The emergence of emotional intelligence theory seemed quite incredible at first; however, its application in leadership gave tremendous results. The emotional intelligence theory in leadership postulates that “the leader’s moods and behavior drive the moods and behaviors of everyone else” (Goleman, Boyatzis, and McKee 44). This shows that the emotional intelligence of a leader is an integral component of an organization because it determines the climate of a working environment. The work environment where there is freedom of sharing information and personal growth is due to a high level of emotional intelligence, while the work environment gripped with fear and anxiety is due to the low emotional intelligence. Two-year research by Goleman, Boyatzis, and McKee found out that, “…of all the elements affecting bottom-line performance, the importance of the leader’s mood and its attendant behaviors are most surprising” (44). The research proved that there is a strong positive correlation between leadership emotional intelligence and the performance of the workers.
The mechanism of emotional intelligence in leadership emanates from both psychological and neurological bases. The mechanism of emotional intelligence in driving performance through an organization system is similar to electric current in wires. Since the moods and behaviors of leadership determine the performance of the organization and that emotional intelligence reflects emotional leadership, “it requires an executive to determine, through reflective analysis, how his emotional leadership drives the moods and actions of the organization, and then, with equal discipline to adjust behavior accordingly” (Goleman, Boyatzis, and McKee 44). Self-assessment and awareness in terms of moods and behaviors are necessary for a good leader to impart objective performance to the organization.
Although emotional intelligence and leadership are fundamental factors in driving an organization’s performance, nobody bothers to delve or discuss them in the workplace and literature. According to Goleman, Boyatzis, and McKee, workers never discuss the emotional impact of the leadership because “…a conversation about an executive’s mood or the moods in his employees might be construed as an invasion of the privacy” (45). On the other hand, leaders can openly criticize workers’ emotions and behavior without any fear because of their position. The workers have varied experiences with their bosses; while an upbeat boss is very inspiring, thus enabling objective performance, a sour-spirited boss is very discouraging leading to very poor performance in the organization. Research has shown that “an upbeat environment fosters mental efficiency, making people better at taking in and understanding information, at using decision rules in the complex judgment, and at being flexible in their thinking” (Goleman, Boyatzis, and McKee 46). The performance of the organization is a reflection of the upbeat work environment where workers explore the full potential of their abilities.
Even though poor emotional leadership results in terrible performances, there are exceptions to this general observation. The exceptional performance by the poor emotional leaders is due to two factors, namely, the size of the organization and additional strengths. A chief executive officer of a large multinational organization, and who has poor emotional leadership will have a negligible impact on the organization’s performance because good emotional leadership of the division heads will drive the performance of the organization. Furthermore, additional leadership strengths such as creativity and mobilization of the workers overshadow the lack of emotional leadership thus the organization will exceptionally perform. Bill Gates is a rough and tough leader with poor emotional leadership but he has managed to perform exceptionally because his Microsoft Company is a multinational organization with competent divisional heads and employees who need minimum supervision (Goleman, Boyatzis, and McKee 45). Therefore, the emotional leadership and competencies of the employees overshadow the poor emotional leadership of their managers in the organization.
Scientific research has elucidated the mechanism of emotional leadership showing rippling and resonating effects of the moods in an organization. The research has proved that the human brain has an open-loop limbic system, which is an emotional center that relies on external stimuli in its moods. Scientists have described the open-loop limbic system as “interpersonal limbic regulation: one person transmits signals that can alter hormonal levels, cardiovascular functions, sleep rhythms, even immune functions, inside the body of another” (Goleman, Boyatzis, and McKee 46). Thus, the open-loop limbic system socially allows leadership to alter the physiology and eventually emotions of the workers. Scientists also have found out that emotional skills are innate in part and are inherited genetically, but experiences determine the extent of genetic expression.
Since life experiences determine the genetic expression of innate emotional intelligence, a leader must acquire emotional intelligence through experiences. According to Goleman, Boyatzis, and McKee, “an emotionally intelligent leader can monitor his or her moods through self-awareness, change them for the better through self-management, understand their impact through empathy, and act in ways that boost others’ moods through relationship management” (48). These resonate well with the performance of emotional intelligence in leadership application. To acquire emotional intelligence, a five-step process has been designed. This process involves identifying the real self at one end and the ideal self at the other end and then creating a strategic plan of activities that will result in the bridging of the two extreme ends to achieve emotional intelligence.
Works Cited
Goleman, Daniel, Richard Boyatzis, and Annie McKee. “Primal Leadership: The Hidden Driver of Great Performance.” Harvard Business Review, (2005): 41-51.