Part V: creating the EQ-i 2.0 and EQ 360 2.0

EQ-i 2.0 Leadership Report Interpretive Guide

Emotional Intelligence and Leadership Research

Research suggests that high levels of emotional intelligence in some areas can help predict leadership success, while low levels of emotional intelligence in other areas can help predict leadership derailment (i.e., unsuccessful, if not catastrophic, leadership). The EQ-i 2.0 Leadership Report offers an assessment of the factors of emotional intelligence that are empirically linked to specific behaviors of successful leaders. As such, it is a useful tool for all those who assess leadership effectiveness and/or aptitude within organizations, including human resources personnel who are responsible for the selection, development, and promotion of adept leaders.

There is support for the theory that leaders score higher on EI skills than the general population. In a study conducted by Stein et al. (2009), top executives significantly differed from the general population on the EQ-i in 8 of 15 EQ-i subscales. Moreover, leaders who demonstrated higher levels of empathy, self-regard, reality testing, and problem solving were more likely to generate high profits for companies.

Due to often changing market forces, a volatile environment, and pressures to accomplish more with fewer resources, leaders require more than technical knowledge to succeed in their role (George, 2000). Researchers have noted that emotional skills are important for successful performance at the executive level (Carmeli, 2003), and become more critical (as compared to IQ or technical savvy) as employees progress through the organizational hierarchy (Dulewicz & Higgs, 2003; Goleman et al., 2002). McClelland (1999) demonstrated that division presidents with higher levels of EI outperformed performance targets by 15–20% and had a 94% retention rate. On the other hand, division presidents who scored lower on EI competencies under-performed by 20% and had a 50% retention rate.

Much of leadership and EI research centers around the model of transformational leadership (e.g., Ashkanasy and Tse, 2000; Barling, Slater, & Kelloway, 2000). 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 are able to regulate their own emotions. 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 plays a particularly important role in transforming others. Research associates EI and transformational leadership, and shows positive relationships between the two constructs (e.g., Barling, Slater, & Kelloway, 2000).

Further support for the role of emotional intelligence in leadership can be substantiated by two independent meta-analyses. A meta-analysis is a “study of studies” that helps to remove the subjective interpretation around inconsistent research findings. In the first meta-analysis, a strong positive relationship was found linking emotional intelligence to leadership (Martin, 2008). In the second meta-analysis conducted by Harms and Crede (2010), the link between emotional intelligence and leadership was further corroborated when taking into account same-source raters (consistent raters of emotional intelligence and leadership).