By Douglas Anele

Emotional intelligence (or EI afterwards) is one of the most exciting concepts that appeared occasionally in the literature of psychology in the 1970s and 1980s. Therefore, it is fair to say that the concept is relatively new when compared to more established Freudian and behaviourist notions such as Oedipus complex, superego, reinforcement and conditioned reflex among others. EI emerged as a respectable psychological construct, based on the increasing recognition by psychologists, researchers in organisational behaviour, and managers of corporate organisations that cognitive or cerebral intelligence alone is insufficient for optimum performance at home, in the office or manufacturing plant etc. Even so, up till now whenever Chief Executive Officers (CEOs) and managers of corporate organisations consider emotions in relation to performance in the workplace, they usually concentrate on its more extreme and negative manifestations like anxiety, depression, embarrassing moments, hurt feelings and so on. Moreover, they tend to believe that emotions have no place, or a relatively minor role, in the corporate world, on the presumption that the competitive atmosphere of business thrives on “cold facts and figures.” However, the assumption that emotions are at best a relatively unimportant component of the workplace psychological environment has been seriously challenged by research findings to the effect that poor emotional and social skills have jeopardised careers and corporate organisations more than lack of technical expertise. The lesson here is that those in charge of corporate institutions must pay more attention to the crucial role of emotions in the professional and personal lives of their employees – and of themselves as well.

In order to understand EI, it is necessary, first, to grasp the meaning of ‘intelligence.’ But the behavioural disposition or attribute denoted by ‘intelligence’ is difficult to define in a manner that commands universal acceptability among experts in psychology, cognitive science, philosophical psychology and related disciplines. For example, Robert J. Sternberg reports that in 1921, when editors of the Journal of Educational Psychology asked fourteen famous psychologists to define intelligence, their responses varied. However, the answers given suggest that intelligence involves (1) the capacity to learn from experience and (2) the ability to adapt to the surrounding environment. The impressive literature on ‘intelligence’ establishes that concept ties together different cognitive and psychological qualities. Hence, intelligence connotes the ability to think and manipulate ideas systematically, the capacity for abstract thinking, and the power of appropriate responses from the point of view of truth or factIt also involves the capacity to inhibit an instinctive adjustment, the ability to redefine the inhibited instinctive adjustment in the light of imaginally experienced trial and error, and the volitional capacity to convert the modified instinctive adjustment into overt behaviour to the advantage of the individual as a social animal. David Wechsler proposed one of the most influential definitions of intelligence. According to him, intelligence is the aggregate or global capacity of the individual to act purposefully, to think rationally and to deal effectively with his or her environment.

Now, when the adjective ‘emotional’ is coupled to ‘intelligence’ to derive ‘emotional intelligence,’ attention is directed to a specific aspect or manifestation of intelligence. Emotion embraces evaluative, affective, intentional and psychological conditions such as happiness, love, sadness, fear, disgust, and other inner states sometimes difficult to capture adequately with words. Consequently, EI refers to and underscores the possibility of understanding one’s emotions or the emotions of others and using such understanding to achieve some beneficial result. According to the Oxford Dictionary of Psychology, EI is the capacity to monitor one’s own and other people’s emotions, to differentiate between various emotions and categorise them appropriately, and to use emotional information to guide thinking and behaviour. It is that “ability to perceive and express emotion, assimilate emotion to thought, understand and reason with emotion, and regulate emotion in the self and others.”

EI encompasses four competencies, namely, (a) the ability to perceive, appraise and express emotions accurately; (b) the ability to access and evoke emotions when they facilitate cognition; (c) the capacity to understand emotional messages and utilise emotional information; and (d) the ability to control one’s emotions to bolster growth and well-being.

Related to EI are the concepts of social intelligence and emotional quotient (or EQ, which is analogous to the IQ index conventionally used to measure intelligence generally). Social intelligence is the ability to understand and interact with people requiring reasonable application of interpersonal skills and adaptability. Emotional quotient or emotional-intelligence quotient (EQ), on the other hand, measures the level of EI possessed or manifested by an individual. Like IQ, scientific assessment of EQ is a daunting challenge to researchers.

Meanwhile, since the late 1990s, there is reasonable progress in the development of more accurate measures that focus on the key competencies associated with EI.

From the foregoing, EI refers to the array of personal-management and social skills that allow one to succeed in the workplace and life generally. Intuition, integrity, character, trustworthiness, good communication and relationship skills are essential features of EI. As indicated earlier, seasoned professionals in different domains of human endeavour oftentimes regard emotions as a hindrance to rational discussion or serious work. For instance, a senior manager who admonishes his subordinate to control her emotions, or reminds her that emotions and business do not mix, betrays ignorance of the strong nexus between emotions and productivity.

At any rate, the types of emotions intended when such advice is given are usually out-of-control emotions that interfere with work and other activities in a person’s life. But EI is different from pure emotionalism or the tendency of allowing emotions to overwhelm reason in challenging situations, since it stresses rational channelling of emotions for achieving stated objectives.

Preoccupation with our rational, factual side is not EI, because Instincts, feelings and intuitions gained through experience are sources of significant information about the world. As a result, if we use data derived from rational cognitive intelligence only, we operate with half the information we need to make appropriate decisions and choices. A purely rationalistic approach rarely leads to overall success in any corporate organisation or to a fulfilling personal life. That is why genuine EI entails having access to information from the emotional centre of the brain (the limbic system) and complementing it with information from the rational centre of the brain (the cortex and neo-cortex).

TO BE CONTINUED