Work Environment Under An Emotionally Intelligent Leader Management Essay
When Henry Ford introduced F.W Taylor’s ‘Scientific management’ into his production line in the 1920’s, the first automated production line, he witnessed productivity rises and falling costs. Although F.W Taylor’s Scientific Management theory was based on a simple assumption- money being the prime motivator- Ford could see that for costs to be kept low productivity and hence employee motivation had to be kept high. Researchers universally agree on high productivity being directly linked to high motivation. However researchers have differentiated opinions about the variables that cause motivation. From simple motivators such as money and working conditions to more complex variables such as job enrichment and a manager’s emotional intelligence, researchers and psychologists have come up with various theories.
The concept of and research on the link between emotional intelligence of the managers and the motivation levels of their subordinates has recently come to the forefront. Fleishman has effectively argued this point by the evaluation of current recruitment trends. He pointed out that as organizations employed skilled professionals it could no longer use simple human resource practices to motivate these employees
Emotional intelligence is more important and fundamental a concept, as conventional intelligence measures - IQ (Intelligence quotient), is too narrow a concept and because a much wider scope of intelligence exists. According to Daniel Goleman, author of ‘Emotional Intelligence’, people who are academically brilliant may be socially inapt in certain business situations. Daniel thus stated that Emotional Intelligence Quotient was also an important characteristic of a successful manager rather than a consideration of just his Intelligence Quotient Goleman)
The rewards of having an emotionally efficient manager as Morris (1996) identified helped create a motivated workforce, satisfied consumers and a better supplier-business relationship. The benefit, Morris identified was due to workers finding their workplace and environment comfortable and hence instigating loyalty to the organization and goal congruence - they made the organizational goals their personal goals. Another benefit of an increase in workplace satisfaction is that workers found it easier to cooperate, participate and engage as useful members of a productive team. (Morris)
Fleishman however has stated that there were three prerequisites of cooperative and harmonious staff behavior
Trust between workers
The sense of being part of a group
Sense of belonging to an effective group, one where each members potential is put to use.
WORK ENVIRONMENT UNDER AN EMOTIONALLY INTELLIGENT LEADER
However the integration of an emotionally considerate work environment is not just a top down task that the management can enforce. The integration of an emotionally strong worker - manager relationship is a two way effort. Managers’ emotional stability depends on the effectiveness of their workforce. Workers, thus, should help create and promote an environment that breeds appreciation of emotional intelligence. This, Flann (1960) identified could be done if workers communicated with their managers about the problems they encountered in their work. This is very similar to two way communication and instant feedback, where workers and managers discuss issues and their interaction leads to emotional changes. Such emotions however could be positive or negative. (Flann)
Daniel Goleman in his research listed two aspects of emotional intelligence
Personal Scope-Understanding yourself, goals, objectives and behavior
Social scope- Understanding others and their behavior
Goleman also laid down five dimensions of emotional intelligence
Acknowledging your own emotions
Controlling your emotions
Distinguishing and realizing others’ emotions
Managing relationships and emotions
Goleman said that by developing emotional intelligence in these five domains managers could become more productive. Goleman also found that the ‘stress factor’ could be reduced if emotional intelligence was developed and put into practice. Emotional intelligence, as Goleman identified, had important managerial implications since it reduced conflicts, strengthened relationships and increased understanding.
The emotional intelligence of managers can be divided into two aspects when talking about human resource management. The primary effect of emotional intelligence is on the work outcomes of subordinates while the secondary effect is on the work attitudes of subordinates.
Culliver (1991) in his research showed an important link between the manager’s idea of achievement and the worker’s idea of achievement. Culliver spoke of situations where there was an expectation gap in that the ideas of achievement in both the groups had different implications. As a result, whatever work achievement a worker had gained would be insufficient compared to the manager’s expectations, and hence, his emotional response to the situation would have been lesser than what the subordinate would have expected. This negativity Culliver pointed out was simply due to different perspectives of job achievement. (Culliver 1991)
Another prospect of workplace motivation is job enrichment -a principle that allows employees to use a wider scale of their potential abilities, and not just the physical ones. Job enrichment involves practices such as quality circles, team discussions and group efforts. Alegra found this an effective way to motivate subordinates; increasing confidence by giving workers a chance to participate in improving output not only quantitatively but also contributing to the design and quality of the output they produced. As workers enjoy some degree of power and autonomy, Alegra believed it could not only help increase work satisfaction but also cut down on recruitment and training expenses. By enriching job tasks, workers innovate and integrate efficient working practices. Alegra also highlighted the fact that workers with well enriched jobs often view their organization’s goal as their personal goals, leading to goal congruence. (Alegra 1983)
Emotional recognition of workers, Wilk believed, created allegiance between workers and the organization. Workers who received positive emotional recognition were often the ones who remained loyal to the business.
Where this level of positive emotional response was not forthcoming, the workers would become reluctant to contribute in the organization. In businesses where capable and influential members did not perform to their full potential, for the business’ prosperity, they drove the business into disintegration.
However emotionally intelligent managers posses certain traits which help them identify, develop and integrate measures to rectify the source of these poor attitudes. (Wilk 1995)
Fleishman also identified emotional inspiration as an important characteristic of a successful manager. Emotional encouragement helps create positivity about the organizations goals. It also helps subordinates believe that success is realistic. This is very important especially when workers believe that their contributions are insignificant compared to the complex and daunting organizational goals. When tasks in hand are difficult and the workforce is pessimistic, emotional inspiration helps promote optimism. This inspiration can be in the form of simple but frequent two - way communication between managers proposing change and his subordinates, or, can be rituals with enlivening speeches and events to celebrate achievements. (Fleishman 1953)
Dutton and Dukerich found that the optimism an emotionally intelligent manager derived from looking at his subordinates and their performance motivates both the manager and his workforce. The manager is able to stabilize his emotions and also gains assurance from his subordinates. This bond and trust in the manager - subordinate relationship makes their environment more conducive to increased efficiency and effectiveness. This increases the probability of success and the likelihood of achieving goals. (Dutton and Dukerich 1991)
Managers however should be very careful in their display of emotions, especially when they are steering a multi-skilled, trained and valuable workforce. Tiegs (1992) identified that such managerial emotions are dictated by their able workforce. This is because managers fear loosing these valuable and competitive workers. Managers realize that varying emotional display might result in high labor turnover and therefore a transfer of trade secrets to businesses competitors. Tiegs found that these managers thus display little or no emotion to disturbances in the work environment. (Tiegs 1992)
As people do not work in an isolated environment it is important that each participant recognizes the other and their emotions. This is why an individual’s emotional intellect also includes an element of social intelligence, which is the quality to assess other’s emotions and to differentiate between them, and also the ability to manipulate one’s own emotions accordingly. An emotionally intelligent individual, according to James, has the ability to analyze not only their own emotions but are also able to analyze their colleague’s emotional states and to use it to identify and solve problems and to increase productive efficiency. (James 1986)
Receptivity to change is also an important issue that managers have to consider when employing workplace changes or work practice changes. At organizational level receptivity also reflects the willingness to think and suggest collectively to a proposed change. Staw has stated that receptivity was not just a state but also a process. However, receptivity also denotes the emotional acceptance of a proposed change. Staw found that if individuals found the change meaningful and beneficial, their emotional attitude could help sway the attitudes of their colleagues. Managers could therefore reduce resistance to changes and smoothen out the implementation of changes by communicating emotionally as well. (Staw 1985)
Incentive, according to Hackman was the reason why people wanted to commit. Organizational goals are unattainable if there is no commitment on the part of the employees. Hackman stressed on the need to perform small acts that helped create a sense of belonging. (Hackman)
An emotionally intelligent manager, according to research conducted by Cherniss, Grimm and Liautaud (2010), cannot always be successful in creating an emotionally intelligent team too. A team posseses its own distinct traits with individuals each having different emotional capabilities and capacities. The whole team’s emotional intelligence is very different than the sum of individual emotional intelligence as teams interact at diverse levels. Cherniss pointed out that the manager must also posses traits other than personal competence - the idea of controlling one’s own emotions, and also social competence - that is being able to analyze and regulate others emotions. A manager, according to Cherniss, Grimm and Liautaud, must be able not only to psychoanalyze and control his own and his group’s emotions but should also be weary of the emotions of groups outside his control but indirectly affecting their performance. (Cherniss, Grimm and Liautaud (2010)
A manager must also be aware of the different emotional capacities of his subordinates. If a particular worker has a lower emotional understanding the manager needs to be able to identify and rectify this and to encourage him to analyze things. The manager needs to ensure that the team appreciates the work of that member and does not push him into a negative mindset and complex (Stains 1984). However Fleishman found that such a work environment can make it impossible for some people to work as a team. Fleishman said that because of different management attitudes, workers found it difficult to get on with one another and this could lead to a fall in team productivity. This will affect the manager’s emotional intelligence negatively and will make his management approach more autocratic. This in turn could lead to further workplace negativity and steeper falls in productivity.
If the members of a team improved at recognizing emotional display, team performance could be enhanced. Parrado (2001) talked of a situation where a group was helping out its members in improving performance of different tasks. The idea was that individuals should be able to identify team members who needed the most attention. During the research a series of test trials were carried out. A member in this laboratory test group found the new task assigned to him uncomfortable but was good at his original task. The laboratory test group identified this discomfort of his and instead of pushing him back they contributed to provide support to him and to strengthen their weakest link.
Stains (1984) identified that all civilization, ancient and modern, are accustomed to the six universal expressions, that of anger, fear, happiness, sadness, shock and repugnance, indicated to the extent that expression of human emotion was universal. Ibarra (1995) however said that the six universal expressions could only be well applied to individuals and not to entire groups. Ibarra found dissimilarities in social emotional structure and individuals. Ibarra has therefore stressed the ability of the manager in being able to assess emotional expressions in different group situations.
Work - family conflict is another aspect of employees’ attitude towards work. Workers’ focus and his capacity to work can be affected by family disputes. Family conflicts have a negative impact on worker performance. Sickness, family tragedies, etc have an impact on the absenteeism rate and hence on the productivity of a worker. Any financial problem could also lead to a request for monetary assistance from the manager. Other family interruptions and deaths in the family may also stress the worker out and reduce worker efficiency. According to Lichter (1995), work- family conflicts can only be handled well by managers who have good emotional intelligence and are able to comprehend the situation well. Such managers are able to show stability of emotions in such situations and thus provide comfort and a sense of calm.
Another influence on the work attitude of an employee is the work – relations conflict. The work – relations conflict arises because one work position is in conflict with another. In such a situation one employee’s role overlaps or spills onto the other employee’s role. In such situations only an emotionally intelligent manager will be able to scrutinize worker roles and rearrange these conflicting roles in such a way that instead of overlapping, these roles complement each other, so that there is goal congruence rather than dysfunctional behavior (workers are able to work together as a unit than for themselves individually). (Stains 1984)
A worker’s commitment to the organization also has an impact on the worker’s attitude. High work commitment means low turnover and absenteeism, but has little direct impact on performance. Commitment is not the same as motivation. Bottger, however found that dissatisfaction from just one component of the work environment will not lead to a fall in commitment to the organization as a whole. He, however, found that commitment could be increased if management could effectively convey messages, educate employees and provide incentives in order to increase participation and therefore enhance the performance of the entity. (Bottger 1986)
Job satisfaction is another aspect of a worker’s attitude towards his job. It is the emotional pleasure a worker derives from doing his work. Yoav found an important link between emotional intelligence and job satisfaction. Emotions, according to Yoav, were caused by intelligence, which affects worker satisfaction. He believed that emotional stability affects both job satisfaction and group performance. Managers who are emotionally intelligent can provide working conditions that are emotionally stable and hence can encourage workers to derive satisfaction from their work. (Yoav 1998)
Managers must therefore be able to build traits of emotional ability in their subordinates to ensure that pessimistic and optimistic emotions are transferred to them. Morris and Fieldman (1996) stressed on the need for workers to vent out their pessimistic emotions, as it allows workers to refocus on core work and to move in a positive direction. Group norms in subordinates could breed positivity, optimism and enthusiasm to achieve. However, this positivity might not come from the team as a whole but from the individuals in a team, as the Hay group interviews revealed. The research showed that where negativity did arise, some team member would usually take up the mantle, stop the blame game and promote positive and constructive behavior. (Morris and Fieldman 1996)
Managers must also be intelligent enough to take into account emotions triggered as a result of or calling for a radical change in an organization. The organization’s emotional capabilities could be identified from the way that it treats these dynamic emotions and thus deals with inevitable change. (Kulik, Oldham and Hackman 1987)
Some workers whose jobs are enriched and additional responsibilities are added to their job description might view this simply as an additional burden. Thus, employees may not be motivated by this job enrichment and rotation and this might affect the managers’ emotional intelligence adversely. Worker efficiency might fall and so will productivity. If the job rotation or enrichment does not provide self actualization - the feeling that you have done something on your own, workers might view themselves as machines which can be rotated and replaced. The manager’s emotional response is important in this case since it will determine the attitude of the worker towards the change and the organization as a whole. However Huber (1991) found that usually labour unrest will lead to managerial frustration. Huber found that managers need to be competent in interpreting personal communication to be able to clearly distinguish emotions. Huber found this appraisal of unspoken emotional messages an important aspect of being a socially competent person. (Huber 1991)
The social contacts a business has, also has an impact on managers’ emotional intelligence. Roberts (1981) found that social contacts of managers often promote business interests. They create brand awareness, help business get contracts and sponsorships, etc. Roberts said that those social contacts could be individuals, other companies and even governmental figures. Success through these social circles brought about emotional strength to the manager which in return created a positive business environment where efficiency and productivity rises were noticeable. (Roberts 1981)
TalentSmart conducted an American ‘Emotional Intelligence Appraisal’ on business executives in China to identify where the secrets to Chinese economic success lay. The results of the test conducted on American and Chinese executives were on the extreme ends of a spectrum. The research concluded that the Chinese executives were far ahead of their American counterparts in two of the most important Emotional Quotient Skills: Self-management and Relationship - management. This, according to the study, provides the Chinese with a competitive edge over the Americans in the same positions with the same level of authority. The Americans thus lagged behind on cost competitiveness in the global markets, leading to analysts considering the possibility of the world’s superpower losing its esteemed position in international commerce.
(Forbes.com, China’s Secret Weapon, 11.14.05)
Studies conducted by TalentSmart showed the link between emotional intelligence and job performance and concluded that 58% of a leader’s job performance is positively correlated to a high emotional quotient. The study further identified that 90% of high performers had high emotional quotient.
(THE BUSINESS CASE FOR EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE (EQ) 2009 UPDATE, TalentSmart, Inc. www.TalentSmart.com)
Daniel Goleman’s work for the Harvard Business Review (1998), on emotional intelligence remains the most well researched work on the link between emotional intelligence and managerial success. Goleman had already promoted the idea of emotionally intelligent managers being successful leaders through his book ‘Emotional Intelligence’ (1995).
Goleman in his article ‘What makes a Leader’ (Harvard Business Review 1998), spoke about effective managers and successful leaders possessing five important characteristics. These characteristics, according to Goleman, were of self-awareness, self-regulation, motivation, empathy and social skills. Goleman said these characteristics were distinct in effective managers.
1. SELF AWARENESS
When Goleman spoke about being self-aware, he spoke about people who were well aware of their strengths and weaknesses. Goleman found that self-aware people were not hesitant in discussing their weaknesses and have both self confidence and a realistic approach to self assessment.
2. SELF REGULATION
Self-Regulation is the second desired attribute of a successful manager, one who is highly regarded in emotional intelligence. Self regulation is the characteristic describing the ability of being able to control their impulse reaction and behavior and being able to acquire the quality of thinking first and acting later.
Good managers must also possess the passion to succeed and achieve. Goleman found that the manager’s enthusiasm to succeed was an important motive for a manager, often more than incentives offered by the company.
Empathy is the lineament in emotionally intelligent managers that describes the act of taking into account stakeholder interests and sentiments when making decisions. Goleman said that managers must take into account and understand stakeholder emotions before making decisions.
2. SOCIAL SKILLS
Social skill refers to the proficiency with which managers establish and maintain relationships. Goleman said that if managers possessed all four preceding characteristics they would naturally build their social skills too. Goleman also stated that socially skilled managers posses the ability to make their subordinates believe that the businesses goal is their goal, leading to goal congruency and a greater motivation to achieve targets. Social skill, Goleman referred was being ‘friendly with a purpose’.
Goleman in his research talked of how different business situations called for different management styles and leadership qualities (‘Leadership that gets results’), from being cooperative to being authoritative, and from being democratic to being coercive. Withal Goleman said that his research on two hundred global companies led him to a single and consistent conclusion - that all good managers have one common trait, having a high degree of emotional intelligence. Goleman nevertheless discerned that other managerial skills, such as his intelligence quotient, were not at all irrelevant. Goleman named emotional intelligence the ‘sine qua non’ of a leader. He was convinced that in the absence of emotional intelligence, a manager possessing other highly rated traits would still fail in becoming a prosperous manager.
Daniel Goleman used competency models – models built to distinguish, train and promote virtuoso achievers in the businesses leadership stream. Goleman used 188 competency models, all from different firms, including giants like British Airways and Credit Suisse. The idea behind the assessment of competency models was to identify personal aptitude that drove performance. On analyzing data, Goleman found that though Intelligence Quotient (IQ), technical skills, long term potential etc. were important managerial qualities, emotional intelligence was twice as important a managerial characteristic at all levels of the organizational hierarchy.
David McClelland’s findings also supported Goleman’s idea of high emotional intelligence being not only a distinguishable feature of brilliant managers, but also a reason for better performance. McClelland’s research of a global food and beverage company in 1996 revealed that in sections where senior managers had critically high emotional intelligence they surmounted their earning goals by a fifth. Divisions that did not have an emotionally intelligent management, underperformed by almost the same amount (one fifth lower than targets). McClelland’s findings were consistent throughout the company’s divisions in US, Asia and Europe.
A research paper produced by Center for Creative Leadership in 2003, titled ‘Leadership skills and Emotional Intelligence’ further pointed out that the core aspects of managerial operations which had been observed, increased performance amongst emotionally intelligent managers.
According to the research paper, managers who had skills of participative management correlated highly with higher grades of emotional intelligence. Such managers were distinguished as possessing the important relationship - building skill. In other words emotionally intelligent managers would take opinions from all ends of the table before they implemented any change. Such managers were found good at collaborating with others and promoting healthy workplace relationships.
Another additional trait of a successful and emotionally intelligent manager is that they make workers and the work environment easy and comfortable. Such managers benefited from relaxed working conditions where workers would not take any impulsive action detrimental to them or to the corporation. It also is a sign of success since it shows that people are comfortable in your presence or under your leadership.
Emotionally intelligent managers also displayed better performance than their counterparts when it came to building and preserving relationships. Emotionally intelligent managers, according to the research, have excellent impulse control. This control allows managers to avoid volatile behavior, and this translates into stronger bonds with both, the bosses and the subordinates.
Another aspect where emotionally intelligent managers score highly is in being assertive without being destructive. In cases where managers have to deal with problematic employees a high emotional intelligence allows managers to express themselves without creating a fix out of the matter.
Emotionally intelligent managers are also more successful at constituting changes. Such managers, because of their social and interpersonal qualities, are able to get people to accept the change. This acceptance and cooperation to bring about change is solely because these managers are able to inspire their subordinates into believing that the change is for the greater good for the greatest number of people, and will breed efficiency.
In his report ‘Leadership that Gets Results’ (Goleman, 2000), Daniel Goleman drew attention towards the result of the McBer research. The research, based on a sample of 3,871 executives from across the globe, aimed at solving the myth of effective leadership styles. The research discourses six broad leadership styles, each arising as a result of a different set of emotional capabilities and capacities of the manager. Each leadership style was also noted to have a distinct and distinguished impact on the workplace environment. In circumstances where this impact on the workplace climate was positive, financial results and efficiency improved. Goleman, nonetheless, found that the workplace environment was not the only element of an improved financial result. Other variables such as business dynamics and economic conditions also have immense impact on business performance, but Goleman believed favorable workplace environment accounted for almost a third of business performance .The research also pointed out to the fact that successful leaders would not be contingent upon just one leadership and management style.
The Six Leadership styles
The Coercive is a ‘do as I say’ approach that is particularly effective in critical situations or with problem employees (McGregor’s Theory X employee). Coercive styles in normal business situations may end up as the worst management method since it limits the flow of ideas from lower levels of the organization to the higher levels of management. People may lose personal initiative as well as a sense of obligation. People, as Maslow in his hierarchy of needs identified, were motivated by things greater than money. They desire job satisfaction, social relationships at work and esteem out of their job outcomes etc. and a coercive leadership style may damage it the most. Workers as a result, lose the motivation and initiative to work. Coercive leadership style also limits a true leader’s ability to create goal congruency - making people believe that the organizations’ goals and their personal goals can be achieved through one common struggle. A coercive style of leadership, according to Goleman, was only useful in extreme situations, ones where business uplift was required or a hostile takeover had to be avoided. Goleman stressed on this management style being used only in one off situations as it damages a leader’s sensitivity to workforce morale and emotions, and this can be very detrimental in long run manager-worker relations.
The second management style discussed is the authoritative style or the ‘come along with me approach’. This approach is particularly useful when workers had to be redirected towards a new goal or a more clearer and realistic goal. An authoritative leader only shows his followers their ultimate aim and leaves upon them the decision of the method they will employ to achieve that target or goal. Authoritative leaders are visionary in their approach and they inspire people into believing that their work fits the bigger aim of the organization. Such leaders are hence able to bank on increased workforce commitment for the organizational goals. This style therefore allows a lot of flexibility to workers who are able to choose their own means of working towards the organizational aims. Authoritative leaders give their workers a chance to innovate and experiment with working methods. Of all the six management styles, Goleman found that the authoritative management style was the best in almost all business circumstances. Its overall impact on workplace environment scored it a positive .54 correlation, which remained the highest of all the six management styles.
The third management style that Goleman spoke about was the affiliative style or the ‘people first’ aspect of management. This management style values individuals and their emotions foremost. Mangers using this management style try to build strong emotional bonds at the workplace and are hence able to create worker loyalty to the management. These strong emotional bonds lead to increased positive communication and a transfer of inspiration and ideas across the workplace. Workers under this management style also enjoy higher levels of flexibility since managers are willing to adjust on unnecessary obligations. Affiliative leaders were also noted to be good at providing feedback, most of which was positive. Affiliative leaders were also adept at creating a sense of belonging, by building strong manager-worker relationship. Affiliative management styles, Goleman identified, could not be used in isolation. The idea of allowing workers such a great level of flexibility and the constant laudation of workers can lead to a lack of accountability of poor worker performance, and, may result in the workers perceiving managers as having higher levels of tolerance. Affiliative styles of management gives workers no clear direction, and, if overused could even lead to management disasters. This is why most successful managers have been widely known to use this style along with the ‘vision building’ authoritative style.
Democratic management style, Goleman stated, was the ‘what is your opinion’ approach when dealing with people. This style builds upon the strengths of workforce through participation and consensus. Goleman believed that by amassing people’s ideas, leaders earn respect and commitment. By allowing workers a say in their working domains, democratic managers crusade flexibility and worker commitment to higher levels. However if consensus is difficult to derive, then the only result a democratic leadership style may bring is endless discussions and possible conflict. When business dynamics change rapidly, the decision making process needs to be quick, but democratic leaders often lag behind leaders of other management styles. The democratic leadership style is useful in situations where employees are well informed and/or the manager is out of ideas. In such situations democratic leadership styles will yield strong and invigorating ideas. But in circumstances where the workforce is not competent enough to provide worthy advice, democratic leaders are poor performers.
Pacesetting style is the ‘do as I do’ approach. Pacesetter’s set high performance standards and expect people to not only be better at what they do but also to be prompt in accomplishing their tasks. Managers following such a style are quick to point out mistakes and demand improvement from poor performers. Failure to comply leads to the replacement of such a candidate with one who is deemed more effective and worthy. This management style may seem to be a highly effective means to achieving organizational goals, but it is not the case. Workers under the pacesetting style feel like machines, as the pacesetters’ demands for excellence are often unrealistically high. Worker morale drops as result, as they see no point in making an effort. Subordinates believe that a pacesetting manager does not trust them to work well in their own manner and so worker flexibility is hurt and the sense of responsibility evaporates as work becomes more routine and alienating. Pacesetting managers are also not known for their feedback to workers. They only come into the communication network when something goes wrong. Workers as a result feel that if they do receive feedback it will always be negative. In the absence of the pacesetter, workers are rudderless in their approach, since they depend heavily on directions from the pacesetter. A pacesetting style is found suitable for situations where employees are competent and self actuated towards their work. Pacesetting is likely to be successful in circumstances where workers need little guidance such as in the case of highly talented professionals.
The coaching style of management is a ‘try this’ approach when managing people. The coaching style aims at building people’s strength and such managers want their employees to develop long term prospects rather than concentrate on short term immediate gains and tasks. Coaching managers are renowned for giving plentiful feedback and pedagogy. Coaching managers believe in delegation and delegate very often. Such managers love to challenge their employees in order to teach them from their own experience, even if the managers know that the worker will fail in the task at hand. The coaching style remains the least used method of management of all the six styles. This is because managers often complain of the time factor of this method. Since the teaching process is very time consuming managers prefer to avoid it, especially since business dynamics change rapidly and results have to be produced instantaneously. However research has found a distinguished positive impact on workplace climate as a result of this management method being in use. The research also identified a paradox of the coaching management style’s impact on business performance. Since the coaching style focuses on developing individuals rather than concentrating on the task at hand, effectiveness of this method in workplace results is complex to grasp. The coaching style also makes little sense if workers are hesitant or reluctant to learn and to accept changes in the working methods or conditions. Any coaching effect will simply be an aimless routine exercise in the employee’s perspective. The coaching management style is also less useful in situations where managers are not competent enough to initiate the teaching and training process. Research found that most mangers are either incapable or unwilling to teach and are ready only to direct people. Most managers found this management style completely unadoptable.
Daniel Goleman (2000) in his Harvard Business Review report identified that most successful managers were ones who had mastered more than one management style. Managers who demonstrated excellent control over democratic, affiliative, authoritative and coaching styles of management were the best at providing a business climate that bred efficiency. Goleman found that emotionally intelligent managers were skillful at switching between these styles when the situation demanded. Emotionally intelligent managers when dealing with their employees were noted to read them well and were able to adjust their attitudes accordingly. So if a manager noticed a talented employee underperforming since he finds the management unsympathetic towards worker, the manager should be able to register this if he is emotionally intelligent. The manager can then vary his management approach towards this employee in a way that will reenergize him. This individual and personalized management leads to a positive sentiment in the workers and this could be translated into a productivity gain.
Bass and Avalio (Bass 1985, Bass and Avalio 1990) identified two distinct types of leadership models. They are complementary in approach to each other, one being transformational leaders and the other being the transactional approach of leadership. A transformational leader is one who increases cognizance and revives the interest of the individuals and teams towards the organization. Transformational leaders push workers to perform beyond pre-determined goals, targets and standards. Transactional leaders on the other hand motivate employees by feting them in return for fulfilling their normal tasks and achieving their set targets. Such leaders do not try to push workers beyond their normal routine tasks and standards.
Lowe and Kroeck found transformational leaderships effective since such managers promoted performance par standards (Lowe and Kroeck 1996). Yammarino (Yammarino 1994) found that transformational leaders push their subordinates beyond set standards and this promoted worker empowerment rather than manager dependence. Research has indicated that rewarding people on the basis of their progress and achievement reflects positively on the emotional intelligence of the manager (transactional leadership approach). Such managers are able to trade off good performance for rewards. This makes it clear to the employee what is being expected of them (Bass 19970. Barling et al (2000) and Palmer (2001) also concurred with the research findings. They too believed that leaders who employed contingent rewarding practices - reward for work accomplishment, scored highly on emotional intelligence quotient.
Mayer and Slovey’s work (1993) tried to reason for the differences in the levels of emotional intelligence. They both suggested that this variation in levels of emotional intelligence was simply due to differences in appraisal of the emotions of oneself and others.
While a lot of research has already been conducted on leader characteristics, their actions, and the reasoning behind their decision, George‘s (2000) research aimed at researching the affect of a leader’s emotions on their personal work and also on the work of their subordinates. George found that emotional intelligence is a key player in the effectiveness of a leader. George indicated that the leader’s ability to perceive and apprehend the moods and emotions itself led to management efficiencies. George found that leaders with higher emotional intelligence were more competent and capable of problem solving and in addressing issues. Emotionally intelligent managers were better at decision making, since they were well aware of their employee’s emotions and reactions and were able to consider these factors when making the decisions. (Schwarts 1990)
Mayer and Salovey’s model of emotional intelligence was further worked on by Caruso et al (1999). The four tier model of emotional intelligence was based on identifying emotions, using emotions, analyzing emotions and then managing them. Caruso et al found that the ability to identify emotions allowed managers the ability to be aware of their subordinate’s expectations and prospects. Caruso argued that managers who understood emotions well were better guided in the decision making process. He found that managers who were more receptive to the emotions of others were also better at apprehending the perspectives of their employees. Managers who were good at handling and dealing with the emotions of both their own and others were also noted for their work stress reduction skills and their ability in reducing job discontent and worker frustration.
The Swinburne University Emotional Intelligence Test (SUEIT) (Palmer and Stough,2001) is a model of factors that are representative of the abilities that are useful in emotional analysis. The model is an assessment of how workers think typically and react through emotional display when at work. The SUEIT consists of five variables, that of emotional recognition - being able to apply both emotional intelligence and emotional knowledge, understanding the emotions of others, being capable enough to manage both your and others positive and negative emotions and emotional control - how effectively emotions such as stress and anger can be limited or manipulated at the workplace.
CAN EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE BE DEVELOPED?
Given the benefits of being emotional intelligence to both, the organization and individual it is clear that it is highly rated quality. It is however debatable whether this quality of being emotionally intelligent is a genetic heredity or an art that can be taught and learnt. Scientific research has suggested that both ways of acquiring emotional intelligence are important. Research has identified that emotional intelligence can be nurtured and bred into humans. It develops with age. Research and human experience has also shown that sharpening your emotional intelligence is possible through learning too. Although learning to be emotionally intelligent is by no means an easy task. However, it is worth the effort because of all the potential benefits it has on personality development and social understanding. Genetic emotional intelligence also needs to be enhanced through training, so that it is polished.
Daniel Goleman in his 1998 Harvard Business Review article talked about how his research indicated that emotional intelligence could not be developed through traditional training programs. Emotional development could be best developed through experience and motivation, through practice, and feedback.
Goleman, however, said that one cannot expect to build their emotional ability without sincere effort. According to him, empathy is something managers cannot learn through a seminar or a learn – it - yourself guide. It is something, Goleman believed, that could be achieved only with a sincere desire to succeed and concentrated effort. To become a true leader, Goleman called emotional intelligence an important pre-requisite.
Whatever studies, be it limited, that have been carried on emotional intelligence agree almost fully that the ability to analyze and manage ones own and others emotions are characteristics inherent in effective leadership approaches. They further agree that it is emotionally intelligent leaders who inspire success, lead teams which are effective in their tasks and are easy to mingle and work together with others – socially strong.
Leaders need to be able to manage the ups and lows of their team to preserve efficiency. This ability comes to managers who are emotionally sound, those who can handle both positive and negative emotional aspects of work. Leaders must also through their appearance bring about a sense of credibility, association and security in his followers. Leaders, thus, must be able to maintain positive appearances, both emotionally and physically.
If you are the original writer of this essay and no longer wish to have the essay published on the UK Essays website then please click on the link below to request removal: