Emotional intelligence

Emotional intelligence did not significantly affect the team performance of the inter-instituted collaboration. Emotional intelligence presented a highly significant relationship to team performance. Achievement and elites' socioeconomic status--which were approved to promote team identity --might miscarry the direct effects of emotional intelligence on team performance. In other words, team members' emotional intelligence could only create adverse effects on the knowledge-sharing mechanism but not on team performance directly (somewhat indirectly). Likewise, the members' emotional intelligence also had a significant negative impact on team conflict, negatively impacting team performance. Emotional intelligence indirectly affects team performance in faculty members' relationship mechanisms. This phenomenon might reflect the unique cultural characteristics of program faculty, a type of social elites who could well manage or suppress emotion and highly valued professional achievement, considering their high socioeconomic status and high professional identity. However, their thinking styles and behavior were inevitably influenced by emotional intelligence like any other human being. Consequently, knowledge-sharing mechanisms and team conflict were influenced as moderating factors to affect team performance.

Synthetically, the emotional intelligence of faculty members seemed not to create significant effects on team performance due to the unique community culture of higher-educational campuses, such as faculty members' academic achievement and social status. However, emotional intelligence played the role of antecedent in team conflict, resulting in significant effects on team performance.

Conclusion

Team performance factors of inter-instituted collaboration. Notably, this study emphasized the relationships among several factors to team performance, including faculty members' emotional intelligence, knowledge-sharing, and team conflict. The following four conclusions were drawn on the bases of research findings:

(1) Knowledge-sharing among faculty members at the higher-education level was crucial in team performance in inter- instituted collaboration. Like any other organization, the knowledge we share in higher-education settings is the primary mission of institutes and the foremost strategy for implementing this mission.

(2) Team conflict within the inter-instituted community created direct but adverse effects on faculty members' team performance in collaboration projects. As in any other community, team conflict within a faculty