LEADING WITH EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE: IN THE FOOTSTEPS OF A LEADER

This critique explores leadership in cross-cultural transnational business and community environments. It also covers leadership in transition from industry to academia. Specifically, it looks at testing my Personal Contingent Leadership Paradigm (PCLP) adaptation and my own leadership effectiveness over my career timeline. The fundamental ingredient of my PCLP is gradual balance of my dominant Intelligent Quotient (IQ), which is logic-based leadership with an Emotional Intelligence (EQ) and Social Intelligence (SQ). General logic-based leadership is classified as IQ leadership, whereas general mental ability is classified as EQ leadership. EQ is the ability to recognise, appraise, and control one’s own, others’, and group’s emotions. SQ is the intelligence that is used to address problems of meaning and purpose, value, goals, and vision. As a result, the Leadership Intelligence (LQ) idea tries to align all three intelligences. Effective LQ entails a leader’s ability to manage their own and others’ emotions (EQ), their ability to reason and make logical decisions (IQ), and their ability to follow their passions and express their desires (SQ). For effective leadership, all three intelligences (IQ, EQ, and SQ) are required.

The research methodology, research questions and premises were designed to justify my PCLP with an overarching research question: “How do I counterbalance my dominant IQ (logic based) leadership with an EQ-SQ overlay?” In extension of this research question, I would also explore “How circling out and back into academic leadership has enabled me to be a better leader?” My research considered the followings:

1. A literature review of values-driven ethical leadership to test the premises of intrinsic alignment to be effective in cross-cultural and industry-academia transition. The further extended literature review on the theme of contextual selected cases.
2. A longitudinal case study on my leadership practice to derive consistency and adaptation over my career line.
3. Qualitative field research analysis to understand my own leadership practices and leadership perception of others related to selected cases utilising narrative research, grounded theory, and mixed method.
4. Quantitative student survey to validate leadership initiatives in academia in line with my aspired PCLP.

The literature review of leadership with IQ, EQ, SQ, and LQ found that leadership with IQ is inadequate in unleashing the potential of followers. As leadership quotient (LQ) dictates, leaders like me, who are dominant in IQ (logic based) leadership need to balance with EQ and SQ underlay for optimum leadership outcome. Studying my own life as the master case and critically looking at the utilisation of IQ-EQ-SQ is quite unique in the leadership literature.

The qualitative research study looked at inputs of purposeful sample of leaders in areas of industry, academia, and community who closely saw me leading in those areas during my leadership career timeline. The study found as validated by participants that leaders tend to exhibit less EQ when in authority. The ideal leadership outcome is dependent on the balance of IQ and EQ, as evidenced by my leadership narratives and cross-examination by participants. It will have a negative impact if you are biased in one direction or the other.
Other interesting findings that came out are: (i) community organisations lack leadership as they are heavily management-driven; (ii) in order to fine-tune one’s PCLP, a leader may consider Leadership Values Survey by the followers; (ii) in regards to religious community organisation, aspiration of power in people’s heart might not be eroded by theocracy; and (iv) perceived failure in the short-term may be a success in the long-term.

Overall, all research justified and further contributed to my PCLP. My life and my leadership story in this research made a significant contribution to leadership practices, which many leaders may relate to in their leadership journeys.