Intelligence? Emotions? or, the Emotional Intelligence: Theories and Evidence in Global Context

Transcription

1 2 Intelligence? Emotions? or, the Emotional Intelligence: Theories and Evidence in Global Context Emotions can get in the way or get you on the way. Mavis Mazhura Abstract This chapter portrays the conceptual development of Emotional Intelligence as a distinct branch of intelligence. The growing branch of relevant literature has gradually shifted its focus from pure cognitive abilities to concede the presence of non-cognitive skills allowing one to comprehend and control personal emotions; to recognize and appreciate that of others and to use such skills to make a system better functioning by fostering success of those who belong to it. The chapter reviews the attempts made to relate two apparently unrelated terms namely, Emotions and Intelligence to explain the abilities to lead an effective life. It reviews the basic tenets of the Bar-On model, the Mayer- Salovey model; Goleman s Mixed model, and the Big-five and other trait-based models with their applications in global context. Keywords Emotional intelligence Bar-On model Ability based model of Mayer and Salovey Mixed model of Goleman Big-five model Trait based models The Author(s) 2018 G. Chakrabarti and T. Chatterjea, Employees Emotional Intelligence, Motivation & Productivity, and Organizational Excellence, DOI / _2 11

2 12 G. Chakrabarti and T. Chatterjea 2.1 Introduction The study of Emotional Intelligence dates back to the era of Charles Darwin when he portrayed emotional expression to be essential for survival. With the passage of time, different schools of scientists came to believe that standard cognitive intelligence does not always suffice as a tool for explaining human behaviour, to analyze their success, and to predict their failures. Rather, what should be emphasized more is a combination of competencies that allows a person to be cognisant of, to comprehend and to be able to control personal emotions; to recognize and appreciate the emotions of fellow beings and use this acumen to develop an environment that would make a system better functioning by fostering success of all those who are part of it. Such competencies that allow people to make their own way in a complex world by successfully dealing with people and the environment have come to be referred to as Emotional Intelligence. Historically, the analysis of intelligence was centred around personality traits and particularly, on cognitive intelligence that led to the development of Intelligence Quotient. Inclusion of emotional intelligence in such analyses seemed to be difficult although the psychologists of the day recognized the theoretical presence of social intelligence along with two other types of intelligence, namely, the verbal-propositional intelligence that includes stock of vocabulary, verbal communication skills, logical thinking and the proficiency in identifying similarities or otherwise among objects; and the spatial performance intelligence or the ability to assemble objects, and the skill to comprehend and construct patterns. However, the social intelligence was perceived to be so strongly associated with the two others that psychologists never felt the urge to treat and analyse it as a special or even separate form of intelligence. Hence, while analysing individual success stories and explaining efficiencies in solving problems, scientists focused much on the intellectual, logical, analytical, and rational abilities of the incumbents. Success stories thus were all about how well one can acquire, organize and implement new knowledge. Gradually, scientists came to concede the presence of non-cognitive intelligence, or, precisely emotion, which

3 2 Intelligence? Emotions? or, the Emotional 13 may be described as an unconscious state which is distinct from cognition, volition or motivation. It was perhaps since early eighteenth century that psychologists were trying to effectively isolate three aspects of human behaviour, namely, Cognition or thought, Affect or Emotion and Motivation. And there has been a gradual shift in focus from pure cognitive abilities to a combination of cognitive and non-cognitive excellence in an attempt to relate two apparently non-related terms that is Emotions and Intelligence to explain the abilities to lead an effective life. E.L. Thorndike (1920) perhaps was among the first few to recognize the existence of a special type of social, rather than cognitive intelligence that involves appreciation and management of emotions of one s fellow members. David Wechsler (1940, 1958) further emphasized the necessity to incorporate non-cognitive aspects of intelligence along with the traditional cognitive ones in defining intelligence properly. In his seminal paper, Gardner (1983) argued that people often seem to have certain types of intelligence that standard cognitive tests, such as IQ tests, fail to recognize. He thus introduced the concepts of intrapersonal and interpersonal intelligence as ability to comprehend one s own emotions and the emotions of others respectively. Such non-cognitive, additional types of intelligence were described as essential in explaining and predicting the performance and accomplishment of individuals. Gardner, however, did not christen this non-cognitive intelligence as Emotional Intelligence. The term was introduced, perhaps for the first time in 1985 in the doctoral thesis of Wayne Payne, who developed the concept in his study of emotions. All the literature that developed subsequently in the field emphasized the need to assess Emotional Intelligence for different individuals at different stratum of their behaviour and interaction. Such assessments are absolutely essential in order to explore one s ability to cope with his immediate world, his emotional and social skills and to identify his strengths and weaknesses to flourish as an individual, a team member or an effective leader. It is now being widely believed that while enhanced emotional intelligence makes individuals more efficient, productive, and successful; organizations can become more productive by hiring people

4 14 G. Chakrabarti and T. Chatterjea with higher emotional and social skills and by offering opportunities to enhance these skills in the workplace. However, while defining Emotional Intelligence, one must keep in consideration the fact that Not everything that connects cognition to emotion, is Emotional Intelligence (Mayer and Salovey 1997). Over the past few years, a number of studies have been conducted in the area where cognition is related to affect. As pointed out by Mayer and Salovey (1997), emotions might alter thoughts in many different manners, but not necessarily in a way to make one emotionally intelligent. While Wechsler (1940, 1958) tried to relate intelligence not only to cognition but the ability to adapt as well, Salovey et al. (1995) emphasized that while ability to adapt is a part of intelligence, adaptation does not characterize intelligence. As pointed out by them, many organisms that could hardly be described as intelligent adapt themselves perfectly to changing environment. Another example may be that of mood-biasing effect or mood-congruent judgement. As pointed out by Mayer et al. (1990), the mood biasing effect takes place when an effective match between a person s moods and ideas increases the judged merit, broadly defined, of those ideas. However, the increased interaction between mood and cognition in mood-congruent judgement has nothing to do with increased smartness. Some studies prefer to incorporate emotional self control in the analysis of Emotional Intelligence. Mayer and Salovey (1997), however, assert that there are cases where emotional outburst, rather than self-control would be more effective. Accordingly, they argue, a proper definition of Emotional Intelligence must combine the ideas that emotion makes thinking more intelligent and that one thinks intelligently about emotions. Once, the term is defined, means are to be introduced for quantifying and assessing it properly with further methodologies to explore its independence or otherwise from cognitive intelligence. Moreover, any such theory of Emotional Intelligence must be able to account for real life phenomena. Building up of a workable concept of Emotional Intelligence thus needs to relate the term to the studies of intelligence and emotions. Traditionally, emotions were taken to be irrational, erratic, idiosyncratic and unsettling behaviour: an adversary to intelligence (Schaffer et al. 1940; Young 1936, 1943).

5 2 Intelligence? Emotions? or, the Emotional 15 Studies conducted later on (Mandler 1984; Mayer and Salovey 1997) recognized emotions as potentially contributing to thought rather than disturbing it they prioritize cognition. The basic point to start from is then to recognize that emotions provide information about the relationship with one s surroundings. 2.2 Models for Analysing Emotional Intelligence The early attempts to define Emotional Intelligence and to relate it to cognitive intelligence involved drawing in of the correlation method. Under the method, two types of intelligences are treated as similar, or even identical, if they are correlated or correspond to each other for a chosen individual. The intensity and extent of such association must be more than what could be explained by chance factors. However, psychologists of those days felt that while presence of a high correlation between cognitive and non-cognitive intelligence would render the two types of intelligence non-distinguishable, incidence of a zero correlation between them might make one too sceptical to label the newly introduced emotional intelligence as intelligence in true sense: The new intelligence is so different that it is not intelligence at all. Hence the presence of a low to moderate correlation between the two types of intelligences was thought to be ideal. Some studies worked on this association further. Spearman (1927) opined that such intelligences move in tandem because these draw on a common mental resource which he preferred to term as general common resource or general intelligence (g). The possession of such resource in plenty explains the success stories of an individual. Relevant literature offers alternative mathematical models for estimating g at individual level. There are studies, however, that bypassed the correlation approach and adhered to theoretical analysis to establish the presence of Emotional Intelligence. Guilford and Hoepfner (1971) asserted the presence of near about 120 intelligences based on combinations of basic human mental process. The model, however found very little appreciation as the number of intelligence to

6 16 G. Chakrabarti and T. Chatterjea be tracked was too high and it failed to lend itself to correlation method for empirical verification. Gardner (1983, 1995), in his thoery of multiple intelligence, too avoided the correlational approach and intended to explain presence of muliple intelligences with cultural differences and human brain structure. In empirical verification of the model, he found all intelligences to be significantly interrelated. However, although the theory is intuitively appealing and still has some acceptance among the researchers, theorists including Gardner himself remained sceptical about the empirical findings (Detterman 1982; Sternberg 1994). Apart from such exceptions, the Emotional Intelligence models developed in the twentieth century relied predominantly on the correlation method. According to the Encyclopaedia of Applied Psychology (Spielberger 2004) there are currently three foremost approaches towards analysis of Emotional Intelligence, namely, the Bar-On Model (1997), the Goleman Model (1995) and the Mayer-Salovey Model (1997). This study while focussing on these three would like to go for an academic discussion of the trait based model of Emotional Intelligence introduced by Konstantin Vasily Petrides in The term Emotional Intelligence gained immense popularity after Daniel Goleman came to publish his book Emotional Intelligence in 1995 where he posited emotional intelligence to be equally important as IQ to explain one s success in academic, professional, social, and interpersonal aspects of life. According to him, emotional intelligence is an array of skills and characteristics that can be taught and cultivated. Goleman s original model has now come to be considered as a mixed model that combines what have subsequently been modelled separately as ability EI and trait EI. The trait model encompasses behavioural dispositions and self perceived abilities and is measured through self report (Konstantin and Furnham 2001). The ability model as developed by Peter Salovey and John Mayer in 1997 focuses on the individual s ability to process emotional information and to use it to navigate the social environment. Bar-On, on the other hand, offered a model based within the context of personality theory, emphasizing the co-dependence of the ability aspects of emotional intelligence with personality traits and their application to personal well-being. This is in contrast to the Goleman s model, developed in terms of performance,

7 2 Intelligence? Emotions? or, the Emotional 17 where individual abilities and traits are integrated to gauge their impact in each sphere of life (Goleman 2001) The Bar-On Model of Emotional Intelligence The Bar-On model (1997) starts from a very basic premise by raising a very basic question, namely, why do some people with a high IQ struggle in life, while others with a moderate IQ succeed? With its emphasis on non-cognitive intelligence, it has introduced a scientific and one of the best normed measures of Emotional Intelligence that is administered to over 42,000 individuals in thirty-six countries. This multifaceted measure with its multicultural applicability examines almost all the aspects of emotional and social intelligence. While defining Emotional Intelligence, the theory does not confuse it with IQ, aptitude, academic achievement, vocational interest or personality. Rather, it has been taken as the emotional, social, communicative, and relational abilities of individuals to grasp their own as well as others wants and needs so as to be able to cope with environmental demands and pressures. As pointed out by Goleman, the most significant contribution of this approach to the literature has been the effort to develop an Emotional Quotient scale. The Bar-On model involves 133 brief items answered on a five-point scale from Not true of me to True of me. The EQ-i is suitable for individuals who have attained an age of seventeen years of more and it takes approximately 40 minutes to complete. The test involves few scales namely, total EQ, five EQ Composite scales, fifteen EQ Content Scales and four Validity scales. The model identifies the following composite EQ scales with the associated content scales: (i) Intra-Personal scale includes Emotional Self-Awareness, Assertiveness, Self-Regard, Self-Actualization, and Independence as content scale. Among these content scales, Emotional Self-Awareness is described as the ability to recognize and comprehend one s diversified and distinct emotions, along with the capability to identify the factors

8 18 G. Chakrabarti and T. Chatterjea causing those. Assertiveness is portrayed as the ability to put across and defend one s emotions, viewpoints, and opinions and rights in a non-destructive way. Self regard is defined as the ability to recognize, accept and respect one s own emotion; recognizing and accepting one s positive and negative aspects as well as one s limitations and possibilities. Independence is described as self-reliance and the ability to self-direct one s thinking and actions without any significant emotional dependency on their fellow members. Further, self-actualization is epitomized as the capacity to realize one s potential and the endeavour to pursue one s longing. Such factors are responsible for development of better attitude towards work, consistent behaviour and improved interaction with fellow members. It is likely to help people to think and act on their own and yet still incorporate others ideas whenever appropriate. Ability for successful conflict resolution, to work in cohesion and to share ideas effectively comes naturally with strengthening of intrapersonal factors leading ultimately to optimization of individual as well as team performances. (ii) Inter-Personal scale includes Interpersonal Relationship, Empathy, and Social Responsibility as content scale. Developing Interpersonal Relationship refers to one s ability to establish and maintain mutually beneficial and gratifying relationships with the fellow members. Empathy is recognized as the capability to comprehend and appreciate the feelings of others. Further, Social responsibility is defined as the ability to present oneself as a cooperative, contributing, and constructive member of one s social group. Inter-Personal factors thus help in developing effective communication and cohesive functioning that facilitate action as team member and leads ultimately to significant contribution to society as a whole. (iii) Adaptability is the third EQ factor that includes Problem Solving, Flexibility, and Reality Testing as content scale. The problem-solving ability is defined as one s proficiency in identifying problems and to render and implement effective solutions. Flexibility refers to the skill to adjust one s emotions and their manifestation to shifting situations and conditions. Finally, Reality Testing is portrayed as the ability to recognize and analyse the association between the

9 2 Intelligence? Emotions? or, the Emotional 19 perception and the reality. Alternatively, it relates the subjective aspects with the objective ones. Individuals high on adaptability are expected to cope with challenging and dynamic situations effectively with an ability to come out with realistic and viable solutions to emerging issues. (iv) The fourth EQ factor, namely, Stress Management includes Stress Tolerance, and Impulse Control as content scale. Among these content scales, stress tolerance is defined as the competence and confidence to handle and react in stressed situation effectively. Impulse Control is explicated as the ability to control, or even delay or resist, the manifestation of one s emotions. An individual with better ability to manage stress can meet the target and manage the workload without making much mistake.. (v) The fifth EQ scale or the General Mood involves Optimism and Happiness as content scale. Out of these content scales, Optimism is taken as the proficiency to look at the brighter side of any event, even under adversity whereas Happiness is described as the skill to remain satisfied with one s life under any circumstances. Such factors often create a positive atmosphere that lifts spirit and improves the overall performance. Using these factors, the Bar-On model calculates the EQ (EQ-i) for each respondent and judges their ability to cope with the environmental demands. Assuming a normal distribution for the scores, with mean 100 and standard deviation of 15, any score in the range of is considered to be the average score. Any score greater (less) than 115 (85) is considered to be a high (low) score. Any respondent scoring in the average range for a particular factor is considered to be functioning efficiently in handling situations related to that factor. An above-average score indicates the efficiency of the person in terms of the factor concerned, while a low score identifies skills that necessitate improvement for better functioning and higher probabilities of success. The Bar-On test finds wide application in a variety of field including corporate, educational institutions, clinical, medical, and academics. The model was estimated for near about four thousand respondents from the United States and Canada. Seventy-nine percent of the

10 20 G. Chakrabarti and T. Chatterjea respondents were white and under the age of 30 years, with equal representation of males and females (Bar-On 1997, 2002). Testing the impact of age, gender and ethnicity revealed that the older groups scored significantly higher than the younger groups on most of the EQ-i scales; and respondents in their late 40s obtained the highest mean scores. An increase in emotional-social intelligence with age is also observed in children (Bar-On and Parker 2000). While statistically significant gender differences exist for some of the factors measured by the EQ-i, there is hardly any gender bias on EQ-i as a whole. Specifically, for the North American sample (Bar-On 1997), females tend to have stronger interpersonal skills whereas the males outperform them in terms of intrapersonal capacity, managing emotions and adaptability. Women are found to be more socially responsible and better aware of emotions, demonstrating more empathy and relating better interpersonally than men. On the other hand, men score better in terms of possession of self-regard and self-reliance, coping with stress, flexibility, problem solving capacity and optimism. Similar gender patterns are observable in almost all studies that use EQ-i (American Psychiatric Association, 1994). The test, however, did not reveal significant differences in Emotional Intelligence between the various ethnic groups that were compared (Bar-On 1997, 2000, 2004; Bar-On and Parker 2000). The finding is indeed significant as studies over the past years found significant differences in cognitive intelligence between various ethnic groups (Suzuki and Valencia 1997). Stability estimates of the test were reported to be quite high. For seven population samples, the value of Cronbach s alpha measuring the internal consistency ranged from 0.69 to 0.86 for the fifteen subscales with an overall average internal consistency of 0.76 (Bar-On 2002). Content validity is reported to be adequate and structural validity was established through factor analysis to test the hierarchical structure of the Bar-On model of emotional intelligence (Bar-On 2002). Construct validity was established through measures of convergent and divergent validity. Although the correlations were not so significant between the EQ-i and the other available measures of standard intelligence (Bar-On 2002; Brackett and Mayer 2003), it was distinctly higher for some measures of psychological and subjective well-being (r takes the value

11 2 Intelligence? Emotions? or, the Emotional 21 of 0.54 and 0.35 respectively) and for the Big Five personality factors (Brackett and Mayer 2003). Studies (Van Rooy and Viswesvaran 2004; Van Rooy et al. 2005) suggest that no more than 4% of the variance of the EQ-i can be explained by cognitive intelligence. Further, the degree of overlap between the EQ-i and personality tests is found to be no more than 15% based on eight studies in which more than 1700 individuals participated. This finding establishes the fact that EQ-i measures something else other than personality traits. And, this must be true because the skills that EQ-i attempts to measure are much different from the simple personality traits which unlike these skills do not enhance continuously from childhood to adulthood and cannot be improved upon through individual endeavour (Bar-On 2004). These findings, along with the fact that EQ-i is fairly significantly correlated with other measures of emotional social intelligence (ESI) establish EQ-i to possess substantial construct validity. That is, the tool measures exactly what it was designed to measure. Tests of incremental validity of the Bar-On model assert that with personality and intelligence (IQ) held constant, emotional intelligence as measured by the EQ-i can still predict some of the human behaviour, particularly addictions, pretty well (Brackett and Mayer 2003). Further study results suggest that emotional intelligence as measured with the Bar-On model could accurately predict success in life particularly in business and industry settings. It could also differentiate between achievers and wash-outs in social interactions, military schools, air force, work places and academia in different countries (Bar-On 2002; Handley 1997; Swart 1996). It is pretty good in predicting impact of Emotional Intelligence on physical and psychological health, self-actualization and subjective well-being (Bar-On 1997, 2004; Bar-On et al. 2005; Krivoy et al. 2000) The Ability-Based Model: Mayer and Salovey Much of the development in the area of Emotional Intelligence was done by Mayer and Salovey (1997) where they defined Emotional Intelligence as the ability to perceive emotion, to access and generate

12 22 G. Chakrabarti and T. Chatterjea emotions so as to assist thought, to understand emotions and emotional knowledge, and to reflectively regulate emotions so as to promote emotional and intellectual growth. The model starts from the premise that emotion acts as an important piece of information that becomes important when one interacts with others in social relationships and in different social environment. However, people would have different ability to recognize the importance of this information, to process it and to combine this non-cognitive ability successfully with the cognitive ability for an effective functioning of the system. The Ability-based model considers four types of such abilities. The proficiency to recognize and understand one s own emotion and to comprehend the emotions expressed by others fall under the ability to perceive emotions or what they described as Emotional Perception. This is followed by the expertise to use such emotional knowledge or noncognitive aspects of human behaviour to carry out cognitive functions: a skill which is termed as Emotional Use. The third type of the non-cognitive ability considered by the Solvey and Mayer model is labelled as Emotional Understanding where people strive to understand shades and layers of emotions, their origin, reciprocity and evolution over time. The analysis is completed by introducing Emotional Management or the ability to manage or regulate emotions, own as well as of others, effectively. With the model developed primarily with these four basic abilities, Mayer and Salovey (1997) introduced sixteen other emotional skills, four under each of these categories. Such an analysis covers the development of emotional skills over one s entire lifetime starting from childhood to adulthood and it seeks to combine the relatively simple skills to recognize and demonstrate emotions with more sophisticated and conscious skills of perceiving, demonstrating and controlling emotions. Following Mayer and Salovey (1997), a detailed analysis of these categories and sub-categories may be presented as follows: 1. Perception, appraisal and expression of emotion: Mayer and Salovey (1997) presented this category as the lowest branch of emotion that is concerned with the accuracy with which one can identify his or her emotion and its contents. During the journey from childhood to adulthood, one gradually (and sequentially) develops emotional or

13 2 Intelligence? Emotions? or, the Emotional 23 non-cognitive skills that Mayer and Salovey (1997) tried to categorize under four subgroups namely, (a) Ability to identify emotion in one s physical states, feelings and thoughts. (b) Ability to identify emotions in other people through language, sound appearance and behaviour. (c) Ability to express emotions accurately and to express needs related to those feelings. (d) Ability to discriminate between accurate and inaccurate, or honest versus dishonest expressions of feeling. In order to describe how these skills develop sequentially, Mayer and Salovey (1997) argued that infants respond initially to the expression of their parents, but gradually, they come to identify and distinguish among emotions and respond to incidents related to different social surrounding. Progressively, with maturity, people learn to control their own emotions, comprehend those of others and are eventually able to manifest emotions appropriately. 2. Emotional facilitation of thinking: Mayer and Salovey (1997) considered this as the second higher branch of emotion where emotions facilitate cognitive processing. Right from infancy, human emotion and its expression signal the human needs, changes within them and their surroundings. An infant yells when it desires its basic needs to be fulfilled. With maturity, gradually, the interdependence and interaction between non-cognitive and cognitive skills become stronger. A grown-up person uses emotion, anticipation, and its possible manifestation to determine and to shape future courses in life. For example, one might anticipate the possible hostility and empathy that might be faced when he or she intends to enter professionally or otherwise, a new arena of life. Such anticipation about future feelings and its effective processing often shapes one s future course of action. This is what Mayer and Salovey (1997) described as an emotional theatre of the mind : a grown up mind offers a processing area where emotions are spawn, comprehended, analysed, controlled and manifested so as to determine one s immediate or future courses in life. Further channels, however, may be identified under this branch where non-cognitive

14 24 G. Chakrabarti and T. Chatterjea factors such as mood swing might effectively impinge on occupational and non-occupational activities and reasoning. While unfolding the role of emotion in facilitating reasoning Mayer and Salovey (1997) identified four sub-phases of interaction between non-cognitive and cognitive skills that develop gradually as an infant transforms itself into a grown-up, emotionally mature human being. These four sub-phases of interaction may be described sequentially as follows (Mayer and Salovey 1997): (a) Emotions prioritise thinking by directing attention to important information. (b) Emotions are sufficiently vivid and available that they can be generated as aids to judgement and memory concerning feelings. (c) Emotional mood swings change the individual s perspective from optimistic to pessimistic, encouraging consideration of multiple points of view. (d) Emotional states differentially encourage specific problems approaches such as when happiness facilitates inductive reasoning and creativity. The third branch of emotional skill is particularly concerned with how individuals perceive their emotions and dissect those to use such emotional knowledge to shape their attitude towards developing and maintaining relationships in different spheres (professional or otherwise) of life. 3. Understanding and analysing emotions; employing emotional knowledge: in order to show how one accumulates emotional knowledge and process those to reach effective solutions to real life problems, Mayer and Salovey (1997) concede that such accumulation initiates in one s salad days and grows with maturity in life thereby unfolding newer dimensions of emotions and leading to better understanding of those. A child gradually learns to distinguish between liking and loving, annoyance and anger and so on (Plutchik 1984) and the sense of emotional reasoning develops gradually where feelings may be related effectively to relationships at professional or personal level. With maturity a person seems to recognize the presence of complex and contradictory emotions and the sequence or chains in which

15 2 Intelligence? Emotions? or, the Emotional 25 emotions gush in. Accordingly, Mayer and Salovey (1997) described four sequential phases of accumulating emotional knowledge: (a) Ability to label emotions and recognise relations among the words and the emotions themselves, such as the relation between liking and loving. (b) Ability to interpret the meanings that emotions convey regarding relationships, such as that sadness often accompanies a loss. (c) Ability to understand complex feelings: simultaneous feelings of love and hate, or blends such as awe as a combination of fear and surprise. (d) Ability to recognise likely transitions among emotions, such as the transition from anger to satisfaction, or from anger to shame. The highest branch of emotional development is concerned with the ability to manipulate and control emotions so as to facilitate emotional and intellectual growth. Hence, Mayer and Salovey (1997) defined the most sophisticated emotional skill as the Reflective Regulation of emotions to promote emotional and intellectual growth. 4. Reflective Regulation of emotions to promote emotional and intellectual growth: the branch starts from the requirement that one must be open to emotions for effective controlling of those. Emotions are to be comprehended without aggrandizing or underrating their significance and one must stand ready to accept or welcome even the worst form of emotional upheavals. This is particularly because efficiency in controlling emotions comes from its accurate comprehension which in turn depends on the ability to put up with waves of emotions, pleasing or otherwise. Ability to control and manipulate emotions affects cognitive reasoning and ultimately helps one to get effective control over adverse situations. Moreover, such skills gradually mature to form what Mayer and Salovey (1997) described as reflective or meta-experience of mood and emotion. As pointed out by Mayer and Gaschke (1988), emergence of feeling like I don t fully understand the way I m feeling is direct and conscious reflections on emotional responses. These are not to be understated as simple perception of one s feelings. Mayer and Salovey (1997) further decomposed metaexperience of mood into meta-evaluation and meta-regulation. Metaevaluation is particularly related to how clearly one perceives the

16 26 G. Chakrabarti and T. Chatterjea nature and the effects of his or her mood and attends and entertains those, while meta-regulation is concerned with whether such mood swings are optimally controlled. The sub-phases in development of reflective regulation of emotion may be described as follows: (a) Ability to stay open to feelings, both those that are pleasant and those that are unpleasant. (b) Ability to reflectively engage or detach from an emotion depending upon its judged informativeness or utility. (c) Ability to reflectively monitor emotions in relation to oneself and others, such as recognising how clear, typical, influential or reasonable they are. (d) Ability to manage emotion in oneself and others by moderating negative emotions and enhancing pleasant ones, without repressing or exaggerating information they may convey Measuring Emotional Intelligence in Mayer and Salovey Model Mayer and Salovey (1997) were indeed aware of the fact that developing a concept of Emotional Intelligence in terms of a set of skills or proficiencies has nothing to do with the measurement of emotional achievement or emotional competence. Anastasi (1988) was among those who first raised the issue of whether Emotional Intelligence could be compared to emotional achievement or emotional competence. While cognitive intelligence (e.g., academic intelligence) may be compared to cognitive achievement (that is, academic achievement) and cognitive competence (academic excellence, in this case), it is difficult to infer that a person, high on emotional intelligence would always attain high levels of emotional achievement and competence. Such processes of accomplishing and attaining competence depend on a variety of factors including the family background, the societal structure and the experiences in life that the incumbent has undergone. Therefore, given the possible lack of one to one correspondence

17 2 Intelligence? Emotions? or, the Emotional 27 between emotional intelligence and emotional competence, analysts often prefer to speak in terms of the latter (Saarni 1988). Mayer and Salovey (1997), however, relied much on development of a measure that would take into account the emotional intelligence, emotional competence and emotional achievements simultaneously. A reliable and workable measure of emotional intelligence, while establishing it as a true form of intelligence, must be able to distinguish it from other forms of cognitive and general intelligence. As asserted by them any true measure of Emotional Intelligence has to fulfil three criteria. Firstly, such measure must be able to capture the sub-phases of emotional development. Secondly, it must directly measure and quantify a skill without putting much emphasis on one s self assessment regarding his or her Emotional Intelligence. And, finally, such measure must be able to connect different emotional skills. Mayer and Salovey (1997) found very few studies to satisfy all these criteria. Mayer et al. (1990) found factors or skill that might explain individual differences in recognizing and distinguishing emotions. Mayer and Geher (1996) found emotional perception to be correlated with cognitive as well as other emotional skills. Averill and Nunley (1982) found emotional intelligence, or emotional creativity as they described it, to be able to predict individual success rates independent of cognitive intelligence. Mayer et al. (2002) developed their own ability-based Emotional Intelligence test (MSCEIT) designed to measure the four branches of the Emotional Intelligence model of Mayer and Salovey. MSCEIT, that takes minutes to complete, consists of 141 items. MSCEIT provides fifteen main scores, namely, the total EI score, two Area scores, four Branch scores, and eight Task scores. In addition to these fifteen scores, there are three Supplemental scores. The test can be scored in two ways, namely, the general consensus and expert consensus scoring. However, ranking of the incumbents based on these two methods are almost identical. The test passes the internal consistency reliability test in terms of the split-half approach. The overall reliability (r) of the test stands at 0.93 for general and at 0.91 for expert scoring. The reliability (r) of the Perceiving Emotion branch scores stands at 0.91 and 0.90, for general and expert scoring, respectively. In terms of general and expert scoring, the reliability scores stand at 0.79 and 0.76 for Facilitating

18 28 G. Chakrabarti and T. Chatterjea Emotion branch; at 0.80 and 0.77 for Understanding Emotion branch and at 0.83 and 0.81 for Managing Emotion branch respectively. The tests are found to have content validity (Mayer et al. 2002). The test found Emotional Intelligence to be a measurable, reliable and true form of intelligence, which is significantly distinct from other forms of intelligence. People who are high on Emotional Intelligence according to MSCEIT are indeed found to require less cognitive effort in solving real life problems (Jausovec et al. 2001). Correlations among non-cognitive abilities, however, are found to be higher at lower level of intelligence (Jensen 2003). Further, MSCEIT rarely correlate with other self-reported Emotional Intelligence tests, such as BarOn EQ-i (Bar-On 1997), Scale of Emotional Intelligence (Schutte et al. 1998) or Occupational Personality Questionnaire (Collins 2001). This is particularly so because of two reasons: people s perception usually does not match with reality and the definition of EI used by MSCEIT is different from that employed by other tests. However, predictive ability of Emotional Intelligence has been emphasized by a number of studies that take Emotional Intelligence as the best predictor of success in life (Gibbs 1995; Goleman 1995, 1998a). Goleman did, however, expand the original concept of Emotional Intelligence put forward by Mayer and Salovey, and this has caused some confusion and overstating of its importance The Mixed Model of Emotional Intelligence: Goleman s Model In 1998, Goleman in his Working with Emotional Intelligence introduced a framework of Emotional Intelligence to show how skills to comprehend, manage and demonstrate emotions explain one s success stories in professional life. While presenting Emotional Intelligence as a theory of explaining and predicting success, Goleman described Emotional Intelligence is a wide array of skills that drives leadership and emotional competence is a learned capability based on Emotional Intelligence that results in outstanding performance at work. Specifically, having emotional skills does not guarantee that one

19 2 Intelligence? Emotions? or, the Emotional 29 has acquired emotional competence rather it asserts that an individual has the potential to become competent. Gaining emotional competence depends on the ability with which such potential would be realized and intelligence would be transformed into capabilities: a practice that must be learned. Having an innate Emotional Intelligence skill is thus absolutely necessary, but not sufficient to demonstrate competence in any of the Emotional Intelligence fields. In his 1998 work, Goleman introduced a framework of five main Emotional Intelligence domains or dimensions and twenty-five emotional competences. These five main dimensions are described as (a) Self-awareness or the ability to know one s emotions, strengths, weaknesses, values and goals; to comprehend their impact on others and to use insights in taking decision. (b) Self-regulation or the skill to control and/or manage one s unsettling emotions and to adapt to shifting situations. (c) Social skill or the proficiency in managing relationships to drive or direct others in one s desired direction. (d) Empathy or the ability to take into account other s feelings especially when making decision. (e) Motivation or the urge to drive for achievement. Of these skills, self-awareness, self-regulation and motivation were described as personal competencies that are related to knowing and controlling one s own emotions. The remaining two depicted social competence where individuals recognize, comprehend and manage other s emotions. Later on, based on a study conducted by Boyatzis et al. (2000) the five domains were collapsed to form four constructs namely, Self-awareness, Self-management, Social-Awareness and Relationship (or social) management. The number of emotional competencies was reduced to twenty from twenty-five considered earlier. A look into the following matrix might make the framework more comprehensive.

20 30 G. Chakrabarti and T. Chatterjea Recognition Self awareness Emotional self awareness Personal Accurate self assessment Self confidence competence Social awareness Empathy Social competence Service orientation Organizational awareness Regulation Self management Self control Personal Trustworthiness Conscientiousness Adaptability Achievement drive Initiative competence Relationship management Developing others Social Influence Communication Conflict management Leadership Change catalyst Building bond Team work and cooperation competence The first component of emotional intelligence, Self Awareness is described as the ability to recognize and truly comprehend one s feeling at a particular moment that helps one take decisions with confidence. As pointed out by Goleman (1998a, b) it is the same as what Mayer and Stevens (1994) described as meta-mood which is the affective counterpart of meta-cognition. Goleman defined three competencies under self awareness to be portrayed as: (a) Emotional Self Awareness that emphasizes the ability to recognize, distinguish and understand one s own feeling in a true sense and to gauge their impact on one s ultimate performances. (b) Accurate Self assessment that are concerned with the ability to honestly investigate and acknowledge one s strengths and weaknesses. Boyatzis (1982) described such competence as the hallmark of superior performance. People with such competence are fully aware of their strengths and weaknesses, welcome constructive (or

21 2 Intelligence? Emotions? or, the Emotional 31 (c) otherwise) comments and stand ready to concede their faults and seek to learn from mistakes. Self confidence or the ability to feel that what one learns about their strengths and weaknesses are not his or her true valuation. Rather, people with such competence, are truly aware of their capabilities, have strong self assurance and capability of decision making, fight, even for the most unpopular thing, if they feel it is right, and believe that they can manage their own lives effectively. As pointed out by a study (Goleman 1998a, b) emotional self awareness could explain and predict the performances of financial planners in a financial company. As asserted by Kelley (1998), the competence in accurate self assessment is found in almost every star performer among knowledge workers in companies like AT&T and 3M. Further, while average performers overestimate their ability, achievers consistently underestimate their skills: a trait that shows competence in accurate self assessment (Goleman 1998a, b). Boyatzis (1982) found self confidence to be a unique factor while distinguishing average performers from the best ones among supervisors, managers and executives. For a group of entry level accountants, Saks (1995) identified competence in terms of self confidence as a better predictor of performance rather than their innate skill or previous training. Holahan and Sears (1995) considered a sixty-year study involving 1000 man and women with high IQ, where they were tracked from their childhood to retirement. The people with competence in self confidence in their salad days were found to be the achievers in their respective professions. The second cluster in personal emotional intelligence that is, Self Management or self regulation is described as the ability to take responsibility of one s emotions and to comprehend and manage the impact of such emotions on decision making and responses. Goleman (1998a, b) defined six competencies under this cluster defined as follows. (a) Emotional Self Control: a skill that is described as the efficiency in managing one s disruptive emotions and the ability to remain calm and not to retort even under stress or in hostile situations.

22 32 G. Chakrabarti and T. Chatterjea (b) Trustworthiness: a skill portrayed as the ability to convey one s values, principles, objectives and emotions to others and act accordingly in a consistent manner. (c) Conscientiousness: the ability to remain cautious, self-disciplined and meticulous while pursuing responsibilities. (d) Adaptability: the skill to be amicable to new information and the ability to discard long-established but outmoded ideas without being hesitant to muddle through shifting requirements. (e) Achievement Drive: the competence that refers to the positive and confident endeavour to enhance performance continually. (f) Initiative: the efficiency to be proactive instead of remaining reactive. It is described as the skill to anticipate situations and to take pre-emptive rather than remedial actions. The competence in emotional self control is found to characterize superior performer in fields such as counselling and psychotherapy, and among flight attendants, managers, executives, store managers in retail chains and many others (Rahim and Psenicka 1996; Boyatzis and Burrus 1995; Spencer and Spencer 1993; Boyatzis 1982; Lusch and Serkenci 1990). Barrick and Mount (1991) and Barrick et al. (1993) found conscientiousness of executives and employees to have significantly positive impact on job performances, particularly, on sales. Spencer and Spencer (1993) identified the presence of adaptability as a skill among all the best-performers in industries. McClelland (1961) documented achievement drive, or achievement orientation (as he intended to call it) to explain success of entrepreneurs. Spencer and Spencer (1993) found such drive as an important factor that distinguishes among performances. Few studies (Crant 1995; Rosier 1996) identified initiative as the key explaining factor of above-average performances in industries such as real estate, financial services and consulting. Goleman (1998a, b) defines the third cluster of emotional intelligence, the Social Awareness as the skill to recognize and comprehend the social relationships and the social structure in which one is operating. Social Awareness manifests itself in three competencies, namely, empathy, Service Orientation and Organizational Awareness.

23 2 Intelligence? Emotions? or, the Emotional 33 (a) Empathy is described as the skill to comprehend others feelings, worries and requirement. As emphasized by Goleman (1998a, b), an empathetic person essentially possesses competence in self awareness. (b) Service Orientation is the efficiency to comprehend even the undeclared requirements and apprehensions of the customer group and mould the services accordingly. It usually builds upon the other social awareness skills. (c) Organizational Awareness is portrayed as the ability to recognize the emotions of a group that facilitates stronger networking and coalition among the group members. Skills to be sensitive and compassionate are often identified as the factor explaining star-performance, particularly among physicians, managers of product development teams, retailers, sales persons and personnel in other industries (Friedman and DiMatteo 1982; Spencer and Spencer 1993; Pilling and Eroglu 1994). With a competence in service orientation, people are found to flourish in the arena of sales (Spencer and Spencer 1993; McBane 1995). Competence in organizational awareness explains the above-average performance in almost every field. As pointed out by Boyatzis (1982) people skilled in organizational awareness can comprehend situations objectively and in an unbiased manner that helps them respond to situations effectively. The fourth cluster of Emotional Intelligence in the Goleman s model is described as relationship management or the social skills. Social skills are those to which one gets access to while entering into relationship with others. While social awareness helps to understand others, social skills offer means of interacting with the fellow members in a way that facilitates productivity by improving interpersonal relationships. Such competencies involve developing others, influence, communication, conflict management, leadership, change catalyst, building bond, and team work and cooperation. (a) Developing others are concerned with the skills of intuiting the developmental needs of fellow members and feeling the urge and taking initiative to shore up their capabilities.