A Critical Analysis Of Emotional Intelligence And Transformational Leadership
DipOL - Final Project
1. Emotional Intelligence and its Effect on Leadership Styles
Candidate 1000544
Diploma in Organisational Leadership
University of Oxford – Said Business School
February 2016
2. Abstract
This research project will examine the relationship Emotional Intelligence plays in
leadership, and will further explore the various styles of leadership. The focal question
being researched is how significant a role does Emotional Intelligence play in leadership
development and leadership styles. My research will incorporate existing work which will
help solidify and guide my empirical study. The review of the literature will provide
thoughtful insight on what the current existing work has to say about the effect
emotional intelligence has on leadership styles, and will bridge any gaps with my
findings.
4. I. INTRODUCTION
Emotional Intelligence, or EI for short, is a relatively modern phenomenon
taking the business world by storm. Since its inception in the 1990’s, EI has been
studied by many prominent psychologists and consultants in the hopes of
developing the next generation of leaders. My research, which will be a
combination of interviews and a thorough literature review, will focus on the
effects EI has on leadership styles and development for selected managers
within my current organization. I will interview managers on both the technical
(engineering) side of the business as well as other non-technical managers to
better understand their backgrounds and what is making them successful today,
or what can be done to further enhance development. Additionally, I will
interview employees of the managers being researched to gain further
perspective and analysis in to their particular leadership styles. By gathering and
analyzing this supplemental data, I will be able to approach each manager and
present exacting findings to help them in future development. As a practitioner in
the field of Human Resources, analyzing and critically reviewing the linkage
between EI and leadership styles will help me better understand the needs and
opportunities for my managers to continue to grow and help my organization stay
healthy for years to come.
5. II. LITERATURE REVIEW
What Is Emotional Intelligence?
Emotional Intelligence can be understood as “the capacity for recognizing our
own feelings and those of others, for motivating ourselves, and for managing emotions
well in ourselves and in our relationships.” (Goleman, 1998) John Mayer and Peter
Salovey, both Psychology Professors, defined EI in the article “How Emotional
Intelligence Became a Key Leadership Skill” published by the Harvard Business Review
(HBR) in the following way: “From a scientific (rather than a popular) standpoint,
emotional intelligence is the ability to accurately perceive your own and others’
emotions; to understand the signals that emotions send about relationships; and to
manage your own and others’ emotions. It doesn’t necessarily include the qualities (like
optimism, initiative, and self-confidence) that some popular definitions ascribe to it.”
(Ovans, 2015)
Mayer and Salovey’s research ended up creating the first recognized model of EI
back in 1997 which focused on cognitive abilities and considered EI a form of “pure
intelligence.” (Mayer & Salovey, 1997) The model was described in four distinct
“branches” which include (1) Perceiving Emotions; (2) Using Emotions to Facilitate
Thought; (3) Understanding Emotions; and (4) Managing Emotions. (Mayer & Salovey,
1997) Mayer and Salovey chose these distinct skills as they collectively fully
represented the core of EI. As you can see in the picture on the following page, the
model has EI in the center with all four branches (or components) linked together.
6. (Photo courtesy of www.iveybusinessjournal.com)
A second model of EI was brought to light by perhaps the best known researcher
in the field, Daniel Goleman. Goleman was a psychologist who focused his research on
behavioral sciences and wrote several best-selling books and articles on the
development of EI. His core beliefs centered on the notion that EQ (Emotional Quotient)
was more relevant and important than a person’s IQ. He further went on to document
that the characteristics of EI could be learned and developed. The competencies in the
model, which are outlined in the table on the following page, are detailed in length in his
book, “Emotional Intelligence: Why It Can Matter More than IQ and Working With
Emotional Intelligence.” Goleman’s core beliefs center on the fact that a person with
7. high EI will be able to successfully navigate through all of the characteristics below. He
lists in order of importance, the five essential attributes for leaders aspiring to have
higher levels of EI.
The Five Components of Emotional Intelligence at Work
From Daniel Goleman (1998)
Definition Hallmarks
Self-Awareness The ability to recognize and
understand your moods,
emotions, and drives, as well as
their effects on others
Self-confidence
Realistic self-assessment
Self-deprecating sense of humor
Self-Regulation The ability to control or redirect
impulses and moods
The propensity to suspend
judgment and think before
acting
Trustworthiness and integrity
Comfort with ambiguity
Openness to change
Motivation A passion to work for reasons
that go beyond money or status
A propensity to pursue goals
with energy and persistence
Strong drive to achieve
Optimism, even in the face of
failure
Organizational commitment
Empathy The ability to understand the
emotional makeup of other
people
Skill in treating people
according to their emotional
reactions
Expertise in building and
retaining talent
Cross-cultural sensitivity
Service to clients and customers
Social Skill Proficiency in managing
relationships and building
networks
An ability to find common
ground and build rapport
Effectiveness in leading change
Persuasiveness
Expertise in building and
leading teams
8. A third model of EI was introduced by Konstantinos Vasilis and is known as Trait
EI. Formally defined by the Performance Institute in the article, “The Three Models of
Emotional Intelligence” Trait EI is “a constellation of emotional self-perceptions located
at the lower levels of personality hierarchies.” (Resuena, 2015) To put this in more
common terms, Trait EI refers to an individual’s self-perceptions of their emotional skills
and abilities. The table below will highlight a sampling of traits and how someone with
higher perceptions of themselves will perceive them.
The Sampling Domain of Trait Emotional Intelligence in Adults and Adolescents
Facets High scorers perceive themselves as…
Adaptability …flexible and willing to adapt to new conditions.
Assertiveness …forthright, frank, and willing to stand up for their
rights.
Emotion perception (self and
others)
…clear about their own and other people’s feelings.
Emotion expression …capable of communicating their feelings to others.
Emotion management (others) …capable of influencing other people’s feelings.
Emotion regulation …capable of controlling their emotions.
Impulsiveness (low) …reflective and less likely to give in to their urges.
Relationships …capable of having fulfilling personal relationships.
Self-esteem …successful and self-confident.
Self-motivation …driven and unlikely to give up in the face of adversity.
Social awareness …accomplished networkers with excellent social skills.
Stress management …capable of withstanding pressure and regulating stress.
Trait empathy …capable of taking someone else’s perspective.
Trait happiness …cheerful and satisfied with their lives.
Trait optimism …confident and likely to “look on the bright side” of life.
(Courtesy of the London Psychometric Laboratory – University College London)
9. As with the other models, Trait EI is important to understand and apply because
it has several tacit implications, particularly for managers. In a study by the Journal of
Applied Psychology and subsequently published by Forbes Magazine in 2015 titled
“Emotional Intelligence Predicts Job Performance: The 7 Traits that Help Managers
Relate”, the most crucial traits for successful managers high in EI must possess. They
include in specific order (1) Emotional Stability; (2) Conscientiousness; (3) Extraversion;
(4) Ability EI; (5) Cognitive Ability; (6) General Self-Efficacy; and (7) Self-rated job
performance. (Bailey, 2015)
EI & Leadership Styles
Goleman also argued that EI is essential for leadership development, and
hence, linked EI with leadership. In his 2004 article for the Harvard Business Review
titled “What Makes a Leader”, Goleman outlines how merely possessing the “hard
business skills” such as toughness, determination, intelligence, and vision are not
enough to make someone successful. (Goleman, 2004) Ultimately, he claims that the EI
factor will determine how successful a leader will become due to the many components
EI targets, as outlined in the chart above. In a supplementary article also by HBR titled
“How Emotional Intelligence Became a Key Leadership Skill”, “an understanding of
what exactly constitutes Emotional Intelligence is important not only because the
capacity is so central to leadership, but because people strong in some of its elements
can be utterly lacking in others, sometimes to a disastrous effect.” (Ovens, 2015) Given
the overwhelming evidence that EI plays an integral role in leadership, it is important to
critically examine the different leadership styles.
10. In his 2002 best seller “Primal Leadership: Realizing the Power of Emotional
Intelligence,” Goleman does in to detail about six classic styles of leadership which
surface throughout organizations today. He cites that successful and effective leaders
will be able to naturally adapt and use any of the styles at any point given the nature of
the situation. Goleman also goes on to state that no one particular style is better than
another – merely just knowing which style to use is the essential aspect to ensuring
positive leadership. The six styles of leadership that Goleman outlines at length include
(1) Visionary; (2) Coaching; (3) Affiliative; (4) Democratic; (5) Pacesetting; and (6)
Commanding. (Goleman, 2002) He goes on to further elaborate on the leadership
conundrum in the article “Leadership That Gets Results.” In this article, Goleman further
states that “experts offer advice based on inference, experience, and instinct, not on
quantitative data.” (Goleman, 2000) This is the reason that leadership, despite all of the
trainings and experts that surface, is not resonating within many organizations today. In
addition, he goes on to characterize the six different styles of leadership noted above
and again stresses that no one style should be used exclusively, rather, it is situational
and depends on the immediate needs of the organization. “Each style has a distinct
effect on the working atmosphere of a company, division, or team, and, in turn, on its
financial performance. The styles, by name and brief description alone, will resonate
with anyone who leads, is led, or, as is the case with most of us, does both. Coercive
leaders demand immediate compliance. Authoritative leaders mobilize people toward a
vision. Affiliative leaders create emotional bonds and harmony. Democratic leaders
build consensus through participation. Pacesetting leaders expect excellence and self-
direction. And coaching leaders develop people for the future.” (Goleman, 2000)
11. While Goleman outlined his correlation between EI and leadership, subsequent
articles have been written noting the relevance of EI as it relates to Transformational
Leadership. Transformational Leadership is a style of leadership dating back to the
1970’s and has been researched by both academics and those in the management
community. Transformational leadership is a “process that generates and builds an
exceptional level of influence over followers, harnessing follower commitment, and
leading to accomplishments above normal levels of expectation.” (Bass & Avolio, 1993)
Transformation leaders tend to be more charismatic and can develop a long term vision
for the future. These leaders also tend to probe the intellectual curiosity of followers and
engage and motivate them.
In a recent study conducted by TalentSmart in cooperation with the University of
South Africa’s School of Management, a sample of 60 managers were surveyed using
the Multi-Factor Leadership Questionnaire and the Emotional Intelligence Appraisal.
This appraisal method provided feedback to the manager from a 360 degree
perspective including peers, supervisors, and subordinates. As a result, there were
three main leadership styles identified and they include (1) Transformational; (2)
Transactional; and (3) Laissez-faire.
Transactional leadership, as opposed to transformational leadership, is a style in
which the leader tends to point our mistakes and short-comings of his/her team. These
leaders also do not place a heavy emphasis on rewards and recognition and often rely
on rules and policies to guide their decisions. Laissez-faire leaders are hands-off in
nature and allow their subordinates the freedom to complete their tasks on their own
12. time. This approach, like the transactional approach, has its shortcomings as there is
often a breakdown in support and interpersonal connection. (Bradberry & Su, 2015)
III. Qualitative methods & information gathering
To properly research and answer the question of whether EI has a direct
influence on leadership styles within my organization, my first priority was to
establish a method in which to gather the data, and then choose my sample
population. My strategy was to interview both employees and managers to gain a
better perspective on the EI and leadership notion. Once this was completed, I
would gather and then analyze the data and publish my findings.
I chose to use a qualitative study because the question I was researching
was more exploratory in nature. My purpose was to gain a better understanding of
the opinions of others, particularly of the managers and employees, in the hopes of
further identifying their level of EI and leadership style. In addition, by reviewing the
Quality Criteria, as defined by Prof Michael Smets, the qualitative research
methodology would require a high degree of (1) Credibility; (2) Transferability; (3)
Dependability; and (4) Confirmability. (Smets, 2015)
The data, which was a combination of interviews as well as surveys,
touched on all four major components of the qualitative research methods. The
participants ranged in length of service within the organization from 1-20+ years,
and were selected primarily because of the teams they led and/or the projects they
were working on. The questions being asked during the interview were focused
13. primarily to getting the respondent to pause and give reflection in to their
leadership style, and how they assess their own levels of EI. The questions asked
of the employees who worked for the managers being interviewed gave them the
opportunity to provide direct feedback, and actually served as a reverse
Performance Review in certain instances. By having both an individual and a
subordinate metric, I was able to present explicit data to the manager once the
data was analyzed and was able to proactively address specific areas for them to
review for development.
14. IV. ANALYSIS & FINDINGS
I began my interviews with employees in both engineering and non-
engineering roles, and asked the same questions to each person. I clearly
explained to each employee to be as honest and forthcoming as possible, and
reassured them that the feedback they gave to me would remain confidential. The
questions that I asked included (1) Please help describe your manager’s
leadership style; (2) Does this style differ from your previous manager (if
applicable); and (3) Is there style working for you, and if not, what could you
recommend? I chose the straightforward questions in order to get the most direct
responses, since the goal is to be able to use the information for management
development purposes later.
During the interview process, I noticed that the non-engineering
employees tended to lean towards their managers being a blend of coaching and
democratic (often getting buy-in from other members of the team) as opposed to
the engineering employees who consistently viewed their manager as having a
commanding approach. One specific employee who works as a Technical Trainer,
commented that his manager was very approachable and loved to coach and
mentor. He went on to say that in his nearly 20 years working for the Company, he
had not worked for a better, more approachable, and all around great manager. I
also interviewed a senior member of the Technical Support team to get a better
understanding of their relatively new leader. The person had 20 years of service
with the Company, with the last 8 in his current Technical Support role. He
mentioned before I could even start asking the questions, that the new manager
15. was a “breath of fresh air.” “He actually takes the time to listen and try to
understand things from our perspective, not like the previous manager who never
stepped out of his office, or bothered to check in and see how people were doing.”
I found his comments particularly helpful since he was not one to compliment
management, and often, was known to criticize at length everything that went
wrong with the products and the team altogether. He was very excited at the new
change, and definitely put a positive spin on his manager. To put a different spin
on management styles, I interviewed an electrical engineer who had just had a
change in leadership. She was a peer for 6 years with her now recently promoted
manager, and did not want any part of it. She expressed he was not qualified for
the role, and also went on to state he was a bully and used his power for negative
reasons. This raised some concerns in my eyes and allowed me to further
understand what was happening within that team.
In addition to the interviews with the employees, I also had a chance to
interview 10 different managers of various levels within the organization. Some of
the managers were seasoned veterans who had been managing for years, while
others were very new to the concept and had been promoted to their current roles
within the last 6 months. I found a stark contrast in styles from the seasoned
managers to those that have only just begun this phase of their career. The
seasoned managers tended to focus more on people, as they already had a firm
grasp on the processes that their roles required. One such manager, recently
promoted to a Senior Engineering Manager responsible for two separate sites
including personnel and managing a budget, explained his role in the following way
16. “my job is to ensure my team has the resources to do their jobs- they are all
professionals and I am there for them should they need anything. I am not here to
micro-manage or add any extra stress to the team, as that does nothing but put
added strains to the already overwhelming workload.” I found this to be an
interesting perspective, particularly for a manager with many objectives and
deadlines to meet. Another example from my interviews was with the Technical
Support Manager, who joined the Company back in October. He had come from a
different industry and was trying to learn our industry as quickly as possible to be
able to start understanding the challenges and opportunities of the team. He
described himself as having a hybrid mix of coaching and pacesetting. He
described in detail that although his team does not always have an easy task of
talking with customers, his belief is always to coach for opportunities and fine tune
areas of opportunity. In the short time the manager was here, he has already been
praised at length by his direct reports for his bias for action, fair and equitable
treatment for all, and attention to quality and standards.
In addition to conducting the interviews for both employees and managers,
I also felt it incumbent since my topic focused on both EI and leadership styles, to
hand out some assessments to the managers. These assessments would also be
used for individual development, so the benefit was mutual in that I could gather
the data, and the manager could have a better understanding of their strengths
and development opportunities.
To begin, I researched EI questionnaires and ended up choosing the
questionnaire from the Leadership Toolkit from the organization London Leading
17. for Health specifically for its in-depth coverage and self-assessment layout. While
the questionnaire was a self-reported exercise, I felt the managers responses were
on track with the responses I received from the interviews conducted with their
direct reports. The questionnaire featured five characteristics which were being
evaluated which included Self-Awareness, Managing Others, Motivating Oneself,
Empathy, and Social Skill. The respondent was to complete each question with a
numerical value ranging from 1-5 with 1 being the lowest and then complete the
score for each on the last page. These were the figures used to help identify the
individual’s strengths and development needs.
The sample size I used for this was 10 managers spread out in a variety of
disciplines across the site. I used half of the questionnaires for managers leading
technical teams since a majority of my site is in an engineering or otherwise
technical role. The other half were spread out amongst the Quality, Training, Sales,
Technical Support, and Human Resources managers. I chose this combination of
technical and non-technical managers because it would allow for a holistic view of
the entire organization, and not just certain segments which tended to get the most
spotlight.
In addition to the EI questionnaire, I also had the same sample size
complete a leadership style exercise, which indicated the dominant style used on a
daily basis. The exercise (courtesy of crowe-associates.co.uk) allowed for four
distinct leadership style choices which included Directing, Coaching, Facilitating,
and Delegating. Similar to the EI questionnaire, this leadership style survey
focused on broader issues, forcing each manager to selectively choose which
18. situation was most appropriate for them.
The survey focused on the five main components to EI which are defined in
the table above and include such qualities as Self-Awareness, Managing
Emotions, Motivating Oneself, Empathy, and Social Skill. Each manager was
asked to complete the 50 question survey and then score each component on the
final page. The scoring assessments for each section outlined personal strengths,
needs attention, or development opportunity. As you can see below, the results of
the ten different managers are outlined below.
I selectively chose the managers from different teams within the
organization I support. Since many of the employees at my site come from
an engineering, or otherwise technical function, I chose a 50/50 split
between technical and non-technical managers to get a greater perspective
and to see which group overall had more consistent numbers. The results are
shown below in Figures 1 and 2 collectively. Figure 1 has my sample group of
technical managers and their responses. The two categories with the highest
scores were Self-Awareness and Motivating Oneself. I found these interesting as
Self- Awareness, according to Goleman, was the most important component to
manager with higher EI. After my individual interviews with each manager, I learned
more about how these ratings correlated within their team. For example, the
Technical Publications Manager told me that her team prefers to work
independently, each contributing their own specific knowledge to the greater
project. The Sustaining Engineering Manager commented that his team (which has
employees in both the US and Canada) For the Non-Technical set of managers
19. (Figure 2), Social Skill, and Managing Emotions came out ahead, which, after my
interviews, is a very accurate assessment. The strengths of these managers lie in
their intrinsic ability to communicate with others, motivate from within, engage with
enthusiasm, and focus on results.
22. V. DISCUSSION & CONCLUSION
Emotional Intelligence, as it has been described, plays an integral
part of leadership development for managers at any level in an
organization. It is a potent tool which can be used to turn organizations
mired in conflict and turmoil into one’s which prosper with fluidity and
efficiency. My research, combining the interviews with both employees
and managers, as well as incorporating the survey data, indicates an initial
path towards leading and engaging with higher levels of EI. Many
managers have already developed characteristics associated with high EI
and through their actions, deliver the leadership their teams, and the
greater business, rely on. Other managers, through thoughtful reflection,
have stated that they now have a starting point in which to develop
themselves and become more in-tuned with their current management
style. They acknowledged the specific areas in which to develop, and as
their HR Leader, will help to facilitate coordinated trainings aimed at
bridging the gaps.
This exercise has also helped me become a better rounded HR
Leader for not just my team in Florida, but for my organization in general. I
was able to take a segment of the leadership population, in a business
unit that that produces equipment vital for the safety and security of
customers worldwide, and help redefine the notion of EI and leadership.
Through careful and thought out questions, I was able to understand the
unique development opportunities for my team, and in turn, develop action
23. plans for immediate implementation. Feedback was strong with many
positive outlooks and expectations for the future. I was very grateful to
have been able to perform this research, and look forward to developing
additional leadership and EI training in the immediate future.
Recommendations
Given the underlying fact that EI plays an instrumental role in a
manager’s leadership style, it is essential that organizations develop and
implement targeted trainings so that emerging leaders understand the
power of managing their emotions. Trainings should be centered around
the five traits that Goleman outlined (Self Awareness, etc.) to maximize
potential benefit and drive for results. A supplemental recommendation
would be for any person promoted from an individual contributor role to a
management role, to distribute a survey like the one used to his/her direct
reports in order to obtain essential feedback. By opting to include the team
in the survey, the new manager is already demonstrating a key EI
characteristic, which will help them build credibility and team unity down
the road. Lastly, as with any business skill, continuous improvement and a
focus towards personal development and growth is essential. Emotional
Intelligence as it has been studied and analyzed, can be learned- it is up
to the person to take that step and commit to learning and dedicating
themselves to learning and practicing the EI characteristics daily.
24. VI. References
Avolio, B and Bass, B. 1993. Improving Organizational Effectiveness Through
Transformational Leadership. Sage Publications.
Bailey, Sebastian. 2015. Emotional Intelligence Predicts Job Performance: The 7 Traits
that Help Managers Relate. Forbes
Bradberry, T. and Su, L. 2015. Emotional Intelligence and Transformational Leadership.
Talent Smart.
Goleman, Daniel. 1998a. Working with emotional intelligence. New York: Bantam
Goleman, D. 1998b. What makes a leader? Harvard Business Review, November-
December.
Goleman, Daniel. 1995. Emotional intelligence: Why it can matter more than IQ, New
York: Bantam.
Goleman, D. 2000. Leadership That Gets Results. Harvard Business Review
Goleman, Daniel. 2002. Primal Leadership: Working with emotional intelligence. New
York: Bantam
Mayer, J.D., and P. Salovey. 1997. What is emotional intelligence?
Ovans, Andrea. 2015. How Emotional Intelligence Became a Key Leadership Skill.
Harvard Business Review.
Resuena, Suzhie. The Three Models of Emotional Intelligence. The Performance Institute
Smets, Michael. 2014. Analysing Qualitative Data. The University of Oxford.
