Now that we have examined the three facets of Emotionally Intelligent Leadership (Context, Self, Others) – we can dig a little deeper into the framework. EIL consists of twenty-one capacities to which a leader should pay attention. In the American Heritage Dictionary, capacity is defined as “ability to perform or produce; capability.” We chose this word because, as noted, everyone has the capacity to develop the ability to lead others effectively. In our book, we take an in-depth look at each of the 21 capacities. Take a close at the capacities we have identified and let us know what you think. Which ones resonate with you the most? What have we missed? Knowing what you now know about emotionally intelligent leadership in the broad sense, what specific capacities come to mind for you?

Emotionally Intelligent Leadership

Consciousness of Context – The environment in which leaders and followers work

• Environmental awareness: Thinking intentionally about the environment of a leadership situation
• Group savvy: Interpreting the situation and/or networks of an organization

Consciousness of Self – Being aware of yourself in terms of your abilities and emotions

• Emotional self-perception: Identifying your emotions and reactions and their impact on you
• Honest self-understanding: Being aware of your own strengths and limitations
• Healthy self-esteem: Having a balanced sense of self
• Emotional self-control: Consciously moderating your emotions and reactions
• Authenticity: Being transparent and trustworthy
• Flexibility: Being open and adaptive to changing situations
• Achievement: Being driven to improve according to personal standards
• Optimism: Being positive
• Initiative: Wanting and seeking opportunities

Consciousness of Others – Being aware of your relationship with others and the role they play in the leadership equation

• Empathy: Understanding others from their perspective
• Citizenship: Recognizing and fulfilling your responsibility for others or the group
• Inspiration: Motivating and moving others toward a shared vision
• Influence: Demonstrating skills of persuasion
• Coaching: Helping others enhance their skills and abilities
• Change agent: Seeking out and working with others toward new directions
• Conflict management: Identifying and resolving problems and issues with others
• Developing relationships: Creating connections between, among, and with people
• Teamwork: Working effectively with others in a group
• Capitalizing on difference: Building on assets that come from differences with others

- Scott J. Allen & Marcy Shankman

Another foundational concept from emotionally intelligent leadership is that leadership is a relationship between the leader (self), the followers (others), and the context. What does this mean? To every situation the leader brings certain knowledge, skills, and abilities. Some leaders may have an incredible amount of technical knowledge; others have a unique ability to motivate others through public speaking and motivation. The leader (self), however, is only one part of the equation.

Followers are the second part of the leadership equation, and they are often overlooked. After all, without followers, a leader has no one to lead! In actuality, followers often determine if the leader succeeds or is fraught with challenges. If a leader captures followers’ hearts and minds, much can be accomplished. If not, very little will be accomplished.

Context is the third piece of the leadership dynamic. The context is the environment in which the leader and followers work (Fiedler, 1996); it is generally a combination of setting and situation. Setting refers to the structure of the organization; for example, a for-profit organization in corporate America, a college sports team, or any organization or group (formal or informal) in which the leader – follower relationship exists. The situation includes the many different forces of a particular time and place, including, but not limited to, individual personalities, organizational politics, culture (both within the organization and outside of the organization) and tensions or challenges within the setting.

Situations are dynamic. The context may be filled with people who value being involved or it may not. Each new context requires a different set of knowledge, skills, and abilities on the part of leaders and followers.

So let’s apply this concept to politics in the United States. How is the context today in 2008/2009 different than the context in 2004? How did this impact the presidential race and what did the candidates need to be thinking about to be successful? Think back to when the Nixon-Kennedy debates were televised. In that new context of television becoming a part of daily life, people saw how young Kennedy was (as well as vibrant and handsome) while to many, Nixon did not seem any of those things. While that’s not the only reason for the outcome as we know it, certainly the context of those debates mattered. What were the triggers this year?  – Scott J. Allen & Marcy Shankman

Consciousness of others means that emotionally intelligent leaders are aware of and attuned to those with whom they are working. As you know, followers are an integral component of the leadership equation. The role of others (followers) must be taken into consideration for emotionally intelligent leadership to occur.

Consciousness of others includes a person’s ability to empathize, inspire, influence, coach, manage conflict, and facilitate change.

All of these capacities involve working with other people. The challenge is this: because the context (socioeconomic status, country, culture, organization, etc.) changes so often, there is an infinite number of variables affecting leadership. As a result, the emotionally intelligent leader must be attuned to not only him or herself, but others as well. And being attuned to others means not lumping them all into a group as if they were one person – each follower has his/her own priorities, strengths, curiosities, challenges, etc. Consciousness of Others means that the emotionally intelligent leader has an awareness of these complexities and how his or her approach impacts others.

For instance, our ability to effectively manage conflict has real consequences. This awareness and the ability to change our approach given the context will likely yield success or failure. If our default approach is to “avoid” conflict or “accommodate,” doing so will yield certain results – and not always the best results. For example, think back to a situation where had you used a style of “collaboration” to approach the conflict, everyone involved would have been better off. However, because you avoided or accommodated, the conflict wasn’t resolved and the problem or issue persisted. A default for all of us is to place blame on others for our frustration when in fact we are part of the problem (and the solution).

Emotionally intelligent leadership is, in part, about having the awareness and ability to work with others to help the work of the group move forward. As a leader, sometimes our ability (or inability) to do so will determine success or failure.

Where have you experienced this above mentioned phenomenon in your work life? Can you think of examples where your inability to respond to others in the appropriate manner yielded additional frustration, challenges, or even failure? Is there anyone willing to go out on a limb and get the conversation going? – Scott J. Allen & Marcy Shankman

Foremost in our model of emotionally intelligent leadership, the leader must be conscious of three fundamental facets that contribute to the leadership dynamic: consciousness of context, self, and others. We define consciousness of self as “Being aware of yourself in terms of your abilities and emotions.”

Consciousness of self is all about you. Knowing who you are, what you stand for, and how your answers and actions can affect others are all components of consciousness of self (Higher Education Research Institute, 1996). The good news is this: we have our entire lives to work on consciousness of self. Just like any other EIL capacity, however, this takes effort. If we are not intentionally working to better understand our motives, values, and inner workings, who will? We need to recognize that this introspection won’t likely result in concrete answers — it is the process of introspection that is important. In fact, this concept aligns nicely with Chickering and Reisser’s (1993) notion of “managing emotions” and building self-awareness in their Seven Vectors of College Student Development.

For instance, think back to the last time you had fun. What was it that made you feel this way? Who were you with? What were you doing? Did you feel motivated? Having an awareness of these and other factors can help you create more happiness. The beauty of consciousness of self is that we can engage in these kinds of questions around the full range of emotions we experience, behaviors we demonstrate, and even our reactions to others. This is just one of the many reasons why it’s good that we have our whole lives to raise our consciousness of self.

Another alignment with the Seven Vectors Model is Chickering and Reisser’s vector of developing integrity. Simple awareness is not enough. Your words and actions must be closely aligned. As we go through life, most of us will have the experience of working for a boss or an organization that claims to value the customer or employee, yet their actions are the complete opposite. Leaders whose words match their actions truly exhibit consciousness of self. They are aware of how the two must align to yield long – term success. Doing so fosters trust in others, which is a core ingredient for those hoping to lead.

So, a key question for us to consider is this: is awareness enough? Does awareness change behavior? What elements must be present for behavior to change? Think about a habit, behavior or addiction you have tried to change. What were the elements of success?

It seems that awareness combined with motivation and the ability to regulate are key ingredients. What are others? How do we foster these in others? – Scott J. Allen & Marcy Shankman

Part of our motivation for writing this book is that we believe college students (and young professionals) have a terrific “learning lab” at their disposal. The campus environment provides a rich and plentiful array of opportunities for students to practice leadership skills for four (or maybe five) years. Campus-based organizations, residence halls, athletic teams, and related opportunities provide students with many different ways to get involved. Students can experiment with different approaches to leadership — honing the philosophy and style that best suits them.

We believe that emotionally intelligent leadership (EIL) is an important topic for anyone who wants to demonstrate effective leadership. EIL provides a new lens through which to view the unique contributions that emotional intelligence adds to understanding and demonstrating leadership. This model of emotionally intelligent leadership synthesizes two major bodies of research and theory: emotional intelligence and leadership. Throughout the book, the research and work of other scholars and practitioners is discussed as part of the EIL model.

In 1990, Peter Salovey and John Mayer published a scholarly paper in which they coined the term emotional intelligence. They defined EI as “the ability to monitor one’s own and others’ feelings and emotions to use the information to guide one’s thinking and actions” (p. 189). In 1995, the term was made popular by Daniel Goleman in his book Emotional Intelligence. In his follow-up book, Goleman (1998) defined emotional intelligence as “the capacity for recognizing our own feelings and those of others, for motivating ourselves, and for managing emotions well in ourselves and in our relationships” (p. 317).

Like others, we have wrestled with how to develop leadership capacity in others. As you look around your campus (or organization) it is likely there is a lot of discussion about leadership – any number of conferences, keynotes, courses and weekend retreats. In addition there is a lot of leadership happening. However, we see a disconnect between the “talking” and the “doing” – all too often each is done in isolation. How do we begin to bridge the gap? Can we ensure that those talking about leadership can “do” leadership and those “doing” leadership can also reflect upon their work? What have you seen in the field?

We would love to hear your thoughts. – Scott J. Allen & Marcy Shankman