Critical Thinking Assignment – Goleman vs. McCrimmon

by Brandon E. Smith
AMBA 600 7461
October 25th, 2014

Goleman’s Major Conclusions and Research Methods Regarding Emotional Intelligence In Daniel Goleman's “The Emotional Intelligence of Leaders”, real life examples, scientific facts, and the overall impacts of emotional intelligence on leaders and organizations are highlighted. Overall, high emotional intelligence in leaders is more dependent on success within an organization as opposed to high rational intelligence. This basically means that a majority of successful individuals take into account the emotions of themselves and others, while personal knowledge has minimal bearing on the degrees of achievement. Goleman points out that there is minimal variation in the IQ's of organizational leaders, further supporting that emotional intelligence is a bigger determinant in measuring accomplishments on all organizational levels. From a scientific standpoint, emotions are controlled internally by the limbic system. Contained within this region of the brain is a structure called the amygdala, which stores a person's life-long memory. The amygdala is also responsible for controlling all of the different types of emotional reactions a person may experience. The author’s observations of the biological aspects of emotional intelligence, which includes the purpose of the limbic system and the function of the amygdala, are critical in understanding why emotions are a part of human life and important to organizational leaders. The article further examines the concept of emotional intelligence by highlighting its dimensions and its relationship with success. The five dimensions of emotional intelligence are self-awareness (of surroundings and the decisions one makes), managing emotions (considering the feelings of self and others and practicing self-control), motivating others (taking an optimistic approach as opposed to a pessimistic view), showing empathy (reaction to the emotions of other individuals), and staying connected (to the emotional state of the group as a whole). Referencing studies involving emotions and decision making, self-control, stress management in the workplace, optimism and empathy support Goleman's analysis of these five dimensions. In addition to the dimensional approach, team performance in relation to emotional intelligence and leadership is supported by the existence of three types of teams – poor performing (below average), well-performing (above average), superlative (perfectly synergized team). By correlating group performance with the main concept, teams that perform poorly have minimal implementation of emotional intelligence, while well-performing and superlative teams function with higher degrees of emotional intelligence. Even though understanding emotional intelligence is essential for any type of leader, emotional intelligence is currently in decline in many organizations and in life as a whole, with this downturn beginning at the early stages in life and progressing further in current workplaces. When comparing the past with the present, one study mentioned in the article supports the decline in emotional intelligence in children by acknowledging that there is less social interaction (with family members and peers) and more technological interaction in the modern world. This is also demonstrated by a trend in modern organizations functioning with little to no emphasis on emotional intelligence. Though there are ways to improve upon emotional intelligence, leaders who function with a high level of emotional intelligence can help rejuvenate an organization’s focus and views on human emotions.
McCrimmon’s Major Conclusions and Research Methods Regarding Thought Leadership As organizational structures and functions evolve, new forms of leadership come to life and may be a determining factor in independent and organizational successes. “Thought Leadership: A Radical Departure from Traditional Leadership”, by Mitch McCrimmon focuses on a new concept and approach to leadership – thought leadership. Typically, leadership trends found in many organizations include informal leadership, shared/distributed leadership, leaderful organizations, and positional leadership. In an effort to alter the ideas or train of thought of both individuals and organizations, thought leadership is a new approach to addressing innovation and differs vastly from traditional positional leadership. To support this, the article focuses on the contrasts between positional leadership and thought leadership as seen by experts in each respective field. While it is apparent that all business settings have positional leaders in place, thought leaders lack empowerment, lack the capacity to manage others, and are unable to make decisions that positional leaders can. More specifically, thought leaders usually emerge from within an organization with the presentation and demonstration of new ideas to equal counterparts and senior managers. With this being the case, McCrimmon also points out that ultimately, the ideas of thought leaders are subject to rejection, which presents the opportunity for an individual to pursue success with the new idea as an entrepreneur. To fully understand what thought leadership entails, the article highlights many of its important characteristics, which include having a more technical approach as opposed to a personal approach (in comparison to positional leadership), the ability to be derived both internally and externally (in terms of the organization), and having the tendency to be organic in nature. Thought leadership also tends to have competitive elements, can involve both small and large changes within an organization, and generally involves convincing others to embrace new ideas. The article offers detailed examples of each characteristic to solidify this new approach in leadership. Simply put, McCrimmon feels that thought leadership is most beneficial to innovative industries and organizational settings that are creative, competitive, and flexible in nature. Thought leadership also allows for one to paint a better picture of the overall functioning of any organization.

Which author’s discussion is more convincing? While both articles are very informative, rational, well-written, and most importantly persuasive, in my opinion, McCrimmon's arguments and supporting information presented in his article about thought leadership were more plausible in comparison to Goleman's analysis of emotional intelligence. This view was formed because of the specifics of the concept presented, the positive effects it has in the business world, the fact that it is driven by innovation, and because it can be applied to many personal work experiences. The concept of thought leadership, when compared to emotional intelligence, was explained in great detail by noting how much of an impact it has on an organization, its common attributes, and who these ideas are presented to. This coverage on a current leadership trend, as opposed to the dissection of emotional leadership, is also more applicable to the constant changing state of many modern workplaces and industries, especially since it may involve input from members at any level within an organization. By identifying that thought leadership is best suited for a business that is in a consistent state of transition on all levels, it is clear that the presentation and implementation of new beliefs takes precedent over the personal actions of the organization and its members. An example that comes to mind of thought leadership in action involves ways to increase revenue for my business unit at work. Before it was brought to the attention of my superiors, I took it upon myself to determine ways that the organization can cut costs across the board and become more profitable. These recommendations include the reduction of overall vendor service fees, the elimination of additional ancillary fees that vendors may charge above and beyond base service fees, the increase of fees that we charge our client for services, and more reliance on independent vendors (as opposed to more costly national vendors) for the services we provide.
With keeping in mind that “all it takes is one influential person to recognize that they have the potential to become a thought leader and take action”, I presented my thoughts on how to curtail spending to my manager, as well as upper-level management (Gibbons-Klein, 2011). To my surprise, the organization received my ideas with praise and allowed me the opportunity to incorporate a new fee schedule/structure for both our vendor and clients. As a result, organizational revenue has been experiencing an upturn and all parties that were subject to these changes are reasonably satisfied with the outcome. Since emotional intelligence was not factored into this example and because new ideas from many different directions can have long-lasting impacts, it is clear that anyone has the capacity to become a thought leader, even if the need for change has not yet been recognized.

References

Gibbons-Klein, M. (2011). Winning by thinking: How to create a culture of thought leadership in your organization. Development and Learning in Organizations, 25(1), 8-10. Retrieved from ABI/Inform Complete October 25, 2014.