50 Psychology Classics (28 page)

Awareness of what others are feeling and thinking, and in turn the ability to influence a wide range of people.

Handling close personal relationships well, but also having a sense of social networks and politics. Interacting well with people and the ability to cooperate to produce results.

Emotional intelligence can make the most of whatever technical skills we have, Goleman notes. Scientists want the rest of the world to know what they are doing. Programmers want people to feel that they are service oriented and not just “techies.” Most tech companies have well-paid troubleshooters who can liaise with clients to get things done. They are just as smart and often as skilled as the regular technical staff, but they also have the ability to listen, influence, motivate people, and get them collaborating.

Emotional intelligence, Goleman points out, is not about “being nice” or even expressing our feelings—it is learning how to express those feelings in an appropriate way and at appropriate times, and being able to empathize with others and work well with them.

IQ explains 25 percent of job performance, Goleman argues, which leaves a full 75 percent for other factors. In most fields, a reasonable degree of cognitive ability or IQ is assumed. So are basic levels of competence, knowledge, or expertise. Beyond these, it is emotional and social competencies that separate the leaders from the rest.

Goleman observes that the more senior we are in an organization, the more “soft skills” matter for doing the job well. At the top leadership level, technical skills are of no great import. What matters, in addition to the obvious factors such as the desire to achieve and the ability to lead teams, are:

Capacity for “big-picture” thinking; that is, the ability to chart future directions accurately from the mass of current information.

Political awareness, or having a picture of how certain people or groups interact and influence one another.

Confidence. Psychologist Albert Bandura coined the term “self-efficacy” to describe a person's belief in their potential and ability to perform, aside from actual ability. This belief alone is an excellent predictor of how well you actually do in your career.

Intuition. Studies of both entrepreneurs and top executives discovered that intuition is at the heart of their decision-making processes. They need to
provide “left-brained” analyses to convince others of their view, but it is the subconscious analysis that brings them to correct decisions.

It is instructive also to look at executive
failure
, and
Working with Emotional Intelligence
mentions several studies of executives who were working at a high level but who were then fired or demoted. According to the well-known “Peter Principle,” such people “rise to the level of their incompetence” and go no further. Goleman believes that they are held back by shortcomings in the key emotional intelligence competencies. They are either too rigid, unable or unwilling to make changes or adapt to change, or have poor relationships within the organization, alienating those who work for them.

The executive search firm Egon Zehnder found that executives who failed were usually high in both IQ and expertise, but often had a fatal flaw such as arrogance, unwillingness to collaborate, inability to take account of change, or overreliance on brainpower alone. In contrast, the most successful managers stayed calm in crises, took criticism well, could be spontaneous, and were perceived to be strongly concerned for the needs of those they work with.

Goleman mentions possibly the most important difference between IQ and emotional intelligence: Whereas we are born with a certain level of native intelligence that does not change much after the teenage years, emotional intelligence is largely
learnt
. Over time we have the chance to improve our ability to manage our impulses and emotions, to motivate ourselves, and to be more socially aware. The old-fashioned terms for this process are “character” and “maturity”; unlike native intelligence, their development is our responsibility.

A fair amount of controversy has swirled around the concept of emotional intelligence. John Mayer and Peter Salovey, the psychologists who originated it, have stated that Goleman's delineation of what constitutes emotional intelligence (including words such as zeal, persistence, maturity, and character) goes far beyond, and distorts, their original definition. They have also noted their unease with Goleman's thesis that EQ can be a predictor of success in life. Yet Goleman notes the considerable research on emotional competencies, going back 30 years, plus studies done in over 500 organizations. The weight of this research suggests that IQ is secondary to emotional intelligence as a predictor of how well someone will do in a job.

There is still plenty of debate about whether emotional intelligence exists at all. Many of its attributes, some argue, are simply facets of personality, while other psychologists maintain that IQ is still the most reliable indicator of likely work success. Yet Goleman's argument has been distorted. Nowhere does he say that IQ does not matter. He says that, all things being equal (intelligence level, expertise, education), people who work well with others, are far sighted, are empathic, and are aware of their emotions will go a lot further in
their career. This thesis will make sense to anyone who has begun work and discovered that their ability to “get ahead” depends little on what they learnt in training school or university.

The second two-thirds of
Working with Emotional Intelligence
simply fill out what was said in the first, but it is fascinating to read Goleman's examples from corporate life. Though the specific references to late 1990s companies will inevitably date, the book is a blueprint for how an emotionally intelligent organization should operate, and it may change your views on how things should be done where you work.

Daniel Goleman grew up in Stockton, California and went to Amherst College. His doctorate in psychology from Harvard University was supervised by David McClelland
.

For 12 years Goleman wrote a column for
The New York Times
in the behavioral and brain sciences, and he has also been a senior editor at
Psychology Today.
He has a Career Achievement award for journalism from the American Psychological Association. In 1994 he co-founded the Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL), which seeks to promote social, emotional, and academic learning to enhance children's success at school and in life. Goleman is currently co-chairman of the Consortium for Research on Emotional Intelligence in Organizations at Rutgers University
.

Other books include
The Meditative Mind
(1996),
Primal Leadership
(2002, with Richard Boyatsis & Annie McKee), and
Destructive Emotions: A Scientific Dialogue with the Dalai Lama
(2003)
.

“What can make a marriage work is surprisingly simple. Happily married couples aren't smarter, richer, or more psychologically astute than others. But in their day-to-day lives, they have hit upon a dynamic that keeps their negative thoughts and feelings about each other (which all couples have) from overwhelming their positive ones. They have what I call an emotionally intelligent marriage.”

“At the heart of my program is the simple truth that happy marriages are based on a deep friendship. By this I mean a mutual respect for and enjoyment of each other's company.”

In a nutshell

What makes a marriage or partnership strong is not such a mystery—psychological research provides answers if we care to look.

In a similar vein
Louann Brizendine
The Female Brain
(p 52)
Susan Forward
Emotional Blackmail
(p 94)
Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, & Sheila Heen,
Difficult Conversations
(p 272)

When Dr. John Gottman began researching the subject in the early 1970s, there was very little solid scientific data on marriage and the factors that make it work. Marriage counselors depended on conventional wisdom, opinion, intuition, religious beliefs, or the ideas of psychotherapists to give advice to couples, with the result that their assistance was not particularly effective.

In 1986, Gottman, a psychology professor at the University of Washington in Seattle who had previously studied mathematics at MIT, set up his Family Research Lab, colloquially known as the “Love Lab.” A furnished apartment overlooking a lake, the laboratory was set up to film and record the conversations, arguments, and body language of couples living together.

Surprisingly, the project was the first to scientifically observe real married couples in action. By the time Gottman published
The Seven Principles for Making Marriage Work
(written with Nan Silver), his team had observed more than 650 couples over a 14-year period. Most of those who came to his marriage classes were on the brink of divorce, but after learning his principles their relapse rate back to marital misery was less than half the average for marriage counseling.

There are hundreds of titles on improving relationships, but Gottman's book has the edge because its advice is founded on actual data rather than well-meaning generalities. As a consequence, many of its answers are counterintuitive, and Gottman delights in busting a few myths about what makes for a happy and stable romantic partnership.

Attendees at Gottman's workshops are always relieved to hear that even the happiest and most stable couples have their fights. What makes a good marriage is not simply “chemistry” but how the partners handle conflict.

Under the heading “Why most marriage therapy fails,” Gottman reveals the biggest myth of professional counseling: that communication between partners is
the key to a happy, lasting marriage. Counselors tell you that your problems relate to poor communication, and that “calmly and lovingly” listening to your partner's point of view will transform your marriage. In place of screaming matches, repeating back and validating what your partner is saying, and then calmly stating what you want, will create breakthroughs in understanding.