If you do any research on testing for Emotional Intelligence, you are likely to run into a couple of names repeatedly. One is Howard Gardner who came up with the idea that there are several types or modalities of intelligence.
Two of these, interpersonal and intrapersonal, have to do with comprehending feelings, moods and motivations. Interpersonal is the detection of these in others, and intrapersonal is ability to perceive and understand these inside of oneself. Gardner does not illuminate how people gain these two types of intelligences. His idea is to test yourself to uncover the areas of your intelligence or interests. This will help you choose a direction to develop yourself through education, and also to select a career that suits you. As these tests are mainly for individual use, and not used by schools to place students or companies to determine who gets the promotion, there has been no real attempt to validate them.[1]
Another pair of names you will hear is John D. Mayer and Peter Salovey. They define emotionally intelligent people as those “who regulate their emotions according to a logically consistent model.”[2] This is an interesting twist. Many of us look at emotions and logic as being diametrically opposed.
When people say things such as “it is not how much you know but how passionate you are,” they are often pitting logical thinking against the ability to appeal to emotions. The preference for an enthusiastic person as opposed to a thoroughly competent person is based on the idea that a person can always be taught the necessary content. But a pleasingly enthusiastic person in one culture may be overly dramatic in another. And lacking the competence to perform the task makes the over the top personality even more irritating.
Mayer, Salovey and Caruso have worked on creating tests for Emotional Intelligence based on their definition because an emotional view of emotional intelligence makes it impossible to pin down. The ability to regulate emotions in a logical manner is not the only ability tested. In fact, the actual constructs of the test have been changing. The first version of the Emotional Intelligence test measured emotional creativity, social intelligence and ability to perceive non-verbal cues. However, the more recent Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT) has shifted to a more intellectual measurement of emotions. It measures perception of emotion; emotional facilitation of thinking; understanding/analyzing emotions; and reflective regulations of emotions.[3]
These “emotional” skills are assessed through answering multiple choice scenario questions that are validated by the choice that academics in the field of emotional intelligence would choose. But the answer selection is still extremely subjective. The best answer for people living in the United States that are upper middle class with college education would likely match the choice of the experts. But it may not be the best answer for other classes of people in the United States, or even wealthy and educated people living in Mexico. The best answers need to be validated for the each group being tested.
Emotional intelligence is hard to pin down, even when you look at it logically.
Search on Google for information on how to be less confident, and over 90% of the hits will actually be explaining ways to increase your confidence. This does have its perks. According to research from Washington University overconfident managers are more likely to get promoted. Then, they are also more like to make investment decisions that hurt their companies.
Have you been a the position in which someone purported to be knowledgeable, or even an expert in an area gave you instructions that were impossible to follow once you got into the details… huge chunks of the process were missing or full of jargon with no real information. However, this person didn’t do it just once or twice, but so frequently you began to wonder if they plotted to destroy your reputation at work, or were just plain stupid. According to recent research on overconfidence there is a good chance that probably did not have as much knowledge in the field as you, but didn’t know it.
Did you ever wonder how researchers determine levels of confidence? Typically this research is perform using a population of college students volunteer to take part in psychological tests (sometimes a requirement for a psychology course). To measure confidence, students take a general knowledge test and estimate how well they did. Most of the students are not very accurate at guessing their performance on the tests. Typically 40-50% typically are over confident, and 30 to 40 % are under confident, and the small remaining percentage accurately estimate how well they have answered the questions.
Many researchers have duplicated the finding that women are more likely to show less confidence than men. Women are told if they want to make their mark in any field they need to believe in themselves and show confidence like men do.
One of the traits of leaders that make people want to follow them is that they exude confidence. They seem sure of themselves as if they know their way around and have a plan for where they are going. One of the traits that people dislike about their bosses is that they seem “sure of themselves.” According to 2014 Gallup poll, t
Transformational leadership is a theory based on leaders with a set of skills that inspire followers (typically employees) to value their contribution and therefore work harder. It seems like the perfect answer to increasingly competitive nature of business in a global community. But does it work out as well as it seems to in theory?
People of high charisma are not immune to personal attacks. When there is severe criticism or antagonism leveled at them, they may call on their skill to change the desires of their followers to match their own. Often the critical or antagonistic person is dealt with by the followers not the leader.
Stable personality traits are those which appear throughout most of life. As innate, or inborn traits they are already part of the personality in childhood and become notable characteristics or patterns of behavior in adulthood. However, a person’s perceived level of charisma does not seem to be stable. This is not necessarily because behaviors that increase your ability to influence others can be taught and practiced (similar to taking acting lesson). In studies in which managers were provided with this kind of coaching, changes occurred but these were minimal compared to the difference that already existed between the most and least charismatic people in the group.
We see political leaders that have been coached to appeal to the masses on television. They carry themselves erect (confident in the clothes, hair and makeup that their stylist has spent hours on). They smile warmly and expressively, acknowledging associates they recognize in the crowd (who may or may not exist). They speak with authority (having spent many hours listening to their own voice with the assistance of a coach). However, if you want to appeal as a leader that is actually present with a group of people, a different set of skills can make or break your ability to lead. You must be able to identify with the group you are speaking to and show that you are trustworthy and competent.
Write about what? 