Emotional Intelligence - Summary
February 10, 2013
ASMT W4b (R)
ASMT W4b (R)
Why Emotional Intelligence Is Not Essential for Leadership C6 p.171
Mitch McCrimmon, the author of “Why Emotional Intelligence Is Not Essential for Leadership”, presents an argument contrary to that of Daniel Goleman’s claim that leaders must be emotionally intelligent to be effective. He even ventures as far as calling Goleman’s theory harmful. “The bottom line is that emotional intelligence is more important for management than leadership” (Rowe, 2013, p. 172).
McCrimmon begins his argument referencing great leaders like Martin Luther King, Mahatma Gandi, and Nelson Mandela. Each of these men has influenced others with their passion to eradicate unfairness. They convinced those who can make decisions to favor their ideas. “They aimed their cry at their respective governments and the population at large . . . but none of them managed the people responsible for making the policy changes that they were promoting” (Rowe, 2013, p. 172). They were bottom-up leaders. McCrimmon makes this point in order to simplify and redefine leadership to “the successful promotion of new directions” (Rowe, 2013, p. 172). This simplified definition of leadership allows for the promotion of better ideas in an environment where the leadership role shifts from person to person as ideas are developed. As justification for his new definition, McCrimmon claims that the traditional concept of leadership is founded within the confines of the managerial framework, not in those who lead outside of managerial roles.
Returning to the topic of the article, the author contends that “emotional intelligence is critical for management, though not so for leadership” (Rowe, 2013, p. 174). From the beginning, emotional intelligence should have been associated with management, but “a scapegoat was needed to blame for the failure of Western businesses to cope with Japanese competition, and management was fingered for this role” (Rowe, 2013,
ASMT W4b (R)
ASMT W4b (R)
Why Emotional Intelligence Is Not Essential for Leadership C6 p.171
Mitch McCrimmon, the author of “Why Emotional Intelligence Is Not Essential for Leadership”, presents an argument contrary to that of Daniel Goleman’s claim that leaders must be emotionally intelligent to be effective. He even ventures as far as calling Goleman’s theory harmful. “The bottom line is that emotional intelligence is more important for management than leadership” (Rowe, 2013, p. 172).
McCrimmon begins his argument referencing great leaders like Martin Luther King, Mahatma Gandi, and Nelson Mandela. Each of these men has influenced others with their passion to eradicate unfairness. They convinced those who can make decisions to favor their ideas. “They aimed their cry at their respective governments and the population at large . . . but none of them managed the people responsible for making the policy changes that they were promoting” (Rowe, 2013, p. 172). They were bottom-up leaders. McCrimmon makes this point in order to simplify and redefine leadership to “the successful promotion of new directions” (Rowe, 2013, p. 172). This simplified definition of leadership allows for the promotion of better ideas in an environment where the leadership role shifts from person to person as ideas are developed. As justification for his new definition, McCrimmon claims that the traditional concept of leadership is founded within the confines of the managerial framework, not in those who lead outside of managerial roles.
Returning to the topic of the article, the author contends that “emotional intelligence is critical for management, though not so for leadership” (Rowe, 2013, p. 174). From the beginning, emotional intelligence should have been associated with management, but “a scapegoat was needed to blame for the failure of Western businesses to cope with Japanese competition, and management was fingered for this role” (Rowe, 2013,
References: Rowe, G., & Guerrero, L. (2013). Cases in leadership. (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publishing.