Personality and Emotional Capability

Introduction

Emotional Intelligence (EI) has become widely accepted as a dimension (construct in psychometric language) that plays a key role in determining job performance as we have already noted. However, there is disagreement on what EI is with a variety of EI models – Ability Model, Mixed Model and Trait Model – attempting to explain EI.
There is also a strong opinion that EI does not really exist as a distinctive psychological dimension or construct but that it is simply the expression of a person’s cognitive ability and personality traits.

Based on our 30 years of action research in the field, we agree with the latter view that EI really is our cognitive ability but especially our personality traits in action. We prefer to refer to this as Emotional Capability and abbreviate it as EQ and in this module show you why it is critical to assess and understand an individual’s EQ before making a decision to appoint them or not.

What then is Personality/Emotional Capability?

Personality can be described as:

• Deeply ingrained attitudes and patterns of behaviour that tend to repeat themselves and are stable over time.
• That regulate the way in which we interact with our working environment – people, pressures, self-management….
• And that influence the way in which we use our acquired/ technical competencies (skills and knowledge)

We will illustrate this with a short case study

The Case of Robert

Robert is a charted accountant with 5 years working experience in a manufacturing organisation. A pre – employment psychometric assessment showed that Robert’s general mental ability is very superior and places him in the top 5% when compared to other graduates. An EQ assessment shows that he lacks attention to detail, is unassertive, shy and prefers to work alone. Robert has recently been promoted into the position of financial manager.

Being a CA with solid working experience Robert has all the technical/acquired competency to do the work of a financial manager. His very superior general mental abilities indicate that he has ample cognitive ability to deal with the problem-solving challenges of the job.

However, his performance in the role is characterised by errors and careless mistakes. His team works in silos and are un co – ordinated resulting in workflow bottlenecks. Robert isolates himself in his office all day and pays no attention to leading and motivating his staff. He avoids having meetings wherever possible and when he does have them, he is indecisive, disengaged and unable to persuade and influence his team. As a result, he begins to manage by decree and instruction. Staff morale and performance are low.

Let’s Analyse Robert…

Despite having excellent acquired competencies and general mental ability, Robert still failed in the financial manager position because his personality and emotional capabilities were poorly matched to the role.
Remember we have said that EQ is deeply ingrained.

The attributes of poor attention to detail, unassertiveness, shyness and preference for working alone were therefore bound to manifest even though they were counterproductive, much like the scorpion and frog story we told in an earlier module. We would expect Robert to continue with the same behaviour – careless mistakes (poor attention to detail), general disengagement from his staff (shyness and preference for working alone) and inability to lead and persuade (unassertiveness). This will be his default way of functioning across a wide range of jobs and work situations.

We said EQ regulates the way in which people deal with the non – technical demands of a role (how we interact with people, deal with pressure, self-manage) and this is clearly seen in the way Robert handles his staff.

We also said it influences the way in which we use our acquired/technical competencies. Despite having excellent qualifications and good working experience, Robert’s poor attention to detail influenced HOW he used those competencies resulting in careless errors in financial reporting.

Remember...

An individual’s personality is made of stable patterns of behaviour, that are partly genetically “coded” but that are also developed as we grow up. By the time we reach young adulthood, these behaviours both through genetic coding and repetition over time are “hardwired” in our brains and become the default way in which we respond to situations.

The “deeply ingrained” aspect is important to remember, because when someone comes into an organisation, he brings these deeply ingrained behaviours with him to the job. They will express themselves as the default way in which he deals with a multitude of situations. With all of us, some of these embedded patterns of behaviour will reflect high emotional competence (EQ) and others will reflect low EQ. Being deeply ingrained, they are not easy to change.

Low EQ, or a poor match between a person’s EQ and what the job requires is a critical reason why some people fail in jobs, despite having excellent competencies (technical and non – technical skills) and cognitive capabilities (IQ)s and has a huge impact on organisational performance and bottom line. “Correcting” low EQ or “adjusting it” so that it will fit the job, is no easy matter given the “deeply ingrained” nature of EQ.

Let’s illustrate further…

Imagine that you must appoint someone into a key management/leadership role. Would you appoint someone with one or a combination of the following EQ issues and is:

• Cold, aloof, unable to connect emotionally with people, has no empathy and is unable to see things from another person’s point of view
• Buckles under stress, becomes dejected and pessimistic when faced with obstacles, is easily discouraged, struggles to focus, and think clearly when under pressure
• Domineering, overbearing and a poor listener
• Is over – optimistic, impulsive, under – estimates challenges
• Cannot assert himself, is easily led and influenced by others, is a pleaser who can’t speak his mind
• Is unreliable, cuts corners, disregards norms and rules, does not plan, is only interested in quick wins
• Is emotionally sensitive and easily hurt; is subjective and emotional rather than logical when making decisions; follows gut feeling at the expense of facts
• Is suspicious; has little trust or faith in others; believes the worst about people; is irritable and hard on people
• Has his head in the clouds; lives in his imagination; is not grounded; does not know how to turn ideas into practical actions steps
• Is tactless; commits interpersonal blunders; can’t “ read” people or group dynamics; is easily fooled and manipulated by others; is insensitive and steps on people’s toes
• Is over – confident; lacks vigilance; is unaware of his own development needs or general opportunities for improvement
• Dislikes working in a team; follows his own head; prefers to work alone; get’s impatient when having to do things through others
• Has no regard for his reputation and does not care what other’s think of him; is unprincipled and does what suits him, rather than what is right; does not abide by generally accepted norms and standards
• Is bad tempered; has poor control over his emotions; is prone to letting feelings of anger and irritation show
• Is dependent and passive; lacks initiative; prefers to follow rather than to lead

These behaviors have nothing to do with the individual's COMPETENCIES and have everything to do with his PERSONALITY AND EMOTIONAL CAPABILITIES.

Pause for a moment and reflect on what the impact of any or worse a combination of these behaviours would be on leader’s job performance. Hopefully you will agree that the above are all examples of poor emotional capability that will impact negatively on a leader or manager to successfully function in such a role IRRESPECTIVE of what his IQ, qualifications, past experience and competencies are.

So just how big a deal is poor EQ when it comes to individual and organisational performance?