The purpose of this article is to evaluate claims that emotional intelligence is significantly related to transformational and other leadership behaviors. Results indicated a validity estimate of . 59 when ratings of both emotional intelligence and leadership behaviors were provided by the same source (self, subordinates, peers, or superiors).
However, when ratings of the constructs were derived from different sources, the validity estimate was . 12. Lower validity estimates were found for transactional and leadership behaviors.
Separate analyses were performed for each measure of emotional intelligence. Trait measures of emotional intelligence tended to show higher validities than ability-based measures of emotional intelligence. Agreement across ratings sources for the same construct was low for both transformational leadership and emotional intelligence. Research into the relationship between emotional intelligence (EI) and transformational leadership is filled with bold claims as to the relationship between these constructs.
Noted experts in the field of EI argue that elements of EI such as empathy, self-confidence, and self-awareness are the core underpinnings of visionary or transformational leadership. An information package distributed by Multi-Health Systems, the leading distributor of EI assessment tools, claims that “emotional intelligence is synonymous with good leadership. ” Some have claimed that “for those in leadership positions, emotional intelligence skills account for close to 90 percent of what distinguishes outstanding leaders from those judged as average”.
The Essay on Emotional Intelligence Leadership Style
DEVELOPMENT OF EI The development of Emotional Intelligence requires a recognition of one's own strengths and limitations, an exploration of how current decisions are framed through beliefs and prior experiences, and the actualization of potential by using the greater self knowledge gained. However, in a report by the Institute of Management (2002) research showed that the quality of leadership in ...
Others have noted the disappointing results of intelligence and personality models in the prediction of exceptional leadership and have argued that EI may represent an elusive “X” factor for predicting transformational leadership. The concept of transformational leadership, “full range leadership theory”, is one of the most widely researched paradigms in the leadership field and has shown substantial validity for predicting a number of outcomes including leader performance and effectiveness ratings in addition to follower satisfaction and motivation.
Transformational leaders act as mentors to their followers by encouraging learning, achievement, and individual development. They provide meaning, act as role models, provide challenges, evoke emotions, and foster a climate of trust. The five dimensions of transformational leadership are idealized influence (attributed), idealized influence (behavioral), individual consideration, inspirational motivation, and intellectual stimulation. Idealized influence (attributed) refers to the socialized charisma of the leader and whether or not he or she is perceived as being confident and committed to high-order ideals.
Idealized influence (behavioral) refers to charismatic actions by the leader that are based on values, beliefs, or ideals. Individualized consideration is the extent to which a leader attends to the needs and concerns of his or her followers by providing socio-emotional support. This involves mentoring followers, maintaining frequent contact, encouraging followers to self-actualize, and empowering them. Inspirational motivation is the degree to which leaders inspire and appeal to followers by setting challenging goals and communicating optimism with regard to goal attainment.
Intellectual stimulation refers to the extent to which leaders engage in behaviors that cause followers to challenge their assumptions, think creatively, take risks, and participate intellectually. Although definitions of EI vary widely, it can be thought of as “the set of abilities (verbal and non-verbal) that enable a person to generate, recognize, express, understand, and evaluate their own and others’ emotions in order to guide thinking and action that successfully cope with environmental demands and pressures”. As a trait, EI is considered to be an innate characteristic that enables and promotes well-being.
The Essay on Charismatic Leadership Leaders Followers Leader
How to be a Charismatic Leader What do Martin Luther King, John F. Kennedy, Charles Manson and David Kouresh all have in common? By definition, they were all charismatic leaders. Charisma is the result of specific behaviors on the part of the leaders, which leads followers to view them as charismatic. In essence, charismatic leaders have a powerful message, an arousing personality style and the ...
Trait EI has been described as a constellation of emotional self-perceptions at the lower levels of personality hierarchies. As ability, EI is considered to be important for not only comprehending and regulating emotions, but also understanding and integrating them into cognitions. While there have been considerable efforts made to create psychometrically valid measures of EI, there remains no single universally accepted measure of EI, and a number of criticisms have been made concerning the psychometric properties of the current scales available with regard to their convergent, discriminator, and predictive validity.
Little convergence across EI measures were found in comparing a number of different EI inventories. Because of this, we have questioned whether or not different measures of EI assess the same construct at all. Beyond concerns about cross measure comparability, it has noted that in numerous studies, EI measures fail to add incrementally to the prediction of work outcomes above and beyond established measures of personality and cognitive intelligence. Moreover, concerns have been raised about the susceptibility of trait-based EI measures to faking under high-stakes conditions.
Interest in EI remains high, in particular in the leadership domain. Anthropologists have noted that appropriate emotional displays and recognition of the emotional displays of others are essential for successful functioning and leadership in primate societies. Moreover, there are a number of theoretical arguments to be made for the relationship between EI and effective leadership, specifically transformational leadership. EI competencies such as self-confidence, self-awareness, transparency, and empathy have been argued to be essential for communicating visionary messages.
First, empathy may be necessary for transformational leaders who display individual consideration to followers. Second, emotion management may promote positive affect and confidence in followers expressing and generating new ideas. Third, self-aware leaders may possess a greater than average sense of purpose and meaning. Fourth, those skilled at emotional management are also those more likely to put the needs of others ahead of their own personal needs. George argued that emotional appeals may be used by transformational leaders for inspirational motivation.
The Essay on 6 Leadership Traits That Differentiate Leaders From Non Leaders
Drive: Leaders have a high effort level, they are relatively determined towards achieving an objective. They are motivated, full of energy and ambitious which is converted into working tirelessly in their activities, and they show initiative. Desire to Lead: Leaders have a strong desire to influence and lead other. This is demonstrated in their willingness to take responsibility. A business leader ...
Others have pointed out that adherence to professional or moral standards of behavior are common aspects of both EI and transformational leadership. Despite these generally weak results, this study does suggest a number of theoretical implications for further research on the topic of the potential effect of EI on transformational leadership or any number of other leadership outcomes. First, it is essential that researchers select their criteria appropriately and assess phenomena using the most relevant source.
EI, which occurs mostly within the individual, should be assessed using self-reports or performance data. Transformational leadership measures, on the other hand, are behavioral in nature and best studied from the point of view of those who are meant to be affected by them. As a consequence, further research needs to focus more on using multiple ratings sources to establish an accurate picture of the nature of this relationship. Second, only in rare cases was EI tested for incremental validity above and beyond measures of intelligence and personality.
