This chapter examines EI, presents a history of EI including the various models, and a discussion of the three streams approach to classifying EI literature. The author advocates…
Abstract
This chapter examines EI, presents a history of EI including the various models, and a discussion of the three streams approach to classifying EI literature. The author advocates for the efficacy of the Stream One Ability Model (SOAM) of EI citing previous authors and literature. The commonly used SOAM instruments are discussed in light of recent studies. The discussion turns to alternate tests of the SOAM of EI including Situational Judgment Tests (SJTs). Recommendations include an analysis of SOAM instruments, a new approach to measurement, and increased use of SJTs to capture the four-branch ability model of EI.
Details
Keywords
In 1990, Salovey and Mayer presented a framework for emotional intelligence (EI). This marked the beginning of 20 years of academic research, development, and debate on the…
Abstract
Purpose
In 1990, Salovey and Mayer presented a framework for emotional intelligence (EI). This marked the beginning of 20 years of academic research, development, and debate on the subject of EI. A significant amount of previous research has attempted to draw out the relationship between EI and leadership performance. EI has been a uniquely controversial area of the social sciences. EI is based on three simple yet fundamental premises. This manuscript reviews the definitions and models in the field of EI with special emphasis on the Mayer ability model and the connection between EI and leadership. The paper aims to discuss these issues.
Design/methodology/approach
This paper takes the form of a literature review.
Findings
EI appears to have a foothold in both our popular vernacular and our academic lexicon. However, it is not entirely clear what future form it will take.
Originality/value
This manuscript explores the current relationship between EI and leadership, discusses the various instruments and scales used to measure the construct, and examines the controversy and criticism surrounding EI. Finally, it illuminates some areas for additional research.
Details
Keywords
Legalists and social scientists have not been able to explain the expansion of gay rights in a conservative age because they refuse to respect the special qualities of judicial…
Abstract
Legalists and social scientists have not been able to explain the expansion of gay rights in a conservative age because they refuse to respect the special qualities of judicial decision making. These qualities require the Supreme Court to look simultaneously at the past, present, and future, and, most importantly, to determine questions of individual rights through a consideration of how citizens are to live under a continuing rights regime. Unless scholars understand how and why Supreme Court decision making differs from that of more directly politically accountable institutions we can expect no greater success in explaining or predicting individual rights in the future.