The document discusses the importance of emotional intelligence (EI) for change managers in successfully implementing organizational change. It outlines three models of EI and argues that EI is crucial for change managers as it allows them to understand implications of change, adapt to it, help others embrace it, and navigate emotionally charged scenarios. Research shows EI contributes to effective leadership, is important for project managers to improve chances of success, and that developing EI competencies through training can help change managers and organizations achieve outstanding performance during times of change.

1. Introduction<br />Much has been written about the role of Emotional Intelligence (EI) in leadership from the viewpoint of initiating a change to set a direction or a new goal. The role of management, though, in adapting and then sustaining the change in an organization is not highlighted adequately. It’s true that the leadership defines and disseminates the change as a strategically positive move, but the success of a change largely depends upon how it is executed by management. The real transformation begins with management, who must first understand the implication of the change, adapt it and help the rest of the organization embrace it. These performance functions test the capacity for EI in change managers. <br />There are a number of challenges faced by modern organizations. Globalization, social responsibility, mergers and acquisitions, and the ubiquitous access to information are forcing companies to constantly innovate and change to stay competitive. When a company decides to shift its strategic focus in response to these forces, organizational change becomes necessary to support and implement the new framework. Companies must realign resources to accommodate the changed goals and objectives. The idea sounds lucid, but the extent of the success in implementing such changes is not consistent, and not all companies experience a smooth transition. Organizational changes require significant investment and it’s therefore imperative that projects are handled appropriately. The risks are highly tangible, but relate to the effect on the workforce. The purpose of this paper is first to explore the underlying reasons EI is integral to the successful execution of an organizational change project, to gain an understanding of current perceptions of EI from practicing project managers, and finally attempt to identify a framework to guide emotional competence development for change managers. <br />Why Emotions are so Significant<br />The examination of the human brain and its evolution helps to explain why emotions are so hard to control. Emotions elicit powerful physiological and often unconscious reactions. Emotions have been found to emanate from a broad pathway extending from the amygdala in the central part of the brain where chemicals that trigger emotions originate, to the prefrontal cortex located just behind the forehead. The prefrontal cortex is where decision formation and analytical reasoning occurs, but this part of the brain has not evolved sufficiently to send strong signals back to the amygdala. It does so only through narrow indirect back-channels. This means the reasoning portion of the brain has limited means to regulate the chemical production in the limbic brain, and as a result impedes humanity because emotions inhibit the ability to reason. When these particular emotions are negative, such as when fearful, anxious or sad, lingering physiological consequences can result in fatigue and diminished motivation. When organizational change occurs negative emotions are often invoked. This can help explain the reactive nature of personnel during times of change. <br />Strength in leadership is recognized in stable resolve in the face of adversity, and the ability to remain calm under fire while effectively navigating out of crisis. More and more organizations are realizing that compelling leadership goes beyond just cognitive ability. An intuition for handling emotionally charged scenarios is just as crucial (if not more so), to effective job performance. Goleman, Boyatzis and McKee argue that while the Intelligent Quotient (IQ) is important, EI competence matters far more. They suggest EI constitutes 80-90% of the skills needed to distinguish outstanding leaders. <br />Many successful corporate leaders have demonstrated that great companies can be built by treating employees well. Modern corporate leaders seem to have abandoned the Jack Welch style of leadership and many now epitomize soft skills – teamwork, communication and motivation. The focus has clearly shifted from the traditional IQ and technical skills approach, to the EI competency for high-performance individuals. George argues that “emotional intelligence contributes to effective leadership by focusing on the development of goals and objectives, instilling in others an appreciation of the importance of work activities, generating and maintaining enthusiasm, confidence, optimism, cooperation and trust, encouraging flexibility in decision making and maintaining a meaningful identity for an organization.” While these traits are critical in the executive role, we argue these are just as crucial for mid-tier change managers because, as Goleman, Boyatzis and McKee assert, leadership is ultimately distributed throughout the organization.<br />Emotional Intelligence Models and Their Relevance <br />Salovey and Mayer are widely credited with advancing the term, ‘emotional intelligence’ in 1990, when they identified EI as a subset of social intelligence. Associated with the processing of emotional information as it related to cognitive ability, this model focuses on accurate perception, appraisal, and expression of emotion; the ability to access and/or generate feelings; to understand emotions and emotional knowledge; and to regulate emotions to promote emotional and intellectual growth. Measured using an ability-based performance assessment, the scores for this model correlate with existing intelligences while accounting for unique variance, and scores can improve with age. <br />Reuven Bar-On developed an EI model based on mixed intelligence with both cognitive and personality factors. His ability-based model focuses on the ability for awareness, understanding and appropriate expression of emotion within oneself and relating to others, and the ability to change and solve problems. He suggests that EI develops over time and can be improved with training. Bar-On’s Emotion Quotient Inventory or (EQ-i), is a self-report intended to measure success dealing with environmental demands and pressures. <br />A third model by Daniel Goleman again incorporates both the cognitive and personality aspects but also relates EI to performance in the workplace. This model first analyzes the triggers of emotions within the individual as self-awareness. Self-management through the use of tools that can help address emotions and help manage them is the next stage. Goleman then opens the framework outwards, by examining social awareness - the ability to recognize emotions in others. Finally, there is relationship management: the key to emotional competency from which strong agents of change emerge with the ability to recognize, relate and manage emotions in others. This model uses a 360-degree Emotional Competency Inventory (ECI) incorporating manager, peer- and direct-report ratings. This is followed with a self-report work competency questionnaire for emotional intelligence (WCQei). <br />Goleman argues that EI competencies are learned and can be developed or coached to achieve outstanding performance. He also states that traditional and contemporary organizational training programs offering insight into EI need to extend far beyond current rudimentary offerings. Stys and Brown, quoting from a study by Dearborn in 2002, argue that a one-size-fits-all approach ignores individual complexities while focusing [only] on cognitive learning. Goleman further contends this process consists of four development phases: preparation for change, training, transfer and maintenance of skills, and evaluation. <br />All three models of emotional intelligence identify the awareness and management of emotions as key elements, and that a relationship between elements of the models has been established through statistical analysis. While controversy continues with regard to the scientific validity of some for-profit EI tests, Van Rooy and Viswesvaran argue that given observed correlations established between emotional intelligence, cognitive ability and personality factors, emotional intelligence should be regarded as a valuable predictor of performance. <br />Several models of EI are tied with mainstream personality theory, specifically the mixed models of Bar-On and Goleman. Researchers including Goleman have proposed that effective leaders must possess social and emotional intelligence and transformational leadership in particular, for achieving higher ratings of effectiveness and satisfaction. Leaders high in emotional intelligence are the key to organizational success. Clarke, using the ability-based approach, measured sixty-seven practicing and certified project managers for EI, empathy, cognitive ability, personality, transformational leadership and project management competences, using various measurement standards, controlling for personality influence and IQ. The ability to use emotional intelligence and an overall measure of emotional intelligence ability were found to be statistically associated with the project manager competencies of teamwork and managing conflict. These findings support our hypothesis that EI competencies provide strength for the project manager, and an ability to resonate with stakeholders can contribute to a more repeatable route to successful project outcomes.<br />The Role of Emotional Intelligence in Project Management <br />Anthony Mersino states that “projects are risky and successful projects are never guaranteed… Being adept at reading situations and people is one way that project managers can improve their chances for success.” The ability to remain calm in stressful situations, absorb and react appropriately to criticism, and use these tools to improve personal and project performance are some of the EI competencies needed in a modern project manager. In our survey of twenty-five project managers, the majority stated that they would benefit from greater skills in perceiving and managing the emotions of team members and stakeholders, and in managing upward.<br />Some people are naturally more gifted in EI competencies than others, but mainstream models suggest that EI can be developed over time. Project managers often get the opportunity to develop this competency through the use of conventional management techniques. These include dealing with personnel issues such as tardiness, inappropriate behavior, unsatisfactory performance and even the positive situations in the form of recognition and reward, promotion and establishment of goals. By managing direct reports and in being directed, project managers can learn how best to communicate to elicit the greatest return. <br />The project manager who makes the effort to connect with his or her team contributes enormously to establishing vital relational connections such as trust, integrity, credibility and the implied power dimension engrained in the role. This can be enhanced by nurturing the team to establish project ‘buy-in’, discussing the importance of the team, the perceived expectations, and establishing the support channels to help carry the project. Any scenario where the project manager, as a change agent, connects with the emotional needs of the project team significantly raises the chances of project success both at the beginning during planning, during execution and at the end of the project. By establishing a bond, furthered by ongoing compassion and empathy for personal and professional needs, the project manager establishes a powerful toolbox for motivation, much more so than when taking the role of task master for the schedule and project plans. Contemporary research indicates that this occurs because emotions and sensitivity to relational bonding are established at a very young age, and social relationships are evolved over a period of time. Tapping into this powerful basic need yields an intrinsically powerful result. The relational bond becomes crucial when working in virtual teams. For an organizational change project, we would argue that given the emotionally reactive nature of a change project, lack of face-to-face interaction with the stakeholders could be tantamount to accepting failure at the onset. <br />A Project with Greater Risk: The Organizational Change Project <br />Three elements are at the core of organizational change projects – the change itself, contemporary project management and change management#. One significant key difference between organizational change project management and traditional project management is the human element in terms of post-change continuity. Lewin viewed organizations as systems in which the present situation is not static, but an equilibrium of forces working in opposite directions. According to Lewin , status is held in balance by those forces seeking to promote the change – the driving forces and those attempting to maintain the status quo – the restraining forces. For any change to occur, the driving forces must exceed the restraining forces allowing the propensity for change. Dealing with the after effects of a change and motivating employees to embrace the change mandates that the change managers have competence in social management. Change, by its very nature, encounters resistance. Therefore, companies that diligently invest in this aspect of project management are likely to have a much higher chance of success. <br />Huy argues, “Emotion provides the primary feedback mechanism that alerts the person that various set goals are not being achieved, and this, in turn, motivates behavior.” Huy elaborates that for radical change, deep-rooted assumptions must first be exposed. Then, through a double-loop learning cycle – whereby a change in the underlying assumptions is necessary – this leads to a change in behaviors and, in turn, activates strong emotions. <br />Other ideas also support this notion that change elicits strong emotions. Maslow in his well-known 1943 paper, ”A Theory of Human Motivation”, argued that people are motivated through a basic hierarchy of needs – physiological, safety, kinship, self-worth, and self-actualization – in that order. A threat to any one of these needs, particularly the lower-level needs, can be devastating to the individual affected. The most unsettling event in terms of emotional reaction to a planned organizational change is when there is likely to be a change that results in employee’s separation caused by a merger, downsizing or dissolution of a product line, for example. Regardless of the adaptive nature of the organizational culture, this directly threatens the hierarchy of needs at an individual level – and this highlights the primary reason emotional competence is so critical for change agents. <br /> Organizational change can come in the form of planned or unplanned changes, and the challenge in executing the changes can depend heavily on the organizational culture. We asked a number of current project managers to identify EI competences as they relate to the types of organization and changes. These results are discussed in the next section. In addition to these factors, the magnitude of the organizational change has a direct relationship to the number of people likely to be affected by it. On a large change project, the change agent’s EI competencies may well be stretched across larger groups of stakeholders. Scaling back project scope, however, requires no fewer competencies, but the channels of communication can be reduced. In other words, the broader and deeper the project scope, the more orchestrated is the communications work. We also contend that there may be an inversely proportional relationship between the frequency of organization changes and support for the change, within a given organization.<br />Preliminary Survey and its Results<br />To better understand perceptions regarding EI, our survey targeted twenty-five project management professionals with two essential qualifications. First, respondents had a minimum of three years in the project management profession, and represented a number of companies across several industrial sectors, and second, all were enrolled in or alumni from an MBA program.<br />87% of the respondents stated they had a good grounding in the concept of EI, and 82% have been involved with organizational change projects in their professional careers. An overwhelming 96% of the respondents agreed that there was a strong link between EI attributes and a successful change agent. <br />All respondents indicated that EI helps to understand the likely impact on the morale and productivity of employees impacted by an organizational change.<br />26% of the respondents agreed with the premise that the success in implementing an organizational change is guaranteed if the mechanics of planning and implementation are appropriately accommodated, while 65% disagreed. <br />83% said they could pinpoint the EI factors that contributed to the successful implementation of an organizational change, and 78% said they could pinpoint similarly for an unsuccessful organizational change. This tends to suggest that project managers are at least aware of which factors contribute to success and failure in change projects, and forms the basis for our follow-up investigation.<br />A small majority (56%) indicated that education does not necessarily trump experience, and these participants consider organizational familiarity as a predictor for success of an organizational change project.<br />83% of the respondents agreed that positive or a negative reaction occurs primarily across the whole range of affected groups, rather than at an individual level. This indicates the extensive nature of reaction within an organization.<br />96% of the respondents agreed that the level of success in implementing an organization change across the organization is influenced by employee’s needs and personality type. <br />Finally, we asked the respondents to indicate which EI domains were relevant in relation to the adaptive and un-adaptive organization, and then separately, to the project type: planned or unplanned. We contend that adaptive cultures facilitate the adoption of strategies and practices that continuously respond to changing environments. These cultures support an organization's immediate strategy and strive to guide positive change. Un-adaptive cultures can be inward focused, resistant based on historical procedure, and bureaucratic in approaching the change. The planned changes are categorized as proactively introducing a new product, service, process, technology, business model or merger/acquisition. In contrast, an unplanned change is caused by events such as a new government regulation, public relation problem, CEO suddenly leaving the company, force majeure, or something similarly unforeseen. We presented five general domains of EI covering personal competences relating back to Goleman’s initial EI model to establish a baseline framework of understanding for participants. We defined the domains as follows: <br />Self-Awareness – recognizing one’s own emotions and their effects on others, one’s strengths and limitations, and confidence in one’s self worth and capability.<br />Self-Regulation – managing disruptive emotions and impulses, taking responsibility for personal performance, exhibiting flexibility in times of change, and openness to new ideas.<br />Self-Motivation – striving to meet a standard of excellence, aligning goals with those of the organization, displaying readiness to embrace opportunity, remaining optimistic despite obstacles and setbacks. <br />Social Awareness – empathizing other’s perspectives, anticipating and recognizing other’s needs, responding to developmental needs to ensure success, cultivating opportunity through diverse groups, recognizing power relationships and emotional currents.<br />Social Skills – communicating clearly and persuade effectively, inspiring and managing change processes, negotiating and resolving disagreements, nurturing instrumental relationships, creating synergy in pursuing collective goals.<br />The respondents selected one or more EI domains – as defined above – and expressed their perceived worth when attributing them to project and organization type. The results were collated and are summarized below: <br />In an adaptive organizational culture, 71% of respondents agreed that self-motivation was most helpful. Leaders might need a greater sense of motivation for embracing a change project in an adaptive culture, due to the frequently evolving culture. This could indicate a strong sense of optimism and tenacity to follow through despite strategic stonewalling.<br />In an un-adaptive culture, 73% of respondents indicated the ability to self-regulate emotions was most helpful. This could suggest that in an un-adaptive culture the sense of frustration elicits a greater proportion of emotions within the individual in attempting to champion the change.<br />For a planned change, 76% chose self-motivation, and 67% agreed that social skills were also important. For an unplanned change, 76% indicated advanced social skills were most helpful, but 62% indicated self-management was a core competence as well. Self-motivation should not be surprising as a desirable EI competency during planned changes. Planned changes provide an opportunity to select the change leader to lead the project, and a far greater propensity for planning can evolve from project leaders who champion the organization’s strategic objectives. Also important were the tendency toward the social skills competency in both planned and unplanned changes suggest the need for project managers to hold strong conflict-resolution skills, the ability to develop strong ongoing working relationships and the need for the change leader to drive momentum through effective communication. <br />24777778486 <br />Figure 1 – Survey Results: Organization variables and their relevance to EI domains<br />Building the Framework for Future Exploration<br />Given the limited scope of this research, the intent of our survey was to explore common perceptions of the target audience and not to assess EI of the respondents. This study is intended as a platform for future research. Calls for further EI research often cite the need for improving current measurement techniques beyond self-assessment and peer-report measures. Clarke argues, “There is a need to identify more clearly the extent to which project manager competences thought to be associated with EI actually accounts for variability of project outcomes, and in identifying how differences in managing change, complexity and ambiguity may be defining features affecting the relative influence of EI.” To establish a deeper understanding of successful EI attributed from organizational change projects, our current qualitative investigation targets specific change leaders who have undertaken and succeeded in significant organizational change projects. For the purposes of this investigation, we define a successful significant change project as one that has enacted change to procedural systems, business units or existing infrastructure as intended, and that impacts multiple groups within the workforce. Additionally, the cultural dimensions might also be investigated further to understand the potential range of variability this factor exerts on the success of a project in a multicultural workforce. <br />In a series of interviews for our enhanced study, a framework list of questions will be used to probe the participant in relation to the project, in terms of its planning, execution and ultimate roll-out, with an eye to managing the stakeholders, both before, during and after the change, factors related to the organizational culture and the effect of organizational change project frequency. Questions will be targeted to understand evolving emotional states, strategies used to mitigate emotions before the project, and handle emerging reactions during the project. Because survey participants almost unanimously expressed an understanding of the EI factors contributing to success or failure, we plan to probe further to get a first-hand account of practical insight into EI competences that work. Upon completion, an analysis will be conducted to determine common traits and strategies used in bringing about the final outcome. We hope to present our findings in the near future.<br />Conclusion <br />In seeking an answer to the question, “Does emotional intelligence help modern organizations successfully implement change?” – given compelling research, experience and our evidence to this point, we would argue that it does. Change by its very nature drives negative emotions, which come about through real concern for a sense of social and economic security. This concern can present itself as fear, anxiety and unease, and this speaks to the very crux of our sense of stability as human beings. When these emotions are felt across a group, a dark cloud descends on the organization, which can fuel reaction, distrust and sometimes destroy the propensity for success. <br />Change agents find themselves in a unique position in that they hold the key to relaying the extent and implications of the change, and as such can use effective, resonating communication to dispel rumors and build buy-in. More importantly, through competence in EI change leaders can gauge and adapt the message to allay fear and concerns, to address negativity by connecting with those affected, and build momentum for stakeholders to appreciate the benefits of the change using relationship-management techniques. <br />It is not enough for leaders to be intellectually brilliant. Cognitive intelligence and emotional intelligence are perhaps orthogonal, but are essential in the skills construct of the modern leader. Strong leadership must be in-tune with the stakeholders because dissonance can impact the propensity and motivation toward success. It’s therefore imperative that modern organizations embrace EI by measuring, nurturing and ultimately rewarding competence. In doing so, companies need to identify effective change leader traits, understand the similarities exhibited by these change leaders with respect to the specific organizational culture, and nurture these competencies in bringing promising leaders through the ranks. Leadership is distributed, and emotional competencies should resonate with every person leading projects or programs. As such these skills should be engrained at all levels of management. By doing so, companies can find ways to mitigate projects from failure by focusing on minimizing negative emotions within their respective organizational culture.<br />References:<br />Boyatzis, Richard, Goleman, Daniel, and McKee, Annie – Primal Leadership: realizing the power of emotional intelligence, Harvard Business School Press, 2002<br />Cherniss and Goleman, 1998 – Bringing Emotional Intelligence to the workplace, 2003 www.eiconsortium.org<br />Clarke, Nicholas – Emotional Intelligence and Its Relationship to Transformational Leadership and Key Project Manager Competences, PMJ, April 2010<br />Côte, Stéphane and Miners, Christopher – Emotional Intelligence, Cognitive Intelligence and Job Performance, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol 51, No. 1 (March 2006)<br />Dawda and Hart, 2000 – Assessing Emotional Intelligence: Reliability and validity of the Bar-On EQ-I in university students, Personality and Individual Differences, 28, 797-812<br />Dearborn, K – Studies in Emotional Intelligence redefine our approach to leadership development. Public Personnel Management, 31 (4), 532-530<br />George, Jennifer - Emotions and Leadership: The Role of Emotional Intelligence, Human Relations, Sage Publications, 2000<br />Groves, Kevin S. – Leader emotional expressivity, visionary leadership, and organizational change, Leadership and Organizational Development Journal, Vol 27, No. 7, 2006<br />Huy, Quy Nguyen - Emotional Capability, Emotional Intelligence and Radical Change, INSEAD, Academy of Management Review, 1999, Vol.24, No.2, 325-345<br />Krames, Jeffrey - Jack Welch and the 4E’s of leadership, Kirkus Reports, April 15, 2005<br />Ledoux, Joseph (New York University) – The Emotional Brain: the mysterious underpinnings of emotional life, Simon and Schuster, 1998<br />Lewin, Kurt – Field Theory in Social Science, Harper and Brothers, 1951<br />Matthews, Zeidner and Roberts - Emotional Intelligence: Science and Myth, MIT Press, 2004<br />Meyer, JD and Salovey, P – Emotional Intelligence Imagination, Cognition and Personality, Baywood Journal, Volume 9, Number 3 / 1989-1990<br />Menkes, Justin – Executive Intelligence, Harper Collins, 2005<br />Stys, Yvonne and Brown, Shelley – A review of the Emotional Intelligence Literature and Implications for Corrections, Research Branch Correctional Service of Canada, March 2004<br />Van Rooy, David and Viswesvaran, Chockalingam – Emotional Intelligence: A meta-analytic investigation of predictive validity and nomological net, 2002<br />