Part I: Getting Started with the EQ-i 2.0
The Building Blocks of Emotional Intelligence
The EQ-i: A Detailed Look
Interest in the EQ-i has steadily increased since its release in 1997. The energy created and sustained by it is evidenced by the number of publications applying or investigating the EQ-i, including books (13), trade publications (countless), dissertations (77), and peer-reviewed articles (71). The EQ-i also garnered attention in several peer-reviewed journal Special Issues including Emotion, Psychological Inquiry, and the Journal of Organizational Behavior. The EQ-i has captured the attention of researchers and practitioners worldwide. It can be employed in many ways and in a variety of settings (see the Introduction for the applications of the EQ-i 2.0 across different settings). This section will take a detailed look at the rich research applications of the EQ-i across varied domains ranging from well-being and resilience to performance success and leadership.
Well-Being
The EQ-i evolved from a research question Dr. Reuven Bar-On proposed 25 years ago: “Why do some people have better psychological well-being than others?” Since then an entire body of research has developed, investigating the links between EI and well-being, generally concluding that EI is a beneficial predictor of emotional and psychological health and well-being (e.g., Martins et al., 2010; Yalcin et al., 2008).
Psychological well-being is defined as one’s overall psychological condition, which has widespread cognitive, emotional and behavioral implications (Bar-On, 1992). In the development and establishment of the EQ-i’s construct validity, relationships between psychological well-being and the various EQ-i subscales were examined. At the time, self-regard, interpersonal relationship, independence, assertiveness, self-actualization, happiness, problem-solving, stress tolerance, impulse control and reality testing were the most valid and reliable elements of psychological well-being (Bar-On, 1992). Additional facets of emotional intelligence (e.g., emotional self-awareness, empathy, optimism) were later included in Bar-On’s research and added to the conceptual model of the EQ-i, which further helped support the link between emotional intelligence and well-being (Goleman, 1995).
Overall EI has been shown to be correlated with some of the best measures of emotional functioning, such as emotional stability (positive relationship), apprehension (inverse relationship), and tension (inverse relationship) as measured by the 16PF (Bar-On, 2002). Moreover, high negative correlations were discovered between total EI and strong indicators of pathology such as anxiety, depression, and schizophrenia, and borderline features as measured with the PAI (Bar-On, 2002). Along a similar investigative vein, mean scores on the current EQ-i 2.0 were higher for the general population group than depressed/dysthymic and other clinical groups (e.g., schizophrenia) and each difference approached or exceeded a medium effect size (see Standardization, Reliability, and Validity).
Particularly in the case of the EQ-i, a meta-analysis conducted by Schutte et al. (2007) showed that the EQ-i, with an average effect size of .49, had a stronger association with measures of mental health than did other measures of EI (i.e., Trait Meta Mood Scale, Salovey et al., 1995; Assessing Emotions Scale, Schutte et al., 1998). More recently, another meta-analysis examining different measures of EI on a more globally diverse sample, concluded that the EQ-i had a similar association of .44 with measures of health (Martins et al., 2010). These two larger meta-analyses summarize years of research showing that the EQ-i can be beneficial in predicting psychological health outcomes in various settings. For instance, the EQ-i has proven to be valuable when examining the psychological adjustment of children with cancer. Regardless of the stage of illness or gender, children suffering from cancer who have higher emotional intelligence scores demonstrate better psychological adjustment and have stronger functioning of internalizing and externalizing behaviors (Haffey, 2007). Similar findings were observed in a control group study of adults with Type 2 diabetes who reported increased well-being, quality of life, and emotional intelligence after participating in a targeted EI development program (Yalcin, 2008).
Resilience
Emotional intelligence has at its core the ability to use emotions to effectively cope with challenges. This includes the capacity to choose among a repertoire of coping strategies (flexibility and stress tolerance), display a positive disposition towards your situation and change in general (optimism), and feel that you can calmly influence a stressful situation without being derailed by your emotions (problem solving).
As alluded to in the history of the EQ-i, coping with and remaining resilient in the face of demands and pressures have always been integral components of this assessment and, as such, much research has been conducted into whether EI supports resilience and coping in the face of stress in various situations and environments (e.g., workplace stress, physiological illness).
If emotional intelligence is central to how we cope, we would expect individuals with high EI to be more likely to use adaptive coping styles than maladaptive styles. Research has shown that the EQ-i is a positive predictor in using adaptive coping styles (“rational” and “detached”) and a negative predictor in using maladaptive coping styles (“emotional” and “avoidance”) (Petrides et al., 2007). Furthermore, this research suggests that EI is a predictor of coping style selection above any effects contributed by personality (e.g., the Big Five). This incremental finding supports the notion that since EI is amenable to coaching and development, by focusing training efforts here (rather than at personality characteristics), individuals become better equipped to identify emotions and choose effective coping strategies to remain resilient in the face of stress. In a study of school principals, significant positive relationships were found between EQ-i scores and principals’ resilience, with General Mood being a significant predictor of resilience (Bumphus, 2009). This type of research, linking the EQ-i to resilience, helps to shed light on the far-reaching effects emotional intelligence can have, not only on retaining top employees, but also on ensuring they are equipped to weather the inherent stressors that come with their roles. The EQ-i has also been shown to measure one’s ability to cope with the stressful environmental demands of adjusting to a new country (Bar-On, 1997), where Total EQ was shown to be positively related to acculturation (i.e., adjustment to a new environment) and emotional health.
Seligman’s term “learned optimism” may help explain why emotional intelligence is related to resilience in the face of stress. Learned optimists, when confronted with pressure or challenges, tend to make specific, temporary, and external attributions about their situation; pessimists make more enduring, global internal attributions about a stressor (Seligman, 2006). Various studies have shown the impact of optimism (one of the subscales of the EQ-i) and the ability to handle stress on performance in education settings (Schulman, 1995) and on job performance, as indicated by variables such as net sales (Lusch and Serpkenci, 1990; Schulman, 1995).
Overall, recognizing and identifying emotions and the way they manifest themselves in physiological symptoms, as well as managing these emotions, can help individuals recognize when they are stressed and, thus, reduce the chance of burnout. In a study examining coping with occupational stress, low to moderate positive correlations were found between EQ-i subscales and purposeful task-orientated efforts aimed at solving problems (as measured by the CISS; Endler & Parker, 1990, 1994); whereas low to moderate negative correlations were found between the subscales and emotional reactions to stressful situations (e.g., becoming angry or preoccupied) (Bar-On, 1997). Task-orientated coping tends to be related to adaptive outcomes in contrast to the nonadaptive outcomes of depression and anxiety associated with emotion coping processes.
Leadership
Leadership is one of the most intensely studied topics in the behavioral/organizational sciences. While research has increased our understanding of effective leadership in terms of personal characteristics and behavior, Barrow (1977) asserted that it is difficult to demonstrate whether leaders’ behavior has an impact on the performance of others or whether group productivity is the result of a multitude of other interactive forces. In this section, behaviors that have been associated with leadership effectiveness are identified, and research findings are presented that demonstrate how emotional intelligence both influences leadership and predicts leadership success or derailment.
The literature that examines the interrelationships between the variables involved in effective leadership supports a multidimensional approach to describing leadership behavior (Barrow, 1977). Early research in this area conducted at Ohio State University (Fleishman, 1953; Halpin, 1954; Stogdill & Coons, 1957) extracted, through factor analysis, nine dimensions of leadership behavior: initiation, membership, representation, integration, organization, domination, communication, recognition, and production. Two factors emerged that accounted for most of the variance: (1) initiating structure (the degree to which the leader focuses on activities such as assigning tasks and specifying procedures for group members), and (2) consideration (the degree to which the leader helps create an atmosphere that is warm, trusting, and supportive).
Researchers at the University of Michigan (Likert, 1961; Tannenbaum, 1966) classified leadership behavior in terms of two basic dimensions: (1) employee orientation, and (2) production orientation. According to this approach, the employee-oriented leader involves subordinates in decision making and includes them in goal setting. On the other hand, the production-oriented leader focuses on task organization, specification of procedures in order to complete the task, and setting precise work standards. These two studies represented major breakthroughs in the study of leadership.
Research in the area of leadership eventually changed its focus from examining behavioral dimensions to distinguishing between effective and ineffective leadership. Fiedler (1967) was one of the first researchers to study whether personal or situational characteristics are more important determinants of effective leadership than other characteristics. In his contingency model there are two basic aspects of leadership effectiveness: (a) relationship-motivated, and (b) task-motivated. While relationship-motivated leaders are primarily concerned with developing supportive group relationships, task-motivated leaders focus on task accomplishment. Leadership situations are defined on a continuum of favorability, with task-motivated leaders being more effective in highly favorable or unfavorable situations, and relationship-motivated leaders more effective in the mid-range of situation favorability. According to the contingency theory, individuals should be placed in situations that are best suited for their leadership characteristics.
One of the more current approaches to leadership focuses on transformational leadership. As its name implies, transformational leadership looks at the process of changing and transforming individuals. Burns (1978) described transformational leadership as a process in which leaders and subordinates raise one another to higher levels of morality and motivation. Transformational leaders motivate individuals to perform beyond baseline expectations, arouse dormant needs in their subordinates, and regulate emotions. Emotional intelligence is thought to play a particularly important role in transforming others. Transformational leaders often seek to empower subordinates, which increases subordinate commitment. An effective transformational leader knows how emotions affect others’ interactions, whom others will follow, and how to make decisions. Transformational leaders are also able to understand and manage their own emotions, making it possible for them to be flexible and creative in their decision making, consider alternative approaches, and have the self-confidence needed to take action (Bass & Avolio, 1997).
Emotional intelligence as measured by the EQ-i contains a number of factors that have been identified as integral to effective leadership (Hansen, 2010; Jasvinder, 2010; Jerome, 2010), including the Interpersonal aspects of the EQ-i (Bumphus, 2009; Cavins, 2006; Hayashi, 2006), Stress Management (Cavins, 2006; Morehouse, 2007), Adaptability (Cavins, 2006; Morehouse, 2007), Empathy (Cavins, 2006), Optimism (Dries & Pepermans, 2007; Hayashi, 2006), Assertiveness (Dries & Pepermans, 2007; Gasiorowska, 2007), Independence (Dries & Pepermans, 2007), Flexibility (Dries & Pepermans, 2007), Self-Actualization (Gasiorowka, 2007), Problem Solving (Cavins, 2006; Gasiorowka, 2007), and Social Responsibility (Cavins, 2006; Dries & Pepermans, 2007). Despite the positive relationship between EI and leadership, the debate continues as to the depth and breadth of that relationship. Although ample empirical support is readily available in support of this EI-leadership connection, a number of independent studies have suggested a weak relationship between the two (Brown, Bryant, & Reilly, 2006; Milhoan, 2008; Noland, 2009; Oney, 2010; Snuggs, 2007).
The application of meta-analytic techniques is an effective method for empirically evaluating the breadth of research addressing the relationship between EI and Leadership. Rosenthal (1995) nicely describes the importance and utility of meta-analytic reviews as:
…quantitative summaries of research domains that describe the strength of the effect or phenomenon, its variability, its statistical significance, & the nature of the moderator variables from which one can predict the relative strength of the effect or phenomenon (Rosenthal, 1995).
In other words, a meta-analysis is the ‘study of studies’ that helps to remove the subjective interpretation around inconsistent research findings. Two independent meta-analyses have been conducted addressing the link between emotional intelligence as measured by the EQ-i and leadership. In a study conducted by Martin (2008), a strong positive relationship was found linking emotional intelligence to leadership. A second meta-analysis conducted by Harms and Crede (2010), further supports the link between emotional intelligence and leadership, specifically transformational leadership, when taking into account same-source raters (consistent raters of emotional intelligence and leadership).
Overall, the link between emotional intelligence and leadership is meaningful. Many variables such as empathy, self-awareness, and self-regard share a strong connection with transformational leadership. The EQ-i offers an assessment of the factors of emotional intelligence that are empirically linked to specific behaviors of successful leaders. As such, the EQ-i shows promise as a useful tool for coaching and developing effective leaders.
Personality
There has been some debate over whether the characteristics of emotional intelligence differ from traditional models of personality (most notably the Big Five, 16 PF and MBTI models), and if such a difference should exist, does EI add practical and incremental value over such personality measures?
The EQ-i was originally developed to measure a number of key “factors” that were related to psychological well-being, so there is little doubt that there will be some associations between emotional intelligence and personality. The caution here is that while EI can be related to various personality traits or types, it should be a distinct construct in and of itself, adding to our understanding of performance above and beyond that which is contributed by personality. Independent studies have shown mixed results on the distinctness of EI from personality. Ciarrochi et al. (2001), Davies et al. (1998) and Livingstone and Day (2005) showed strong overlap between EI and personality. Davies noted, for instance, that only a small amount of uniqueness remains in EI after removing the overlap contributed by personality.
Conversely, other independent researchers have concluded that EI can be separated and viewed as a distinct construct from personality (Petrides, Furnham, 2001) and that although relationships exist, EI can predict performance above and beyond measures of personality (Van Rooy and Viswesvaran, 2004; van der Zee & Wabeke, 2004). In the case of the Big Five, the EQ-i significantly explained variance in job competency performance after controlling for the Big Five (van der Zee & Wabeke, 2004). Researchers have also found relationships, but not complete overlap, between MBTI personality preferences and elements of the EQ-i. For example, people with a preference for extraversion tend to have higher results in Intrapersonal, Interpersonal, Adaptability and General Mood Composite scales as well as higher Total EI results (Leary et al., 2009; Torrington, 2001; Farnsworth et al., 2002). There also emerges a positive correlation between a preference for feeling and the Interpersonal Composite which contains the elements of Empathy, Interpersonal Relationship, and Social Responsibility (Leary et al., 2009).
An independent meta-analysis helps to bring clarity to the debate (Rosenthal, 1991), concluding that there is likely more overlap between EI and personality than both researchers and EI practitioners would like; EI does add incremental validity over personality, yet personality failed to add incremental validity over emotional intelligence (Van Rooy and Viswesvaran, 2004). In this meta-analysis, Van Rooy and Viswesvaran found significant positive correlations between EI and each of the Big Five factors, ranging from .23 (Agreeableness, Openness to Experience) to .34 (Extraversion). Similar (albeit a bit stronger) correlations were found when examining the relationship between the EQ-i 2.0 and the Big Five personality traits, ranging from .10 (Openness to Experience) to .61 (Conscientiousness), and a negative relationship was found between Neuroticism and Total EI (-.71). However, as will be discussed in the next section, EI’s advantage over personality measures is that it is dynamic and can be improved through coaching, training and development, whereas people tend to feel “stuck” with the personality type or trait they are dealt (Stein & Book, 2006).
Training and Development
One advantage that the EQ-i has over any measure of personality is that the skills and behaviors measured by the EQ-i can be enhanced, whereas personality is largely viewed as a stable and relatively fixed characteristic of the way one functions in most situations, most of the time. For this reason, EI can be used to “translate” desired personality characteristics into skills and behaviors that are more amenable to coaching and training. There is a rabid market for training emotional intelligence; EI consulting and training thrives on the very notion that an individual’s EI can be enhanced through personal development. Goleman (1998) suggested that as many as four out of every five companies have efforts directed at improving the EI of their employees, with such end goals as increased customer service (Cavelzani, et al. 2003) and performance on cross-cultural projects (Gabel et al., 2005). Coaches, consultants, and HR professionals have a responsibility to become educated consumers and purveyors of responsible practice. Understanding the mechanisms involved in developing emotional intelligence is the first step to a successful training program. Independent research on the EQ-i generally supports the notion that EI is amenable to change (Dulewicz and Higgs, 2004; Fletcher et al., 2009), and that training programs do not simply result in higher EI scores, but rather practical behavioral change with implications for enhanced well-being, performance, and satisfaction.
Dulewicz and Higgs (2004) reported a number of significant changes in EQ-i scores from pre-test to post-test in a study of retail managers. Managers were part of a dedicated EI training program that met 1 day per week for 4 weeks with a 1 week hiatus between meetings to allow for the deliberate practice of the recently introduced EI behaviors. All training included the use of lectures, videos, practical exercises, role plays, and journaling, with emphasis placed on self-awareness, detachment, emotion regulation, emotion recognition, and empathy. Dulewicz et al. (2004) found that 8 out of the 15 subscales on the EQ-i were strengthened. Subscales such as Assertiveness, Self-Regard, Empathy, and Optimism all improved in the participants exposed to the training program, while no differences were evident in the control group.
Fletcher et al., (2009) demonstrated that emotional intelligence was modestly enhanced in UK medical students who were exposed to a 7-month EI training program that consisted of a 1 to 4 hour training session every month for 7 months. Two groups, a training group and a control group, completed the EQ-i on two separate occasions, with a comparison of pre- and post- test results nearing a 10-point difference on the total EQ-i score. A difference of this magnitude has been linked to meaningful and often observable behavior change (Bar-On, 1997). Similarly, Chang (2007) using an applied behavioral self-modification technique with students in a semester-long Psychology of Adjustment course focusing on assertiveness, empathy, self-regard, and emotion management, reporting meaningful improvement on post-test EQ-i scores. Meanwhile Sadri, Akbarzadeh, and Poushaneh (2009) reported elevated EI scores in male and female high school students after a 12-week training session.
The link between emotional intelligence and enhanced functioning and well-being lends itself to the ideal of training and development. Given that the application of deliberate EI training programs can yield noticeable differences in EI awareness and application, the utility of the EQ-i appears to extend beyond simply gaining insight into one’s persona, to provide a framework by which one can maximize his or her potential.
Performance
The complex and unpredictable nature of high-pressure performance inside and outside of the sporting arena can prompt a heightened level of emotional reactivity, and the inability to cope may lead to undesirable and often unpredictable outcomes. A primary objective of performance psychology is to identify the intrapersonal characteristics and situational variables that interact to influence performance. Although much interest has been directed toward the situational factors affecting performance, it is of utmost importance to examine how dispositional variables (e.g., self-regard, optimism) mitigate these situational factors, as well as how the interaction between dispositional variables may in fact permit increases in meaningful and sustainable behavior change. Given the interactive effects of dispositional factors— of which emotion is of primary interest —and the vast array of situational variables facing the performer, inconsistent performance should not be altogether surprising. However, if we can better understand the mechanisms responsible for mediating the intrapersonal, interpersonal and situational variables affecting high-pressure behavior, we can better account for the interactive effects of the environment and dispositional characteristics on performance, permitting the development of a meaningful intervention. The construct of emotional intelligence (EI), which has received attention in both applied and academic text, has been demonstrated to offer such mediating effects.
Research has demonstrated that enhanced EI can augment human performance and the many tertiary factors related to success such as stress management, self-regard, flexibility, and optimism. Given that the ability to understand and manage emotional information is a critical component of performance, the incorporation of the EQ-i (Bar-On, 1997) into applied practice provides an effective framework for skill development and performance enhancement.
For example, Perlini and Halverson (2006), in a study of National Hockey League (NHL) players, reported that these individuals score above the normative sample on total EQ-i and on three of the five composite measures, including the Intrapersonal, Stress Management, and the General Mood composites. This finding suggests that how an athlete perceives him or herself regulates the stress associated with elite-level performance, and how equipped he or she is with coping skills can translate into enhanced performance. However, an investigation of NCAA Division 1 athletes reported no differences in emotional intelligence between athletes and the normative population (Schwartz, 2008). Although such results are conflicting, it can be argued that performing at a truly elite level, such as in the NHL, requires a different set of skills than is required to perform at the collegiate level.
Pre-competition anxiety has often been associated with performance decrements in elite sport associated with the misallocation of attention, ineffective energy management, and decreased confidence. Independent sport research has reported that those athletes with higher levels of EI report less pre-competition anxiety in the moments leading up to competition (Lu, Li, Hsu, & Williams, 2010). The strong relationship between the Intrapersonal, Interpersonal and Stress Management Composite scales suggests that emotional intelligence can help mitigate the negative effects of performance anxiety. Similar results have been reported with combat sports (Gervais, 2008), golfers (Mousseau, 2008), and pilots (Logan, Papadogiannis, Stein, & Gorewhich, 2008).
The link between emotion and attention has been long considered an integral component of performance success (Nideffer, 1976). That is, as emotions escalate, attention may be adversely affected, broadening to a point of distractibility or excessively narrowing to a point at which relevant performance cues are overlooked. As such, attention control training has garnered significant research energy and recently it has been argued that emotional intelligence may provide a framework for enhancing attention allocation (Papadogiannis, Logan, Mann, & Escobar, 2009). The study of pilots and athletes provides two distinct populations that are regularly immersed in high pressure environments, requiring emotional skills to sustain and even enhance performance. Within these groups Papadogiannis et al. (2009) assessed the relationship between emotional intelligence (EQ-i; Bar-On, 1997) and attentional skills (TAIS; Neideffer, 1976). Both the pilot and athlete groups reported higher Total EI, Emotional Self-Awareness, Stress Tolerance, and Impulse Control scores on the EQ-i, coupled with lower Internal and External Distractibility scores on the TAIS. These findings support the idea that emotional intelligence is associated with reduced distractibility in complex performance environments.
Job Satisfaction/Organizational Climate/Change
The EQ-i has proven to be an effective and versatile tool for use in the corporate environment. The EQ-i has been used as an employee screening tool (Bachman, Stein, Campbell, & Sitarenios, 2000), and it enhances the reliability and effectiveness of the employee recruitment and selection process (Durek & Gordon, 2009). A number of EQ-i factors have been shown to be directly related to performance success in a variety of domains, including sales (Harris, 2009; Mulligan, 2004; Sitarenios & Stein, 1998), medicine (Fletcher, Leadbetter, Curran, & O’Sullivan, 2009), sport (Perlini & Halverson, 2006), academic performance (Parker et al., 2004; Parker, Hogan, Eastabrook, Oke, & Wood, 2006; Walker 2007), and persistence (Giroir, 2010). Assertiveness, empathy, happiness, emotional self-awareness, and problem solving have all been linked to recruitment success within the US Air Force (Handley, 1997). Success, job satisfaction, and adaptation to organizational climate change can be predicted by looking at any number of EQ-i factors.
In a similar vein, the EQ-i has been used to evaluate and enhance the ongoing functioning and well-being of employees at critical and arbitrary stages of employment. Furthermore, the EQ-i has been used for gauging the impact and effectiveness of organizational change and job satisfaction (Engstrom, 2005; Thiebau, Breton, & Richoux, 2005), and collaborative conflict resolution (Malek, 2000). The EQ-i also enables the qualified professional to create tailor-made training programs to improve the emotional skills and functioning of individual employees or, on a larger scale, with the organization as a whole (Elfenbein, 2006; Frye, Bennett, Caldwell, 2006; Hughes & Terrell, 2007).
Not unlike the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI; Myers & McCulley, 1985), the EQ-i has also been used in group and team building contexts (Hughes & Terrell, 2007). Particularly useful in this domain has been the EQ 360, a multi-rater feedback assessment that provides unique and rich insight into the strengths and weaknesses from a self/other's perspective (Bar-On & Handley, 2003; Waddell, 2010). Without question, a large part of effective and cogent teamwork is knowing each member's strengths and limitations as well as having an appreciation for how others perceive themselves and those with whom they interact. Such insight permits each member to leverage the strengths from the individual or group whenever possible. Pinpointing and utilizing this type of information has proven effective for bonding, unifying, synchronizing , and strengthening a group or team (Hughes & Terrell, 2007; Hughes & Terrell, 2009).