No one needs training to feel emotions around the Thanksgiving table, but how about around the conference table? Has the time come for emotional intelligence testing and training?
“I wish I had a decoder for each relationship at the office.”
“When one of my direct reports starts talking to me about her medical problems, I don’t want to be unsympathetic, but it makes me uncomfortable.”
These quotes, from a recent article in Fast Company, illustrate why there is a growing interest in emotions in the workplace. It’s thought that some people have high “emotional intelligence,” and that, as a result, they can more empathetically relate to colleagues or employees. As a result, relationships will go more smoothly, and work will go better.
It’s further thought that emotional intelligence (EI) can be tested, and that if deficiencies show up, special training can help improve individual performance. All of this is a relatively new concept, and a controversial one. Would training in emotions benefit your employees? Can EI be measured? Should it be?
One EI Program that Really Worked
One organization that seems to think so is the U.S. Air Force, which was bedeviled by recruiter retention problems. Each year, reports Fast Company, they would hire and train 400 new recruiters (at $30,000 a head), and then have to dismiss about 25 percent of them by year-end for failing to meet recruitment quotas. The direct costs of the problem were about $3 million, and indirect costs were estimated to be even greater.
Study after study shows excellent return on investment (ROI) for wellness programs, and BLR’s new Workplace Wellness shows you how to achieve it, step by step. Check it out at no cost or risk. Click for info
Wondering if emotional factors—the inability to empathize with potential recruits—could be the problem, the Air Force administered an EI test to its current recruiters and found that the instrument differentiated the top and bottom performers quite clearly.
When they then applied the EI test to new recruiters, the results proved to be “remarkably accurate.” All with an “excellent” fit achieved their quotas, as did 90 percent of those with “good” fits.
Intrigued by the results of the recruiter program, the Air Force then administered the test to two other groups: substance abusers and spousal abusers.
Corporate Wellness programs show great ROIs. And as one expert noted, there’s little downside—even small improvements make a difference. Check out Workplace Wellness: Health Employees, Healthy Families, Healthy ROI. Read more.
Members of those groups shared low scores in certain areas. For example, substance abusers scored low on problem-solving skills, social responsibility, and stress tolerance. Spousal abusers lacked empathy, had poor impulse control, and an inflated self-regard. The testing helped the air force realize that it could better aid such individuals by offering counseling and training in those specific areas, rather than, say, giving them all generic anger management training.
Is Emotional Testing Right for You?
EI testing and training worked for the Air Force. But will it work for you? To find out, the experts advise finding out by testing and observing.
First, test current workers to identify high scores common to the successful people in a job, which are not present in those less successful. Then test applicants to see if the test predicts success. If it does, EI testing may very well deserve a place as one factor in your selection process.
As we said, this is all very new, and we wonder if any of our readers have experience with these concepts and methods—or an opinion on them. If so, please use the Share Your Comments button and let us know what you think.
Meanwhile, from all of us at Daily Advisor, have a happy (and emotion-filled) Thanksgiving!
I understand the concept of EI. What I don’t understand is why it is such a big deal that ‘managers’ have to be tested or trained to use it. I see it (EI testing / training) as a tool for managers to become, (should I even say it?) better LEADERS. What we’re looking at here is not ‘sympathetic response’ or ‘detailed discussions about the personal lives of an employee’. We’re looking at the very REAL issues that face our employees everyday of their lives. Regardless of what you think, employees work in order to have a life. If it’s the other way around, or you think it SHOULD be the other way around, there’s a problem. People WANT to be happy with their work, proud of what they do, anxious (in a good way) to do more for the company that they work for because they realize that they are part of that company. Contrary to some belief systems, the company will not run without the employees. The company IS the employee base and everyone is a member of that synergetic environment whether that realize it or not. If you cannot or will not get involved with the employees and let them understand that you while you cannot sympathize with them, but you CAN empathize with them and will do everything within your power to take care of their personal issues so they can focus on their job, then you will become much like any other forgetable manager out there and not join the ranks of the few real leaders in the workforce today. EI is a good place to start with LEADERSHIP training for all of your supervisors and managers – but it HAS to start at the top level of management. If they aren’t responsive to employee needs, the only thing that will happen is that mid-management will become frustrated – or MORE frustrated.
If I brought this to the table at our company, I would be laughed out of the conference room. I don’t think I would get much empathy from our owner or executive staff (guess they have low emotional IQs!) While I believe that people have different levels of emotional intelligence, I believe it is those levels that make them successful in different types of positions. A solid manager has enough emotional intelligence to demonstrate the kind of empathy that garners loyalty and good working relationships, but has enough business intelligence to not forfeit the business goals in the process. Plus, I am not convinced that you can train someone to feel something. You can train them to respond in a particular way but not necessarily to feel that way. If the response is there without the feeling, then it is just lip service and contrived. If anyone thinks that employees won’t pick up on that, they are sorely mistaken. I’d rather work harder at recruiting the right people and promoting those that demonstrate the qualities that make a good manager than trying to raise someone’s emotional IQ. Sounds to me like a way for some consultant to make a quick buck!
I concur with the validity of EI because emotions and feelings do exist in the workplace. Without them we couldn’t get to that next, great creative idea or build some collaboration and consensus on a hot new project. EI is an area to explore in recruiting and growing high potential leaders. The verdict is still out on if it should be required testing.
Effective — I mean truly effective — and empowering leaders have strong EI, as they know how to observe for the connections and disconnections between people and what it takes to energize, motivate and inspire a team. Leadership that recognizes the importance of sharing emotions in the workplace is a must to develop a culture of openness and honesty. Telling the truth doesn’t mean you have to spill your guts, and leaders can be empathetic and encouraging without rescuing someone from a problem or compromising the organization’s business needs. It’s a leader’s job to mentor, not rescue. So, for me it’s more about having a culture of open discussion, willingness to look at different viewpoints and face conflict confidently and not from a place of defensiveness—this is EI.