EI is Only Powerful if You Can See

Emotional intelligence (EI) has become a foundational construct of leadership across all industries and throughout all levels of leadership within the organization. But what good is it if leaders are completely blind to how to personally use it?

The effectiveness of EI is directly correlated to leaders’ doing two things: 1) enmeshing EI’s concepts within their personality, and 2) proactively eradicating their blind areas.

Each of our leadership careers probably began as an individual contributor who gets promoted because of our mastery of a particular skill set. When this is observed by those higher up, it made sense to promote us to a position where we can help other individual contributors become as skilled as we are in those skills. However, what employers seem to forget is when that promotion happens, there are two skill sets the new supervisor needs immediately along with the new-found authority: management skills and leadership skills.

Management vs. Leadership Skills 

In basic coursework on organizational leadership, formal power is distinguished from informal power. Examples of formal power would be positional, knowledge/expertise, and coercive/reward power. This power, or ways to influence others, could also be called management skills.

Examples of informal power would be relational, charisma, and referent power (the highest form of influence that is built over time and trust). This power (influence) would fall under leadership. This power “feels” the best, but without the status and authority of formal power, the person is just a nice person, if you will. Both types of power are necessary in order to produce the highest success within organizations.

Emotional Intelligence, Job Satisfaction, and Organizational Commitment 

My dissertation for my Ph.D. was The Relationship Between Emotional Intelligence, Job Satisfaction, and Organizational Commitment. I assessed over 100 managers at a well-known high-end fast-food chain and without going into the statistical specificities, the components of EI most highly correlated with both job satisfaction and organizational commitment were from the mixed-model component of adaptability, which included the sub-components of reality testing, decision-making, and impulse control.

Leaders who are the most effective can see reality, i.e. they exhibit high other’s awareness, or what I like to refer to as situational awareness, in order to know the current atmosphere of the individual, team, group, division, and so on and know whether or not their approach should exhibit more formal or informal power (management or leadership, respectively), or a combination of both.

The approach can be also described using personality theory. I have often asked senior leadership teams (SLTs) what approach does their company, division, team, etc. need from them over the next quarter. Using the DiSC model’s general descriptors for each quadrant, I would ask if the company was needing a “driven, get it done, no questions asked” approach (D), or if there was a general atmosphere of being stuck and monotonous, the company needs a fresh approach with brainstorming focus groups (I), or if the company was sick of the “new idea of the month club” that was producing constant changes and inconsistencies, so they needed to stick to one method for a period of six months to see if the idea worked (S), or if it was an atmosphere of conflict, full of disagreements and opinions, so what was needed was accurate, concise data, instead of just emotions (C).

From the macro approach above, we can look at the micro approach of individual leaders. Leadership weaknesses can be directly linked to our personalities. There are two ways to exhibit weaknesses. One weakness is defined as a strength taken too far. Using the DiSC approach above, a “D” taken too far becomes domineering and destructive, and “I” becomes impulsive and too expressive, an “S” avoids conflict and/or too passive, and a “C” can be critical or stuck in paralysis of analysis. The major driver of taking our strengths too far is when we as humans experience negative emotions. These negative emotions can have several sources, but generally is produced from 1) a person feeling their goals are being blocked, and they use some display of anger (active or passive) to break through or go around obstacles, 2) we “take things personally,” which means that negative comments or conflict gets exaggerated because it is impacting our value and worth, or 3) the emotions from past intense negative experiences (divorce, loss of a loved one, prior job loss) get carried over into the present situation. When we experience these negative emotions, we feel like the “underdog” and we want to regain control over the situation to be able to control or influence the outcome towards our desired end. Our pathway to do this is to respond where we feel comfortable and confident, which is our temperament; but we run so hard into it that we take it to an extreme, hence our strength taken too far. The second way to have a weakness does not involve any negative emotions, but it is simply we are being ourselves when the situation needs a different approach. An example of this is when the most effective thing for a leader to do is imitate an introvert and be a good listener, but instead simply talks to much. It’s a matter of being able to read the room.

The Blind Can’t See 

This commitment to self-improvement requires addressing blind spots. Every one of us has a blind area, which means others can see things about ourselves that we cannot see. With every leader I have coached, I have required that two skills be added to every leader’s individual development plan: active listening and proactive teachability. Active listening would seem to be a standard skill to learn, but based upon the feedback many leaders get back from a 360 evaluation, it isn’t. When meeting with SLTs, I ask them to describe the worst leaders they have ever been under. Invariably, the two skills that always rise to the surface are: 1) they don’t listen, and 2) they aren’t teachable. Conversely, when I ask who the best leaders are they have ever experienced, it is just the opposite. Training in active listening is a relatively straight-forward process. On the other hand, proactive teachability is a little more involved.

Teachability can, in many ways, be likened to humility, which is considering other people over yourself. I promote using the word “teachability” over the word “humility” because some misinterpret the term by believing it is the practice of diminishing their value and worth. While teachability is simply an attribute that means we know we don’t know everything and are open to learning from others.

We can never eradicate our blind areas reactively, which means that when others gain enough courage to address our blind spots, we may respond well, but it is still reactive. The assumption is that there are many more people in our lives who see things about us that we don’t see about ourselves but will never gain the courage to address it with us. The only way to truly eradicate our blind areas is through proactive teachability. In every leader’s IDP, I assign them to sit down with one person per week in their sphere of influence and ask them where they are blind, and how they think they can grow. Even if asked, some still may hesitate to be fully transparent, so the leader is to almost beg them by asking for that information that may be in the back of the person’s mind that they would never share. The leader asks for that information, because they are so desperate to grow.

Ensuring Growth and Development of EI 

From the first-time supervisor to the CEO, having self-awareness around these underlying factors helps leaders who want to elevate their communication, influence, and direct report management skills through a distinct approach that amalgamates the understanding of personality temperaments with the enhancement of EI. These leaders undergo substantial transformations, with many having experienced both an increase in confidence, as well as an increase in peace because they know how to address the underlying machine in the background that has hurt them and others in both their personal and professional lives.

Organizations would do well to ensure training and development takes place in management and leadership theory, personality, and EI. However, this powerful information is all for naught unless the leader is paired with a coach or mentor that addresses how the leader responds to negative emotions, and if either of the “machines” of identity, value, and worth and/or intense negative experiences are impacting the leader’s emotions. Finally, the coach/mentor must ensure that training and quantifiable application of both skills of active listening and proactive teachability happens to ensure the follower experience and the true growth of the leader. EI is only as effective as the leader’s understanding of their negative emotions, and their true obsession with eradicating the blind area.

Written by Dr. Greg Stewart.

Have you read it?
Highest-paid CEOs in America.
Countries With Lowest Rate of Economic Growth in 5 Years.
Countries Most in Debt to China.
Most Attractive Cities for Global Talent.
Largest economies in the world by Share of Global GDP.