Does EIQ still have a place in the new era of business?

I was first introduced to the concepts of Emotional Intelligence Quotient (EIQ) over ten years ago. I went through an assessment that acknowledged my ability to identify whether I was happy or sad; whether I could recognize happiness or sadness in others; whether I would react with the appropriate emotional come-back; and whether I could monitor my own levels of happiness or sadness. When you are working with people, all this sort of stuff can be really useful, right?

Based on my obvious curious nature, I read books and articles, mostly through Harvard Business Review and the sensationalized works of Daniel Goldman. These resources marketed the benefits of knowing your EIQ and the your colleague's EIQ. We all walked around diagnosing each other - "high empathy", "low mood monitoring", etc. After the initial interest died down, we discussed how this could add value to our hiring and development practices with future leaders.

When hiring potential candidates, EIQ used in isolation can be costly. By relying on what an assessment tools concludes as being a candidate's natural tendencies, is very different than how a candidate would act in a real-life situation. That is why I would always recommend utilizing behaviour based questions in tandem with the EIQ assessment to determine whether a candidate will be a good fit for the role and organization. Likewise, when developing future leaders. I would not rely of the EIQ summary to help determine the promotion or succession plan of our next CEO. EIQ is a data point and can change based on a person's circumstances, context and time spent reviewing and answering the questions. Folded into a leadership development program that includes 360-degree, mentoring and professional and/or peer coaching can be very effective.

Here are some thoughts from other HR pros:
http://www.linkedin.com/answers/career-education/mentoring/CAR_MEN/326556-933031

I took another EIQ assessment a few weeks. Night and day difference from the one I took 10 years ago.

The Better Manager: Women vs. Men. Is there a difference?

Some think yes. Some academics have studied the results (don't ask me to insert a link 'cause I don't have one). Being a woman and HR, I don't reallyhave a preference as long as there are leaders that can transform an organization when needed, can act with empathy, and can get results with their people.

Others have very clear ideas about women leading versus men leading. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/26/business/26corner.html?8dpc=&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1248613279-JEW0dz7C3wWnMeo7TQyxSw

You decide.

I have found though, in the tech community, women make up only 15-20% of a company's demographics. They want leadership roles, but struggle to be heard. There is a secret expectation that their skills should be obvious to the men who make most of the decisions regarding performance and promotions. Not so! In a heavily male dominated industry, women may need to stand out more and acquire a different tool kit to be heard.

Here's a few resources to look at:

Women Leading Women at http://www.tekara.com/learning_wlw.html

Effective Public Speaking (12 week course, BCIT, MKTG 1323)

Organizational Influence and Persuasion (12 week course, BCIT, ORGB 2455

HR Training: Compensation and Benefits 101

Need to brush up on the foundations of compensation practices, or understand which federal laws impact compensation and benefits decisions, or need to put in place multiple country compensation programs, why not check out ERI.

The Economic Research Institute or ERI has a wide range of online self-study resources for all things relating to compensation and benefits. You can sign up for online sessions immediately for free. Or if you pay $25 you can receive accreditation towards your PHR, SPHR, GPHR.

http://www.eridlc.com/