Golemans Emotional Intelligence - Book Report/Review Example

? Book Review of Goleman’s Emotional Intelligence 13 October Emotional intelligence is not a new concept, and it can be traced to Aristotle’s (350 BC) ideas on managing emotions in The Nicomachean Ethics: “…anyone can get angry- that is easy…but to do this to the right person, to the right extent, at the right time, with the right motive, and in the right way, that is not for everyone, nor is it easy” (Book 2, Section 9). Daniel Goleman (1995) explored emotional intelligence further in his book, Emotional Intelligence: Why It Can Matter More Than IQ. His main argument is that poor emotional intelligence (EI) can help enlighten many personal, team, and organizational performance problems. Part I investigated how emotions affect people’s every day experiences. Part II described Goleman’s dimensions of EI. Part III explained the negative effects of poor EI on personal relationships, organizational performance, and health. Goleman analyzed the variability of EI and offers suitable interventions to enhance it in Part IV, while Part V exhibited the impact of low EI on classroom violence, childhood depression, eating disorders, and different forms of substance abuse. Goleman (1995) used empirical evidence, logic, and anecdotes to argue the importance of EI in being successful and happy. To better understand the basic concepts of the book, this paper reviews organizational behavior theories and concepts, beginning with how EI affects personal relationships. Goleman (1995) argued that gender norms impact how men and women express themselves. He mentions the work of Harvard’s Carol Gilligan, who expressed the gender gap when it comes to social connections: “…boys take pride in a lone, tough-minded independence and autonomy, while girls see themselves as part of a web of connectedness” (Goleman, 1995, p. 2862). As a result: “…boys are threatened by anything that might challenge their independence, while girls are more threatened by a rupture in their relationships” (Goleman, 1995, p. 2862). This can be connected to the ways that people manage their emotions and the emotions of others, which affect their social relations at both intimate and workplace settings. Goleman (1995) offered insights about relationships and EI using sound evidence and anecdotes, as well as his own opinions. He also provided counterarguments that avoid making generalizations: “…psychiatrist friend complained that in his marriage his wife is reluctant to discuss emotional matters between them, and he is the one who is left to bring them up” (Goleman, 1995, pp.2892-2893). Goleman (1995) sought to present evidence and logic to back up his claims regarding the role of EI in establishing good personal relationships. Research supports his contention that EI directly affects social interactions. Mavroveli, Petrides, Sangareau and Furnham (2009) studied the validity of trait emotional intelligence in their article, “Exploring the Relationships between Trait Emotional Intelligence and Objective Socio-Emotional Outcomes in Childhood.” Their primary goal was to explore the construct validity of trait El in middle and late childhood, by examining relationships among cognitive capability, emotion perception, and social behavior. The participants were recruited through two predetermined schools, where 140 female students, with the median age of 9 years old, participated. They finished a TEIQue-CF, the standard progressive matrices (SPM), the guess who peer assessment, the social skills training (SST) test, and the assessment of children’s emotion skills (ACES). Findings showed that: EI is not connected with cognitive ability; students with high EI were better at accurately understanding facial expressions and enjoyed better peer relations; their peers rated them favorably as prosocial students. These findings support Goleman’s contention that EI is a separate construct from IQ, and that it can have significant positive effects on the quality of social relationships. The limitations of the study are its small sampling, the impact of gender and culture on behaviors have to be further examined, and empirical data based on observing actual prosocial behaviors are also needed. In addition, it is possible that Goleman’s (1995) interpretations of the studies he used, as well as this study, suffer from not considering mediating factors, such as workplace and team/school characteristics. Nonetheless, Mavroveli et al. (2009) presented additional evidence that EI can shape extroversion and prosocial actions, which can result to positive relationship management skills among children. These prosocial skills can later become handy for their adult lives. Aside from personal relationships, Goleman (1995) related EI to team or group performance. He asserted that people with high EI are better team players and leaders than those who have poor EI levels: “The single most important element in group intelligence, it turns out, is not the average IQ in the academic sense, but rather in terms of emotional intelligence” (Goleman, 1995, p. 3465). He believed that high IQ alone does not make effective teams and instead: “The key to a high group IQ is social harmony” (Goleman, 1995, p. 3465). To support his contentions, he described the work of Robert Sternberg, the Yale psychologist, and Wendy Williams, and the study on high performers at Bell Labs. From these studies, Goleman (1995) emphasized that the crucial difference between effective and non-effective teams is the former’s ability to maximize the existing skills and talents of the team through “internal harmony” (p. 3480). He stressed that it does not matter if everyone is intelligent in the team, if no one can properly emotionally respond to each other’s goals and interests. In particular, regarding the Bell Labs case, Goleman noted the importance of informal networks: “But when unexpected problems arise, the informal organization kicks in. Its complex web of social ties [forms] every time colleagues communicate, and [solidifies] over time into surprisingly stable networks” (p. 3511). The network becomes a web that supports each other’s functions: “Highly adaptive, informal networks move diagonally and elliptically, skipping entire functions to get things done” (p. 3511). Hence, Goleman is not saying that social conformity is the same as groupthink. Instead, he underlines the ability of people with high EI to establish and maximize the social relationships that are helpful in delivering high-level performances. One study proved that high EI can support teamwork and team performance. Koman and Wolff (2008) studied the connection between EI and team leadership and EI and team performance in “Emotional Intelligence Competencies in the Team and Team Leader: A Multi-Level Examination of the Impact of Emotional Intelligence on Team Performance.” They hypothesized that the team leader’s emotional intelligence (EI) would shape the development of group level emotional intelligence (GEI), which was assessed through the team’s emotionally competent group norms (ECGN). In addition, they believed that the ECGNs would have a positive effect on group effectiveness. They conducted a cross-sectional study of a military organization, where 422 respondents from 81 teams participated. Findings showed that the team leader’s emotional intelligence affected team level emotional competence and team performance through the formation of ECGNs. This study supported Goleman’s (1995) belief that emotionally intelligent leaders can affect team performance. At the same time, high EI in the team results to high performance too. Hence, EI produces positive effects on leaders, individual team members, and the team as a whole. Another premise of Goleman (1995) is that leaders with high EI can result to organizations with better performance. He believed that emotionally intelligent leaders can foster teamwork and high morale: “Leadership is not domination, but the art of persuading people to work toward a common goal” (Goleman, 1995, p. 3237). His idea of leadership is not different from the collaborative leadership style that focuses on motivating people to work toward similar goals. Goleman (1995) proposed three applications of EI in team settings: “…being able to air grievances as helpful critiques, creating an atmosphere in which diversity is valued rather than a source of friction, and networking effectively” (Goleman, 1995, p. 3241). To support these suggestions, he provided real-life examples and some empirical studies. For instance, he cited the experiment of Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, where findings showed that: “The harsh criticism made those who received it so demoralized that they no longer tried as hard at their work and, perhaps most damaging, said they no longer felt capable of doing well. The personal attack was devastating to their morale” (Goleman, pp. 3299-3301). Goleman (1995) showed that criticism is part of ensuring workplace success, but aside from giving honest criticism, it must also be relayed in the most constructive way possible. Otherwise, feedback just becomes a personal attack with no visible relevant results. A study supports Goleman’s contention that leaders with high EI contribute to high organizational performances. Cavazotte, Moreno, and Mateus (2012) studied the impact of leadership EI on leadership and managerial performance in “Effects of Leader Intelligence, Personality and Emotional Intelligence on Transformational Leadership and Managerial Performance.” They obtained data from 134 midlevel managers of a large Brazilian company. Findings showed that leadership effectiveness, as assessed by the achievement of organizational outcomes, is a direct function of a leader's transformational style. In addition, leadership EI affected transformational behaviors too. This study supports the idea that leadership EI is related to organizational performance. The process is based on transformational behaviors, nevertheless, and not on EI per se, which indicates the relationship between leaders with transformational qualities and EI competencies. The book impacts this writer at the workplace and everyday life because it magnifies the role of EI in managing personal and workplace relationships and affairs. Personally, Goleman (1995) presented a practical value, by explaining how EI helps build lasting relationships through open and positive communication styles. Openness must be tempered with the right words that are said at the right time. Goleman’s (1995) concept of self-awareness will help learn more about individual strengths and weaknesses in managing intimate relationships. Moreover, managing the emotions will be useful in coping with stress. It will help this writer assess difficult situations with a broader mind and give more consideration on the emotional factors at play. At the workplace, the book has pragmatic relevance to leadership and communication styles. Empathy is a critical concept to leadership ethics. It requires people to show empathy, not in the sense that the wrongs will be condoned, but for people to rise up to do what is right. Likewise, EI at the organization provides inspiration for a transformational leader. This kind of leader also has high EI because of the individual consideration provided to others. Hence, Goleman offers concepts and tools that can enhance people’s happiness and success. Emotional Intelligence: Why It Can Matter More Than IQ is recommended to all, most especially to parents, teachers, and leaders in politics and organizations. It has a writing style that is engaging and easy to read. In addition, Goleman (1995) strives to balance real-life examples with evidence and logical analysis, which makes his work appealing to scholars in the business and education sectors. Nevertheless, readers should be careful in saying that EI is more important than IQ itself, because this is not what Goleman(1995) is saying. Instead, he emphasizes that IQ is not everything. If people want to be happy, they need EI too because this can help them become better communicators and be better critics of themselves. And if people want to be successful in their organizations, they need both EI and IQ, since they altogether ensure cognitive and social competencies that are relevant in handling workplace roles, responsibilities, and challenges. Thus, EQ, in a sense, makes IQ more rewarding, and life becomes more fulfilling. References Aristotle. (350 BC). The Nicomachean Ethics. (W. D. Ross, Trans.). Retrieved from http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/nicomachaen.2.ii.html Cavazotte, F., Moreno, V., & Hickmann, M. (2012). Effects of leader intelligence, personality and emotional intelligence on transformational leadership and managerial performance. The Leadership Quarterly, 23(3), 443-455. Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional intelligence: Why it can matter more than IQ. New York: Bantam Books. Koman, E. S., & Wolff, S. B. (2008). Emotional intelligence competencies in the team and team leader: A multi-level examination of the impact of emotional intelligence on team performance. Journal of Management Development, 27(1), 55-75. Mavroveli, S., Petrides, K. V., Sangareau, Y., & Furnham, A. (2009). Exploring the relationships between trait emotional intelligence and objective socio-emotional outcomes in childhood. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 79(2), 259-272. Read More