where an honest self-assessment is discouraged (Ansari & Asad, 2023). Static frameworks struggle to accommodate evolving systemic challenges, such as post-pandemic leadership demands (Venter et al., 2024). These methodological constraints, coupled with the predominance of correlational designs, limit causal inferences about EI’s impact. Despite these limitations, the findings underscore the transformative potential of emotionally intelligent leadership in diverse school settings.

Overall, this review synthesises global evidence demonstrating how school leaders’ EI directly and indirectly enhances teacher performance and student outcomes. While universal competencies such as empathy and self-awareness are foundational, their expression and impacts are deeply shaped by cultural and contextual factors. Cultivating emotionally intelligent leadership thus requires nuanced frameworks that adapt core EI principles to local values, systemic goals, and community needs. By developing such culturally grounded approaches, educational systems can harness the full potential of EI to create resilient, inclusive, and high-achieving school environments.

5. Conclusions

This study explored how school leader emotional intelligence constructs such as self-awareness, self-regulation, social awareness, empathy, and relationship management are associated with teachers’ performance and their well-being as well as student outcomes. These constructs consistently emerge across the literature as influential in fostering trust in school leaders, mitigating teacher burnout, and enhancing teachers’ collective efficacy. This study also shows a positive link between an effective application of the constructs and student engagement, achievement, and learning quality. While these patterns suggest that emotionally intelligent school leadership can support improved instructional practices and teacher resilience, this review does not claim direct causality due to the predominance of self-reported data and cross-sectional designs. Notably, it is evident that the interpretation and impact of EI is shaped by sociocultural contexts. Moreover, the widespread use of Western-centric measurement tools limits the cultural validity and generatability of the findings. Hence, future research should prioritise culturally responsive methodologies and longitudinal designs to deepen the understanding of how school leaders’ EI impacts teachers and students.

5.1. Implications for Policy and Practice

To maximise the transformative potential of emotional intelligence (EI) in educational leadership, policymakers and practitioners should embrace strategies that align EI development with cultural, institutional, and systemic imperatives through Culturally Adaptive EI Development Programs and a Systemic Integration of EI Metrics in leadership effectiveness assessments.

Culturally Adaptive EI Development Programs: This proposition holds that leadership training should transcend the one-size-fits-all models to include embedding participatory context-sensitive pedagogies. For example, workshops could prioritise emotional resilience and deference to navigate authority structures in hierarchical systems, such as those in Pakistan and the UAE. Meanwhile, collectivist contexts, such as those of Ethiopia and China, might emphasise communal harmony through collaborative problem-solving. Scenario-based learning, reflective mentorship, and community-engaged co-design can also operationalise EI concepts into culturally resonant practices. Such programs should also integrate local educators and community stakeholders to ensure their relevance and sustainability.

Systemic Integration of EI Metrics: Integrating validated (EI) assessment metrics into leadership development frameworks will ensure that emotional competencies are prioritised alongside technical skills. Hence, policymakers should consider the following issues: First, the selection of primary school leaders should be revised to incorporate EI benchmarks. Second, EI evaluations should be integrated into school leaders’ performance reviews and professional development strategies. Finally, national school leadership selection and accreditation bodies should mandate EI training as a component of leadership certifications.

5.2. Limitations of This Study

The current study primarily relied on secondary data, which comprised self-reported data, Western-derived measures, and cross-sectional designs that limited causal claims and cultural applicability. Nevertheless, its findings consistently demonstrate that principals’ emotional intelligence correlates with enhanced teacher engagement, improved instructional practices and better student outcomes. These convergent results, observed in both resource-constrained and non-Western settings, underscore EI’s foundational role in educational leadership.

5.3. Directions for Future Research

Future research should prioritise the development of culturally sensitive assessment tools and the use of mixed-method research designs to empirically establish how EI shapes leadership practices across diverse contexts. Longitudinal studies that track the impact of EI-focused interventions on teacher retention and student achievement are required to strengthen these causal claims. Additionally, interdisciplinary explorations of how EI synergies with distributed leadership in school settings can illuminate pathways for addressing systemic inequities through emotionally intelligent practices.