Sense and sensibility

Sense and sensibility

In 2001 I queried whether emotional intelligence (EI), was a critical competency or passing fad. A year later I said the jury was still out but in 2003 I concluded that coaching and “EQ” as it is popularly known, was a marriage made in heaven.

How did EI and coaching become so inextricably linked? Many believe Daniel Goleman gave the coaching field the term emotional intelligence. By and large he did.

A short history of EI and EQ

1920 E L Thorndike Social intelligence – ability to act (popularised IQ) wisely in human relations
1940/1943 D Wechsler Non-intellective aspects of general intelligence
1948 R W Leeper Emotional thought is part of, and contributes to, logical thought and intelligence
1983 H Gardner Multiple intelligences (personal, intrapersonal and interpersonal intelligences)
1990 P Salovey and J D Mayer A theory of emotional intelligence as a (cognitive) ability
1995 D Goleman Publishes Emotional Intelligence: (popularised EI) Why it Can Matter More Than IQ

Yet, although his 1995 book popularised the phrase, it was Yale psychologists John D Mayer and Peter Salovey who first developed a theory of EI.

A story shared among the EI community is that Goleman, a psychologist and science journalist for the New York Times and Psychology Today, attended a conference at which Mayer and Salovey were presenting their work. At the time, Goleman was writing a book and thought that “emotional intelligence” would make an apt title. He sought their permission to use it and the rest, as they say, is history. The book became a best-seller. By the time Working with Emotional Intelligence appeared in 1998, Goleman had become a reluctant guru.

My research shows that it was Goleman’s work that served as a catalyst for what Stephen Fineman, professor of management at Bath University, described as the EQ phenomenon. It caused a flurry of practitioner and scientific activity. In response to EQ’s meteoric rise, People Management magazine published an article entitled Emotionally Challenged (19 April 2001) in which the editor invited a number of opponents and proponents to offer their views on the EQ hype, the value of EI measurement and the meaning of the (then) elusive concept.

The two EIs

Although EI has rapidly diffused into coaching practice, in academic circles EI as a psychological construct remains contested territory. Kevin Murphy and Lori Sideman, for example, describe the terrain as occupied by “two EIs”. What they mean is that EI is the product of two communities of practice divided by different values and goals: between the scientist, whose desire, these authors observe, is “to get it right” and the practitioner, whose priority is to solve problems in the real world (2006).

Confusion surrounds EI’s measurement too. Despite Goleman’s assertions that it was unlikely that a test for a single measure of EI could exist, a number of measures are now available. Proponents define EQ in different ways. What you are measuring depends on which guru you follow, according to my research. In a recent personal communication Reuven Bar-On notes:

“In an effort to make sense out of this confusion, the Encyclopaedia of Applied Psychology (Spielberger, 2004) argues that there are three key approaches to defining and measuring this construct: the Salovey-Mayer model, which defines the construct as the ability to perceive, understand and manage and use emotion to facilitate thinking; the Goleman model, which views the construct as a wide range of competencies and skills to drive managerial performance, measured by a multi-rater assessment (Boyatzis et al, 2001); and the Bar-On model, which describes it as an array of interrelated emotional and social competencies and skills that affect intelligent behaviour, measured by self-report (1997a, 1997b) within a potentially expandable multi-model approach, including interview and multi-rater assessment (Bar-On & Handley, 2003a, 2003b).”

EQ or EI?

A particular area of controversy is the EQ label. This was originally coined by Bar-On to describe and measure emotional intelligence. But it has also become a popular shorthand (see panel, above) for the broad area of behavioural qualities that come under the umbrella term EI. It also stands for “emotional quotient” – an individual’s score on a measure of EI.

Reuven Bar-On and the EQ-i

Bar-On’s approach to EI was originally defined as “an array of non-cognitive capabilities, competencies and skills that influence one’s ability to succeed in coping with environmental demands and pressures” (EQ-i technical manual, 1997, 2000, 2002, p14).

His measure, the EQ-i, was developed from research studying factors associated with psychological well-being in the early 1980s. It is described by some as a mixed model of EI, in that it comprises both personality traits and abilities. Among other things, these abilities, competencies and skills are concerned with our capacity to adapt to and cope with the stressors of everyday life. The EQ-i is organised around five dimensions: intrapersonal capacity, interpersonal skills, adaptability, stress management and general mood (see panel). The EQ-i is, in my view, an holistic approach, and shares some of the concepts associated with positive psychology, in its measurement of optimism and happiness.

Of MEIS and MSCEIT

Mayer and Salovey are often cited as the originators of the first theory of emotional intelligence (1990). Controversially referred to by some as a largely cognitive ability model, this approach is based on four hierarchical clusters or “branches”: perceiving emotions, using emotions to facilitate thought, understanding emotions and managing emotions (see panel, above).

Two tasked ability assessment tools have been derived from the original theory: the MEIS (multi-factor emotional intelligence scale), and the MSCEIT (Mayer-Salovey-Caruso emotional intelligence test). MEIS demonstrated that EI can be measured as an ability, while MSCEIT was designed as an accessible measure for use in practice as well as research (see www.emotionalIQ.org).

Caruso and Salovey, in their book, The Emotionally Intelligent Manager, have adapted the four branches of the original Mayer-Salovey model to four emotional skills: reading people, getting in the mood, predicting the emotional future and “doing it with feeling”.

The Emotional Competence Inventory (ECI)

While Goleman is most often associated with EI, his claim that as much as 85 per cent of leadership success could be accounted for by EQ has been widely criticised in the scientific community. Nonetheless, my research with practitioners shows that Goleman made accessible to a lay audience the much-needed “missing link” – between those competencies that practitioners have intuitively known were important and emerging evidence that EI could be developed. See, for example, an early doctoral thesis on the link between EI and performance outcomes, from the UK’s leading supermarket chain (see panel).

Case study: Retail sector

Group size 60 (plus 60 managers as “controls” on a “waiting list”)

Group characteristics Store managers

Structure One day a week for four weeks

Methods and media

• Self-monitoring techniques (strongly informed
• Keeping a diary by NLP)
• Assessment of “self-view”
• Values and goals elicitation
• Developing trust
• Managing key relationships
• Reframing techniques

Evaluation

• EQ assessment
• University study, 225 managers surveyed, general findings revealed improvements
  in performance, quality of working life, lower levels of stress, better morale

  Specific outcomes for managers:

  • Increased self-awareness
  • Observed changes in behaviour
  • Feeling greater control and sense of empowerment
  • Less conflict at work
  • Less stress
  • Increased self-confidence

For Goleman, EI is a set of skills that can be enhanced with practice. His theory centres on four clusters: self-awareness, self-management, social awareness and social skills (see panel, Key players).

My experience suggests that it is this model that is often used to inform leadership competency frameworks, and thus leadership development. Despite his early doubts about measuring EI, he and Richard Boyatzis teamed up with the Hay Group to develop the Emotional Competency Inventory (ECI ), which has been used in executive coaching.

Which tool?

It depends. Here, I have looked at the self-report and 360-degree EI measures most associated with the models of the original key players. But emerging tools are also worth exploring.

For example, Jo Maddocks and Tim Sparrow define EI as “the practice of thinking about feeling”. Their approach is focused on changing attitudes – what they call the eight mindsets. Another approach is Emotions and Behaviours at Work (EBW), a psychometric instrument that attempts to integrate behaviours and personality characteristics that predict effective job performance.

However, the choice of tool remains a matter of personal preference, based on the agreed outcomes expected from the intervention and whether it is, as with any psychometric measure in coaching, fit for purpose.

Most personality measures now incorporate some aspects of EI. The question is, what are you using the measure for? And how will this form the basis of a personal, team or organisational development intervention?

In a qualitative study I carried out in 2007, the findings revealed that it didn’t matter which model of EI was used, provided there was an organisational cultural fit between the model and the leadership competencies deemed important in the organisation.

It also revealed that the outcomes of the assessment should actively inform the design of a tailored programme that incorporates both one-to-one and group-based interventions and employs a wide range of methods to facilitate both cognitive and affective learning.

From EI to EISI

I have shown that there are different models and measures available to the coach. Nonetheless, what unites EI development is the building of individual self-awareness. All writers agree that this is the building block of EQ.

However, what emerged from the study (see panel, below) and my experience of developing individual and team EI over the past decade is the importance of the prevailing organisational culture. EI individuals cannot be developed in isolation from the system in which they exist. Increasingly, key writers (including Goleman) have extended the phrase EI to include the word social, that is, to show that developing emotional and social intelligence is both relational and contextual.

Case study: Housing officers

The project

This was a team EQ intervention over six months. Existing levels of EI were assessed using the Boston EI-Q, before and after the programme. This tool was derived from research into the link between levels of EI and stress in frontline police officers and based on five clusters: self-awareness, emotion-management, self-motivation, relationship management and emotion coaching.
The questionnaire comprises 44 statements relating to emotion-focused actions and is adapted from the work of Hendrie Weisinger. This was a pilot study designed to improve the way they performed as a team, rather than what they achieved. Initial assessments of their team EQ using the Boston EI-Q revealed low motivation.

Drawing on good practice guidelines for developing emotional intelligence (see figure, p33), the intervention comprised of five one-day workshops, concentrating on one of the five “steps to EQ” outlined in The Emotional Intelligence Pocketbook (2001) and was supported through team and individual coaching.

The coaching model was broadly cognitive-behavioural, goal-directed and solution-focused. The coaching was tailored around individual EQ assessments and provided reflective space to explore learning outcomes from the team-based workshops and incidents arising at work and recorded in personal journals. The coaching provided, as one participant observed, “a sort of privacy and security… things came out that I might be hesitant to talk about in the group”.

The outcome

The project was evaluated immediately and again after two years. It showed that levels of EQ across all five dimensions (as measured by the Boston EI-Q) had increased. In terms of the team leader, a 360-degree assessment using the ASE EI-Q (2000) showed that, while she assessed herself as lower in terms of EQ, team members rated her level of EQ as having risen.

My own work and that conducted by Tony Grant at the University of Sydney shows that developing leaders’ coaching skills can develop EI competencies, but that this needs to be spaced out, over time, supported and then followed up.

I agree with Grant’s observations that “leadership, emotional intelligence and coaching are inextricably linked”. Yet to coach for EI effectively, the first step is for the coach to develop their own EI. This is essential if coaches are to design and facilitate coaching interventions that develop emotionally intelligent organisations led by emotionally intelligent leaders, which are fit to house emotionally intelligent individuals.

However, this will take time and it will increase as the coach develops, Peter Hawkins suggests, from being a novice, to a master and, crucially, through reflective practice (supervision).

Conclusions

It is now a decade since I asked whether EI was a critical competency or passing fad. In 1999 a search for EI titles on Amazon.co.uk yielded six. This increased to 63 in 2002, 183 in 2003 and 406 today. Surprisingly, only six of those include coaching in the title.

This is rapidly changing though. To adapt and paraphrase Charles Woodruffe’s (1999) observation that EI is on a roll, in 2009, “coaching for EI is on a roll”. Practitioner literature has grown exponentially, academic research has built a large empirical base and evidence shows that EI is a critical competency, characterising effective leaders and effective teams.

The phrase emotional intelligence has diffused not only into coaching practice but into everyday discourse, with the term being referred to on Desert Island Discs (by Andy McNab); soap operas (Where the Heart Is) and even posed as a question by Ann Robinson on The Weakest Link.

Far from the jury still being out, it has in fact delivered its verdict. It is, as a research participant said to me in 2000, a territory in which “the pioneers have moved out and the settlers moved in”. The pioneers are now exploring new territories – and the territory that potentially offers new frontiers for coaching for EI is that of neuroscience, informing the field of NeuroLeadership. I recommend all pioneering coaches to set forth and explore. K

About the author

Margaret Chapman is a chartered psychologist, chartered scientist and chartered FCIPD. She is an EI coach and supervisor and a partner in EI Coaching and Consulting, and a member of the CIPD coaching and mentoring faculty
mc@eicoaching.co.uk

The author wishes to thank Reuven Bar-On, whose comments were helpful in preparing this article; Dr Mark Slaski, for his seminal doctoral work into EI Development in a UK retail organisation; and Dorothy Spry of Career Performance, for sharing insights from her EI coaching practice.

Learning points

• EI is a performance technology, typically anchored to personal competencies in leadership development.
• The label EI is often subsumed under “high-performance behaviours”.
• What EI “is” varies, so select a model that fits the organisational culturally and is fit for purpose.
• Establish an EQ level using self and (ideally) multi-source (360-degree) feedback and use as a basis to design tailored interventions.
• Agree evidence-based EQ objectives with key stakeholders.
• Recognise that EI needs sustained development over time, including both individual and group-based interventions, incorporating cognitive and experiential components.
• Coaching for EI requires coaches that have developed their own EQ.
• EQ coaches need to model EI and approach the design, development and evaluation of interventions with integrity.

Case study: Local Authority

Group size 16
Group characteristics Established team
Structure One day a month over five months

Topics

• What is emotional intelligence?
• Relating EI to existing management competencies
• Building a vision, eliciting values and setting goals
• Building effective relationships
• Reframing (using cognitive techniques, ABC)
• Self monitoring (awareness in action)
• Identifying thinking patterns – negative self-talk and outdated “parent tapes”

Methods and Media

• Cognitive and experiential learning
• Role-play and real-time feedback/feed forward
• Peer e-coaching and action learning sets
• Use of music and relationship with emotional responses
• Use of metaphor, stories and personal narratives
• Freeze-frame technique
• Personal Action Planning, behavioural assignments

Support

• Managers trained as EI coaches

Evaluation

• “Happy Sheets”
• Pre-Post assessment of EQ
• Performance reviews
• Qualitative and quantitative evaluation follow-up, one year after initial intervention

Emotional Intelligence Development Programme, Public Sector, Local Authority
Adapted from The Emotional Intelligence Pocketbook, 9th reprint (2008)

Case study: the banking institution

The problem

A large banking organisation was looking for a team leader to promote within its IT department. The candidate selected for the job seemed an ideal choice. John had left university with a first-class degree in computing, followed by a master’s in systems analysis. He was, without doubt, very bright and focused on his job and quickly gathered expertise at systems problem-solving. John was soon promoted to team leader of a group of 12 people, even though he had never managed people before.
But John’s lack of people skills soon created tensions within the team.

The solution

The head of HR, after consultation with his manager, decided to refer John for coaching for EI. The coach wanted to help John to understand himself better as a way to nurture his people skills and manage more positively his social interactions with his team. It was decided to administer the Bar-On EQ-i.

After the coach’s initial contracting meeting with John it was clear he was committed to the coaching process as a way of developing his EI skills to help him become a better team leader. John completed the Bar-On EQ-i online and the report outlining his responses to the EQ-i was examined during the coaching feedback session.

The EQ-i assessment indicated how the various aspects of his EI affected his behaviour at work. The results revealed the difficulties he was experiencing when dealing with people and managing stressful situations. His inability to control his temper (low frustration tolerance) made his team feel and behave very negatively towards him. In working with his coach it was decided to concentrate on the following areas of his emotional Intelligence:

• Social awareness and training in interpersonal skills;
• Strategies to better manage the emotions of his work colleagues;
• Understand that individuals are all different;
• Greater flexibility and responsibility in his social interactions;
• Improve emotional control to minimise or remove emotional outbursts.

The outcome

The EQ-i was administered again after nine months to see if there had been a change in John’s EI. An EQ-360 assessment was also conducted in which John’s team members, peers and managers were asked to rate him to discover whether there had been any observable shifts in his behaviour.

A comparison between pre- and post-EI coaching showed that there was agreement between John’s self-assessment and those of other raters, with particular shifts noted in the areas of enhanced interpersonal skills and impulse control – that is, fewer angry outbursts.

With EI assessment, coaching and ongoing support, John had been made aware of how his emotional and social intelligence could help him manage and lead his team more effectively, with positive outcomes.

How to integrate EI into business

• Selection, assessment and performance management
• Management and leadership development
• Organisational change
• Well-being and psychological resilience training
• Team-building and facilitation
• Conflict resolution and mediation

References

• D R Caruso and P Salovey, The Emotionally Intelligent Manager: How to Develop and Use the Four Key Emotional Skills of Leadership, San Francisco, Jossey-Bass, 2004
• M Cavanagh, A M Grant and T Kemp, Evidence Based Coaching, Australian Academic Press, 2005
• M A Chapman, The Emotional Intelligence Pocketbook, Arlesford, Hants, 2001
• V Dulewicz & M Higgs, Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire, ASE, Windsor, 2000
• A M Grant, “Enhancing coaching skills and emotional intelligence through training”, in Industrial and Commercial Training, 39(5), pp257-266, 2007
• D Goleman, Emotional Intelligence: Why it Can Matter More Than IQ, Bloomsbury, 1995
• J Maddocks, “Mindsets: Towards a clearer understanding of EI”, in Selection & Development Review, 21(1), pp3-6, 2005
• K R Murphy and L Sideman, “The two EIs”, in K R Murphy (ed), A Critique of Emotional Intelligence: What Are The Problems and How Can They Be Fixed?, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc, 2006

Further reading and information

• • S Blakeslee and M Blakeslee, “Where Mind and Body Meet”, in Scientific American Mind, pp44-51, Aug/Sept 2007
  • L J Cozolino, The Neuroscience of Psychotherapy, W W Norton Inc., New York, 2002
  • D Rock, “A Brain-Based Approach to Coaching”, in Journal of Coaching in Organizations, 4(2), pp32-43, 2006
  • T Sparrow and A Knight, Applied EI: The Importance of Attitudes in Developing Emotional Intelligence, Chichester, John Wiley & Sons, 2006
  • www.neuroleadership.org
  • www.eiconsortium