The idea of Emotional Intelligence, also called EI or EQ, is widely used to describe personal qualities, separate from IQ, which impact on effectiveness. The concept appears to have its roots in an article by David McClelland, “Testing for Competence not Intelligence” (American Psychologist, 1973). However, it can be argued that the focus on ‘Emotional Intelligence’ has taken attention away from other important factors affecting performance. New research on Authentic Leadership, for example, highlights the need to develop people’s sense of engagement and build on their strengths. This suggests that we look more closely at role relationships, and how to create the ‘supportive environment’ required for high performance.

Getting Inside Emotional Intelligence (EQ)

Despite the current popularity of ‘EQ’ we should remember that it is only a label that serves to describe various attributes that contribute to effectiveness. It generally makes little sense to compare IQ and EQ; it’s just not that simple! By way of comparison, suppose you have a big car, but by mistake it was fitted with a micro-engine. The engine (IQ) is then a big issue, but once the engine is fixed, other things come into play. However, do you enhance the performance of the car by saying it has an EQ problem?

In this example, EQ is being used to describe the brakes, suspension, steering (and numerous other bits!), but is the EQ label really useful? The separate and distinct factors do have a bearing on the ‘passenger experience.’ However, the real issue, highlighted by recent research, relates more to the passengers’ desire to Set Direction, their need for Autonomy, and their concerns about Relatedness. Responding to the passengers motivation to drive themselves is more in the realm of Self Determination Theory (SDT) than EQ. The focus on EQ is essentially all wrapped up with the individual. In contrast, a well-designed set of competencies will take full account of the Context and include elements of SDT.

Changing the Focus

Understanding role relationships and role interdependencies is increasingly important in modern organizations, but does EQ provide the best platform for gaining this insight? In the context of leadership, EQ has become an umbrella term that encompasses a number of late 20th century competencies. The problem is that these are not configured in a way that takes account of the latest research, and particularly the need to be more aware of actions that develop a sense of authenticity in others. This is central to the emerging concept of Authentic Leadership, which involves far more than simply ‘acting with integrity’ or being authentic!

Much traditional assessment has focused on attributes within the individual, rather than identifying what others require of that person. Shifting the focus helps us gain a clearer understanding of the priorities for action. If we look at Assessment Centre research, for example, we find that performance is Situation Specific. Leaders require Agility to adapt to different requirements, but does EQ provide the solution? Simply creating a label, such as Adaptability, does not clarify the different approaches required when dealing with colleagues or clients, an individual or a group. However, there is an alternative perspective, which places more emphasis on what specific role groups require. This is an output orientated model that clarifies the actions required to create alignment. It is perhaps not surprising that professionals are starting to question some of the underlying assumptions of the old thinking, and particularly the concept of Emotional Intelligence.

Read the rest of this entry »