Hiring managers in sales organizations have spent years looking for emotionally intelligent candidates, people who can read a room, manage their own feelings, and connect with buyers. Yet the research on whether emotional intelligence actually improves sales results has been surprisingly mixed. Some studies find a positive link, others find no connection at all, and a few even suggest it can hurt performance.
A study published in the Journal of Marketing set out to investigate why those results have been so inconsistent. The answer, the research team argues, comes down to a factor that has been almost entirely overlooked: how confident a salesperson feels about their emotional skills. The study finds that emotional intelligence only reliably boosts sales performance when it is paired with a matching level of confidence in using those skills. When the two are out of sync, performance can actually decline.
What the researchers wanted to know
The investigation was led by Blair Kidwell, a professor of marketing at the University of North Texas, along with colleagues Jonathan Hasford and Alex Ricardo Zablah at the University of Tennessee, Broderick Turner at Virginia Tech University, and David M. Hardesty at the University of Kentucky. They noticed that prior studies of emotional intelligence in sales settings produced contradictory findings and suspected an important variable was being left out of the equation.
That variable is emotional self-efficacy, or ESE. Emotional intelligence, often abbreviated as EI, refers to a person’s actual ability to perceive, understand, and manage emotions during interactions. ESE, by contrast, captures how confident a person is in those abilities. A salesperson might be highly skilled at reading customer emotions but deeply unsure of that skill, or they might be brimming with confidence while actually lacking emotional awareness. The researchers wanted to understand what happens when these two traits are aligned and what happens when they are not.
The concept the team introduced is called “emotional calibration.” Think of it like a thermometer that reads accurately: a calibrated salesperson has emotional skills that match their confidence level. An uncalibrated salesperson has a mismatch, either overestimating or underestimating their abilities.
How they tested the idea
The researchers conducted four separate field studies across different sales industries. In each study, they measured salespeople’s emotional intelligence using a validated 15-item test called the Emotional Intelligence in Marketing Exchanges scale, or EIME. This is an ability-based test, meaning it evaluates what people can actually do with emotional information rather than asking them to rate themselves. They also measured emotional self-efficacy by asking salespeople how confident they felt in each of their answers.
Study 1 involved 91 real estate agents. Their managers provided commission data covering the previous 12 months. Study 2 surveyed 107 sales counselors at a nationwide fitness chain and used percent-to-quota figures provided by managers. Study 3 collected data from 39 business-to-business salespeople and matched them with 124 of their customers, who rated the quality of the relationship. Study 4 examined 90 insurance agents and included a measure of work-related stress.
Across all four studies, performance was measured using objective or manager-reported data, not self-reports from the salespeople themselves. This is an important detail because the research team’s own preliminary meta-analysis of 18 earlier studies found that the link between emotional intelligence and sales performance disappeared entirely when both variables were measured objectively.
What the data showed
The central finding was consistent across all four studies. When salespeople had both high emotional intelligence and high confidence in their emotional skills, they significantly outperformed their peers. On average, these “calibrated” salespeople achieved performance outcomes 37% higher than underconfident salespeople (high skill, low confidence), 61% higher than negatively calibrated salespeople (low skill, low confidence), and a striking 351% higher than overconfident salespeople (low skill, high confidence).
The worst performers were not the people who lacked both skill and confidence. They were the overconfident ones, people who felt sure about emotional abilities they did not actually possess. The researchers suggest this happens because overconfident salespeople tend to project eagerness and excitement in a way that draws attention to themselves and away from the customer’s needs.
Study 2 shed light on why calibration helps. The data showed that calibrated salespeople built stronger rapport with their customers, defined as a sense of enjoyable interaction and personal connection. This rapport, in turn, was linked to better sales results. Notably, two alternative explanations were tested and ruled out: adaptive selling, which is the ability to change one’s approach based on the situation, and manifest influence, which is the ability to persuade buyers. Neither of these explained the calibration effect.
Study 3 dug even deeper into the process. Calibrated salespeople were more likely to experience feelings of calmness and relaxation during customer interactions rather than nervous excitement. These calm emotional states, which the researchers call “positive avoidance emotions,” were in turn linked to better customer-rated rapport. But this link only held for salespeople with longer job tenures. Newer salespeople who displayed the same calm demeanor did not see the same rapport benefits, possibly because their emotional displays came across as less authentic without the backing of experience.
Study 4 introduced stress into the picture. The researchers found that when salespeople experienced elevated levels of work-related stress, the benefits of emotional calibration weakened significantly. The performance gains began to diminish at relatively modest stress levels, suggesting that even moderate stress can erode the advantages that come from having well-calibrated emotional skills.
A nuance from further analysis
A supplemental analysis called response surface analysis revealed an additional wrinkle. The absolute best performance did not come from salespeople whose confidence perfectly matched their ability. It came from those whose emotional intelligence slightly exceeded their confidence. In other words, a touch of humility, rather than perfect alignment, appeared to produce the best results.
What this means for sales organizations
For managers who use emotional intelligence as a hiring criterion, this research suggests that screening for EI alone is insufficient. A salesperson’s confidence in their emotional skills matters just as much, and the alignment between the two is what appears to drive results. Companies might consider assessing both dimensions during recruitment or onboarding.
Training programs focused on building emotional self-efficacy could be valuable, but the findings come with a warning. Boosting a salesperson’s confidence without also developing their underlying emotional skills could backfire badly. The data indicate that overconfidence is the most damaging form of miscalibration, producing worse outcomes than having low skill and low confidence combined.
The stress findings also carry practical weight. If moderate stress is enough to erode the performance gains from emotional calibration, then investments in salesperson emotional development may not pay off in high-pressure environments unless the organization also takes steps to reduce stress. Supportive supervision, manageable workloads, and adequate resources could all help preserve the benefits of calibration.
Finally, the tenure finding suggests that emotional calibration training may be better targeted at experienced salespeople rather than brand-new hires. Newer salespeople may benefit more from building foundational product knowledge and procedural skills before focusing on emotional competence.
Important caveats
The studies are observational, meaning they identify patterns of association rather than proving that calibration directly causes better performance. The researchers used statistical techniques to address potential sources of bias, but controlled experiments would be needed to establish direct cause and effect. Additionally, the sample sizes in individual studies were relatively modest, ranging from 39 to 107 salespeople. The researchers addressed this by pooling results across studies in a single-paper meta-analysis.
The research also focused on in-person or direct sales interactions. Whether the same patterns hold in phone-based or virtual selling environments remains an open question, though the researchers speculate that emotional cues like calmness and eagerness would still be transmitted through voice tone and video.
