Part I
The EQ Explosion
Chapter 1
Exploring Emotional Intelligence
Redefining Intelligence and Achievement
Do you remember your high-school valedictorian? How about the class brain, who got straight As and seemed destined to follow a path of uninterrupted triumph? Chances are, you don't know what happened to these youthful academic achievers, but you can probably name one or two classmates who went on to chalk up major (and maybe highly unexpected) success. Perhaps they created and now head companies of their own or became prominent and well-respected leaders in their communities. But who'd have thought it at the time? Back then, they were busy socializing, playing guitar in the basement, or tinkering with mysterious spare parts in the garage. Maybe they just squeaked through school with passing grades. Their stars shone brightly only when they went out into the real world.
It is scarcely a revelation that not everyone's talents fit the school system's rather restrictive model for measuring achievement. History is full of brilliant, successful men and women who failed miserably or underachieved in the classroom, and whose teachers and guidance counselors relegated them to life on the margin. But despite this convincing body of evidence, society has persisted in believing that success in school equals success in lifeâor, at the very least, in the workplace. Now that assumption is being overturned.
Most of us know in our bones that there's a world of difference between school smarts and street smartsâbetween braininess and general savvy. The first has its place, but the second, while more intangible, is much more interesting. It's the ability to tune in to the world, to read situations and connect with others while taking charge of your own life. Now, thanks to the EQ-i, undeniable evidence has shown a close link between this abilityâwhich has relatively little to do with intellect per seâand long-term success.
What is success? Let's define it as the ability to set and achieve your personal and professional goals, whatever they may be.
That sounds simple, but of course it's not. An individual's definition of success will quite naturally ebb and flow over time. We want different things and pursue different goals simply because we age, accumulating experience and shouldering responsibilities. Youthful idealism makes room for mature reality and the need for compromise; different imperatives or ingredients assume different intensities, depending on the particular role we're attempting to fillâfor example, that of worker, spouse, or parent. What is our main concern at any given moment? To advance our career, to enjoy a happy marital relationship, or to offer loving support and guidance to our children? Perhaps we're faced with a serious illness, beside which all else pales in comparison, and success becomes a matter of survival. So much for supposedly simple definitions. But the basic aim on which most of us would agreeâto succeed on our own terms (or on terms acceptable to us) in a wide variety of situationsâremains a constant.
That's more than can be said for society's ideas of success, which are changing as we speak. Driven by the hot pursuit of science and technology, 20th-century culture long emphasized cognitive intelligence as the cornerstone for progressâjust as financial reward has long been considered the primary result of that intelligence. The trouble is that sometimes this equation hasn't worked out as planned, as seen in the question: if you're so smart, why aren't you rich? Only in recent years have we begun to appreciate the powerful links between emotional intelligence and a greater, more satisfying, and more well-rounded definition of success which embraces the workplace, marriage and personal relationships, social popularity, and spiritual and physical well-being.
If you stop to think about your friends and family membersâin fact, about your co-workers and the people you encounter in all sorts of day-to-day settingsâwhom do you consider to be the most successful? Who seem to enjoy the fullest and happiest lives? Are they necessarily the most intellectually or analytically gifted of individuals?
More likely they have other characteristics, other skills, which underlie their capacity to achieve what they desire. The more emotional and social sense you have, the easier it is to go efficiently and productively about your life. After decades of working in the fields of psychology and psychiatry, we've concluded that it's at least as important to be emotionally and socially intelligent as it is to be cognitively or analytically intelligent.
What Are the Differences between IQ and EQ?
Simply put, IQ is a measure of an individual's intellectual, analytical, logical, and rational abilities. As such, it's concerned with verbal, spatial, visual, and mathematical skills. It gauges how readily we learn new things; focus on tasks and exercises; retain and recall objective information; engage in a reasoning process; manipulate numbers; think abstractly as well as analytically; and solve problems by the application of prior knowledge. If you have a high IQâthe average is 100âyou're well equipped to pass all sorts of examinations with flying colors, and (not incidentally) to score well on IQ tests.
All that's fine, yet everyone knows people who could send an IQ test sky-high, but who can't quite make good in either their personal or working lives. They rub others the wrong way; success just doesn't seem to pan out. Much of the time, they can't figure out why.
The reason why is that they're sorely lacking in emotional intelligence, which has been defined in several different ways. Reuven Bar-On called it âan array of non-cognitive capabilities, competencies, and skills that influence one's ability to succeed in coping with environmental demands and pressures.â1 Peter Salovey and Jack Mayer, who created the term âemotional intelligenceâ (as it applies today), describe it as âthe ability to perceive emotions, to access and generate emotions so as to assist thought, to understand emotions and emotional meanings, and to reflectively regulate emotions in ways that promote emotional and intellectual growth.â2 In developing the EQ-i 2.0, emotional intelligence has been defined as âa set of emotional and social skills that influence the way we perceive and express ourselves, develop and maintain social relationships, cope with challenges, and use emotional information in an effective and meaningful way.â3
In other words, it's a set of skills that enables us to make our way in a complex worldâthe personal, social, and survival aspects of overall intelligence, and the elusive common sense and sensitivity that are essential to effective daily functioning. In everyday language emotional intelligence is what we commonly refer to as âstreet smarts,â or that uncommon ability we label âcommon sense.â It has to do with our capacity to objectively assess our strengths, as well as be open to viewing and challenging our limitations, mistaken assumptions, unacknowledged biases, and shortsighted/self-defeating beliefs. Emotional intelligence also encompasses our ability to read the political and social environment, and landscape them; to intuitively grasp what others want and need, what their strengths and weaknesses are; to remain unruffled by stress; and to be engaging and the kind of person others want to be around.
A Brief History of Emotional Intelligence
How did emotional intelligence evolve? Plainly, it evolved along with humankind; the need to cope, to adapt and to get along with others was crucial to the survival of the early hunter-gatherer societies. The human brain reflects this undeniable fact. Sophisticated mapping techniques have recently confirmed that many thought processes pass through the brain's emotional centers as they take the physiological journey that converts outside information into individual action or response.
On the one hand, then, emotional intelligence is as old as time. In the 1870s, Charles Darwin published the first modern book on the role of emotional expression in survival and adaptation.4 However, to gain a practical perspective, we'll focus on the development in the 20th century of the concept of EQ. Back in the 1920s, the American psychologist Edward Thorndike talked about something he called âsocial intelligence.â5 Later, the importance of âemotional factorsâ was recognized by David Wechsler, one of the fathers of IQ testing. In 1940, in a rarely cited paper, Wechsler urged that the ânon-intellective aspects of general intelligenceâ be included in any âcompleteâ measurement.6 This paper also discussed what he called âaffectiveâ and âconativeâ abilitiesâbasically, emotional and social intelligenceâwhich he thought would prove critical to an overall view. Unfortunately, these factors were not included in Wechsler's IQ tests, and little attention was paid to them at the time.
In 1948 another American researcher, R.W. Leeper,7 promoted the idea of âemotional thought,â which he believed contributed to âlogical thought.â But few psychologists or educators pursued this line of questioning until more than 30 years later. (One notable exception was Albert Ellis, who, in 1955, began to explore what would become known as Rational Emotive Behavior Therapyâa process that involved teaching people to examine their emotions in a logical, thoughtful way.8) Then, in 1983, Howard Gardner of Harvard University wrote about the possibility of âmultiple intelligences,â including what he called âintra-physic capacitiesââin essence, an aptitude for introspectionâand âpersonal intelligence.â9
By this time Reuven Bar-On was active in the field and had contributed the phrase âemotional quotientâ or EQ.10 The term âemotional intelligenceâ was coined and formally defined by John (Jack) Mayer of the University of New Hampshire and Peter Salovey of Yale University in 1990.11 They expanded on Professor Gardner's concept, settled on the definition of emotional intelligence cited earlier in this chapter, andâwith their colleague David Carusoâhave since developed an alternative test of emotional intelligence that, unlike the EQ-i (Emotional Quotient Inventory), is not self-reporting but ability-based. This test, called the MSCEIT (Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test) has generated a considerable amount of research over the past nine years.12 We have worked with them in the development of this test in the hope that looking at the phenomenon of emotional intelligence from two different perspectives will shed even more light on this important capacity. Some of the findings are presented later on in this book.
What About Cognitive Intelligence?
During the past 100 years cognitive intelligence and the means by which it's measuredâthat is, IQ and IQ testingâhave dominated society's view of human potential.
In 1905 the French psychologist Alfred Binet, together with his colleague, the psychiatrist Theodore Simon, developed the first formal intelligence test.13 Binet had been asked by the Parisian school commission to come up with a way children could be categorized according to ability. The aim was somewhat less than benign: to weed out the âfeeble-minded,â those who would not benefit from a publicly funded system. Binet had long believed that intelligence was an interlocking process which involved judgment, problem solving, and reasoning. Now he could put his theories into practice. He and Simon completed and published an IQ testâadministered, at first, to childrenâthat enabled him to obtain performance standards for different age groups. These formed the basis of what became known as âmental ages.â The results of a test would give the mental age of a person in relation to average levels of growth and intellectual development.
In 1910 the Binet-Simon test migrated to the United States, where the educator and psychologist Henry Goddard14 founded his own school for the âfeeble-mindedâ in New Jersey. Later the test was modified and standardized for a wider American population by Lewis Terman at Stanford University, began to be administered to both children and adults, and became known as the Stanford-Binet test.15
At this time, the ability to measure cognitive intelligence assumed new importance. Not only could it identify and sidetrack the âfeeble-mindedâ who would benefit only marginally from education, it could pick out those who scored high and could be expected to pu...