__ In search of excellence? asks Daniel Goleman. Start working with emotional intelligence. __
__ What a trick of fate: The way to get ahead in the age of the knowledge worker is not through raw brainpower, but by harnessing your emotions. Daniel Goleman, a Harvard-trained psychologist and former New York Times science writer, turned this idea into a household phrase with his 1995 blockbuster Emotional Intelligence. A primer on the art - and science - of self-mastery and social persuasion, the book remains an international best-seller, now translated into 30 or so languages (at this writing it's topping the charts in Turkey). Goleman's follow-up volume - Working with Emotional Intelligence (Bantam, 1998) - goes even further, providing a kind of moral philosophy for corporate America. His thesis: In today's technical fields, you need a highly developed set of soft skills to leverage your hard expertise. Now CEO of consulting firm Emotional Intelligence Services (www.eisglobal.com/), Goleman seems to be walking the talk; let him know what you think at goleman@javanet.com. __
Wired: The mythical hero of Silicon Valley is the nerd - a brain trapped inside a geeky-looking body. Your research suggests otherwise.
Goleman: The stereotype of the tech expert with no social skills may be accurate. And I used to think these two factors were independent. But friends at places like MIT argue that people drawn into the technical fields spend many hours - particularly in adolescence - alone, absorbed at the computer, or in a lab. As they're increasing their technical understanding in math and science, they're missing out on a parallel track of social learning. They become emotionally de-skilled, and that pulls them back later in their careers.
The person who seems to belie this point of view is Bill Gates, who by external appearances is almost autistic. He's hardly what anyone would call a failure.
Gates is a fascinating case. He has a fabulous drive to achieve, and that reverberates throughout his company. On the other hand, he's notorious for the worst of emotional intelligence. He yells, he's abrasive, and he doesn't seem to care how he's coming off. If he were starting at the bottom - if the playing field were level for Gates - he's not the guy you would pick to lead a team. He'd work for you, not run you.
So what's the role of technical skill?
It's an entry-level requirement. You have to have enough to do the job - but it's not what sets star performers apart. A UC Berkeley study, started in the 1950s, followed a group of PhD students in science and the technical fields for 40 years. It turned out EI abilities were four times more important than IQ in determining professional success and prestige by the end of their careers. And in a study of managers who failed, it was always because of a deficiency of EI.
Does our penchant for smartcards, smart homes, and PDAs encourage EI in society, or impede it?
The early returns show a negative impact, particularly as it affects kids - the average level of EI has been declining among young people for the last 20 years. This generation spends more time than any generation in history staring at video monitors. It doesn't matter if they're doing educational CD-ROMs; they're not out playing with other kids.
What about the workplace?
The increasing reliance on communication via the Web and email - if it replaces human touchpoints - weakens the fabric of connectedness that makes a company or organization work. That's why EI is so important in the high tech universe.
How does EI apply to people like Oracle's Larry Ellison who are more inspired by the Japanese "warrior mentality"?
Samurai were Zen students - they engaged more skillfully because they cultivated inner peace. EI is about being skillful, not squishy.
What's today's most emotionally intelligent technology?
The Media Lab's Roz Picard, who wrote a book about 2001's HAL 9000, is investigating computers that can read emotions in the user and adjust themselves accordingly. If you're frantic and uptight, they can make things easier. If you're enthusiastic and zeroed in, they'll up the level of challenge. They're user-friendly in the real sense of the word - which means they're emotionally intelligent, for machines.
It's one thing to program a computer; how about humans?
EI competencies are learnable. In Working with Emotional Intelligence, I set out guidelines for training programs designed to make people better on the job, where the payoff is. A lot of programs out there - like these one-day motivational seminars, or doing ropes courses in the countryside - have little, no, or even a negative effect. Companies are wasting a lot of time and money on inappropriate solutions.
Could good training rescue a troubled company - say, Apple?
EI is not the answer to every problem faced by an organization. There are market realities. But how well you face a market reality is determined by EI. Andy Grove, writing about Intel, makes a good point: The critical thing is how managers respond emotionally to a crisis. So often people panic, deny the crisis - or kill the messenger. A company has to be open to bad news, take it in fully, and respond quickly.
What about other traditions that have a different way of dealing with emotions?
In many Asian cultures you squelch expressions of emotion, particularly of negative emotion - which means that people are getting eaten up inside without showing it. But I was amazed at Asia's interest in EI. In Taiwan, Emotional Intelligence is the best-selling book of all time. In Korea, they're starting to put EI curricula in the schools. "We're very taken by the West," they told me, "and very influenced by your ideas and technologies. And here is Western science affirming our most deeply held values."
Is EI sort of bottom-line Buddhism?
It's very interesting. Buddhists read Emotional Intelligence that way. Christians tell me it's about Christianity. And Jews tell me it's a great book about Judaism. It may in that way reflect what Huxley called "the perennial philosophy," which itself reflects the basic neurological structures that govern human existence. My work is grounded in science, particularly neurological science. Apparently the eternal questions all the great religions are grappling with are the legacy of evolution: What do you do with destructive emotions? How can you live a good life, and have healthy connections to other people? How can you help future generations?
