Request invitation to discuss with me face to face here website Call: +97150 366 0795
COMMON MISCONCEPTIONS SURROUNDING EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE
Emotional intelligence is emerging as a key attribute of high performing business leaders.
Companies such as American Express have realized the power of using emotional intelligence to recruit
and train top sales people.
Do you hear the words Emotional Intelligence and run screaming in the other direction? Do the
words conjure up a picture of shiny, happy, people holding hands? If so, you may be looking at the
concept of emotional intelligence in the wrong way. In his book, Working With Emotional Intelligence,
Daniel Goleman expells some of the myths surrounding emotional intelligence.
Some of the greatest moments in human history were fueled by emotional intelligence. When Martin Luther
King, Jr. presented his dream, he chose language that would stir the hearts of his audience. Instead of honoring
this sacred obligation to liberty, King thundered, America has given the Negro people a bad check. He
promised that a land sweltering with the heat of oppression could be transformed into an oasis of freedom and
justice, and envisioned a future in which on the red hills of Georgia sons of former slaves and the sons of former
slave-owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood.
Delivering this electrifying message required emotional intelligencethe ability to recognize, understand, and
manage emotions. Dr. King demonstrated remarkable skill in managing his own emotions and in sparking
emotions that moved his audience to action. As his speechwriter Clarence Jones reflected, King delivered a
perfectly balanced outcry of reason and emotion, of anger and hope. His tone of pained indignation matched that
note for note.
Recognizing the power of emotions, another one of the most influential leaders of the 20th century spent years
studying the emotional effects of his body language. Practicing his hand gestures and analyzing images of his
movements allowed him to become an absolutely spellbinding public speaker, says the historian Roger
Moorhouseit was something he worked very hard on. His name was Adolf Hitler.
Since the 1995 publication of Daniel Golemans bestseller, emotional intelligence has been touted by leaders,
policymakers, and educators as the solution to a wide range of social problems. If we can teach our children to
manage emotions, the argument goes, well have less bullying and more cooperation. If we can cultivate emotional
intelligence among leaders and doctors, well have more caring workplaces and more compassionate healthcare.
As a result, emotional intelligence is now taught widely in secondary schools, business schools, and medical
schools.
Emotional intelligence is important, but the unbridled enthusiasm has obscured a dark side. New evidence
shows that when people hone their emotional skills, they become better at manipulating others. When youre good
at controlling your own emotions, you can disguise your true feelings. When you know what others are feeling,
you can tug at their heartstrings and motivate them to act against their own best interests.
Social scientists have begun to document this dark side of emotional intelligence. In emerging research led by
University of Cambridge professor Jochen Menges, when a leader gave an inspiring speech filled with emotion,
the audience was less likely to scrutinize the message and remembered less of the content. Ironically, audience
members were so moved by the speech that they claimed to recall more of it.
The authors call this the awestruck effect, but it might just as easily be described as the dumbstruck effect. One
observer reflected that Hitlers persuasive impact came from his ability to strategically express emotionshe
would tear open his heartand these emotions affected his followers to the point that they would stop thinking
critically and just emote.
Leaders who master emotions can rob us of our capacities to reason. If their values are out of step with our
own, the results can be devastating. New evidence suggests that when people have self-serving motives, emotional
intelligence becomes a weapon for manipulating others. In a study led by the University of Toronto psychologist
Stphane Ct, university employees filled out a survey about their Machiavellian tendencies, and took a test
measuring their knowledge about effective strategies for managing emotions. Then, Cotes team assessed how
often the employees deliberately undermined their colleagues. The employees who engaged in the most harmful
behaviors were Machiavellians with high emotional intelligence. They used their emotional skills to demean and
embarrass their peers for personal gain. In one computer company studied by Tel-Aviv University professor
Gideon Kunda, a manager admitted to telling a colleague how excited we all are with what he is doing, but at
the same time, distancing my organization from the project, so when it blows up, the companys founder
would blame the colleague.
Shining a light on this dark side of emotional intelligence is one mission of a research team led by University
College London professor Martin Kilduff. According to these experts, emotional intelligence helps people disguise
one set of emotions while expressing another for personal gain. Emotionally intelligent people intentionally
shape their emotions to fabricate favorable impressions of themselves, Professor Kilduffs team writes. The
strategic disguise of ones own emotions and the manipulation of others emotions for strategic ends are behaviors
evident not only on Shakespeares stage but also in the offices and corridors where power and influence are
traded.
Of course, people arent always using emotional intelligence for nefarious ends. More often than not, emotional
skills are simply instrumental tools for goal accomplishment. In a study of emotions at the Body Shop, a research
team led by Stanford professor Joanne Martin discovered that founder Anita Roddick leveraged emotions to
inspire her employees to fundraise for charity. As Roddick explained, Whenever we wanted to persuade our staff
to support a particular project we always tried to break their hearts. However, Roddick also encouraged
employees to be strategic in the timing of their emotion expressions. In one case, after noticing that an employee
often breaks down in tears with frustration, Roddick said it was acceptable to cry, but I told her it has to be
used. I said, Here, cry at this point in the ... meeting. When viewing Roddick as an exemplar of an emotionally
intelligent leader, it becomes clear that theres a fine line between motivation and manipulation. Walking that
tightrope is no easy task.
In settings where emotions arent running high, emotional intelligence may have hidden costs. Recently,
psychologists Dana Joseph of the University of Central Florida and Daniel Newman of the University of
Illinois comprehensively analyzed every study that has ever examined the link between emotional intelligence and
job performance. Across hundreds of studies of thousands of employees in 191 different jobs, emotional
intelligence wasnt consistently linked with better performance. In jobs that required extensive attention to
emotions, higher emotional intelligence translated into better performance. Salespeople, real-estate agents, call-
center representatives, and counselors all excelled at their jobs when they knew how to read and regulate emotions
they were able to deal more effectively with stressful situations and provide service with a smile.
However, in jobs that involved fewer emotional demands, the results reversed. The more emotionally intelligent
employees were, the lower their job performance. For mechanics, scientists, and accountants, emotional
intelligence was a liability rather than an asset. Although more research is needed to unpack these results, one
promising explanation is that these employees were paying attention to emotions when they should have been
focusing on their tasks. If your job is to analyze data or repair cars, it can be quite distracting to read the facial
expressions, vocal tones, and body languages of the people around you. In suggesting that emotional intelligence
is critical in the workplace, perhaps weve put the cart before the horse.
Instead of assuming that emotional intelligence is always useful, we need to think more carefully about where
and when it matters. In a recent study at a healthcare company, I asked employees to complete a test about
managing and regulating emotions, and then asked managers to evaluate how much time employees spent helping
their colleagues and customers. There was no relationship whatsoever between emotional intelligence and helping:
Helping is driven by our motivations and values, not by our abilities to understand and manage emotions.
However, emotional intelligence was consequential when examining a different behavior: challenging the status
quo by speaking up with ideas and suggestions for improvement.
Emotionally intelligent employees spoke up more often and more effectively. When colleagues were treated
unjustly, they felt the righteous indignation to speak up, but were able to keep their anger in check and reason with
their colleagues. When they went out on a limb to advocate for gender equity, emotional intelligence helped them
keep their fear at bay. When they brought ideas for innovation to senior leaders, their ability to express enthusiasm
helped them avoid threatening leaders. On a much smaller scale, they were able to follow Martin Luther King Jr.s
lead in rocking the boat while keeping it steady.
----------------------------------------------------
More than two decades have passed since psychologists Peter Salovey at Yale and John Mayer at the University
of New Hampshire introduced the concept of emotional intelligence in 1990. Why has it taken us so long to
develop a more nuanced view? After Daniel Goleman popularized the idea in 1995, many researchersperhaps
awestruck themselves by enthusiasm for the concept of emotional intelligenceproceeded to conduct studies that
were fatally flawed. As University of Lausanne professor John Antonakis observed, practice and voodoo science
is running way ahead of rigorous research.
One of the most persistent problems was the use of self-report measures, which asked employees to rate their
own emotional abilities on items like I can tell how people are feeling even if they never tell me and I am
generally very good at calming someone down when he or she is upset. Abilities cannot be accurately measured
with self-reports. As emotion experts Sigal Barsade of Wharton and Donald Gibson of Fairfield University lament,
One might compare this approach to assessing mathematical skills by asking respondents, How good are you at
solving algebraic equations? rather than asking the person to actually solve an algebraic equation.
Thanks to more rigorous research methods, there is growing recognition that emotional intelligencelike any
skillcan be used for good or evil. So if were going to teach emotional intelligence in schools and develop it at
work, we need to consider the values that go along with it and where its actually useful. As Professor Kilduff and
colleagues put it, it is high time that emotional intelligence is pried away from its association with desirable
moral qualities.
1. Misconception: the theory of mindset says that anyone can learn and
achieve anything
2. Misconception: the theory of mindset says that anyone either has a
fixed or a growth mindset
3. Misconception: not much can be done about what kind of mindset you
have
4. Misconception: the theory of mindset is only about intelligence
5. Misconception: people with a growth mindset are obsessive about
learning and always want to be the best
6. Misconception: improving learning and performance is purely a matter
of changing mindsets
7. Misconception: the concept of mindset is only about children
8. Misconception: the concept of the growth mindset puts too much
pressure on children
9. Misconception: the theory of mindset is only useful for individuals
10. Misconception: the concept of mindset is not relevant for people with
an intellectual disability
After a little dissecting its clear that the top two characteristics are really the driving force
behind everything else.
They are the key to it all. In Trevor terms these are the Makers & Breakers of the mindsets.
We can use these two characteristics as a guide to help us understand where we (and our
students are) on the mindset spectrum at any given time.
Its time to build a matrix together. Lets start at the top with the core belief of the two mindsets:
Maker & Breaker #1: Beliefs Towards Learning
People with a fixed mindset believe that things like skills and intelligence are set and you have
what you have. So in short they do NOT believe in their ability to learn and grow. This has long and
short term ramifications that well look at in a second.
People with a growth mindset believe that skills and intelligence can be grown and developed
that they are in control of their ability to learn and grow.
So
Enter Maker & Breaker #2
Maker & Breaker #2: Main Focus/Main Concern
The #1 priority of someone with a fixed mindset (in any situation) is how they look. We can call
this performance focus.
The #1 priority of someone with a growth mindset is learning and getting better process
focus
When these are added to the matrix things get interesting
Lets look at these boxes and see how they impact our ability to learn.
Box #1 Breakdown
People in Box #1 do not believe in their ability to learn and grow (fixed mindset). This can be
their belief towards a certain subject, skill, or even a particular project: I am not a math person,
Ill never be able to figure this out, Im just not a dancer, I cant shoot, I am just naturally good
at drawing its a gift and I dont need to work at it.
BUT
The good news is that theyre not obsessed with what others think of them (priority #1 is NOT
how they look).
However, because of their fixed mindset approach to learning they are likely to give up when
they cant figure something out right away and theyre likely to avoid new and challenging
situations.
The Approach to Learning Emoji Score:
Box #2 Breakdown
People in Box #2 believe in their ability to learn and develop (growth mindset). This is hard but I
can figure it out, I am good at math because Ive worked hard, If I want to get better at shooting,
Ill need to practice more.
AND
Rather than obsessing over how they look their #1 priority is learning and getting better. Theyre
more concerned with the process than performance. They are down to get a little ugly because
they know that is how they learn.
People in this box are able to thrive in the wild and deal with all of the difficulties, mistakes, and
failures that come with learning.
Box #3 Breakdown
People in Box #3 do not believe in their ability to learn and grow (fixed mindset). This can be
their belief towards a certain subject, skill, or even a particular project: I am not a math person,
Ill never be able to figure this out, Im just not a dancer, I cant shoot, I am just naturally good
at drawing its a gift and I dont need to work at it.
AND
Their #1 priority is how they look.
This group is the MOST likely to give up and avoid challenges, get defensive when they get
feedback, and absolutely freak out when they make mistakes.
And its easy to see why. They dont ever want to look bad AND they dont believe in their ability
to learn. Not really a healthy approach to learning, eh?
The Approach to Learning Emoji Score:
Box #4 Breakdown
People in Box #4 believe in their ability to learn and develop (growth mindset). This is hard but I
can figure it out, I am good at math because Ive worked hard, If I want to get better at shooting
Ill need to practice more.
BUT
They are so worried about looking bad that they miss out and avoid opportunities to learn.
This is why a lot of us cant dance
We WANT to learn, we would love to be good at it, but we are so worried about looking bad that
we avoid getting the reps needed to get good at it.
Using the Matrix
In a recent interview, Carol Dweck touched on some of the major misconceptions and hurdles
involved with the growth mindset. One of the biggest (and I agree with her 100%) problems she
has noticed is coaches, teachers, and parents telling their kids that its important to have a growth
mindset but their practice and actions dont reflect this at all. They still punish mistakes, they still
create a culture that values performance over process, they still label kids and tell them what they
can and cant do
Hopefully this matrix can help change that.
Hang this by your desk, in the locker room, or in the gym as reminder. Ask yourself what box
does your group culture align with? What box does your feedback put a student in? What box are
you in? What box are they in?
By MindShift NOVEMBER 16, 2015 By Eduardo Briceo
A growth mindset is the understanding that personal qualities and abilities can change. It leads
people to take on challenges, persevere in the face of setbacks, and become more effective learners.
As more and more people learn about the growth mindset, which was first discovered by Stanford
Professor Carol Dweck, we sometimes observe some confusions about it. Recently some critiques have
emerged. Of course we invite critical analysis and feedback, as it helps all of us learn and improve, but
some of the recent commentary seems to point to misunderstandings of growth mindset research and
practice. This article summarizes some common confusions and offers some reflections.
Confusion #1: What a growth mindset is
When we ask people to tell us what the growth mindset is, we often get lots of different answers, such
as working hard, having high expectations, being resilient, or more general ideas like being open or
flexible. But a growth mindset is none of those things. It is the belief that qualities can change and that
we can develop our intelligence and abilities. The opposite of having a growth mindset is having a fixed
mindset, which is the belief that intelligence and abilities cannot be developed. The reason that this
definition of growth mindset is important is that research has shown that this specific belief leads
people to take on challenges, work harder and more effectively, and persevere in the face of struggle, all
of which makes people more successful learners. It is hard to directly change these behaviors without
also working to change the underlying understanding of the nature of abilities.
Confusion #2: To foster a growth mindset, simply praise children for working hard
A body of research has shown that telling children that theyre smart and implying that their success
depends on it fosters fixed mindsets. When these children later experience struggle, they tend to
conclude that their ability is not high after all, and as a result they lose confidence, so our praise has the
opposite effect of what we intended. On the other hand, praising hard work or strategies used, things
that children control, has been shown to support a growth mindset.
This research was designed to learn more about one of the ways to support a growth mindset, not to
identify all there is to fostering a growth mindset. When people newer to the growth mindset framework
initially learn about this research, they sometimes conclude that we should simply praise children for
working hard. But this is a nascent level of understanding. First, exhorting students to work hard would
be an attempt to directly change behaviors without changing the underlying belief about the nature of
abilities.
Second, students often havent learned that working hard involves thinking hard, which involves
reflecting on and changing our strategies so we become more and more effective learners over time, and
we need to guide them to come to understand this. For example, a novice teacher who sees a student
trying very hard but not making any progress may think well, at least shes working hard, so Ill praise
her effort, but if the student continues to do what shes doing, or even more of it, its unlikely to lead to
success. Instead, the teacher can coach the student to try different approaches to working, studying, and
learning, so that she is thinking more deeply (i.e. mentally working harder) to become a better learner,
and of course the teacher should do the same: reflect on how to adjust instruction. Its not just about
effort. You also need to learn skills that let you use your brain in a smarter way. . . to get better at
something. (Yeager & Dweck, 2012.)
Third, cultivating growth mindsets involves a gradual process of releasing responsibility to students
for them to become more self-sufficient learners, and praise is a communications technique that tends
to be more helpful earlier in that process of building agency. Later on, adults can ask students questions
that prompt them to reflect, so that theyre progressing down the path toward independence.
Fourth, praise and coaching are not the only, or most powerful, ways to foster growth mindsets. For
example, another method is modeling lifelong learning and making it visible, which gets us to the next
confusion.
Confusion #3: Growth mindset is about changing young people, not adults
Some recent criticisms paint growth mindset work as solely focused on the students and not the
adults. This is a misunderstanding of what growth mindset efforts are about. In our work with
educators, we encourage the adults to start with themselves. If we dont work to shift our own mindset
about ourselves and our students, then we wont work to change many other important things in the
system necessary to improve education. Furthermore, our efforts to foster growth mindsets in students
are likely to fail because we will say and do things that reflect our fixed mindset beliefs, which students
will notice. We must deeply explore mindsets within ourselves and then gradually work to develop our
own growth mindsets and our habits as learners. This means authentically working to become better at
what we do throughout our lives, including how we teach and how we create contexts that help students
thrive, and making our learning process visible to one another and to students.
We encourage the schools we serve to train teachers early in their growth mindset efforts, involving
reflections and discussions on adult beliefs and continuous improvement practices. We
provide professional learning resources to help them do so. Dr. Dweck and other mindset researchers
speak about the importance of fostering a growth mindset in adults and have researched the mindsets of
educators, managers, leaders, and other grownups. Growth mindset research is about learning how we
humans can all become more motivated and effective learners, not about how we can change students
but not ourselves.
Confusion #4: All that matters is whats in the mind
Another confusion about mindset is that the only determinant of success is our mindset. But thats
not the case. Context, culture, environment, and systems matter. For one thing, peoples mindsets (as
well as other beliefs and behaviors) are strongly shaped by the people around them. Beyond that,
peoples destiny is not only a function of whats within them, but also of whats around them. A lot of the
early mindset research studies focused on individuals minds because they were seeking to understand
how humans work. But mindset researchers recognize, research, and speak about the importance of
shifting culture, context, and systems, and both researchers and practitioners actively work on that
aspect of change efforts.
Confusion #5: Improvement is all about changing beliefs and not doing anything else
Related to that, another confusion we see, also reflected in recent commentaries, is that growth
mindset work is solely about fostering the belief that we can improve, but not about changing the
educational system or actually doing anything about that belief. Carol Dweck has talked extensively
about changing learning tasks, testing practices, and grading systems. Too many tasks and teaching
approaches are superficial, irrelevant, unengaging, and not learner-centered. We do need to change
these tasks, the curriculum, and the pedagogy. We need to change the idea that school is about testing
rather than about learning. We also need to better tackle broader issues such as childhood trauma and
lack of exposure to early reading. People who dive deeper into growth mindsets learn about how
important these issues are and how we might begin to address them, and a growth mindset helps them
take on the challenges. As David Yeager and Gregory Walton point out:
[Mindset] interventions complementand do not replacetraditional educational reforms. They do
not teach students academic content or skills, restructure schools, or improve teacher training.
Instead, they allow students to take better advantage of learning opportunities that are present in
schools and tap into existing recursive processes to generate long-lasting effects . . . Indeed, [Mindset]
interventions may make the effects of high-quality educational reforms such as improved instruction
or curricula more apparent (Yeager & Walton, 2011).
Deepening our understanding over time
As with anything else, the deeper we go into mindsets, the deeper our understanding becomes. Over
time, more nuanced questions arise, such as about the relationship between mindset and performance,
results, failure, potential, assessments, mistakes, and many other things. For example, early on a teacher
who is learning about mindset may start oversimplifying mistakes as always being good, but this can
confuse learners, as mistakes are not always something we should seek to do. With time we start
distinguishing stretch mistakes, sloppy mistakes, aha-moment mistakes, and high-stakes mistakes.