Previously we studied the history of the study of leadership theory. Researchers began their studies in the late 1800’s under the trait theory. Under this theory researchers assumed that leaders were born and not made. Research studied the heredity of leaders of the past looking for common traits that organizations could use to select future leaders but after years of research, no common traits were found (Nahavandi, 2006).
Researchers then changed their focus to studying behaviors of leaders. Similar to research conducted during the trait era, researchers were searching for common behaviors in leaders. Their hope was that isolating common behaviors would not only help select potential leaders but also give them behaviors that could teach (Nahavandi, 2006).
At present, leadership theory is working under the contingency theory. Researchers working under this theory consider situational factors such as the task and type of work group. The goal is to provide guidelines useful in selecting effective leaders for the situation in which the organization finds itself (Nahavandi, 2006).
During the trait era researchers began using IQ testing, believing that individuals exhibiting a high IQ had the traits of a leader but under the contingency theory in which researchers now operate, another form of measurement was necessary. Researchers began looking for a way to measure how an individual will work under pressure. One such measurement is the emotional quotient (EQ).
EQ is a method of measuring emotional intelligence (EI). It measures the social and interpersonal aspect of intelligence. Whereas IQ measured only the mental aspect of intelligence, EQ considers social intelligence as well. Contingency theorists use it as a measurement to assess how a leader will act under pressure (Nahavandi, 2006). In fact, Goleman (1995) believed that the EQ indicates the potential for personal success in life endeavors. Goleman may have been on to something because later studies were able to find a correlation between leadership effectiveness and EI (Boyatzis, 1999, Cherniss, 2001).
Additionally, studies have found that leaders possessing a high EI engage in transformational leadership behaviors that contribute positively to organization success (Butler, 2006). As we discovered in our studies on transformational leadership, transformational leaders often fail because of difficulty in implementation of changes. Leaders with high EI possess skills that will help them convince their followers to buy into their vision for change.
The use of EQ can also be beneficial in treating CEO disease. CEO disease is a when the CEO becomes detached from negative feedback. Since subordinates are often fearful of sharing negative aspects of a CEO’s behavior out of fear of losing their job, they hesitate to share their observations of their leader’s weaknesses and instead reiterate the leader’s strengths. This creates a vacuum around the leader absent of the candid feedback necessary for organizational effectiveness (Abrahams, 2007).
To combat this vacuum, leaders can be tested to measure their EI. This testing will reveal the leaders strengths and weaknesses. This will enable the leader to confront and deal with their personal weaknesses. The result, increased organizational effectiveness without subordinates having to feel threatened.
In conclusion, we have seen that contingency era researchers needed something in addition to IQ testing to assess a potential leader’s effectiveness. Measurement of a potential leader's EI is seen as an effective way to measure how a potential leader may react under pressure. We have also seen that this testing can be used to prevent CEO disease by revealing a leaders weaknesses without relying on subordinate input.
Next, a look at the type A and type B leader.
References
Abrahams, D. S. (2007, Mar/Apr). Emotional intelligence and army leadership: give it to me straight!. Military Review, 87, pp. 86-93. Retrieved March 8, 2010, http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdf?vid=5&hid=11&sid=476598be-7a6c-4b18-a350-232b08318d79%40sessionmgr13
Boyatzis, R. (1999). Self-directed change and learning as a necessary meta-bompetency for success and effectiveness in the 21st century. Keys to Employee Success in the Coming Decades, , .
Butler, C. J. (2006). Emotional intelligence and leadership behavior in construction executives. Journal of Management in Engineering, 22, pp. 119-125. Retrieved March 8, 2010, http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdf?vid=5&hid=11&sid=476598be-7a6c-4b18-a350-232b08318d79%40sessionmgr13
Cherniss, C. (2001). the business case for emotional intelligence. Concortium for Research on Emotional Intelligence in Organizations, , . Retrieved March 10, 2010, www.eiconsortium.org
Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional intelligence. New York: Bantam Books.
Nahavandi, A. (2006). The science and art of leadership (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River NJ: Pearson Education Inc..
No comments:
Post a Comment