Corporations are slowly recognizing the importance of developing emotional intelligence in leadership. Emotional intelligence can be a powerful business driver. Research has now linked leadership styles with emotional intelligence and positive performance results. The four dimensions of emotional intelligence and the link between leadership styles and different components of emotional intelligence is explored.

Introduction

Nancy eloquently spoke to a leadership style that integrated a teaming environment with agile principles of software development. She kept her focus on the goals and it worked well both during rapid growth and the recent economic downturn. The result of her leadership and the team effort was great productivity and performance.

I want to play in the sand with you and have a conversation as it were, about an idea that has been drumming around in my head for the past two years since my research of Worldwit women - a leading global online and off-line network for women in business and technology (http://www.worldwit.org/) during the rapid growth and downturn in the economy. These ideas build on Nancy’s comments regarding her experience as a leader in providing a positive organizational climate that led to high performance results for her team.

Specifically, I suggest (using my own research and that of Daniel Goleman’s) the following three points:

• Creating positive organizational climates can impact stress reduction and retention of women, which I believe can impact productivity.

• Using certain leadership styles (that spring for different components of emotional intelligence) can positively impact organizational climates, which are important business drivers for positive financial results.

• There are ways we can improve both organizational climates and build emotional intelligence in leadership which can help build positive organizational environments.

Let me start by sharing with you some of the highlights of the research we conducted with Worldwit women during the boom and bust that link positive organizational climates with reduction of stress and employee retention.

At the height of the dot com bubble late 1990s-2000 we found that 73% of women experienced upsides of the working environment and 68% pointed to the downsides (meaning a negative impact on personal/family life. But the trade-off was worth it to women because of the impact women had, the ability to grow, the flexibility and reduction of gender related obstacles.

When we surveyed Worldwit women again after 9/11/01, we found that the upsides were gone. 44% of women said that their work-related stress had increased and 40% felts strains in their marriages or significant relationships. 72% report turning to their families for support, yet 65% said they have little emotional reserve left at the end of the average day on the job to tend to live away from the job. The women could not justify the self-sacrifice anymore as they had been able to do during the rapid growth time.

Particularly significant, is the finding that positive organizational environments (such as those that foster the ability to get satisfaction from accomplishments; having the ability to grow and learn quickly; having autonomy and independence; collaboration and teamwork; and flexibility and the freedom to be creative) are linked to the reduction of stress and the retention of women. Both of these we hypothesize can have a positive impact on productivity and performance.

Highlights of Daniel Goleman’s research on emotional intelligence

One definition of leadership that we are familiar with is that the leader creates change. She or he inspires and aligns people toward a vision for the future, and develops a roadmap to get there.

Many of us are familiar with Daniel Goleman’s work on the link between emotional and leadership styles. Let me briefly review the concept of emotional intelligence and the link to leadership styles. (Goleman, Boyatzis, & McKee, 2002)

Goleman suggests that the ability to manage ourselves and our relationships effectively consists of four fundamental capabilities.

1. Self-Awareness (The ability to read and understand our own emotions and recognize their impact on work performance and relationships.)

2. Self-Management (The ability to keep disruptive emotions and impulses under control. Trustworthiness-display integrity; Adaptability-adjusting to changing situations; Initiative-readiness to seize opportunities.

3. Social Awareness (The capacity for empathy-skill at sensing emotions of others, understanding their perspective and taking an interest in their concern. Organizational awareness-ability to read currents of organizational life, build decision networks and navigate politics.

4. Social Skill (The capacity for visionary leadership, influence, developing others, communication, change catalyst, conflict management, building bonds, teamwork and collaboration.)

Highlights of Daniel Goleman’s research that links emotional intelligence, leadership styles and positive financial results:

Daniel Goleman’s research, (Goleman, 2000), found that four out of six styles of leadership, each springing from a different component of emotional intelligence, have a powerful impact on organizational climate.

Positive organizational climate his research found accounts for a third of the positive high performance results, (the other two being economic conditions and competitive dynamics.) Goleman’s research findings are that leaders who use a combination of these styles have better financial results.

What are the leadership styles?

What are the two leadership styles that have a negative impact on overall climate?

• Coercive and Pacesetting

• Do we ever see these styles in high-tech environments? The one I have found in working with high level scientists and engineers for the past several years is the pacesetting style. These are people who drive themselves and everyone around them into the ground, and have a hard time understanding why people have a problem with them. Does anyone know managers with this leadership style? I found the coercive styles more common in the manufacturing and operational environments that favor hierarchy and compliance. However with the economic downturn it is as if leaders revert back to this style perhaps out of their own stress and uncertainty in the future.

• Drivers of organizational climate include

  • Flexibility-how people are left free to innovate

  • Responsibility-to the organization as a whole

  • Standards-the level of excellence; accuracy of performance feedback

  • Rewards-aptness of rewards

  • Clarity-people have about mission and values

• Goleman suggests that people use these four styles like an “array of golf clubs” for different circumstances. (See handout)

Handout adapted from Daniel Goleman, Leadership that gets results, HBR, March-April 2000

Coercive Style

• The coercive style leader often creates a reign of terror, bullying and demeaning his/her executives, roaring with displeasure at the slightest problem. Direct reports get intimidated and stop bringing bad news or any news, in fear of getting blamed for it, and morale plummets.

• This leadership style is least effective in most situations, and has a negative impact on organizational climate. The extreme top-down decision making kills ideas on the vine, their sense of initiative and ownership plummet, so they feel little accountability for performance.

• The coercive style should be used with extreme caution, as in during a crisis, or genuine emergency. If the leader solely relies on this style, the long term impact is ruinous to the group.

 Authoritative Style

• Vibrant enthusiasm and clear vision are the hallmarks of the authoritative style. This leadership style the research has shown drove up every aspect of organizational climate.

• This leader motivates people by making clear to them how their work fits into the larger vision of the organization. People understand that what they do matters and why, thus maximizing commitment to the organization’s goals and strategies.

• The standards for success and the rewards are clear, but people have great freedom to innovate and flexibility in accomplishing the goals.

• This style works well in almost any business situation. It works best when the organization is adrift and the authoritative leader charts a new vision.

• A limitation is if the leader works with a group of experts or peers who are more experienced. They may see the leader as pompous or out of touch. If the leader becomes overbearing, s/he may undermine the egalitarian spirit of the team.

Affiliative Style

•  The coercive leader says, “Do what I say.” The authoritative leader says “Come with me.” The affiliative leader says “people first.”

• The affiliative leader is a master at creating a sense of belonging and building relationships.

• The affiliative leader tries to create harmony and build strong emotional bonds, which all have a positive effect on communication and loyalty. This style has a positive impact on flexibility, as people talk, trust and share information with each other.

•  The affiliative leader gives people freedom to innovate, and positive feedback that is motivating. The affiliative leader tends to the feelings of his/her people and is open with their own feelings.

• This style works well in general, and is particularly good when trying to build team harmony, increase morale, improve communication or repair broken trust.

• When people need clear directives to navigate through complex challenges, this style can tend to leave people feeling rudderless.

•  Alternating the authoritative style of creating a clear vision and roadmap, with the caring nurturing approach of the affiliative leader, and you have a potent combination.

Democratic Style

• By spending time getting people’s buy-in, the leader builds trust, respect and commitment.

• Because the democratic leader allows people a say in decisions that affect their goals and how they do their work, it drives up flexibility, responsibility and keeps morale high.

• Its impact on climate is not as positive as some of the other styles. Its drawbacks are the endless meetings, where consensus remains elusive, and people can end up feeling confused and leaderless.

• This style works best when the leader is uncertain about direction and needs guidance, or for generating fresh ideas for executing the vision. In times of crisis, consensus may not be effective.

Pacesetting Style

• This style like Coercive should be used sparingly.

• The leader sets high expectations, exemplifies them him/herself, and is obsessive about doing things faster and better, and expects that of everyone else. Poor performers get replaced, yet this style destroys climate.

• Morale drops when people feel overwhelmed by the demands for excellence. Although guidelines may be clear in the leader’s head, they are not clearly articulated so that people understand them.

• People often don’t feel that the leader trusts them to work in their own way, so flexibility evaporates and work becomes task focused.

• This approach works well when employees are highly skilled, and self-motivated professionals like R&D groups or legal teams. Given a talented team, they get the job done on time, but this style should not be used by itself.

Coaching

• This style is used the least often, since leaders say they don’t have the time to help people grow.

• This is a powerful tool, and has a positive impact on climate.

• Coaching improves results, even though the focus is on self -development, because it has a way of pushing up the drivers of climate.

•  Coaching helps commitment, because of the message that I believe in you. Flexibility and responsibility are up because people feel cared about and free to experiment and get feedback.

• This style is most effective when people want to be coached, and want to improve performance.

• This style makes little sense when someone is resistant to changing their ways. At some companies, a part of the annual bonus is tied to the leader’s development of direct reports.

Summary

Leaders need many styles, depending on the situation, and using four or more styles, (not coercive or pacesetting) gets the best results.

• Transition: The styles of leadership change depending on the particular situation. However the principles of leadership hold true over time and situation.

Goleman’s research looked at the financial results of leaders with different styles and found that financial results were a result of one-third competitive dynamics; one third the economic conditions and one-third of positive organizational climate. He found that leaders who used the four positive styles consistently had better financial results than those who used the other two. The two most potent styles were the authoritative (not to be confused with authoritarian) and affiliative. The authoritative style mobilizes people toward a vision while the affiliative style with its focus on people helps bring people along.

Seven Practical Leadership Strategies

Strategies for developing positive organizational environments.

• Leaders who effectively harness their emotional intelligence can have a great impact in creating positive organizational cultures. It’s most effective I believe, if building the positive organizational climate starts at the top with the CEO and leadership team, so that the culture permeates throughout the organization. I suggest however, that even if the rest of the organization operates differently then we as team or project leaders can still have an enormous impact in creating collaborative work communities.

1. Conduct a cultural audit of your company (Division, Project/Practice Team etc.) and prioritize the issues.

•  Partner with senior management to help them understand the implications of the findings, and how your proposed interventions can positively impact the bottom line.

2. Appoint leaders from critical parts of the organization to form a cross-boundary Collaborative Community Council to champion the design and implementation of Collaborative Work Communities across project teams, practices, and client services.

• Provide training and coaching for the members to sustain the effort throughout the organization.

3. Design a pilot Collaborative Community in one area critical to the business.

• Build the Collaborative Community around accomplishing the business goal. Clarify the mission, operating principals and goals of the group in achieving the overall business goal of the team. In the early stages, make sure that the potential “bumps in the road” are identified, and clarify the means by which problems are escalated and productively resolved. Build in the means for assessing the progress of the group so that the group can dynamically respond to changing circumstances.

• Give people some schedule flexibility and, more generally, control over what they do and how they work to allow members to find an appropriate balance between their work and non-work lives.

• Develop initiatives to systemically reduce gender-related obstacles, as well as promote cross-cultural competency within and between communities.

4. Develop dynamic stability both within and between the Collaborative Communities.

• Redesign the organization to encourage the horizontal and vertical flow of communication, integration and collaboration across organizational boundaries.

• Share rather than hoard knowledge, and integrate lessons learned into the culture of the organization.

• Consider how to apply this concept with client partnerships, and when integrating with other organizational environments such as in mergers and acquisitions.

5. Build leadership capital through coaching by harnessing emotional intelligence.

• Coach leaders to understand how their behavior impacts others, and how to manage their own stress.

• Coach leaders how to contain the stress of others, and support people as they navigate work/life difficulties.

• Encourage leaders at all levels to support a healthy work/life balance for employees by modeling balance themselves. People carefully note what behaviors are rewarded, as well as those that have negative consequences.

• Most importantly, build on the individual changes within the group to promote systemic change between and among Collaborative Communities.

6. Measure outcomes in the individual group that contribute to a positive bottom line. One example is to use a Balanced Scorecard (http://www.opm.gov/perform/articles/095.htm, Kaplan and Norton, 2004).

• On a systemic level, measure the outcomes of Collaborative Communities along the financial dimension (cost and tangible benefits); customer value (internal and external); internal processes that enable the Collaborative Community and enhances business objectives); organizational learning (leveraging social capital and knowledge management). Connect the benefits of Collaborative Communities to both the individuals and the organization by measuring progress regarding the state of the intangible assets of human and organizational capital (Kaplan and Norton, 2004).

7. Extend the concept of Collaborative Communities outward to your relationship with customers. Build partnerships with customers that have similar characteristics to Collaborative Communities, so that the positive culture can emanate outwards and have a greater impact on the bottom line.

Building Emotional Intelligence in Leadership

• Emotional intelligence is not a skill that can be easily taught by reading books or even in classroom training, since it involves changing the frontal lobes of our brains that have been ingrained with very specific ways of behaving for very long periods of time. Very often leaders at the top, both men and women do not get effective feedback. A leader may say they have an open door policy, but few people are comfortable giving feedback to their managers or leaders, and few leaders actually ask for it.

• Therefore, the first component in emotional intelligence involves improving the capacity for self awareness. Individual coaching over time is useful as the person receives ongoing feedback.

• Conducting a leadership assessment that includes feedback from peers, subordinates and those above can be useful in helping the leader become aware of how she or he impacts others. Sometimes leaders commit to getting ongoing feedback from selected individuals over time, to better change their behaviors over time.

• Another technique I have used is following the leader to their meetings and watching as an observer. Then in the privacy of individual feedback help the individual see themselves as others experience them. I call it “holding up the mirror.” This is fundamental in raising the self awareness factor of emotional intelligence. This is done in the spirit of a learning environment in which we

  •  Capture the situation-both the context and the specifics in a neutral way.

  • Describe the behavior- about what the person needs to start, stop or continue doing.

  • Describe the impact-describe the impact if you can on yourself so the person can better hear without being defensive.

Helping the leader to self-manage their emotions is even more difficult. This involves helping the leader “get on the balcony” –step back from the situation to gain perspective, and then not jumping into action before some reflection of the incident, any patterns it relates to and what are the parallel processes in the culture of the organization that colludes with the leader.

In summary there are effective strategies for building emotional intelligence in leadership which can help build positive organizational environments, which in turn drive performance.

* * * * * * * * * *
References:

1. Goleman, D., Boyatzis R., & McKee A. (2002). Primal Leadership: Realizing the Power of Emotional Intelligence. Harvard Business School Press.

2. Goleman, D. (2000). Leadership That Gets Results. Harvard Business School Press.

* * * * * * * * * *
About the author:

Mindy Gewirtz, Ph.D., Principal of GLS Consulting is a trusted adviser and strategic thought partner for senior leadership in the public and private sectors.  Mindy has over 20 years experience in management, creating systemic business culture change, leadership development and executive coaching.  Mindy is currently Presidential Advisor to American Type Culture Collection (ATCC), a global bio-resource center.  Recent clients include Malden Mills Industries, The MITRE Corporation, EMC, Evergreen Solar, Dupont and the International Monetary Fund. Mindy builds long-term relationships with leaders, to help them achieve strategic integration of business capabilities and objectives while improving the quality of work life. Mindy leads client engagements and research initiatives with integrity and creativity.  Mindy is a member of the leadership team of Capital Steps -- helping early stage entrepreneurs for next stage investment.

A dynamic conference presenter, Mindy’s most recent co-authored book chapters are: Sustaining Top Leadership Teams, in The Collaborative Systems Field Book: Strategies, Tools and Techniques, Jossey/Bass (March, 2003), and Teams at Malden Mills Industries, in Developing High- Performance Work Teams (ASTD, 1998).  Her research on Women in the New Economy: Insights and Realities (2001) is followed by research on both men and women regarding Coping with the Changing Realities of Work and Life (2002).  Mindy was adjunct faculty Boston University; President, Strategic Business Solutions; Founder of the North American Network of Jewish Information Services, and Boston Eldercare Connection of Greater Boston Jewish Family Services. Her article Capatilizing on Your Most Valuable Intangible Assets-Your People: Keys to Creating Positive Work Environments is forthcoming in October 2004 in the UK Journal, IMIS (Institute for Management Information Systems) 

Mindy earned her Ph.D. in Organizational Sociology from Boston University, and post- graduate certification in HR and Organization Development from the Boston Institute of Psychotherapy.  A Diplomate in clinical Social Work, she holds a MSW from State University of NY, and is a Phi Beta Kappa graduate in Education and Psychology from Brooklyn College. She maintains a clinical practice, and appears in the Who’s Who in American Women. Mindy actively volunteers in communal organizations, and resides with her family in Brookline, MA.
 

Copyright 2004 GLS Consulting, Inc.