Working with Emotional Intelligence

author:"Goleman" intitle:"Emotional intelligence" - Google Scholar

R i g i d i t y : They were unable to adapt their style to changes in the organizational culture, or they
were unable to take in or respond to feedback about traits they needed to change or improve. T h e y
c o u l d n ’t listen or learn.

P o o r R e l a t i o n s h i p s : The single most frequently mentioned factor: being too harshly critical,
insensitive, or demanding so that they alienated those they worked with.

These traits proved to be fatal handicaps even to brilliant executives with strong technical expertise.
In a similar study done on managers, sharp differences emerged between managers who were successful
and those who derailed on most major dimensions of emotional competence:

S e l f - C o n t ro l : Those who derailed handles pressures poorly and were prone to moodiness and
angry outbursts. The successful stayed composed under stress, remaining calm, confident and
dependable in the heat of crisis.

C o n s c i e n t i o u s n e s s : The derailed group reacted to failure and criticism defensively – denying, covering up or passing on the blame. The successful took responsibility by admitting their mistakes
and failures and taking action to fix the problems.

Tr u s t w o rt h i n e s s : The failed group typically was over ambitious, too ready to get ahead at the
expense of others. The successes had high integrity, with a strong concern for the needs of their
subordinates and colleagues, giving these a higher priority than impressing the boss.

Social Skills: The failures lacked empathy and sensitivity and so were often abrasive, and arrogant.
While some were charming on occasion, even seemingly concerned with others, the charm
was manipulative. The successes were truly empathetic and sensitive, showing tact and diplomacy
in their dealings with everyone, superiors and subordinates alike.

Building bonds and leveraging diversity: The insensitivity and manipulative manner of the
failed group meant that they failed to build a strong network of cooperative, mutually beneficial
relations. The successes were more appreciative of diversity and able to get alone with people of
all kinds and at all levels.

To sum up: For star performers in all jobs, in every field, emotional competence is twice as important
as purely cognitive abilities. For success at the highest levels, in leadership positions, emotional
competence accounts for virtually the entire advantage.