Competencies in the 21st Century 9781846637414, 9781846637407

Citation preview

jmd cover (i).qxd

31/01/2008

10:11

Page 1

ISSN 0262-1711

Volume 27 Number 1 2008

Journal of

Management Development Competencies in the 21st century Guest Editor: Richard E. Boyatzis

www.emeraldinsight.com

Journal of

ISSN 0262-1711

Management Development

Volume 27 Number 1 2008

Competencies in the 21st century Guest Editor Richard E. Boyatzis

Access this journal online ______________________________

3

Editorial boards __________________________________________

4

Guest editorial Competencies in the twenty-first century Richard E. Boyatzis_____________________________________________

5

Social and emotional competencies predicting success for male and female executives Margaret M. Hopkins and Diana Bilimoria _________________________

13

Characteristics that distinguish outstanding urban principals: emotional intelligence, social intelligence and environmental adaptation Helen W. Williams _____________________________________________

36

Emotional intelligence competencies in the team and team leader: a multi-level examination of the impact of emotional intelligence on team performance Elizabeth Stubbs Koman and Steven B. Wolff _______________________

Access this journal electronically The current and past volumes of this journal are available at:

www.emeraldinsight.com/0262-1711.htm You can also search more than 175 additional Emerald journals in Emerald Management Xtra (www.emeraldinsight.com) See page following contents for full details of what your access includes.

55

CONTENTS

CONTENTS continued

Identifying competencies that predict effectiveness of R&D managers Christine R. Dreyfus ____________________________________________

76

A 20-year view of trying to develop emotional, social and cognitive intelligence competencies in graduate management education Richard E. Boyatzis and Argun Saatcioglu __________________________

92

The impact of learning goals on emotional, social, and cognitive intelligence competency development David C. Leonard ______________________________________________

109

The impact of social environments on emotional, social, and cognitive competency development Jane V. Wheeler _______________________________________________

129

The beat and rhythm of competency development over two years Kenneth S. Rhee _______________________________________________

146

Call for papers ___________________________________________

161

www.emeraldinsight.com/jmd.htm As a subscriber to this journal, you can benefit from instant, electronic access to this title via Emerald Management Xtra. Your access includes a variety of features that increase the value of your journal subscription.

Structured abstracts Emerald structured abstracts provide consistent, clear and informative summaries of the content of the articles, allowing faster evaluation of papers.

How to access this journal electronically

Additional complimentary services available

To benefit from electronic access to this journal, please contact [email protected] A set of login details will then be provided to you. Should you wish to access via IP, please provide these details in your e-mail. Once registration is completed, your institution will have instant access to all articles through the journal’s Table of Contents page at www.emeraldinsight.com/0262-1711.htm More information about the journal is also available at www.emeraldinsight.com/ jmd.htm

Your access includes a variety of features that add to the functionality and value of your journal subscription:

Our liberal institution-wide licence allows everyone within your institution to access your journal electronically, making your subscription more cost-effective. Our web site has been designed to provide you with a comprehensive, simple system that needs only minimum administration. Access is available via IP authentication or username and password. Emerald online training services Visit www.emeraldinsight.com/training and take an Emerald online tour to help you get the most from your subscription.

Key features of Emerald electronic journals Automatic permission to make up to 25 copies of individual articles This facility can be used for training purposes, course notes, seminars etc. This only applies to articles of which Emerald owns copyright. For further details visit www.emeraldinsight.com/ copyright Online publishing and archiving As well as current volumes of the journal, you can also gain access to past volumes on the internet via Emerald Management Xtra. You can browse or search these databases for relevant articles. Key readings This feature provides abstracts of related articles chosen by the journal editor, selected to provide readers with current awareness of interesting articles from other publications in the field. Non-article content Material in our journals such as product information, industry trends, company news, conferences, etc. is available online and can be accessed by users. Reference linking Direct links from the journal article references to abstracts of the most influential articles cited. Where possible, this link is to the full text of the article. E-mail an article Allows users to e-mail links to relevant and interesting articles to another computer for later use, reference or printing purposes.

Xtra resources and collections When you register your journal subscription online you will gain access to additional resources for Authors and Librarians, offering key information and support to subscribers. In addition, our dedicated Research, Teaching and Learning Zones provide specialist ‘‘How to guides’’, case studies and interviews and you can also access Emerald Collections, including book reviews, management interviews and key readings. E-mail alert services These services allow you to be kept up to date with the latest additions to the journal via e-mail, as soon as new material enters the database. Further information about the services available can be found at www.emeraldinsight.com/alerts Emerald Research Connections An online meeting place for the world-wide research community, offering an opportunity for researchers to present their own work and find others to participate in future projects, or simply share ideas. Register yourself or search our database of researchers at www.emeraldinsight.com/connections

Choice of access Electronic access to this journal is available via a number of channels. Our web site www.emeraldinsight.com is the recommended means of electronic access, as it provides fully searchable and value added access to the complete content of the journal. However, you can also access and search the article content of this journal through the following journal delivery services: EBSCOHost Electronic Journals Service ejournals.ebsco.com Informatics J-Gate www.j-gate.informindia.co.in Ingenta www.ingenta.com Minerva Electronic Online Services www.minerva.at OCLC FirstSearch www.oclc.org/firstsearch SilverLinker www.ovid.com SwetsWise www.swetswise.com

Emerald Customer Support For customer support and technical help contact: E-mail [email protected] Web www.emeraldinsight.com/customercharter Tel +44 (0) 1274 785278 Fax +44 (0) 1274 785201

JMD 27,1

4

EDITORIAL ADVISORY BOARD Khalid Al-Sulaiti Institute of Administrative Development, Qatar University, Qatar Steven Appelbaum Concordia University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada Terry L. Campbell University of Cincinnati, USA Adrian Carr Faculty of Commerce, University of Western Sydney, Australia Irene Chow Chinese University of Hong Kong David Crookall National University of Singapore, Republic of Singapore Rocky J. Dwyer Faculty of Philosophy, St Paul’s University, Ottawa, Canada Robert Fulmer Distinguished Visiting Professor, Graziadio School of Business, Pepperdine University, Los Angeles, USA Kim Turnbull James Cranfield School of Management, UK U.C. Jha LIET, Rajasthan University, India Bernard Keys Director, Center for Managerial Learning and Business Simulation, Statesboro, USA D. Kolb Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, USA Derrick Kon President, Center for Effective Organizations, Singapore Alexander Kouzmin Adjunct Professor, School of Management, University of South Australia, NSW, Australia Romie F. Littrell Auckland University of Technology, New Zealand Manuel London Harriman Hall, Stony Brook, New York, USA Pam McCarthy Principal Leadership and OD Consultant, Claremont School, Surrey, UK Charles Margerison Founding Editor Frederic Nortier Right Management Consultants, Lyon Cedex, France R. Roskin Memorial University, Newfoundland, Canada Lawson Savery Adjunct Professor, Southern Cross University, Losmore, NSW, Australia John R. Schermerhorn Jr Ohio University, Ohio, USA T.T. Rajan Selvarajan Assistant Professor, School of Business, University of Houston-Victoria, Texas, USA Geoff Sheard Flakt Woods Ltd, Colchester, UK Norihiko Suzuki Social Science Division, International Christian University, Tokyo David Thompson Consulting Director, Severstal Corporate University, Tyne & Wear, UK

EDITORIAL REVIEW BOARD

Journal of Management Development Vol. 27 No. 1, 2008 p. 4 # Emerald Group Publishing Limited 0262-1711

Abbas J. Ali Indiana University of Pennsylvania, Indiana, USA Sue Browell National Learning & Development, Ernst & Young, Birmingham, UK Richard L. Bunning Phoenix Associates UK Ltd, Rainford, UK Roy Canning University of Stirling, Stirling, UK Kai-Ming Cheng University of Hong Kong, Department of Education, Hong Kong John K.S. Chong Southeastern Oklahoma State University, Oklahoma, USA Irene Hau-Siu Chow The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Department of Management, Hong Kong S.R. Devadasan PSG College of Technology, Tamil Nadu, India Mary J. Granger George Washington University, Washington DC, USA George T. Haley University of New Haven, Connecticut, USA

Lloyd C. Harris Cardiff Business School, Cardiff, UK Keith M. Henderson State University of New York, Buffalo, USA Edward A. Henninger Pennsylvania College of Technology, Pennsylvania, USA John L. Hunsucker University of Houston, Houston, USA Ben Dozie Ilozor Eastern Michigan University, USA Muayyad Jabri University of New England, Armidale, NSW, Australia Rajashekharaiah Jagadeesh Karnataka, India Robert Jones Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Australia Karen Ketler Eastern Illinois University, USA Geoff Lancaster Huddersfield, UK Conrad Lashley Leeds Metropolitan University, Leeds, UK Monica Lee Lancaster University, UK Donald L. Lester Middle Tennessee State University, Murfreesboro, USA Maurice B. Line Harrogate, UK Marjolein Lips-Wiersma University of Canterbury, Christchurch, NZ Peter J. Lloyd Consultant, Asfield, NSW, Australia Bruce Macfarlane Thames Valley University, London Marie McHugh University of Ulster, Co. Antrim, UK Michael J. Marquardt George Washington University, Virginia, USA Sharon Mavin University of Northumbria at Newcastle, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK Abainesh Mitiku West Virginia State College, West Virginia, USA Robert M. Myers Palm Beach Atlantic College, West Palm Beach, Florida, USA Robert W. Rowden Mercer University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA Jennifer E. Rowley Edge Hill College of Higher Education, UK Janat Shah Indian Institute of Management, Bangalore Marc Siegall California State University, USA Philip H. Siegel Fairleigh Dickinson University, Rutherford, NJ, USA Jim Stewart Leeds Business School, Leeds, UK Dr Stephen Swailes The Business School, University of Hull, UK Syed Amin Tabish S.K. Institute of Medical Sciences, Kashmir, India Tuomo Takala University of Jyva¨skyla¨, Finland Richard J. Varey The Waikato Management School, University of Waikato, Hamilton, NZ Albert A. Vicere Pennsylvania State University, Pennsylvania, USA Daniel Vloeberghs University of Antwerp, Belgium Barron Wells College of Business Administration, La Fayette, Louisiana, USA Penny West Edge Hill University College, UK Adrian Wilkinson Griffith Business School, Griffith University, Queensland, Australia Elliot Wood Curtin Graduate School of Business, Perth, Australia Darwish A. Yousef United Arab Emirates University, Al Ain, United Arab Emirates

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0262-1711.htm

GUEST EDITORIAL

Competencies in the 21st century

Competencies in the 21st century

Richard E. Boyatzis Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, USA Abstract Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to show that development of competencies needed to be effective managers and leaders requires program design and teaching methods focused on learning. This is the introductory essay to this special issue of JMD. Design/methodology/approach – Competencies are defined and an overview is provided for the eight papers that will follow with original research on competencies, their link to performance in various occupations, and their development. Findings – Emotional, social and cognitive intelligence competencies predict effectiveness in professional, management and leadership roles in many sectors of society. In addition, these competencies can be developed in adults. Research limitations/implications – As an introductory essay, this lays the foundation for the papers in this issue. Practical implications – Competencies needed to be effective can be developed. Originality/value – Despite widespread application, there are few published studies of the empirical link between competencies and performance. There are even fewer published studies showing that they can be developed. This special issue will add to both literatures.

5 Received 20 April 2007 Revised 20 August 2007 Accepted 31 August 2007

Keywords Emotional intelligence, Intelligence, Competences, Assessment Paper type General review

The concept of competency-based human resources has gone from a new technique to a common practice in the 35 years since David McClelland (1973) first proposed them as a critical differentiator of performance. Today, almost every organization with more than 300 people uses some form of competency-based human resource management. Major consulting companies, such as The Hay Group, Development Dimensions International, and Personnel Decisions Incorporated and thousands of small consulting firms and independent consultants have become worldwide practitioners of competency assessment and development. And yet, the academic and applied research literature has trailed application. This has resulted in continued skepticism on the part of many academics and some professionals, and less guidance to practitioners from on-going research than is helpful. Some of this is due to the observation that many of the competency validation studies have been done by consultants who have little patience for the laborious process of documenting and getting the results published. This special issue of the Journal of Management Development is devoted to updating our understanding of competencies, how they drive performance and how they are developed. In it, we offer four articles showing the relationship between demonstrated emotional, social, and cognitive intelligence competencies and performance in various occupations, from bank executives to public school principals to R&D managers to military pilots. We also offer four articles showing how these same competencies can be developed in adults. All of the studies in this special issue have been completed by doctoral students as their dissertations or doctoral student/faculty collaborations in the

Journal of Management Development Vol. 27 No. 1, 2008 pp. 5-12 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited 0262-1711 DOI 10.1108/02621710810840730

JMD 27,1

6

Department of Organizational Behavior at Case Western Reserve University. Before getting into each of the articles, let us examine what competencies are. What is a competency? A competency is defined as a capability or ability. It is a set of related but different sets of behavior organized around an underlying construct, which we call the “intent”. The behaviors are alternate manifestations of the intent, as appropriate in various situations or times. For example, listening to someone and asking him or her questions are several behaviors. A person can demonstrate these behaviors for multiple reasons or to various intended ends. A person can ask questions and listen to someone to ingratiate him or herself or to appear interested, thereby gaining standing in the other person’s view. Or a person can ask questions and listen to someone because he or she is interested in understanding this other person, his or her priorities, or thoughts in a situation. The latter we would call a demonstration of empathy. The underlying intent is to understand the person. Meanwhile, the former underlying reason for the questions is to gain standing or impact in the person’s view, elements of what we may call demonstration of influence. Similarly, the underlying intent of a more subtle competency like Emotional Self-Awareness is self-insight and self-understanding. This construction of competencies as requiring both action (i.e. a set of alternate behaviors) and intent called for measurement methods that allowed for assessment of both the presence of the behavior and inference of the intent. A modification of the critical incident interview (Flanagan, 1954) was adapted using the inquiry sequence from the Thematic Apperception Test and the focus on specific events in one’s life from the biodata method (Dailey, 1971). Later, informant assessment through 360 or assessment center and simulations coded by reliable “experts” are essential. This is a behavioral approach to a person’s talent. The anchor for understanding which behaviors and which intent is relevant in a situation emerges from predicting effectiveness. The construction of the specific competency is a matter of relating different behaviors that are considered alternate manifestations of the same underlying construct. But they are organized primarily or more accurately initially, by the similarity of the consequence of the use of these behaviors in social or work settings. A theory of performance is the basis for the concept of competency. The theory used in this approach is a basic contingency theory, as shown in Figure 1. Maximum performance is believed to occur when the person’s capability or talent is consistent with the needs of the job demands and the organizational environment (Boyatzis, 1982). The person’s talent is described by his or her: values, vision, and personal philosophy; knowledge; competencies; life and career stage; interests; and style. Job demands can be described by the role responsibilities and tasks needed to be performed. Aspects of the organizational environment that are predicted to have important impact on the demonstration of competencies and/or the design of the jobs an roles include: culture and climate; structure and systems; maturity of the industry and strategic positioning within it; and aspects of the economic, political, social, environmental, and religious milieu surrounding the organization. The first four articles offered in this special issue are competency validation studies in four different types of professional occupations. Research published over the last 30 years or so shows us that outstanding leaders, managers, advanced professionals and people in key jobs, from sales to bank tellers,

Competencies in the 21st century

7

Figure 1. Theory of action and job performance: best fit (maximum performance, stimulation, and commitmentÞ ¼ area of maximum overlap or integration

appear to require three clusters of behavioral habits as threshold abilities and three clusters of competencies as distinguishing outstanding performance. The threshold clusters of competencies are: (1) expertise and experience is a threshold level of competency; (2) knowledge (i.e. declarative, procedural, functional and metacognitive) is a threshold competency; and (3) an assortment of basic cognitive competencies, such as memory and deductive reasoning are threshold competencies. There are three clusters of competencies differentiating outstanding from average performers in many countries of the world (Bray et al., 1974; Boyatzis, 1982; Kotter, 1982; Luthans et. al., 1988; Howard and Bray, 1988; Campbell et al., 1970; Spencer and Spencer, 1993; Goleman, 1998; Goleman et al., 2002). They are: (1) cognitive competencies, such as systems thinking and pattern recognition; (2) emotional intelligence competencies, including self-awareness and self-management competencies, such as emotional self-awareness and emotional self-control; and (3) social intelligence competencies, including social awareness and relationship management competencies, such as empathy and teamwork. Competencies are a behavioral approach to emotional, social, and cognitive intelligence.

JMD 27,1

8

Competencies as behavioral manifestations of talent While other interpretations of “intelligence” are offered in the literature, we believe that to be classified as “an intelligence,” the concept should be: . Behaviorally observable. . Related to biological and in particular neural-endocrine functioning. That is, each cluster should be differentiated as to the type of neural circuitry and endocrine system involved. . Related to life and job outcomes. . Sufficiently different from other personality constructs that the concept adds value to understanding the human personality and behavior. . The measures of the concept, as a psychological construct, should satisfy the basic criteria for a sound measure, that is show convergent and discriminant validity. An integrated concept of emotional, social, and cognitive intelligence competencies offers more than a convenient framework for describing human dispositions. It offers a theoretical structure for the organization of personality and linking it to a theory of action and job performance. Goleman (1998) defined an “emotional competence” as a “learned capability based on emotional intelligence which results in outstanding performance at work”. In other words, if a competency is an “underlying characteristic of the person that leads to or causes effective or superior performance” (Boyatzis, 1982), then: . an emotional, intelligence competency is an ability to recognize, understand, and use emotional information about oneself that leads to or causes effective or superior performance; . a social intelligence competency is the ability to recognize, understand and use emotional information about others that leads to or causes effective or superior performance; and . a cognitive intelligence competency is an ability to think or analyze information and situations that leads to or causes effective or superior performance. If defined as a single construct, the tendency to believe that more effective people have the vital ingredients for success invites the attribution of a halo effect. For example, person A is effective, therefore she has all of the right stuff, such as brains, savvy, and style. Like the issue of finding the best “focal point” with which to look at something, the dilemma of finding the best level of detail in defining constructs with which to build a personality theory may ultimately be an issue of which focal point is chosen. The separate competencies, like the clusters, are, we believe, the most helpful focal point for description and study of performance. Competencies and a holistic theory of personality The specification of a competency comes from the personality theory on which this approach is based. McClelland (1951) originally described a theory of personality as comprised of the relationships among a person’s unconscious motives, self-schema, and observed behavioral patterns. Boyatzis (1982) offered this scheme as an integrated system diagram that showed concentric circles, with the person’s unconscious motives

and trait dispositions at the center. These affected, and were affected by, the next expanding circle of the person’s values and self-image. The surrounding circle was labeled the skill level. The circle surrounding it included observed, specific behaviors. The synthesis of Goleman (1995) in developing the concept of emotional intelligence and Goleman (2006) into the concept of social intelligence provided yet another layer to this integrated system view of personality. In particular, Goleman’s synthesis introduced the physiological level to this model by relating findings from neuroscience, biology, and medical studies to psychological states and resulting behavior. The result is a personality theory, as shown in Figure 2, that incorporates and predicts the relationship among a person’s: . neural circuits and endocrine (i.e. hormonal) processes; . unconscious dispositions called motives and traits; . values and operating philosophy; . observed separate competencies; and . competency clusters.

Competencies in the 21st century

9

This conceptualization of personality requires a more holistic perspective than is often taken. When integrating the physiological level with the psychological and behavioral levels, a more comprehensive view of the human emerges. The evidence of the causal sequence predicted in this personality theory is emerging but is slow due to the disparate nature of the different fields studying parts of the model. For example,

Figure 2. Levels within the personality structure structure

JMD 27,1

10

arousal of a person’s power motive both causes and is affected by arousal of his or her sympathetic nervous system (i.e. SNS) (Boyatzis et al., 2006). When a person’s power motive is aroused, he or she is more likely to show behavior associated with a group of competencies called Influence, Inspirational Leadership, or Change Catalyst (Winter et al., 1981; McClelland, 1985). Boyatzis and Sala (2004) showed that these competencies form an empirical cluster of emotional and social intelligence competencies as assessed through the Emotional Competency Inventory and now Emotional and Social Competency Inventory (ECI). These competencies are shown more frequently when a person is operating from a Humanistic versus a Pragmatic Operating Philosophy (Boyatzis et al., 2000). When the power motive is aroused along with a person’s self-control at the trait level (McClelland and Boyatzis, 1982; McClelland, 1985), the stressful effects of inhibiting one’s urges add to the arousal of the SNS. The result is elevated blood pressure and decreased levels of both immunoglobulin A and natural killer cells (i.e. basic indicators of the immune system). Relatively recent research has shown that arousal of the SNS is associated with neural circuits passing predominantly through the Right Prefrontal Cortex (Boyatzis and McKee, 2005). Further, it is now the contention of leading researchers in affective neuroscience and genetic expression that experience overtakes genetic dispositions in determining the biological basis of behavior once in adulthood (Williams, 2003). This would suggest that a person’s experience, and his or her arousal effect, rewire neural circuits and tendencies to invoke certain neuro-endocrine pathways. Offering support for the observation, or prediction is the proposed personality theory, that use of one’s competencies (i.e. behavior in specific settings in life) becomes an arousal that over time creates different dispositions, even at the biological level. Competencies can be developed One of the benefits of the competency, or behavioral approach to talent is that we enter a domain of human talent that can be developed in adulthood. Although the understanding of competencies themselves has been extended, perhaps the most important contributions in the last 30 years, has come about primarily in the last 15 years. Decades of research on the effects of psychotherapy (Hubble et. al., 1999), self-help programs (Kanfer and Goldstein, 1991), cognitive behavior therapy (Barlow, 1988), training programs (Morrow et al., 1997), and education (Pascarella and Terenzini, 1991; Winter et al., 1981) have shown that people can change their behavior, moods, and self-image. But most of the studies focused on a single characteristic, like maintenance of sobriety, reduction in a specific anxiety, or a set of characteristics often determined by the assessment instrument, such as the scales of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory. But there are few studies showing sustained improvements in the sets of desirable behavior that lead to outstanding performance. The “honeymoon effect” of typical training programs might start with improvement immediately following the program, but within months it drops precipitously (Campbell et. al., 1970). Only fifteen programs were found in a global search of the literature by the Consortium on Research on Emotional Intelligence in Organizations to improve emotional intelligence. Most of them showed impact on job outcomes, such as number of new businesses started, or life outcomes, such as finding a job or satisfaction (Cherniss and Adler, 2000), which are the ultimate purpose of development efforts. But showing an impact on outcomes, while desired, may also blur how the

change actually occurs. Furthermore, when a change has been noted, a question about the sustainability of the changes is raised because of the relatively short time periods studied. The few published studies examining improvement of more than one of these competencies show an overall improvement of about 10 percent in emotional intelligence abilities three to eighteen months following training (see Boyatzis, 2006 for a review of these studies and their impact). A series of longitudinal studies underway at the Weatherhead School of Management of Case Western Reserve University have shown that people can change on this complex set of competencies that we call emotional and social intelligence competencies that distinguish outstanding performers in management and professions (Boyatzis et al., 2002). And the improvement lasted for years. The four studies offered in this special issue were part of this stream of research. We hope you enjoy the research and that it stimulates many ideas for more research as well as application. References Barlow, D.H. (1988), Anxiety and Disorders: The Nature and Treatment of Anxiety and Panic, The Guilford Press, New York, NY. Boyatzis, R.E. (1982), The Competent Manager: A Model for Effective Performance, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY. Boyatzis, R.E. (2006), “Intentional change theory from a complexity perspective”, Journal of Management Development, Vol. 25 No. 7, pp. 607-23. Boyatzis, R. and McKee, A. (2005), Resonant Leadership: Sustaining Yourself and Connecting with Others through Mindfulness, Hope, and Compassion, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA. Boyatzis, R.E. and Sala, F. (2004), “Assessing emotional intelligence competencies”, in Geher, G. (Ed.), The Measurement of Emotional Intelligence, Novas Science Publishers, Hauppauge, NY, pp. 147-80. Boyatzis, R.E., Murphy, A.J. and Wheeler, J.V. (2000), “Philosophy as a missing link between values and behavior”, Psychological Reports, Vol. 86, pp. 47-64. Boyatzis, R.E., Smith, M. and Blaize, N. (2006), “Sustaining leadership effectiveness through coaching and compassion: it’s not what you think”, Academy of Management Learning and Education, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 8-24. Boyatzis, R.E., Stubbs, L. and Taylor, S. (2002), “Learning cognitive and emotional intelligence competencies through graduate management education”, Academy of Management Journal on Learning and Education, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 150-62. Bray, D.W., Campbell, R.J. and Grant, D.L. (1974), Formative Years in Business: A Long Term AT&T Study of Managerial Lives, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY. Campbell, J.P., Dunnette, M.D., Lawler, E.E. III and Weick, K.E. Jr (1970), Managerial Behavior, Performance, and Effectiveness, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY. Cherniss, C. and Adler, M. (2000), Promoting Emotional Intelligence in Organizations: Make Training in Emotional Intelligence Effective, American Society of Training and Development, Washington, DC. Dailey, C.A. (1971), Assessment of Lives: Personality Evaluation in a Bureaucratic Society, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA. Flanagan, J.C. (1954), “The critical incident technique”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 51, pp. 327-35.

Competencies in the 21st century

11

JMD 27,1

12

Goleman, D. (1995), Emotional Intelligence, Bantam Books, New York, NY. Goleman, D. (1998), Working with Emotional Intelligence, Bantam Books, New York, NY. Goleman, D. (2006), Social Intelligence, Bantam Books, New York, NY. Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R.E. and McKee, A. (2002), Primal Leadership: Realizing the Power of Emotional Intelligence, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA. Howard, A. and Bray, D. (1988), Managerial Lives in Transition: Advancing Age and Changing Times, Guilford Press, New York, NY. Hubble, M.A., Duncan, B.L. and Miller, S.D. (Eds) (1999), The Heart and Soul of Change: What Works in Therapy, American Psychological Association, Washington, DC. Kanfer, F.H. and Goldstein, A.P. (Eds) (1991), Helping People Change: A Textbook of Methods, 4th ed., Allyn & Bacon, Boston, MA. Kotter, J.P. (1982), The General Managers, Free Press, New York, NY. Luthans, F., Hodgetts, R.M. and Rosenkrantz, S.A. (1988), Real Managers, Ballinger Press, Cambridge, MA. McClelland, D.C. (1951), Personality, William Sloane Associates, New York, NY. McClelland, D.C. (1973), “Testing for competence rather than intelligence”, American Psychologist, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 1-40. McClelland, D.C. (1985), Human Motivation, Scott, Foresman, Glenview, IL. McClelland, D.C. and Boyatzis, R.E. (1982), “The leadership motive pattern and long term success in management”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 67 No. 6, pp. 737-43. Morrow, C.C., Jarrett, M.Q. and Rupinski, M.T. (1997), “An investigation of the effect and economic utility of corporate-wide training”, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 50, pp. 91-119. Pascarella, E.T. and Terenzini, P.T. (1991), How College Affects Students: Findings and Insights from Twenty Years of Research, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA. Spencer, L.M. Jr and Spencer, S.M. (1993), Competence at Work: Models for Superior Performance, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY. Williams, R. (2003), personal communication. Winter, D.G., McClelland, D.C. and Stewart, A.J. (1981), A New Case for the Liberal Arts: Assessing Institutional Goals and Student Development, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA. Further reading Williams, R.B., Barefoot, C., Blumenthal, J.A., Helms, M.J., Luecken, L., Pieper, C.F., Siegler, I.C. and Suarez, E.C. (1997), “Psychosocial correlates of job strain in a sample of working women”, Archives of General Psychiatry, Vol. 54, pp. 543-8. Corresponding author Richard E. Boyatzis can be contacted at: [email protected]

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected] Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0262-1711.htm

Social and emotional competencies predicting success for male and female executives Margaret M. Hopkins Department of Management, College of Business Administration, University of Toledo, Toledo, Ohio, USA, and

Diana Bilimoria

Social and emotional competencies 13 Received 20 April 2007 Revised 20 August 2007 Accepted 31 August 2007

Department of Organizational Behavior, Weatherhead School of Management, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, USA Abstract Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to explore three research questions. Are there gender differences in the demonstration of emotional and social intelligence competencies? What is the relationship between emotional and social intelligence competencies and success, and does gender moderate that relationship? Are there differences between the most successful male and female leaders in their demonstration of these competencies? Design/methodology/approach – This study used a 360-degree instrument to measure the demonstration of emotional and social intelligence competencies by top-level executives in one financial services organization. Annual performance and potential assessments measured the participants’ success. Regression analyses and tests of mean differences were used to analyze the research questions. Findings – The results indicated that there were no significant differences between male and female leaders in their demonstration of emotional and social intelligence competencies. The most successful men and women were also more similar than different in their competency demonstration. However, gender did moderate the relationship between the demonstration of these competencies and success. Male leaders were assessed as more successful even when the male and female leaders demonstrated an equivalent level of competencies. Finally, distinctions were found between the most successful males and females and their typical counterparts. Research limitations/implications – A field sample from one organization limits the generalizability of the results. Practical implications – Implications for organizations and their leadership are discussed including the importance of a broad range of competencies used in assessments, the awareness of gender stereotypes and gender-stereotypical behavior, and the acknowledgement of multiple measures of success. Originality/value – This study highlights the moderating influence of gender between the demonstration of emotional and social intelligence competencies and success. Distinctions in competency demonstration between the most successful top-level executives and the typical executives contribute to the literature and to leadership development practice. Keywords Emotional intelligence, Competences, Gender, Leadership Paper type Research paper

A sophisticated degree of emotional intelligence and social intelligence has been positively correlated with outstanding performance (Boyatzis, 1982, 2006; Day, 2000; Dulewicz, 2000; Goleman, 1998, 2006; Humphrey, 2002; Palmer et al., 2001; Sosik and

Journal of Management Development Vol. 27 No. 1, 2008 pp. 13-35 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited 0262-1711 DOI 10.1108/02621710810840749

JMD 27,1

14

Megerian, 1999; Wong and Law, 2002). Emotional intelligence is the capacity to understand the emotions of ourselves and others, and to effectively manage our emotions and the emotions of others (Goleman, 1998). Social intelligence is “being intelligent not just about our relationships but also in them”. (Goleman, 2006, p. 11). The purpose of this study is threefold. First, are there differences between male and female leaders in their overall level of emotional and social intelligence competencies? Second, what is the relationship between the overall level of emotional and social intelligence competencies and success, and does gender moderate that relationship? And third, how similar or different are the most successful male and female leaders in their overall level of emotional and social intelligence competencies? As women continue to join the ranks of leadership positions, considerable attention has been paid to the differentiating aspects of female and male leaders. There are various points of view concerning men and women in leadership positions: “ . . . the search for sex differences in the behavior of leaders has yielded results that are highly equivocal” (Vecchio, 2002, p. 651). One body of research maintains that there are no significant differences in the behaviors of male and female leaders (Day and Stogdill, 1972; Dobbins and Platz, 1986; Maher, 1997; Nieva and Gutek, 1980; Powell, 1990; Vilkinas and Cartan, 1993), and in the overall emotional intelligence of men and women (Bar-On et al., 2000; Petrides and Furnham, 2000, 2006). A contrasting body of research finds that there are gender differences in leadership behaviors. Characteristics such as the use of consensus decision-making, the view of power in relational terms, the encouragement of conflict resolution, and the development of team-oriented work environments, to name a few, have been identified as indicative of female leadership (Helgeson, 1990; Rosener, 1990). Women leaders have been reported to have better people skills than men (Rutherford, 2001), to be more visionary (Vinnicombe, 1987), to have a more democratic leadership style (Eagly and Johnson, 1990) and a more transformational style relying on consideration and interpersonal skills (Bass and Aviolo, 1997; Eagly and Johannesen-Schmidt, 2001). Perrault and Irwin’s (1996) study of men and women at the executive levels in a variety of companies found that women outperform men in 28 of 31 skill areas, leading them to conclude that women behave similarly but more effectively than their male colleagues. Similar results were reported by Sharpe (2000), i.e. women executives received higher ratings on 42 of 52 skills measured, and Shore (1992), i.e. women were rated significantly higher than men on six of seven performance dimensions. Female leaders have also been found to rate higher than male leaders on measures of emotional and social intelligence (Boyatzis and Sala, 2004; Brackett et al., 2006; Ciarrochi et al., 2000; Mandell and Pherwani, 2003; Schutte et al., 1998). A Center for Creative Leadership study (Morrison et al., 1992, p. 37) concluded that “In order to approach the highest levels, women are expected to have more strengths and fewer faults than their male counterparts”. Since a considerable body of research concludes that there are differences between female and male leaders, and that female leaders by and large demonstrate emotional and social intelligence to a greater degree than male leaders, it is proposed that: H1. On average, female leaders will demonstrate an overall higher level of emotional and social intelligence competencies than male leaders.

Luthans (1988) made the distinction between an effective leader and a successful leader. Effective leaders are those who have satisfied and productive employees, while successful leaders are those who are promoted quickly. Each leader type demonstrates different behaviors in order to be effective or successful. The traditional methods of examining success include observable career accomplishments measured by upward mobility and salary level, all directly relating to a manager’s assessment of the performance and the potential of an employee (Lyness and Thompson, 2000). This model remains the predominant one; and for the purposes of this research, success is defined and measured in the conventional manner. Several studies conclude that there is a positive relationship between emotional and social intelligence and job performance. For example, overall emotional and social intelligence predicted sales performance (Wong et al., 2004), individual call center agents’ performance (Higgs, 2004), supervisor ratings of job performance (Slaski and Cartwright, 2002; Law et al., 2004) and general leadership appraisal (Dulewicz et al., 2005). And a lack of self awareness, the foundation of emotional intelligence, resulted in negative performance consequences for leaders (Atwater and Yammarino, 1992; Shipper and Davy, 2002). There is evidence to suggest that the greater the overall level of emotional and social intelligence a person exhibits, the more likely that leader will be considered an outstanding performer, as follows. H2. Male and female leaders who demonstrate an overall higher level of emotional and social intelligence competencies will be seen as more successful than male and female leaders who demonstrate an overall lower level of emotional and social intelligence competencies. Are there differences in the performance assessments of men and women in leadership roles? Some empirical studies have concluded that there are no differences in the ratings of performance between female and male leaders (Day and Stogdill, 1972; Shore and Thornton, 1986). Day and Stogdill (1972) assessed the degree of effectiveness based on subordinates’ evaluations, while Shore and Thornton (1986) examined self-assessments and supervisor ratings of effectiveness. One review of existing research comparing male and female leaders reported that male leaders were generally rated as more effective (Dobbins and Platz, 1986). When differentiating those research studies conducted in the lab from those taking place in the field, however, male leaders were evaluated as more effective in lab situations while there were no differences found in field settings. A sizeable body of research has discovered that there are indeed differences in the assessments of female leaders and of male leaders. One line of reasoning cited for these gender differences has been a “think manager, think male” (Schein, 1976) stereotypical view of leadership (Heilman et al., 1995; Heilman et al., 1989; Metcalfe and Altman, 2001). Schein (1976) and Brenner et al. (1989) discovered that both women and men saw successful leaders as male. Many leadership skills are observed through gender stereotypes and regarded differently when performed by men or by women (Butterfield and Grinnell, 1999; Martell and DeSmet, 2001; Merrill-Sands and Kolb, 2001). Alimo-Metcalfe (1995, p. 3) argued that there was an “insidious gender bias with regard to the assessment of leadership in organizations. . .” Decision makers are likely to evaluate male leaders

Social and emotional competencies 15

JMD 27,1

16

more favorably than females demonstrating equivalent performance (Bartol, 1999). The belief of think manager, think male remains entrenched in our society; and both men and women continue to describe outstanding leaders as having predominantly masculine characteristics (Powell et al., 2002). Eagly et al. (1995) discovered that when the leadership role was male-dominated, men were favored in ratings, concluding that the fit between the leader’s gender and the expectations of the role were the primary determinants of the rankings. A meta-analytic review of empirical literature addressing whether women are devalued in leadership roles reported that evaluations were less for women overall than for men, especially when the dependent variable measured was the leader’s competence or the subject’s satisfaction with the leader (Eagly et al., 1992). A prevalent theme emerging from the research indicates that women in leadership roles believe they are expected to outperform their male counterparts in order to be perceived as successful (Swiss, 1996). The two most frequently cited career success strategies by women executives are to consistently exceed performance expectations and to develop a style that is comfortable for men (Ragins et al., 1998). A Center for Creative Leadership study (Van Velsor and Hughes, 1990) of male and female leaders reported that the females were focused on establishing their credibility and on finding their niche while the males attended to mastering certain business competencies. Stroh et al. (1992, p. 251) examined the gap of career progression, one traditional measure of success, between female and male leaders. They found that women had done “all the right stuff” in order to advance themselves. However, the women in their study followed a traditional male model of career advancement and pursuing this male model had not eliminated the discrimination against them. Another study reported that despite women’s superior performance on six of seven performance dimensions measured, they did not receive superior ratings on their overall potential nor did they advance at a faster rate than men (Shore, 1992). Lyness and Heilman’s (2006) findings also suggest that women are held to stricter standards for promotion. Thus a substantial body of research establishes that additional criteria for success are applied to women leaders. Questions persist about the impact of gender bias on the assessments, judgments, and decisions about women in the workplace. “It seems that because women often are expected to be less effective than men in management situations, they must prove that they are more effective than men in terms of at least some performance criteria. An imagined sex difference has apparently led to some real differences in performance expectations” (Morrison et al., 1992, p. 54). As a consequence of the extensive research supporting the theory that male leaders are generally assessed more positively than female leaders, we propose that: H3. When male leaders and female leaders demonstrate an overall equivalent level of emotional and social intelligence competencies, male leaders will be seen as more successful than female leaders. Considering the most successful male leaders and the most successful female leaders, there are reasons to expect that they will be more alike than different in their leadership behaviors. Once men and women reach positions of leadership and are considered successful in those roles, their socialization into the leadership roles may be more significant than sex or gender and may result in few, if any, differences between them. Eagly and Johnson (1990) proposed that organizational roles were more important than

gender roles and that there would be minimal differences between men and women in the same role. Additional studies report that women and men in leadership roles are more similar than different (Lyness and Thompson, 1997; Morrison et al., 1992). Perceived discrepancies in the attributes of men and women were found to diminish when women were designated as successful (Heilman et al., 1995). Given these findings supporting the proposition that there are few differences between successful men and successful women in leadership roles, we hypothesize that: H4. There will be no significant differences between the most successful male leaders and the most successful female leaders in their overall level of demonstrating emotional and social intelligence competencies. Methods Sample The sample population comprised 130 upper-level executives, 90 males and 40 females, in one financial services institution with offices throughout the United States. One organization as the research site controlled for possible contextual differences in the criterion variable of success for male and female leaders. Over a two-year period, five groups of the organization’s top leaders participated in an executive development program conducted by a local university. The sample group consisted of 105 leaders, 30 females (29 percent) and 75 males (71 percent), reflecting the same gender proportions as the population. The average age of the females in the sample was 44 years, while the mean age for the males was 46 years. Both the female and male executives had been with the organization for an average of 14 years. The females had held their current positions for an average of 2.6 years, and the males for an average of 3.0 years. The male executives in the sample had been in managerial roles for approximately 17 years, while the females had been in the managerial ranks for 14 years. Data collection An introductory email was sent from the company’s Executive Vice President of Human Resources to the sample population, explaining the study and inviting their participation. Following this introduction, the researchers emailed the population to explain the study in greater detail and the method of participation. Three reminder email notices were subsequently sent to those who had not previously responded. Measurement of variables Independent variable: emotional and social intelligence competencies. The emotional and social intelligence competencies of the participating leaders were assessed through the Emotional Competence Inventory (ECI) (Boyatzis et al., 2001), a multi-rater assessment instrument designed as a measurement tool for emotional and social intelligence competencies (Table I). Empirical research suggests that multi-rater sources of information are correlated and that respondents tend to focus on different aspects of the leader’s competencies (Hogan et al., 1994; Salam et al., 1997). The ECI is composed of a series of behavioral indicators of emotional and social intelligence competencies based on the work of Boyatzis (Boyatzis, 1982; Boyatzis and Sala, 2004; Boyatzis et al., 2002) and Goleman (1998). Respondents were asked to

Social and emotional competencies 17

JMD 27,1

18

Table I. Emotional and social intelligence competencies

Self-awareness

Self-management

Social awareness

Relationship management

Emotional self-awareness

Emotional self-control

Empathy

Developing others

Accurate self-assessment

Transparency

Organizational awareness

Inspirational leadership

Self-confidence

Adaptability Service orientation Achievement orientation Initiative

Change catalyst Influence Conflict management Teamwork and collaboration

Source: Boyatzis et al. (2001, 2002)

complete each item on a frequency scale ranging from “Never” to “Consistently”. The ECI is supported by evidence of reliability and validity (Hay Group, 2002). The Emotional Competence Inventory (ECI) was completed by each participant leader, their manager, peers, direct reports, clients, and others as pre-work prior to entering the executive development program. An average of twelve other raters’ feedback reports were received for each individual leader. Results of the ECI were provided only to the participants themselves and to the leadership development program staff delivering the program to assure confidentiality and anonymity. Emotional and social intelligence competencies were scored as follows. Three of the five leadership groups participating in the executive development program completed Version 1 of the ECI. The fourth and fifth leadership groups completed a second, updated version of the ECI. The primary difference between Versions 1 and 2 of the ECI was a consolidation and reduction in the number of items from 110 in Version 1 to 72 in Version 2. The vast majority of the items remained the same between the two versions of this instrument. There were some minor item differences between the two versions and reconciliation of these differences was necessary prior to the final scoring. A thorough review, comparison and alignment of all the individual items within Version 1 and Version 2 were done. Only those items that were comparable in language and intent between the two versions of the ECI were used in the study. Ultimately there were at least three items to measure each of the 17 competencies. Competency scores from all of the other assessors on this multi-rater instrument, not the self ratings of the participants, were used. Prior research has concluded that the aggregated scores of the other rater groups, i.e. manager, peers, direct reports, clients and others, is advantageous in order to reduce random error and perceptual differences among the observations by others (Atwater and Yammarino, 1992; Denison et al., 1995; Hooijberg, 1996; Mount, 1984; Shipper and Davy, 2002; Van Velsor et al., 1993). Taken together, the ratings of other people provide a more complete picture of the leader’s behavior. To arrive at one score per item per person, an average of the total others’ item scores was computed for all 17 competencies for each of the study’s participants. To obtain a per person competency score for the individual 17 competencies, an average of each competency’s item scores was done. In addition to calculating item scores and 17 competency scores, a composite score was figured for each participant by summing

their 17 individual competency scores. The composite score was used to measure the participants’ overall level of emotional and social intelligence competencies. The higher the composite score, the higher the overall level of emotional and social intelligence competencies. Dependent variable: success Organizational measures of performance and potential for every individual in the sample group were collected for the prior three years. An annual development review consisting of annual performance ratings on a three-item scale (1 ¼ development needed; 2 ¼ full performance; 3 ¼ exceptional performance) and annual potential ratings on a three-item scale (1 ¼ mastery; 2 ¼ growth; 3 ¼ turn) is conducted for every leader within the organization by the leader’s immediate manager. Ratings of employees by their managers have been used extensively as a valid method to assess success and performance in organizations (Gattiker and Larwood, 1988; Judge et al., 1995; Lyness and Thompson, 2000). The success measure used in the present study was deemed to have face validity: the ratings are common to all individuals in the organization used as the site for the study, and a combination of the performance scores and the potential scores are used by the organization as a basis for promotional considerations, salary increases and bonus awards. Success was scored as follows. Since the measure of success was treated as one continuous variable, it was necessary to arrive at one final measure for the dependent variable from the multiple years’ performance and potential data collected (Denison et al., 1995; Lyness and Thompson, 2000; Van Velsor et al., 1993). In order to compute a single measure of success, the first step taken was to multiply each person’s annual performance and potential scores to arrive at one annual score. This calculation provided an adequate range to be considered and compared across the sample. The annual scores were then averaged over the three-year period to compute one number representing the participant’s measure of success. In addition to scoring the single measure of success, the performance data and the potential data were considered separately as possible outcome measures to establish if the results might differ based on the use of either the performance or the potential scores as opposed to their combined measure of success. Regressions revealed that the results were substantially the same, no matter whether the performance, potential, or combined success scores were used to measure the dependent variable. Since this was the case, the combined success measure remained as the measure of success. Moderating variable: gender. Gender was coded as zero for males and one for females. Control variables: age and managerial tenure. Two variables were applied as controls, age and experience as a manager. Both variables were measured in years. One other variable, organizational tenure, was also examined but not utilized due to high correlations with the managerial tenure variable. Data analysis H1, indicating that women will demonstrate a higher level of emotional and social intelligence competencies than men, was tested with the Mann-Whitney U test since the separate gender sample groups were distinctly different in size (75 males and 30 females) and not normally distributed.

Social and emotional competencies 19

JMD 27,1

20

H2 proposed that an overall higher level of emotional and social intelligence competencies would result in success for both men and women. This hypothesis was examined using multiple regression analyses for the male sample and the female sample. H3, suggesting that the male leaders would be rated as more successful than the female leaders even when they demonstrated an equivalent level of emotional and social intelligence competencies, was tested using a three-step regression analysis. An examination of the levels of significance of the respective main effects and respective interaction effects from step one to step three was done in order to calculate whether gender made a difference in the relationships between the hypotheses’ independent variable and the dependent variable of success (Cohen and Cohen, 1975). The first step was to enter the respective main effects with the dependent variable. The second step was to include a gender dummy variable with the respective main effects and regress them on success. Gender was coded as zero if male and as one if female. The third step was to add the respective interaction effects to the second step to determine if gender had an impact on the respective main effects and the respective interaction effects. H4 posited that the most successful male and female leaders would be more similar than different in their demonstration of emotional and social intelligence competencies. The most successful males and females were those who scored within the top 40 percent of their respective groups on the measure of success. The results for H4 were determined by two Mann-Whitney U tests of mean differences. First, mean differences between the most successful male and most successful female leaders were calculated; and second, mean tests determined any differences between the most successful males and females and their typical counterparts. Correlations and descriptive statistics were also calculated for all of the variables. Results The correlations and descriptive statistics are reported in Tables II, III and IV. H1 posited that female executives demonstrate an overall higher level of emotional and social intelligence competencies than male executives. Results for H1 are reported in Table V This hypothesis, using the Mann-Whitney U test to compare the mean differences between the males and females of their total emotional and social intelligence competencies scores, was not supported. There were no significant gender differences in the overall level of emotional and social intelligence competencies in this sample. H2, predicting that an overall higher level of emotional and social intelligence competencies for both men and women would result in being considered more successful, was supported for the male (b ¼ 0:23, p , 0.05) but not the female executives in the sample. The control variable, age, was negatively related to the dependent variable, success, for the males (b ¼ 20:48, p , 0.01), indicating that older males were viewed as relatively less successful than younger males (see Table VI). H3 was supported, finding that even when males and females were equivalent in their level of emotional and social intelligence competencies, the male executives were rated as more successful. As the results of the three-step regression in Tables VII and VIII demonstrate, being male made a positive difference in the effect of their overall level of emotional and social intelligence competencies on success (b ¼ 0:03, p , 0.01).

3.57 3.85 4.30 4.01 3.95 3.97 4.07 3.77 4.01 4.15 4.19 3.74 3.96 4.06 3.83 3.62 4.02

Competencies 5. Emotional self-awareness 6. Accurate self-assessment 7. Self-confidence 8. Self-control 9. Transparency 10. Adaptability 11. Achievement orientation 12. Initiative 13. Empathy 14. Organizational awareness 15. Service orientation 16. Developing others 17. Inspirational leadership 18. Change catalyst 19. Influence 20. Conflict management 21. Teamwork and collaboration

Notes: *p , 0.05; * *p , 0.01; n ¼ 105

45.71 14.00 16.12 4.92

Variables 1. Age 2. Tenure in company 3. Tenure in management 4 Success

Mean

0.40 0.36 0.38 0.43 0.35 0.27 0.30 0.33 0.34 0.34 0.37 0.38 0.40 0.39 0.32 0.32 0.34

5.54 8.70 6.89 1.60

SD

0.02 2 0.02 2 0.22 * 2 0.03 0.10 2 0.11 2 0.22 * 2 0.05 -0.08 0.24 * * 0.06 2 0.04 2 0.24 * * 2 0.36 * * 2 0.00 0.03 2 0.10

0.33 * * 0.70 * * 2 0.40 * *

1

2 0.09 2 0.09 2 0.29 * * 2 0.03 0.08 2 0.10 2 0.18 * 2 0.11 2 0.08 0.41 * * 0.07 2 0.16 2 0.22 * 2 0.34 * * 0.02 2 0.16 * 0.12

0.41 * * 2 0.16

2

0.01 0.02 2 0.22 * 2 0.04 0.17 * 2 0.04 2 0.14 0.04 2 0.08 0.32 * * 0.02 2 0.07 2 0.15 2 0.24 * * 0.09 0.08 2 0.05

2 0.29 * *

3

0.19 * 20.06 0.21 * 20.07 0.04 0.13 0.19 * 0.14 0.07 20.10 20.03 20.00 0.27 * * 0.37 * * 0.23 * 0.07 0.05

4

6

0.12 0.33 * * 0.53 * * 0.57 * * 0.37 * * 0.38 * * 0.58 * * 0.33 * * 0.40 * * 0.51 * * 0.54 * * 0.23 * * 0.38 * * 0.51 * * 0.68 * *

Social and emotional competencies

5

0.56 * * 0.12 0.08 0.57 * * 0.41 * * 0.38 * * 0.49 * * 0.41 * * 0.26 * * 0.15 0.53 * * 0.46 * * 0.25 * * 0.35 * * 0.59 * * 0.46 * *

21

Table II. Means, standard deviations and correlations for whole sample

3.57 3.85 4.30 4.01 3.95 3.97 4.07 3.77 4.01 4.15 4.19 3.74 3.96 4.06 3.83 3.62 4.02

Competencies 5. Emotional self-awareness 6. Accurate self-assessment 7. Self-confidence 8. Self-control 9. Transparency 10. Adaptability 11. Achievement orientation 12. Initiative 13. Empathy 14. Organizational awareness 15. Service orientation 16. Developing others 17. Inspirational leadership 18. Change catalyst 19. Influence 20. Conflict management 21. Teamwork and collaboration 0.40 0.36 0.38 0.43 0.35 0.27 0.30 0.33 0.34 0.34 0.37 0.38 0.40 0.39 0.32 0.32 0.34

5.54 8.70 6.89 1.60

SD

2 0.01 2 0.07 0.28 * * 0.50 * * 0.44 * * 0.10 2 0.01 0.19 * 0.33 * * 0.70 * * 0.51 * * 0.45 * * 2 0.02 0.10

7

0.00 0.44 * * 0.00 2 0.12 0.65 * * 0.24 * * 0.41 * * 0.27 * * 0.23 * * 2 0.16 0.29 * * 0.10 0.53 * *

8

0.40 * * 0.42 * * 0.51 * * 0.33 * * 0.44 * * 0.25 * * 0.36 * * 0.32 * * 0.22 * 0.18 * 0.63 * * 0.43 * *

9

0.49 * * 0.54 * * 0.62 * * 0.37 * * 0.44 * * 0.46 * * 0.62 * * 0.34 * * 0.55 * * 0.35 * * 0.68 * *

10

0.61 * * 0.18 * 0.17 * 0.34 * * 0.56 * * 0.70 * * 0.69 * * 0.43 * * 0.30 * * 0.27 * *

11

0.18 * 0.29 * * 0.27 * * 0.44 * * 0.62 * * 0.57 * * 0.43 * * 0.44 * * 0.30 * *

12

13

0.46 * * 0.43 * * 0.48 * * 0.51 * * 0.09 0.41 * * 0.34 * * 0.77 * *

22

Notes: *p , 0.05; * *p , 0.01; n ¼ 105

45.71 14.00 16.12 4.92

Table III. Means, standard deviations and correlations for whole sample

Variables 1. Age 2. Tenure in company 3. Tenure in management 4. Success

Mean

0.32 * * 0.25 * * 0.27 * * 0.01 0.44 * * 0.27 * * 0.51 * *

14

JMD 27,1

3.57 3.85 4.30 4.01 3.95 3.97 4.07 3.77 4.01 4.15 4.19 3.74 3.96 4.06 3.83 3.62 4.02

Competencies 5. Emotional self-awareness 6. Accurate self-assessment 7. Self-confidence 8. Self-control 9. Transparency 10. Adaptability 11. Achievement orientation 12. Initiative 13. Empathy 14. Organizational awareness 15. Service orientation 16. Developing others 17. Inspirational leadership 18. Change catalyst 19. Influence 20. Conflict management 21. Teamwork and collaboration

Notes: *p , 0.05; * *p , 0.01; n ¼ 105

45.71 14.00 16.12 4.92

Variables 1. Age 2. Tenure in company 3. Tenure in management 4. Success

Mean

0.40 0.36 0.38 0.43 0.35 0.27 0.30 0.33 0.34 0.34 0.37 0.38 0.40 0.39 0.32 0.32 0.34

5.54 8.70 6.89 1.60

SD

0.53 * * 0.43 * * 0.16 * 0.49 * * 0.18 * 0.47 * *

15

0.66 * * 0.40 * * 0.49 * * 0.33 * * 0.47 * *

16

0.60 * * 0.60 * * 0.28 * * 0.55 * *

17

0.36 * * 0.24 * * 0.11

18

0.27 * * 0.50 * *

19

0.37 * *

20

21

Social and emotional competencies 23

Table IV. Means, standard deviations and correlations for whole sample

JMD 27,1

While this regression coefficient is rather small, the level of significance is high. On the other hand, being female made a marginally significant negative difference in the impact of their overall level of emotional and social intelligence competencies on success (b ¼ 20:02, p , 0.10). Gender was coded one (1) for the females; and their coefficient for the impact of competencies total score on success was the coefficient for the gender by competencies total score interaction term (2 0.046) added to the

24 Table V. Mean differences in level of emotional and social intelligence competencies between males and females

Table VI. The effect of level of emotional and social intelligence competencies on success

Males (n ¼ 75) Mean rank

Females (n ¼ 30) Mean rank

54.51

49.23

Composite competencies score

Table VIII. Gender effect on relationship of level of emotional and social intelligence competencies to success

2 0.802

0.423

Notes: *p , 0.10; * *p , 0.05; * * *p , 0.01; One-tailed Mann-Whitney U test

Success Composite competencies score Age Managerial experience R2 Adjusted R 2

Males n ¼ 75

Females n ¼ 30

0.231 * 20.485 * * 20.038 0.301 0.334

0.267 20.127 0.014 0.054 0.078

Notes: *p , 0.05; * *p , 0.01; Numbers reported are unstandardized coefficients

Beta

Table VII. Gender effect on relationship of level of emotional and social intelligence competencies to success

Differences between groups Z p

Step 1. Composite competencies score Step 2. Composite competencies score Gender Step 3. Composite competencies score Gender Gender £ composite competencies score

0.019 0.020 0.039 0.030 3.110 2 0.046

Significance þ

0.077 0.073þ 0.669 0.015 * * 0.072þ 0.075 *

Adj R 2

F

0.021 0.013

3.20þ 01.68

0.034

2.22þ

Notes: *p , 0.10; * *p , 0.01; n ¼ 105; Three-step regression with gender as dummy variable (coded: 0 ¼ males; 1 ¼ females)

Constant Beta Significance

Males n ¼ 75

Females n ¼ 30

0.265 0.030 0.015 * *

3.380 2 0.020 0.075 *

Notes: *p , 0.10; * *p , 0.01; n ¼ 105; Three-step regression with gender as dummy variable (coded: 0 ¼ males; 1 ¼ females)

coefficient for the competencies total score (0.030) (2 0.046 þ 0:030 ¼ 20:02). Gender was coded zero (0) for the males, and their coefficient for the impact of competencies total score on success was the coefficient for competencies total score (0.030) because the interaction term was zero (Cohen and Cohen, 1975). H4 proposed that there would be no significant differences in the overall level of emotional and social intelligence competencies between the most successful male and the most successful female leaders. To test this hypothesis, the top 40 percent of the females (based on success ratings) were compared and contrasted with the top 40 percent of the males in the sample. As Table IX demonstrates, H4 was supported. There were no significant differences between the most successful men and the most successful women in their overall levels of emotional and social intelligence competencies with one exception. The most successful men demonstrated the Service Orientation competency more frequently than the most successful women ( p , 0.05). At marginal levels of significance, the most successful men demonstrated Achievement Orientation more often than their female peers; and the most successful female executives had more tenure in the company than the most successful male executives. A second comparison was made between the most successful males and females, defined as those scoring in the top 40 percent in their respective gender groups on the success ratings, and the typical males and females in the sample. Table X presents the findings from this test.

Most successful males (n ¼ 29) Mean rank

Most successful females (n ¼ 11) Mean rank

Age Tenure in company Tenure in management

21.16 19.23 22.52

18.77 27.17 18.96

20.579 210.897 20.856

0.563 0.058 * 0.392

Competencies Emotional self-awareness Accurate self-assessment Self-confidence Self-control Transparency Adaptability Achievement orientation Initiative Empathy Organizational awareness Service orientation Developing others Inspirational leadership Change catalyst Influence Conflict management Teamwork and collaboration

21.00 22.15 21.52 22.90 22.23 22.18 23.52 21.63 21.27 20.27 23.98 23.27 21.72 21.62 22.67 22.65 21.85

22.75 19.88 21.46 18.00 19.67 19.79 16.46 21.17 22.08 24.58 15.29 17.08 20.96 21.21 18.58 18.63 20.63

20.418 20.543 20.014 210.169 20.613 20.571 21.685 20.111 20.195 21.030 22.075 21.476 20.181 20.097 20.975 20.961 20.292

0.676 0.587 0.989 0.242 0.540 0.568 0.092þ 0.911 0.845 0.303 0.038 * * 0.140 0.856 0.922 0.330 0.337 0.770

Notes: *p , 0.10; * *p , 0.05; Two-tailed Mann-Whitney U test

Social and emotional competencies 25

Differences between groups Z p

Table IX. Mean differences in emotional and social intelligence competencies between the most successful males and the most successful females

JMD 27,1

26

Table X. Mean differences in emotional and social intelligence competencies between the most successful males and females and the typical males and females

Most successful males and females (n ¼ 40) Mean rank

Typical males and females (n ¼ 65) Mean rank

Age Tenure in company Tenure in management

38.96 46.35 43.27

60.28 57.44 59.48

2 3.544 2 1.830 2 2.686

0.000 * * * 0.067þ 0.007 * * *

Competencies: Emotional self-awareness Accurate self-assessment Self-confidence Self-control Transparency Adaptability Achievement orientation Initiative Empathy Organizational awareness Service orientation Developing others Inspirational leadership Change catalyst Influence Conflict management Teamwork and collaboration

59.11 50.63 62.30 50.08 51.38 56.77 60.13 57.90 53.40 42.54 49.00 53.60 63.01 66.51 56.99 51.82 53.98

48.93 54.58 46.80 54.94 54.08 50.48 48.25 49.73 52.73 59.98 55.67 52.60 46.33 43.99 50.34 53.79 52.35

2 1.678 2 0.651 2 2.554 2 0.801 2 0.445 2 1.037 2 1.959 2 1.347 2 0.111 2 2.875 2 1.099 2 0.164 2 2.751 2 3.712 2 1.096 2 0.324 2 0.268

0.093þ 0.515 0.010 * * * 0.423 0.656 0.300 0.050 * * 0.178 0.911 0.004 * * * 0.272 0.870 0.006 * * * 0.000 * * * 0.273 0.746 0.789

Differences between groups Z p

Notes: *p , 0.10; * *p , 0.05; * * *p , 0.01; Two-tailed Mann-Whitney U test

Significant differences at the p , 0.01 level were found in the successful male and female leaders’ demonstration of the Self Confidence, Inspirational Leadership and Change Catalyst competencies as compared with the typical leaders. Achievement Orientation was significantly different between these two groups at the p , 0.05 level, again with the most successful men and women showing this competency more often. Additional distinguishing differences included the demonstration of Emotional Self Awareness more frequently by the successful group ( p , 0.10), and Organizational Awareness more often by the typical group ( p , 0.01). Finally, age, tenure in the company and tenure in management differentiated the most successful males and females from the typical males and females. The most successful were younger ( p , 0.01), had less time in a management position ( p , 0.01) and had less tenure with the company ( p , 0.10).

Discussion This study examined three primary questions. First, are there differences between male and female leaders in their overall level of emotional and social intelligence competencies? Second, what is the relationship between the overall level of emotional and social intelligence competencies and success, and does gender moderate that relationship? And third, are there any significant differences between the most

successful male and female leaders in their overall level of emotional and social intelligence competencies? No significant differences were found between male leaders and female leaders in their overall level of emotional and social intelligence competencies. These results contradict previous research reporting significant differences in levels of emotional intelligence and social intelligence (Brackett et al., 2006; Ciarrochi et al., 2000; Schutte et al., 1998). There is also substantial evidence to support the present study’s findings, however. No differences have been found between men and women in their exhibiting overall emotional intelligence (Bar-On et al., 2000; Petrides and Furnham, 2000, 2006) and in their demonstration of other leadership behaviors (Dobbins and Platz, 1986; Karau and Eagly, 1999; Powell, 1990; Vilkinas and Cartan, 1993). Many reported behavioral differences between male and female leaders in prior studies reflect a stereotypical difference in the perceptions of others as measured in laboratory situations (Lipman-Blumen, 1996) as opposed to behavior observed in a field setting. The increased use of 360-degree assessments of individual behavior hopefully assists in diminishing the impact of these stereotypes. A second noteworthy result of this study is that even considering the most successful male and female leaders, those who received the highest performance and potential ratings, only one competency was significantly different between these two groups (Baack et al., 1993; Heilman et al., 1995). The Service Orientation competency was perceived as being demonstrated more frequently by the men than the women. The remainder of the emotional and social intelligence competencies did not differentiate the most successful male and female leaders. The most successful leaders have been recognized and rewarded by their organization for meeting certain standards of performance and behavior. Perhaps executive women are more similar to, than different from, executive men due to their socialization into leadership roles. It is likely that males and females in this category have assimilated into their leadership roles and become more homogenous than dissimilar. While there were no differences found between the male and female leaders in their overall level of emotional and social intelligence competencies, there were significant distinctions between the most successful male and female leaders and the typical male and female leaders. Four emotional and social intelligence competencies significantly separate the most successful male and female leaders from their typical counterparts. Self Confidence, Achievement Orientation, Inspirational Leadership and Change Catalyst are the four competencies that distinguish the most successful leaders. Self confidence is a long-established critical competency characteristic of the most successful performers. A prevailing viewpoint has women generally lacking in self confidence; yet in order for women and men to succeed at the highest levels in an organization, both must consistently demonstrate self confidence. Inspirational leadership and change catalyst are especially vital competencies for leaders successfully competing in a global economy, working in industries undergoing structural changes and facing uncertain futures. Highly successful leaders also include achievement orientation in their repertoire of competencies differentiating them from the typical leaders. An achievement orientation has more frequently been associated with men, demonstrating a drive to accomplish goals, whereas this behavior in women has not necessarily been rewarded. A need for achievement confirms the gender role expected for males and is contrary to the gender stereotype for females. Similar to the

Social and emotional competencies 27

JMD 27,1

28

significance of the self confidence competency for both highly successful men and women, an achievement orientation is germane to their enduring success. Gender does moderate the relationship between overall level of emotional and social intelligence competencies and success. Only male leaders, not female leaders, were more successful when they demonstrated an overall higher level of competencies. And even when the male and female leaders demonstrated an equivalent level of competencies, there was a significant positive relationship with assessments of success for the men and not for the women. A “think manager, think male” (Schein, 1976) attitude has been well documented as the prevalent standpoint for both men and women. It is expected that men are leaders and therefore that they demonstrate leadership abilities (Brenner et al., 1989; Carli and Eagly, 2001; Heilman et al., 1989). Their legitimacy in leadership positions has been established throughout history. In particular, when the role is male-dominated or the individuals performing the evaluations are predominantly men, there is substantial empirical evidence concluding that women are devalued in leadership roles (Eagly et al., 1995; Eagly et al., 1992; Powell et al., 2002). Prior research has reported that women are less likely to be considered successful due to their focus on effectiveness as opposed to the politicking needed for success (Eagly et al., 2003; Luthans, 1988). In fact, female executives have previously cited their primary career strategy for success as consistently exceeding performance expectations (Ragins et al., 1998). Perhaps there are more expectations for women to demonstrate emotional and social intelligence competencies than for men to do so because these behaviors represent the “soft skills” more traditionally associated with women. Women are presumed to demonstrate soft skills, and emotional and social intelligence competencies may not be acknowledged as extraordinary behavior for them (Fletcher, 1999). Maybe an absence of these competencies would negatively impact the assessments of success for women; but their presence does not positively impact assessments of their success. The traditional perspective of leadership maintained that the use of command and control behaviors and a hard skill set was necessary for outstanding performance. These descriptors depict the stereotypical male behavior. The modern view of leadership recognizes the efficacy of a soft skill set, one that incorporates emotional and social intelligence as well as cognitive intelligence. Conceivably it is more important for men to show emotional and social intelligence competencies in order to be seen as successful, given the evolving picture of outstanding leadership. Additional variables not explored in this study may present some alternative explanations for the outcome variable of success. For example, the individual relationships between the study’s leaders and their respective managers, and the tenure of those relationships, are two possible factors impacting the success outcomes. The participants’ network of relationships in the company may influence their performance and potential appraisals, the measure of success in this study. In addition, if the company culture is male-oriented then the climate is generally not supportive for women to succeed. A number of ancillary findings are intriguing and merit attention. The most successful female leaders had been with their organization twice as long as the most successful male leaders; and the most successful men were younger in age than the

typical male leader, had less tenure with their organization and had fewer years in a managerial position than their typical male counterparts. The career paths between successful men and successful women are different for a variety of work-life reasons. Lyness and Judiesch (1999) discovered that women are more likely than men to attain higher level positions due to promotions rather than being hired into organizations, supporting the present study’s findings. Males may be more mobile than females and more easily move between organizations in order to obtain higher-ranking positions and advance their careers. Organizational fit and finding a niche are critical factors for women in their careers (Lyness and Thompson, 2000; Marshall, 1995). Clearly the most successful women in this study have managed their organizational fit. Sex discrimination in the workplace has been an unfortunate albeit common practice. This is another plausible explanation for the disparity in organizational tenure between successful males and females. It may take women longer to reach the ranks of management, particularly upper management, and to be recognized as high performing and high potential due to sex-based discrimination in organizations. Limitations of the study A field setting was selected to minimize the impact of gender stereotypical results often found in laboratory research settings investigating gender differences. Nevertheless a field setting in one organization may be problematic because people self-select into and out of job positions based on their match with the environment. Over time these actions result in relatively homogeneous settings with relatively similar people within them. Second, although the selection of one organization controlled for context in this study, this choice limits the generalizability of the results. Additionally, while the male and female respondents mirrored the organization’s population for male and female leaders, a third limitation to be considered is the relatively small sample size of women executives in the study. Implications for future research There are a number of recommended directions for future research as a result of these findings. First, the question of gender differences in exhibiting emotional and social intelligence competencies remains a contested area for further exploration. While the present study found no significant differences between men and women in their overall demonstration of these competencies, previous research has reported equivocal results. Additional investigations into gender differences in the demonstration of emotional and social intelligence competencies can certainly yield new insight and perhaps clarity. Those emotional and social intelligence competencies differentiating the most successful leaders and their typical peers merit further study. The individual competencies separating the most successful from the typical leaders in this research need to be analyzed further to determine if this list is germane to one organization or more universally applicable. Also warranted is an extended examination of what particular competencies consistently set apart the most successful leaders. Additional studies assessing emotional and social intelligence competencies should be done with validated 360-degree instruments, as was done in this study. A composite picture of a leader’s behaviors from multiple raters, as opposed to reliance on

Social and emotional competencies 29

JMD 27,1

30

self-reports or the perspectives of a single rater group such as direct reports or managers, provides a more complete picture. Insights from a variety of people interacting with leaders in various ways will expand our understanding of leadership competencies. Further analyses undertaking the comparisons of emotional and social intelligence competencies between the individual rater groups’ scores (i.e. self scores, manager, peers, direct reports, clients and customers’ scores) will provide deeper insight into the importance of demonstrating particular competencies to each of these distinct groups. Examining the impact of emotional and social intelligence competencies on assessments of performance, potential and success with large samples of male and female leaders from multiple organizations will extend this research and the generalizability of the results. The interaction of a person’s gender role with their organizational role merits increased consideration and scrutiny. While most empirical studies examine these two roles within a bipolar framework, there is evidence to explore the interplay between the gender role and the organizational role and their impact on men and women. For example, considering the situational contexts when each of these two roles might predominate, as well as when the two roles might intermingle and support one another, are areas for further study. Implications for practice There are several implications for organizations as well as for those individuals who lead organizations. Organizational systems that have a limited framework for successful leadership behaviors will restrict their ability to recruit and develop outstanding leaders. The emotional and social intelligence competencies used in organizational assessments for hiring, training and development, and promotions must be expanded to include the broadest possible range of competencies. The core list of competencies considered critical for successful leadership today will certainly evolve to adapt to business conditions and challenges in the future. Organizations must be expansive and fluid in recognizing and rewarding the demonstration of a broad number of emotional and social intelligence competencies. Organizational leaders might expand their notions of success to include both extrinsic and intrinsic measures in order to better understand the various ways that individuals gauge their own success. Success is measured in multiple ways. External measures include hierarchical position, salary, and other public recognitions of achievements. Internal measures of success involve a feeling of self-worth and a passion for the content of one’s work. Recognizing that there are different constructs for success will assist organizational leaders in understanding, motivating and rewarding those who work for them. The expression of emotional and social intelligence competencies may appear differently when men and women exhibit them. Organizational leaders need to be keen students of these competencies and pay close attention to observing men and women demonstrating them in multiple situations. For example, emotional and social intelligence competencies that include behaviors focused on working with others, competencies such as teamwork and collaboration and developing others, must be acknowledged as important for organizational viability, growth and change when

demonstrated by either males or females. These vital competencies oftentimes are not recognized as extraordinary when being applied by women. These behaviors, while traditionally associated with women more than men, are essential for all leaders to demonstrate effectively. Special attention needs to be paid to the pace of career advancement for women as well as the opportunities provided to women that allow them to be considered for advancement. Developmental opportunities should be created and offered on an ongoing basis, strategically selected based on the organization’s and individual’s needs. Critical for women’s career advancement, organizations need to examine their practices, procedures and policies on a regular basis to determine whether they are reinforcing gender stereotypes and stereotypical behavior. Hiring procedures, training opportunities and development programs, benefits packages, leave policies, and performance, salary and promotional evaluations can all play a part in contributing to gender stereotypes. Executives in policy-making positions must periodically reflect on their own behavior, not only for their own learning and development but also to see whether they are behaving in ways that contribute to gender stereotypical practices. These decision-makers may be sending subtle messages throughout the organization that sustain or support gender stereotypical behavior. Modeling the behavior of the leader one would like to be will go a long way toward creating that reality not only for oneself but also for the system in general. Finally, organizational leaders have an obligation to speak up when they observe gender stereotypes operating in the organization. Silence continues the practice of seeing men and women through a narrow and limiting perspective of their potential contributions and gifts. References Alimo-Metcalfe, B. (1995), “An investigation of female and male constructs of leadership and empowerment”, Women in Management Review, Vol. 10, pp. 3-8. Atwater, L.E. and Yammarino, F.J. (1992), “Does self-other agreement on leadership perceptions moderate the validity of leadership and performance predictions?”, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 45, pp. 141-64. Baack, J., Carr-Ruffino, N. and Pelletier, M. (1993), “Making it to the top: specific leadership skills”, Women in Management Review, Vol. 8, pp. 17-23. Bar-On, R., Brown, J.M., Kirkcaldy, B.D. and Thome, E.P. (2000), “Emotional expression and implications for occupational stress: an application of the Emotional Quotient Inventory”, Personality and Individual Differences, Vol. 28, pp. 1107-18. Bartol, K.M. (1999), “Gender influences on performance evaluations”, in Powell, G.N. (Ed.), Handbook of Gender and Work, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA. Bass, B.M. and Aviolo, B.J. (1997), “Shatter the glass ceiling: women may make better managers”, in Grint, K. (Ed.), Oxford University Press, New York, NY. Boyatzis, R.E. (1982), The Competent Manager: A Model for Effective Performance, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY. Boyatzis, R.E. (2006), “Using tipping points of emotional intelligence and cognitive competencies to predict financial performance of leaders”, Psicothemia, Vol. 17, pp. 124-31. Boyatzis, R.E. and Goleman, D. (2001), Emotional Competence Inventory, Hay Group, Boston, MA.

Social and emotional competencies 31

JMD 27,1

32

Boyatzis, R.E. and Sala, F. (2004), “Assessing emotional intelligence competencies”, in Geher, G. (Ed.), The Measurement of Emotional Intelligence, Novas Science Publishers, Hauppauge, NY. Boyatzis, R.E., Stubbs, E.C. and Taylor, S.N. (2002), “Learning cognitive and emotional intelligence competencies through graduate management education”, Academy of Management Journal on Learning and Education, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 150-62. Brackett, M.A., Rivers, S.E., Shiffman, S., Lerner, N. and Salovey, P. (2006), “Relating emotional abilities to social functioning: a comparison of self-report and performance measures of emotional intelligence”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 91 No. 4, pp. 780-95. Brenner, O.C., Tomkiewicz, J. and Schein, V.E. (1989), “The relationship between sex role stereotypes and requisite management characteristics revisited”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 32, pp. 662-9. Butterfield, D.A. and Grinnell, J.P. (1999), “‘Re-viewing’ gender, leadership, and managerial behavior: do three decades of research tell us anything?”, in Powell, G.N. (Ed.), Handbook of Gender and Work, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA. Carli, L.L. and Eagly, A.H. (2001), “Gender, hierarchy, and leadership: an introduction”, Journal of Social Issues, Vol. 57, pp. 629-36. Ciarrochi, J.V., Chan, A.Y.C. and Caputi, P. (2000), “A critical evaluation of the emotional intelligence construct”, Personality and Individual Differences, Vol. 28, pp. 539-61. Cohen, J. and Cohen, P. (1975), Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ. Day, D.R. and Stogdill, R.M. (1972), “Leader behavior of male and female supervisors: a comparative study”, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 25, pp. 353-60. Day, D.V. (2000), “Leadership development: a review in context”, The Leadership Quarterly Yearly Review of Leadership, Vol. 11, pp. 581-614. Denison, D.R., Hooijberg, R. and Quinn, R.E. (1995), “Paradox and performance: toward a theory of behavioral complexity in managerial leadership”, Organization Science, Vol. 6, pp. 524-40. Dobbins, G.H. and Platz, S.J. (1986), “Sex differences in leadership: how real are they?”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 11, pp. 118-27. Dulewicz, C., Young, M. and Dulewicz, V. (2005), “The relevance of emotional intelligence for leadership performance”, Journal of General Management, Vol. 30, pp. 71-86. Dulewicz, V. (2000), “Emotional intelligence: the key to effective corporate leadership?”, Journal of General Management, Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 1-14. Eagly, A.H. and Johannesen-Schmidt, M.C. (2001), “The leadership styles of women and men”, Journal of Social Issues, Vol. 57, pp. 781-97. Eagly, A.H. and Johnson, B.T. (1990), “Gender and leadership style: a meta-analysis”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 108, pp. 233-56. Eagly, A.H., Johannesen-Schmidt, M.C. and van Engen, M.L. (2003), “Transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire leadership styles: a meta-analysis comparing women and men”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 129, pp. 569-91. Eagly, A.H., Karau, S.J. and Makhijani, M.G. (1995), “Gender and the effectiveness of leaders: a meta-analysis”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 117, pp. 125-45. Eagly, A.H., Makhijani, M.G. and Klonsky, B.G. (1992), “Gender and the evaluation of leaders: a meta-analysis”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 111, pp. 3-22.

Fletcher, J.K. (1999), Disappearing Acts: Gender, Power, and Relational Practice at Work, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. Gattiker, U.E. and Larwood, L. (1988), “Predictors for managers’ career mobility, success, and satisfaction”, Human Relations, Vol. 41, pp. 569-91. Goleman, D. (1998), Working with Emotional Intelligence, Bantam Books, New York, NY.

Social and emotional competencies

Goleman, D. (2006), Social Intelligence, Bantam Books, New York, NY. Hay Group (2002), Emotional Competence Inventory: Technical Manual, Hay Group, Boston, MA. Heilman, M., Block, C.J. and Martell, R.F. (1995), “Sex stereotypes: do they influence perceptions of managers?”, Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, Vol. 10, pp. 237-52. Heilman, M.E., Block, C.J., Martell, R.F. and Simon, M.C. (1989), “Has anything changed? Current characterizations of men, women, and managers”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 74, pp. 935-42. Helgeson, S. (1990), The Female Advantage: Women’s Ways of Leadership, Doubleday, New York, NY. Higgs, M. (2004), “A study of the relationship between emotional intelligence and performance in UK call centres”, Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 19, pp. 442-54. Hogan, R., Curphy, G.J. and Hogan, J. (1994), “What we know about leadership effectiveness and personality”, American Psychologist, Vol. 49, pp. 493-504. Hooijberg, R. (1996), “A multidirectional approach toward leadership: an extension of the concept of behavioral complexity”, Human Relations, Vol. 49, pp. 917-46. Humphrey, R.H. (2002), “The many faces of emotional leadership”, Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 13, pp. 493-504. Judge, T.A., Cable, D.M., Boudreau, J.W. and Bretz, R.D. (1995), “An empirical investigation of the predictors of executive career success”, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 48, pp. 485-520. Karau, S.J. and Eagly, A.H. (1999), “Invited reaction: gender, social roles, and the emergence of leaders”, Human Resource Development Quarterly, Vol. 10, pp. 321-7. Law, K.S., Wong, C-S. and Song, L.J. (2004), “The construct and criterion validity of emotional intelligence and its potential utility for management studies”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 89, pp. 483-96.

33

Lipman-Blumen, J. (1996), The Connective Edge: Leading in an Interdependent World, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA. Luthans, F. (1988), “Successful vs effective real managers”, Academy of Management Executive, Vol. 2, pp. 127-32. Lyness, K.S. and Heilman, M.E. (2006), “When fit is fundamental: performance evaluations and promotions of upper-level female and male managers”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 91 No. 4, pp. 777-85. Lyness, K.S. and Judiesch, M.K. (1999), “Are women more likely to be hired or promoted into management positions?”, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 54, pp. 158-73. Lyness, K.S. and Thompson, D.E. (1997), “Above the glass ceiling? A comparison of matched samples of female and male executives”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 82, pp. 359-75. Lyness, K.S. and Thompson, D.E. (2000), “Climbing the corporate ladder: do female and male executives follow the same route?”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 85, pp. 86-101. Maher, K.J. (1997), “Gender-related stereotypes of transformational and transactional leadership”, Sex Roles, Vol. 37, pp. 209-25.

JMD 27,1

34

Mandell, B. and Pherwani, S. (2003), “Relationship between emotional intelligence and transformational leadership style: a gender comparison”, Journal of Business and Psychology, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 387-404. Marshall, J. (1995), “Working at senior management and board levels: some of the issues for women”, Women in Management Review, Vol. 10, pp. 21-5. Martell, R.F. and De Smet, A.L. (2001), “A diagnostic-ratio approach to measuring beliefs about the leadership abilities of male and female managers”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 86, pp. 1223-31. Merrill-Sands, D.M. and Kolb, D.M. (2001), “Women as leaders: the paradox of success”, Center for Gender in Organizations’ Insights, Briefing Note 9, Apri, pp. 1-4. Metcalfe, B. and Altman, Y. (2001), “Leadership”, in Wilson, E (Ed.), Organizational Behaviour Reassessed: The Impact of Gender, Sage Publications, London. Morrison, A.M., White, R.P. and Van Velsor, E. (1992), Breaking the Glass Ceiling: Can Women Reach the Top of America’s Largest Corporations?, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA. Mount, M.K. (1984), “Supervisor, self and subordinate ratings of performance and satisfaction with supervision”, Journal of Management, Vol. 10, pp. 305-20. Nieva, V.F. and Gutek, B.A. (1980), “Sex effects on evaluation”, Journal of Management Review, Vol. 5, pp. 267-76. Palmer, B., Walls, M., Burgess, Z. and Stough, C. (2001), “Emotional intelligence and effective leadership”, Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 22, pp. 5-10. Perrault, M.R. and Irwin, J.K. (1996), Gender Differences at Work: Are Men and Women Really that Different?, Advanced Teamwares Inc., Agoura Hills, CA. Petrides, K.V. and Furnham, A. (2000), “Gender differences in measured and self-estimated trait emotional intelligence”, Sex Roles, Vol. 42, pp. 449-61. Petrides, K.V. and Furnham, A. (2006), “The role of trait emotional intelligence in a gender-specific model of organizational variables”, Journal of Applied Social Psychology, Vol. 36, pp. 552-69. Powell, G.N. (1990), “One more time: do female and male managers differ?”, Academy of Management Executive, Vol. 4, pp. 68-75. Powell, G.N., Butterfield, D.A. and Parent, J.D. (2002), “Gender and managerial stereotypes: have the times changed?”, Journal of Management, Vol. 28, pp. 177-93. Ragins, B.R., Townsend, B. and Mattis, M. (1998), “Gender gap in the executive suite: CEOs and female executives report on breaking the glass ceiling”, Academy of Management Executive, Vol. 12, pp. 28-42. Rosener, J.B. (1990), “Ways women lead”, Harvard Business Review, November-December, pp. 119-25. Rutherford, S. (2001), “Any difference? An analysis of gender and divisional management styles in a large airline”, Gender, Work and Organization, Vol. 8, pp. 326-45. Salam, S., Cox, J.F. and Sims, H.P. (1997), “In the eye of the beholder: how leadership relates to 360-degree performance ratings”, Group and Organization Management, Vol. 22, pp. 185-209. Schein, V.E. (1976), “Think manager, think male”, Atlanta Economic Review, Vol. 26, pp. 21-4. Schutte, N., Malouff, J., Hall, E., Haggerty, D., Cooper, J., Golden, D. and Dornheim, L. (1998), “Development and validation of a measure of emotional intelligence”, Personality and Individual Differences, Vol. 25, pp. 167-77. Sharpe, R. (2000), “As leaders, women rule”, Business Week, November 20, pp. 74-84.

Shipper, F. and Davy, J. (2002), “A model and investigation of managerial skills, employees’ attitudes, and managerial performance”, Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 13, pp. 95-120. Shore, L.M. and Thornton, G.C. (1986), “Effects of gender on self- and supervisory ratings”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 29, pp. 115-29. Shore, T.H. (1992), “Subtle gender bias in the assessment of managerial potential”, Sex Roles, Vol. 27, pp. 499-515. Slaski, M. and Cartwright, S. (2002), “Health, performance and emotional intelligence: an exploratory study of retail managers”, Stress and Health, Vol. 16, pp. 63-8. Sosik, J.J. and Megerian, L. (1999), “Understanding leader emotional intelligence and performance: the role of self-other agreement on transformational leadership perceptions”, Group and Organization Management, Vol. 24, pp. 367-90. Stroh, L.K., Brett, J.M. and Reilly, A.H. (1992), “All the right stuff: a comparison of female and male managers’ career progression”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 77, pp. 251-60. Swiss, D. (1996), Women Breaking through, Peterson’s, Princeton, NJ. Van Velsor, E. and Hughes, M.W. (1990), Gender Differences in the Development of Managers: How Women Managers Learn from Experience, Center for Creative Leadership, Greensboro, NC. Van Velsor, E., Taylor, S. and Leslie, J.B. (1993), “An examination of the relationships among self-perception accuracy, self-awareness, gender, and leader effectiveness”, Human Resource Management, Vol. 32, pp. 249-63. Vecchio, R.P. (2002), “Leadership and gender advantage”, Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 13, pp. 643-71. Vilkinas, T. and Cartan, G. (1993), “Competencies of Australian women in management”, Women in Management Review, Vol. 8, pp. 31-5. Vinnicombe, S. (1987), “What exactly are the differences in male and female working styles?”, Women in Management Review, Vol. 3, pp. 13-21. Wong, C-S. and Law, K.S. (2002), “The effects of leader and follower emotional intelligence on performance and attitude: an exploratory study”, Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 13, pp. 243-74. Wong, C-S., Law, K.S. and Wong, P-M. (2004), “Development and validation of a forced choice emotional intelligence measure for Chinese respondents in Hong Kong”, Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Vol. 21, pp. 535-59. Corresponding author Margaret M. Hopkins can be contacted at: [email protected]

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected] Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

Social and emotional competencies 35

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0262-1711.htm

JMD 27,1

36

Characteristics that distinguish outstanding urban principals Emotional intelligence, social intelligence and environmental adaptation Helen W. Williams

Received 20 April 2007 Revised 20 August 2007 Accepted 31 August 2007

The Cleveland Foundation, Cleveland, Ohio, USA Abstract Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to focus on two research questions. First, what are the emotional and social intelligence competencies that distinguish outstanding from typical urban principals? Second, how do outstanding and typical urban principals conceptualize and adapt differently to their external organizational environment? Design/methodology/approach – A criterion sample of 12 outstanding and eight typical principals was identified from a large Midwestern urban school district. Data from critical incident interviews and written questionnaires were collected. The quantitative and qualitative data were analyzed to identify the key characteristics that describe differences between the two performance groups. Findings – Significant differences are found in both areas of inquiry. Outstanding principals demonstrate a broad and deep repertoire of competencies related to emotional and social intelligence. Twelve of the 20 competencies studied significantly differentiate outstanding and typical principals. In addition, the study found differences in how outstanding and typical principals conceptualize and adapt to their external organizational environment. Outstanding principals interact with a broader range of external groups and utilize a wider spectrum of boundary-spanning strategies. Research limitations/implications – A field sample from one urban school district limits the generalizability of the results. Practical implications – Usefulness of the findings for school districts and universities is explored including the implications of a competency assessment and development approach for the recruitment, selection and preparation of principal candidates as well as leadership training for incumbent principals. Originality/value – This study suggests that emotional and social intelligence is a critical factor in effective principal performance and is an important framework to examine in future research. The study provides a methodology that can be easily replicated in other urban districts. Keywords Emotional intelligence, Social skills, Principals, Leadership Paper type Research paper

Journal of Management Development Vol. 27 No. 1, 2008 pp. 36-54 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited 0262-1711 DOI 10.1108/02621710810840758

Over the past decade, public education in the United States has come under increased scrutiny. With the passage of the federal No Child Left Behind law and subsequent adoption of state oversight systems, public schools are now accountable for improving student achievement as measured by standardized test scores and high school graduation rates. This accountability mandate presents unique challenges for principals of urban schools where typically 50 percent of students do not graduate on time and two-thirds or more fail to reach even the basic level on national tests. Recent studies point to significant correlations between principal leadership and student achievement (Hallinger and Heck, 1996a, b, 1998; Cotton, 2003; Leithwood et al.,

2004; Marzano et al., 2005). Earlier studies suggest that the potential for principal impact may be stronger in lower SES schools (Coleman, 1966; Edmonds, 1979; Rowan and Denk, 1984; Andrews et al., 1986; Hallinger and Murphy, 1985). In addition, research strongly suggests that some urban principals are more effective than other urban principals. (Edmonds, 1979; Hallinger and Murphy, 1985; Smith and Piele, 1989; Bryk et al., 1998; Haberman, 1999). These studies describe the characteristics of effective practice and provide information about differences in style and focus. However, to date, research has provided very little data about the skills, knowledge, dispositions, motivations and self concepts that characterize and differentiate outstanding and typical urban principals. The objective of this study was to identify the competencies that distinguish outstanding principals in a large urban district. The conceptual framework The conceptual framework for this study was derived from the “model of effective job performance” developed by Richard E. Boyatzis (1982). Boyatzis identified three factors – individual competencies, job demands and organizational environment – that contribute to effective job performance and described their interrelationship as a dynamic and contingent process as explained in the introductory article in this special issue. Individual competencies describe “what a person is capable of doing” and includes a combination of motives and traits, self-image and social role, skills and knowledge. Job demands “reveals what a person is expected to do” including the functions, tasks, roles and expected output. Organizational environment “reveals how a person is expected to respond to the job demands” and includes mission, climate, culture, policies and procedures. It is the “fit” of these three factors that results in effective job performance. Boyatzis (1982, p. 12) defined “effective job performance” as “the attainment of specific results (i.e. outcomes) required by the job through specific actions while maintaining or being consistent with policies, procedures and conditions of the organizational environment”. For the purposed of this study, each of these factors was explored and defined within the urban school context. Organizational environment Urban principals are responsible for educating significantly higher proportions of economically disadvantaged, minority, special needs and second language learner students. Yet they work in a largely unsupportive external environment characterized by frequent changes in superintendent and school board leadership; entrenched bureaucracy; prescriptive union-management agreements; high student mobility rates; inadequate and unstable resource base; declining public confidence and increased competition for students, particularly from charter schools. In addition to navigating a complicated school district bureaucracy, research suggests that effective urban principals need to rethink their relationship to parents and the community (Goldring and Sullivan, 1996; Sanders and Epstein, 1998; Sanders, 1999; Keyes and Soleil, 2001). Principals must balance the traditional approach of buffering the school from negative external forces with a strategic openness and purposefully create more porous boundaries between the school and its environment (Goldring and Sullivan, 1996).

Outstanding urban principals

37

JMD 27,1

Haberman (1999) also emphasized both the boundary spanning and buffering aspects of the principal’s external role in the urban context. He suggested that effective principals ensure the safety and security of everyone in and around the school environment; connect students and their families to health and human services and protect the school from the chaos in which they must operate (i.e. state mandates, temporary superintendents, school board politics and central office turf wars).

38 Job demands Today it is generally recognized that the job demands of the principal are tied to the changing educational context (Portin, 2000). Three leadership frameworks are particularly relevant to the job demands of the urban principal. “Instructional leadership”, the most frequently cited, describes principals who are focused on academic goals; hold high expectations for staff performance and student achievement; observe and work directly with teachers to improve instruction; minimize disruptions to ensure efficient use of instructional time; creatively use resources; monitor student achievement results and use data to guide planning (Bossert et al., 1982; Persell and Cookson, 1982; Hall and Hord, 1984; Leithwood and Montgomery, 1986; Davis and Thomas, 1989; Leithwood et al., 1990; Levine and Lezotte, 1990; Bolman and Heller, 1995; Leithwood and Duke, 1999; Reeves, 2004; Marzano et al., 2005). Over the past decade, “change leadership” has emerged as another important framework. Urban principals are increasingly charged with leading educational reform in their buildings requiring a transformational rather than a transactional approach. As leaders of change, principals must establish a direction, align people and resources to that direction, continue to motivate and maintain the focus and anticipate and address problems that can derail the direction (Christensen, 1993; Leithwood and Steinbach, 1993, 1995; Fullan and Stiegelbauer, 1991; Fullan, 1996, 2001; Neumann et al., 2000; Rallis and Goldring, 2000). Most recently, the concept of “entrepreneurial leadership” is gaining attention. Effective principals organize, rather than manage their schools, for results. They analyze the needs of their students, design a staffing plan to meet those needs, arrange a schedule to fit the plan and choose relevant teaching materials. They are willing to take risks; they are problem solvers rather than rule followers. This framework becomes more relevant as large urban school districts (i.e. Boston, New York, Chicago) increasingly move toward decentralization providing more autonomy to principals in return for accountability (Ouchi, 2003; Hess, 2006; Williams, 2006). Individual competencies The focus on competencies as a predictor of job performance began over 30 years ago (McClelland, 1973; Boyatzis, 1982; Spencer and Spencer, 1993). Differentiating competencies are the “factors that distinguish superior from average performers” (Spencer and Spencer, 1993, p. 15). The competency assessment method or competency study is used to develop valid competency models which describe the differentiating characteristics of outstanding performers in a job. This methodology has been used extensively across a variety of job classifications and organizations (Boyatzis, 1982; Spencer and Spencer, 1993; Giber et al., 2000). In addition, generic models for predicting success have been developed based on an analysis of competency studies (Boyatzis, 1982; Spencer and Spencer, 1993; Goleman, 1998; Goleman et al., 2002).

A significant number of national educational professional associations have developed separate generic leadership models that describe a set of dispositions, skills, and knowledge that contribute to effective principal performance (National Policy Board for Educational Administration, 1993; Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium, 1996; National Association for Secondary Principals, 1999; National Association of Elementary School Principals, 2002). While these models signal a growing recognition that individual competencies are linked to effective performance, they lack rigor and specificity. The models tend to be theoretically rather than empirically derived and give equal weight to all competencies as opposed to identifying those that make the most difference in principal performance. More recently, three separate syntheses of empirical research have looked at the correlation between principal leadership and student achievement. In her narrative review of 81 reports, Cotton (2003) identifies 25 categories of principal behavior that positively affect student achievement, teacher behavior, teacher attitudes, student behavior, student attitudes and dropout rates. In their review of empirical research, Leithwood et al. (2004) identified three basic practices as the core of successful leadership-setting direction, developing people and redesigning organization. In the most comprehensive study to date, a meta-analysis of 69 studies involving 2,802 schools, Marzano et al. (2005) identified 21 categories of behaviors – “principal responsibilities”that are positively correlated to student achievement (correlations range from 0.18 to 0.33). The “principal responsibilities” include: affirmation; change agent; contingent rewards; communication; culture; discipline; flexibility; focus; ideals/beliefs; input; intellectual stimulation; involvement in curriculum, instruction and assessment; knowledge of curriculum, instruction and assessment; monitoring/evaluating; optimizer; order; outreach; relationships; resources; situational awareness and visibility. These recent syntheses are important because they establish an empirical link between principal behaviors and student achievement. However, the empirical research regarding highly effective principals has primarily focused on effective approaches, functions and activities rather than on “the characteristics that enable or increase the likelihood of a person performing those activities” (Boyatzis, 1982, p. 8). There is little research on leadership antecedents, particularly personal variables. Focus of study The primary focus of this study was to identify the competencies that differentiated outstanding and typical urban principals. The competency assessment methodology, widely used in other fields in the United States, offered a useful approach to explore this question. In addition, Forde et al. (2000) successfully used this method in Great Britain to identify the competencies that differentiated outstanding and average head teachers. It made sense to focus this exploration using the empirically derived models of emotional intelligence and social intelligence which have emerged as key frameworks in competency research and assessment methodology (Sternberg, 1985; Salovey and Mayer, 1990; Gardner, 1993; Goleman, 1995, 1998, 2006; Goleman et al., 2002). Emotional intelligence competencies contribute to an individual’s ability to understand and manage oneself. Social intelligence competencies focus on an individual’s ability to understand others and manage relationships. Evidence strongly suggests that emotional and social competencies are the differentiating factors in success. The

Outstanding urban principals

39

JMD 27,1

relevance of these competencies to effective principal leadership is gaining increasing attention within the education sector (Cherniss, 1998, 2000; Patti and Tobin, 2003). Secondarily, this study focused on a separate but related question – identifying differences in how outstanding and typical urban principals conceive of and operate within their external environments.

40

Research design and methods This empirical study utilized a criterion sample design and involved the collection and analysis of both quantitative and qualitative data to identify individual emotional and social competencies and related contextual characteristics that distinguish outstanding urban principals. The study was constructed to specifically address identified weaknesses associated with past research on educational administrative behavior including lack of multi-method approaches, poor selection criteria, lack of useful and empirically derived concepts to describe what is observed, and lack of attention to situational effects. Sample The design utilized a criterion group of 20 principals from a large Midwestern urban school district – 12 outstanding and 8 typical performers with a minimum of three years experience. The use of a single district controlled for many of the situational variables research has suggested impact administrative behavior. The criterion sample was drawn from a population size of 120 principals. The ratio of outstanding to typical in this sample (12:8) was consistent with an assumption in competency research that one can learn more from the “superstars” than from the typical performers (Miles and Huberman, 1984; Spencer and Spencer, 1993; McClelland, 1998). A multiple source nomination process, which included peer nominations, supervisor nominations and teacher ratings over two years, was used to identify the criterion sample. It is preferable to use nominations over ratings because people are asked to identify rather than measure outstanding performance (Lewin and Zwany, 1976; Boyatzis, 1982). The multiple source approach used in this study is sound and addresses the criticisms associated with studies that have used single source and/or sole reliance on ratings to identify criterion samples (Hemphill et al., 1962; Boyatzis, 1982; Spencer and Spencer, 1993). The 12 outstanding principals in the sample were selected on the basis of meeting three conditions: nominated by two or more peers; nominated by two or more supervisors and had at least a 2.75 (out of a possible 3.00) rating from teachers for both years. The eight typical principals were selected on the basis of receiving no peer or supervisor nominations and had ratings from teachers which were equal to or less than 2.0 for both years. The sample was given to the researcher without any indication of who was “outstanding” and who was “typical”. The sample of 20 included 11 elementary school principals, five middle school principals and four high school principals. The demographics of this sample were representative of the population of the study site. The sample had 58 percent females, as compared to 55 percent in the population of principals. It had 67 percent African Americans as compared to 70 percent in the population. The sample averaged nine years as a principal as compared to nine years for the population. All differences were non-significant.

Data collection and analysis Data from behavioral event incident interviews (BEI) were used as the major source for exploring both aspects of the study – individual competencies and adaptation to the external environment. The BEI, designed to get the participant to vividly and accurately describe real experiences in his/her job, is a well established qualitative research method for assessing individual competencies (McClelland, 1973; Boyatzis, 1982; Spencer and Spencer, 1993; McClelland, 1998). During a two hour audio-taped interview, each principal was asked to describe three work incidents, two in which he or she felt effective and one in which he or she felt ineffective. The interviewer, trained in the BEI technique, encouraged the principal to share specific details about what he or she said, felt, thought, and did during each episode. In addition to the behavioral incident interviews, principal participants also completed two written questionnaires – a Career History and Rotter Locus of Control (Rotter, 1966). Emotional and social competencies. Each incident was analyzed using a code derived directly from a model of emotional and social intelligence competencies (see Table I) that has been widely used and its validity and reliability well documented (Boyatzis et al., 1999; Boyatzis and Sala, 2004). A double coding method (Miles and Huberman, 1984; Boyatzis, 1998) was used to determine reliability for 16 of the 20 interviews. The researcher and another coder, individually analyzed behavioral event interviews from sample subsets (four

Outstanding urban principals

41

Emotional intelligence clusters/competencies Self-awareness cluster Emotional self-awareness Recognizing one’s emotions and their effects Accurate self-assessment Knowing one’s inner resources, abilities and limits Self-confidence A strong sense of one’s self worth and capabilities Self-management cluster Self-control Keeping disruptive emotions and impulses in check Trustworthiness Maintaining integrity Conscientiousness Taking personal responsibility for own performance Adaptability Being flexible in responding to change Achievement orientation Striving to improve or meet a standard of excellence Initiative Displays proactivity Social intelligence clusters/competencies Social awareness cluster Empathy Sensing others’ feelings, perspectives and taking an active interest in their concerns Organizational awareness Reading social and political currents Service orientation Anticipating, recognizing, and meeting customers’ needs Social skills cluster Developing others Sensing others’ development needs and bolstering their abilities Leadership Inspiring and guiding individuals and groups Influence Wielding effective tactics for persuasion Communications Listening openly and sending convincing messages Change catalyst Initiating or managing change Conflict management Negotiating and resolving disagreements Building bonds Nurturing instrumental relationships Teamwork/collaboration Working with others and creating group synergy toward shared goals

Table I. Summary of emotional and social intelligence competencies

JMD 27,1

42

outstanding and four typical principals) and then met to discuss results and reach agreement about the presence or absence of each competency within each incident. The initial inter-rater reliability was 87 percent, with 100 percent agreement following discussion of differences. Another eight of the interviews were analyzed independently by the two coders with 99 percent agreement. Given the high percentage of inter-rater reliability, the final four interviews were coded by the researcher. The total number of incidents in which a competency was coded became the principal’s frequency score for that competency. The highest score a principal could obtain for any competency was “3” meaning that the competency was coded in each of the three incidents described in the interview. The lowest frequency score a principal could receive for a competency was “0” meaning that the competency was not coded in any of the three incidents. Data were summarized for each performance group at the competency and cluster levels. Given the ordinal nature of this data, two non parametric statistical tests were selected to examine differences in the demonstration of emotional and social intelligence between the outstanding and typical principal groups. First a Chi-Square analysis was to examine differences between the performance groups regarding the distribution of each of the competencies across the three incidents (consistency). In addition, Two-tailed Mann Whitney U’s were run for each competency treating the frequency score as the dependent variable (intensity). Conceptualization of and adaptation to the external environment. In addition to competencies, behavioral incidents were analyzed to describe and compare outstanding and typical principals’ conceptualization and adaptation to the external environment on two variables. First, behavioral incidents were coded to identify how often principals mentioned specific groups and subgroups identified in the literature review as part of a principals’ external task environment. The groups included: School District Bureaucracy, such as central office, union; Community Partners, such as social service agencies, corporations; and Parents and Families. Separate frequency scores reflecting the percentage of incidents in which each of the three specific groups was mentioned were calculated for both the outstanding and typical groups. Two-tailed Mann Whitney U’s were run treating the frequency scores for each group (i.e. school district bureaucracy, community partners and parents/families) as the dependant variable. Second, the researcher developed a theory driven code consisting of the 12 boundary spanning strategies identified by Goldring (1995). The researcher and two experienced coders analyzed a total of 20 incidents, the first incident in each interview. Based on the results of the coding, only four of the eleven original strategies were included in the final code because their reliability and frequency far outpaced the other strategies (see Table II). Given the high percentage of coder agreement (95 percent), the researcher analyzed the remaining 40 incidents using this code. Separate frequency scores reflecting the percentage of incidents in which each strategy was coded were calculated for each principal performance group. Two-tailed Mann Whitney Us were run treating the frequency scores of each boundary spanning strategy the dependant variable.

Strategy

Description

Buffering

Principals seal off core of school from environmental influences (e.g. create formal procedures to respond to parent requests)

Resource acquisition

Principals compete for support by seeking alternative means of acquiring resources (e.g. special status – “empowered schools” – special grant programs, etc.)

Coalition building

Principals join elements from school and environment for a common purpose (e.g. joint decision-making task force, etc.)

Public relations

Principals try to influence the environment’s perceptions of and knowledge about the school (e.g. promote a positive image)

Results Emotional and social intelligence competencies Outstanding principals showed more consistent demonstration of both emotional and intelligence competencies across the sample, as shown in Table III. At least 50 percent or more of the outstanding group was coded one or more times (1+) for 18 of the 20 competencies. In contrast, 50 percent or more of the typical group was coded for one or more times (1+) for 10 of the 20 competencies. Significant differences were found for five of the emotional intelligence competencies (self confidence, self control, conscientiousness, achievement orientation and initiative) and for four of the social intelligence competencies (organizational awareness, leadership, conflict management, teamwork/collaboration). Significant differences were found in the intensity of using the competencies in all four cluster levels areas and for 12 of the 20 competencies, as shown in Table IV. In terms of emotional intelligence, outstanding principals demonstrated significantly higher levels for 5 of 9 competencies (self confidence, self control, conscientiousness, achievement orientation, initiative). Significant differences were found for 7 of the 11 social intelligence competencies competencies (organizational awareness, developing others, leadership, influence, change catalyst, conflict management and teamwork/collaboration). In addition, two other emotional and social intelligence competencies, emotional self awareness and empathy, differentiated at the near significant level ( p , 0.10). Conceptualization and adaptation to the external environment No significant differences were found between outstanding and typical principals in their references to the external groups at either the parent or school district bureaucracy levels, as shown in Table V. However, outstanding principals referred to community partners, particularly local organizations/leaders and social service agencies/police more frequently than did typical principals. Outstanding principals used two of the four strategies at a significantly higher rate: coalition building ( p , 0.01) and public relations ( p , 0.005), as shown in Table VI. Discussion As the findings indicate, emotional and social intelligence competencies matter. Significant differences were found between outstanding and typical principals for five

Outstanding urban principals

43 Table II. Code for external environment adaptation strategies

75.0 16.7 100 58.3 100 100 100 100 58.3 100 100 100 41.7 100 100 58.4 100

Self-management cluster Self-control Trustworthiness Conscientiousness Adaptability Achievement orientation Initiative

Social awareness cluster Empathy Organizational awareness Service orientation

Social skills cluster Developing others Leadership Influence Communications Change catalyst Conflict management Building bonds Teamwork/collaboration 58.3 83.3 100 16.7 33.3 33.3 33.3 83.3

83.3 75.9 16.7

0 0 33.3 16.7 100 100

16.7 8.3 91.7

25.0 25.0 75.0 0 8.3 16.7 0 33.3

50.0 16.7 0

0 0 8.3 0 25.0 8.3

0 0 25.0

Notes: *p , 0.10; * *p , 0.05; * * *p , 0.01; Chi Square analysis was run

50.8 66.7 100

Table III. Differences in the consistency of use of emotional and social intelligence competencies across incidents by performance group 62.5 37.5 75.0 12.5 50.0 50.0 62.5 50.0

100 37.5 25.0

25.0 37.5 50.0 25.0 62.5 37.5

12.5 50.0 25.0

12.5 12.5 62.5 0 12.5 12.5 12.5 25.0

75.0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 12.5

0 25.0 12.5

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0

% of typical group coded (n ¼ 8) 1 þ times 2 þ times 3 times

44

Self-awareness cluster Emotional self-awareness Accurate self-assessment Self-confidence

% of outstanding group coded (n ¼ 12) 1 þ times 2 þ times 3 times

6.875 * 12.187 * * 6.932 * 2.292 7.784 * 10.556 * 1.711 9.583 *

5.833 * 10.909 * * * 2.684

11.250 * * * 1.111 9.394 * 2.684 20.000 * * * 16.181 * * *

3.205 2.407 14.213 * * *

Difference X2

JMD 27,1

Mean frequency score Outstanding Typical (n ¼ 12) (n ¼ 8) Self-awareness cluster Emotional self-awareness Accurate self-assessment Self-confidence Self-management cluster Self-control Trustworthiness Conscientiousness Adaptability Achievement orientation Initiative Social awareness Empathy Organizational awareness Service orientation Relationship skills cluster Developing others Leadership Influence Communications Change catalyst Conflict management Building bonds Teamwork and collaboration

3.58 0.67 0.75 2.17 7.50 0.75 0.17 1.50 0.75 2.25 2.08 5.00 2.33 1.92 0.75 13.17 1.75 2.08 2.75 0.58 1.42 1.50 0.92 2.17

Z

1.25 0.13 0.75 0.37 2.38 0.25 0.37 0.50 0.25 0.63 0.37 3.00 1.75 1.00 0.25 5.75 0.87 0.50 1.63 0.13 0.63 0.50 0.75 0.75

Outstanding urban principals

Group difference p 0.003 * * * 0.082 * 0.867 0.000 * * * 0.000 * * * * 0.026 * * 0.304 0.004 * * * 0.119 0.000 * * * 0.000 * * * 0.002 * * * 0.064 * 0.002 * * * 0.119 0.001 * * * 0.034 * * 0.001 * * * 0.014 * * 0.151 0.024 * * 0.010 * * 0.711 0.004 * * *

22.978 21.739 20.168 23.496 23.701 22.219 21.027 22.898 21.561 23.928 23.765 23.131 21.850 23.121 21.561 23.473 22.119 23.273 22.447 21.436 22.258 22.583 2.370 22.905

Notes: *p , 0.10; * * p , 0.05; * * * p , 0.01; Two-tailed Mann Whitney U tests

Group references Percentage of incidents Total Outstanding Typical (n ¼ 59) (n ¼ 35) (n ¼ 24) Parents School/district bureaucracy Central office Other schools in district Cleveland teachers’ union Community partners Local organizations/leaders Social services/police Corporations/foundations Professional developers

57.6 52.6 47.5 10.2 3.4 44.1 27.1 18.7 8.5 10.2

57.1 51.4 48.6 8.65 0 54.3 40.0 25.7 11.4 11.4

Notes: *p , 0.10; * *p , 0.05; Two-tailed Mann Whitney U tests

58.3 54.2 45.8 12.5 8.3 29.2 8.3 8.3 8.3 8.3

45

Table IV. Differences in the intensity of use of emotional and social intelligence competencies by performance group

Differences Z

p

20.042 20.256 20.923 20.582 21.780 22.070 22.174 21.828 20.667 21.027

0.966 0.798 0.356 0.560 0.075 * 0.038 * * 0.030 * * 0.068 * 0.505 0.304

Table V. Frequency and differences in references to specific groups in the external environment by performance group

JMD 27,1

of nine emotional intelligence competencies and seven of eleven social intelligence competencies. Outstanding and typical principals conceive of and adapt to their environment differently. Outstanding principals interact with a broader set of players, using a more extensive set of boundary spanning strategies.

46

Emotional and social intelligence competencies matter In the context of high accountability and school reform, the job demands of the urban principal require multidimensional leadership. Effective urban principals are simultaneously instructional leaders, change leaders and entrepreneurs. This study suggests that there is a repertoire of specific emotional and social intelligence competencies that differentiates outstanding from typical principals. The emotional intelligence competencies are associated with an individual’s ability to manage himself or herself to get the desired results. Principals with EI competencies are better able to identify challenging and realistic school improvement goals, keep their eyes on the prize even in the midst of instability, make decisions that further established goals and think out of the box. The social intelligence competencies address an individual’s ability to lead and manage others to get the desired results. It is clear from the literature that principals impact student outcomes by impacting the factors that impact students (e.g. quality of teaching, school climate etc.). In other words, it is only through influencing and organizing others within and without the school, that principals can achieve real change. When reviewing these eleven differentiating competencies, six stand out as particularly critical – self confidence ( p , 0.005), achievement orientation ( p , 0.001), initiative ( p , 0.001), organizational awareness ( p , 0.005), leadership ( p , 0.005) and teamwork/collaboration (p , .005). Between 80 to 100 percent of the outstanding principals in the study were coded for these six competencies in at least two out of the three incidents. In contrast, only 25 percent of the typical group were coded for these same competencies in at least two incidents. Self-confidence. All of the outstanding principals in the sample were coded for self confidence in at least one incident and 92 percent were coded in two incidents. This compares to only 25 percent of the typical principals being coded in one incident and 13 percent being coded in two incidents. First, outstanding principals stood up for what they believed in, particularly with their staff. Second, outstanding principals presented themselves in an assured and unhesitating manner particularly in uncertain and tense

Use of strategies Percentage of incidents Outstanding Typical Table VI. Differences in use of boundary spanning strategies by performance group

Buffering Resource acquisition Coalition building Public relations

41.7 41.7 66.7 83.3

Notes: *p , 0.01; Two-tailed Mann Whitney U tests

12.5 62.5 12.5 12.5

Differences Z

p

2 1.359 2 1.252 2 2.666 2 2.982

0.174 0.211 0.008 * 0.003 *

situations. Finally, outstanding principals were able to act independently of central office when necessary. Achievement orientation. All of the outstanding principals were coded at lease twice for this competency and no typical principal was coded twice. Principals with high levels of achievement orientation strive to improve or meet a standard of excellence. Achievement orientation is embedded in five of the twenty one principal responsibilities correlated with student achievement identified by Marzano et al. (2005). These include: change agent (is willing to challenge and actively challenges the status quo); discipline (protects teachers from issues and influences that would detract from their teaching time and focus); focus (establishes clear goals and keeps those goals in the forefront of the school’s attention); monitoring/evaluating (monitors the effectiveness of school practices and their impact on student learning) and resources (provides teachers with materials and professional development necessary for successful execution of their jobs). Initiative. All of the outstanding principals were coded at least twice for initiative as compared to one typical principal. Outstanding principals in the study act rather than simply studying options, go beyond what is required and expected, seek information in unusual ways, initiate action to create possibilities for the future, cut through red tape and find and act upon opportunities that contribute to their school improvement agenda. The emotional competency of initiative is closely linked to “redesigning the organization” one of the three basic practices cited in the Leithwood et al. (2004) as impacting student achievement. Organizational awareness. All of the outstanding principals were coded at least once and 75 percent were coded at least twice. Only three of the eight typical principals (38 percent) were coded once and of these, only one (13 percent) was coded twice. There are two themes that come up frequently in outstanding principals’ ability to read job related social and political currents. First, outstanding principals are aware of the potential and actual dynamics of race in teacher expectations of students and in relationships between students and teachers, students and students, and teachers and parents. Second, outstanding principals are aware of how teachers will react to potential changes in school structure and curriculum. Organizational awareness is closely aligned to the principal responsibility of situational awareness which had the largest correlation to student achievement of the 21 principal responsibilities cited in the meta-analysis completed by Marzano et al. (2005). Leadership. All of the outstanding principals were coded at least once and 83 percent were coded at lease twice. Only three of eight typical principals (38 percent) were coded once and only one (13 percent) was coded twice. Outstanding principals lead by giving direction, stimulating enthusiasm, modeling consistently, using a clear standard and by articulating a clear mission or vision. The competency of leadership is closely aligned with the findings of Leithwood et al. (2004) which indicated that “setting direction” accounts for the largest proportion of a principal’s impact. Teamwork and collaboration. All 12 of the outstanding group were coded once and ten of 12 (83 percent) were coded twice. In comparison, only half of the typical group was coded once and only two of the eight (25 percent) were coded twice. Outstanding principals consciously use teamwork and collaboration to foster group learning and further the school improvement agenda.

Outstanding urban principals

47

JMD 27,1

48

Like the emotional intelligence competency of achievement orientation, the social intelligence competency of teamwork and collaboration is embedded in five of the twenty-one responsibilities identified by Marzano et al. (2005) that correlate with student achievement. These include: affirmation (recognizes and celebrates accomplishments and acknowledges failures); communication (establishes strong lines of communication with and among teachers and students); culture (fosters shared beliefs and a sense of community and cooperation); input (involves teachers in the design and implementation of important decisions and policies) and intellectual stimulation (ensures faculty and staff are aware of the most current theories and practices and makes the discussion of these a regular aspect of the school’s culture). Conceptualization and adaptation to the external environment Studies inside and outside the field of educational administration have concluded that individuals can and do define their organizational leadership roles differently (Katz and Kahn, 1978; Mintzberg, 1980; Manasse, 1985; Jonas et al., 1989). This study suggests that outstanding and typical principals make different choices about how they exercise the role of principal in the external environment. Outstanding principals have a broader conceptualization of their external environment characterized by regular and evenly distributed interaction with the district/school bureaucracy, parents and community partners. The data clearly indicates that typical principals operate in a narrower external arena made up of predominantly parents and the district/school bureaucracy. Outstanding principals demonstrate a broad repertoire of environmental spanning strategies. Both typical and outstanding principals utilize buffering and resource acquisition strategies. However, outstanding principals use of coalition building ( p , 0.05) and public relations ( p , 0.05) to build strategic partnerships is significantly higher. Although not a focus of this study, it is worth noting that there appears to be a positive link between the two sets of findings regarding differences in competencies and differences in environmental adaptation. Those principals with a broader repertoire of emotional and social intelligence competencies are able to operate in a more complex environment using a variety of strategies. Those principals with less developed emotional and social intelligence operate in a narrower environment using less sophisticated strategies. All of the principals in the study, demonstrate some of the SI competencies. But the outstanding group demonstrates a greater number of them consistently over the three incidents. This would suggest that the outstanding principals attend to building individual relationships, group relationships and relationships of the whole. Trustworthiness and building bonds are the only two competencies in which the typical group was coded more often than the outstanding group. These two competencies are directly related to building one-on-one relationships suggesting attention to this dimension is more important to the typical group. In addition, it appears that the two groups view the purpose of relationship building very differently. Typical principals value the interpersonal and reciprocity aspects of relationship building. Outstanding principals, on the other hand, focus on alignment – view relationships in the context of goals. Outstanding principals explicitly refer to relationships or consensus building as a means or prerequisite to meeting goals. They

focus on the importance of organizing the parts into the whole. Outstanding principals actively build parent and community partnerships in support of school goals and student achievement. Limitations of study/alternative explanations This study had several limitations that resulted from the research design. First, the sample was drawn from just one school district. However, this single district approach was intentionally adopted to control for external and organizational variables. Second, the sample size was limited to 20 principals. While this limits the generalizability of the study, the sample size was dictated by the size of the population and the criterion sample approach used. Third, the sample size precluded analysis of the data for subgroups of elementary and secondary principals. In addition, alternative explanations of the study’s results must be examined. First, experience in terms of number of years could explain differences in role/job perceptions and interpretations as well as performance. However, experience was not a differentiating variable in terms of the two performance groups (p ¼ 0:621). Second, a principal’s individual sense of efficacy could be a determining factor. While more work needs to be done in this area, preliminary indications based on the results of Rotter Locus of Control test indicates there is no difference between the two performance groups using this measure (p ¼ 0:664). Third, the communication of different role expectations could account for these differences. However, this is not a possible factor in this study. All of the principals work for the same school system and have the same supervisor within the elementary and secondary level. Fourth, “native intelligence” could account for the differences found. Given that all participants in the study have advanced degrees, one would assume that there is a base level of intelligence across the two groups. It does not appear that any of these alternative explanations accounts for the results of this study. Implications for future research Replication of study. Replication of this study is the logical and critical next step. The key issue is whether or not the results of this study represent a core group of competencies and characteristics that differentiate outstanding and typical urban principals across multiple sites. A related research issue is to what extent these differentiating competencies are similar or different for effective elementary and secondary principals. Emotional and social intelligence and educational leadership. Additional research is needed to understand the relationship between specific emotional and social intelligence competencies and effective principal practice correlated with student achievement. In particular, an examination of the contribution of six competencies – self confidence, achievement orientation, initiative, organizational awareness, leadership and teamwork/collaboration would be fruitful. Implications for practice Usefulness to school districts. The major implication of this study is the potential benefit of a competency based approach to help urban school districts create systems to better recruit, select and prepare principal candidates and provide more

Outstanding urban principals

49

JMD 27,1

50

effective professional development for current principals. The initial step in this process is to build the system infrastructure. This involves at least two elements. The first element involves the creation of a leadership model that identifies the knowledge and competencies that are empirically linked to effective principal performance in the specific school district. The second element of the system infrastructure is to build the capacity to assess individual principal candidates and incumbents using the leadership model as the basis. The assessment capacity can involve and combine a variety of approaches: 360 feedback, formal use of assessment centers etc. The leadership model and assessment capacity can be used to develop criteria and a process for recruiting, evaluating and selecting candidates from outside and within the system. In addition, the model can be used to design and the monitor the impact of professional development targeted to improving the performance of current principals. The leadership model/assessment approach provides districts with a tool to actually tailor professional development to build on the strengths and identify and address the development needs of individual principals. Universities. Based on the results of this study and other research, universities could consider incorporating a competency assessment and development approach into their principal preparation programs. This approach has been used successfully in professional preparation programs in other fields such as management education.

References Andrews, R.L., Soder, R. and Jacoby, P. (1986), “Principal roles, other in-school variables and academic achievement by ethnicity and socio-economic status”, paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA. Bolman, L.G. and Heller, R. (1995), “Research on school leadership: the state of the art”, in Bacharach, S.B. and Mundell, B. (Eds), Images of Schools, Corwin Press, Thousand Oaks, CA. Bossert, S.J., Dwyer, D., Rowan, B. and Lee, G. (1982), “The instructional management role of the principal”, Education Administration Quarterly, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 34-64. Boyatzis, R.E. (1982), The Competent Manager: A Model for Effective Performance, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY. Boyatzis, R.E. (1998), Transforming Qualitative Information: Thematic Analysis and Code Development, Sage Publications Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA. Boyatzis, R.E. and Sala, F. (2004), “Assessing emotional intelligence competencies”, in Geher, G. (Ed.), The Measurement of Emotional Intelligence, Novas Science Publishers, Hauppauge, NY. Boyatzis, R.E., Goleman, D. and Rhee, K.S. (1999), “Clustering competence in emotional intelligence: insights from the emotional competence inventory (ECI)”, in Bar-On, R. and Parker, J.D. (Eds), Handbook on Emotional Intelligence, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA. Bryk, A.S., Sebring, P.B., Kenbow, D., Rollow, S.G. and Easton, J.Q. (1998), Charting Chicago School Reform, Westview, Boulder, CO. Cherniss, C. (1998), “Social and emotional learning for leaders”, Educational Leadership, Vol. 55 No. 7.

Cherniss, C. (2000), “Emotional intelligence: what it is and why it matters”, paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, New Orleans, LA, April 15, 2000. Christensen, G.J. (1993), The Changing Role of the Principal in the Move from a Tradition School to an Accelerated School, National Center for the Accelerated School Project, Stanford, CA. Coleman, J.S. (1966), Equality of Educational Opportunity, US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC. Cotton, K. (2003), Principals and Student Achievement: What the Research Says, Association for Supervison and Curriculum Development, Alexandria, VA. Davis, G.A. and Thomas, M.A. (1989), Effective Schools and Effective Teachers, Allyn & Bacon, Boston, MA. Edmonds, R. (1979), “Effective schools for the urban poor”, Educational Leadership, Vol. 37 No. 1. Forde, R., Hobby, R. and Lees, A. (2000), The Lessons of Leadership: A Comparison of Headteachers in UK Schools and Senior Executives in Private Enterprise, Hay McBer, London. Fullan, M. (1996), “Leadership for change”, in Leithwood, K.A. and Hallinger, P. (Eds), International Handbook of Educational Leadership and Administration, Kluwer Academic Press, Dordrecht. Fullan, M. (2001), Leading in a Culture of Change, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA. Fullan, M. and Stiegelbauer, S. (1991), The New Meaning of Educational Change, Teachers College Press, New York, NY. Gardner, H. (1993), Frames of Mind, Basic Books, New York, NY. Giber, D., Carter, L. and Goldsmith, M. (Eds) (2000), Linkage Inc.’s Best Practices in Leadership Development Handbook, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA. Goldring, E.B. (1995), “Striking a balance: boundary spanning and environmental management in schools”, in Bacharach, S.B. and Mundell, B. (Eds), Images of Schools, Corwin Press, Thousand Oaks, CA. Goldring, E.B. and Sullivan, A.V. (1996), “Beyond the boundaries: principals, parents and communities shaping the school environment”, in Leithwood, K.A. and Hallinger, P. (Eds), International Handbook of Educational Leadership and Administration, Kluwer Academic Press, Dordrecht. Goleman, D. (1995), EmotionaI Intelligence, Bantam Books, New York, NY. Goleman, D. (1998), Working with Emotional Intelligence, Bantam Books. Goleman, D. (2006), Social Intelligence, Bantam Books, New York, NY. Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R. and McKee, A. (2002), Primal Leadership: Realizing the Power of Emotional Intelligence, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA. Haberman, M. (1999), STAR Principals Serving Children in Poverty, Kappa Delta Pi, Indianapolis, IN. Hall, G.E. and Hord, S.M. (1984), Change in Schools: Facilitating the Process, State University of New York Press, Albany, NY. Hallinger, P. and Heck, R.N. (1996a), “Reassessing the principal’s role in school effectiveness: a review of empirical research, 1980-1995”, Educational Administration Quarterly, Vol. 32 No. 1. Hallinger, P. and Heck, R.N. (1996b), “The principal’s role in school effectiveness: an assessment of methodological progress, 1980-1995”, in Leithwood, K.A. and Hallinger, P. (Eds),

Outstanding urban principals

51

JMD 27,1

52

International Handbook of Educational Leadership Administration, Kluwer Academic Press, Dordrecht. Hallinger, P. and Heck, R.N. (1998), “Exploring the principal’s contribution to school effectiveness”, School Effectiveness and School Improvement, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 157-91. Hallinger, P. and Murphy, J. (1985), “Assessing the instructional management behavior of principals”, Elementary School Journal, Vol. 86 No. 2, pp. 217-47. Hemphill, J.K., Griffiths, D.E. and Frederiksen, N. (1962), Administrative Performance and Personality: A Study of the Principal in a Simulated Elementary School Teachers College, Columbia University, New York, NY. Hess, F.M. (Ed.) (2006), Educational Entrepreneurship: Realities, Challenges, Possibilities, Harvard Education Press, Cambridge, MA. Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium (1996), Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium Standards for School Leaders, Council of Chief State School Officers, Washington, DC. Jonas, H.S. III, Fry, R.E. and Srivastva, S. (1989), “The person of the CEO: understanding the executive experience”, The Academy of Management Executive, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 205-15. Katz, D. and Kahn, R.I. (1978), The Social Psychology of Organizations, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY. Keyes, M.C. and Soleil, G. (2001), School-Community Connections: A Literature Review, AEL Inc., Charleston, WV. Leithwood, K.A. and Duke, D.L. (1999), “A century’s quest to understand school leadership”, in Murphy, J. and Louis, K.S. (Eds), Handbook of Research on Educational Administrators, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA. Leithwood, K.A. and Montgomery, D.J. (1986), The Principal Profile, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, Toronto. Leithwood, K. and Steinbach, R. (1993), “Total quality leadership: expert thinking plus transformational practice”, Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, Vol. 7. Leithwood, K. and Steinbach, R. (1995), Expert Problem Solving: Evidence from School Leaders, State University of New York Press, Albany, NY. Leithwood, K.A., Begley, P.T. and Cousins, J.B. (1990), “The nature, causes and consequences of principals’ practices: an agenda for future research”, Journal of Educational Administrators, Vol. 28 No. 4. Leithwood, K., Louis, K.S., Andersen, S. and Wahlstrom, K. (2004), How Leadership Influences Student Learning: Review of Research, Center for Applied Research, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN. Levine, D.U. and Lezotte, L.W. (1990), Unusually Effective Schools, National Center for Effective Schools Research and Development, Madison, WI. Lewin, A.Y. and Zwany, A. (1976), Peer Nominations: A Model, Literature Critique, and a Paradigm for Research, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA. McClelland, D.C. (1973), “Testing for competence rather than intelligence”, American Psychologist, Vol. 28 No. 1. McClelland, D.C. (1998), “Identifying competencies with behavioral event interviews”, Psychological Science, Vol. 9 No. 5. Manasse, A.L. (1985), “Improving conditions for principal effectiveness: policy implications of research”, Elementary School Journal, Vol. 85 No. 3.

Marzano, R.J., Waters, T. and McNulty, B.A. (2005), School Leadership That Works: From Research to Results, Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, Alexandria, VA, Mid-continent Research for Education and Learning, Aurora, CO. Miles, M.B. and Huberman, A.M. (1984), Qualitative Data Analysis: A Sourcebook for New Methods, Sage Publications, Beverly Hills, CA. Mintzberg, H. (1980), The Nature of Managerial Work, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. National Association of Elementary School Principals (2002), Professional Development Inventory: Dimensions and Descriptors Definitions, National Association of Elementary School Principals, Alexandria, VA. National Association of Secondary School Principals (1999), Selecting and Developing the 21st Century Principal, National Association of Secondary School Principals, Reston, VA. National Policy Board for Educational Administration (1993), Principals for Our Changing Schools: Knowledge and Skill Base, National Policy Board for Educational Administration, Fairfax, VA. Neumann, F.M., King, M.B. and Youngs, P. (2000), “Professional development that addresses school capacity: lessons from urban elementary schools”, American Journal of Education, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, pp. 259-99. Ouchi, W.G. (2003), Making Schools Work, Simon & Schuster, New York, NY. Patti, J. and Tobin, J. (2003), Smart School Leaders: Leading with Emotional Intelligence, Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company, Dubuque, IA. Persell, C.J. and Cookson, P.W. Jr (1982), The Effective Principal: A Research Summary, National Association of Secondary Principals, Reston, VA. Portin, B.S. (2000), “The changing urban principalship”, Education and Urban Society, Vol. 32 No. 4, pp. 492-505. Rallis, S.H. and Goldring, E.B. (2000), Principals of Dynamic Schools: Taking Charge of Change, Corwin Press, Thousands Oaks, CA. Reeves, D.B. (2004), Accountability for Learning: How Teachers and School Leaders Can Take Charge, Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, Alexandria, VA. Rotter, J.B. (1966), “Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement”, Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, Vol. 609. Rowan, B. and Denk, C. (1984), “Management succession, school socioeconomic context and basic skills achievement”, American Educational Research Journal, Vol. 21 No. 3, pp. 17-537. Salovey, P. and Mayer, J.D. (1990), “Emotional intelligence”, Imagination, Cognition and Personality, Vol. 9, pp. 185-211. Sanders, E.T.W. (1999), Urban School Leadership: Issues and Strategies, Eye on Education, Larchmont, NY. Sanders, M.A. and Epstein, J.L. (1998), “School-family-community partnerships in middle and high schools: theory to practice”, Report No. 22, National Institute on the Education of At-Risk Students (ED/OERI), Washington, DC. Smith, S.C. and Piele, P.K. (Eds) (1989), School Leadership: Handbook for Excellence, ERIC Clearinghouse for Educational Management, Eugene, OR. Spencer, L.M. Jr and Spencer, S.M. (1993), Competence at Work: Models for Superior Performance, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY. Sternberg, R.J. (1985), Beyond IQ, Cambridge University Press, New York, NY.

Outstanding urban principals

53

JMD 27,1

54

Williams, J. (2006), “Entrepreneurs within school districts”, Educational Entrepreneurship, Harvard Education Press, Cambridge, MA. Further reading Marsh, D.D. (2000), “Educational leadership for the 21st century: integrating three essential perspectives”, The Jossey-Bass Reader on Educational Leadership, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA. Corresponding author Helen W. Williams can be contated at: [email protected]

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected] Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0262-1711.htm

Emotional intelligence competencies in the team and team leader A multi-level examination of the impact of emotional intelligence on team performance Elizabeth Stubbs Koman

Emotional intelligence competencies 55 Received 20 April 2007 Revised 20 August 2007 Accepted 31 August 2007

The Stubman Group, LLC and US Navy, Chesapeake, Virginia, USA, and

Steven B. Wolff The Hay Group, Boston, Massachusetts, USA Abstract Purpose – The purpose of this research is to examine the relationships among team leader emotional intelligence competencies, team level emotional intelligence, and team performance. Design/methodology/approach – It is argued here that the team leader’s emotional intelligence (EI) will influence the development of group level emotional intelligence (GEI), which was measured by a team’s emotionally competent group norms (ECGN). Second, it is hypothesized that the presence of ECGNs will positively influence group effectiveness. Data were collected from 422 respondents representing 81 teams in a military organization. Findings – Results show that team leader emotional intelligence is significantly related to the presence of emotionally competent group norms on the teams they lead, and that emotionally competent group norms are related to team performance. Research limitations/implications – Limitations of this research include a narrow sample with the teams not being highly interdependent. Practical implications – This research provides implications for practice in three primary areas: development and sustainment of emotionally intelligent managers and leaders; development and sustainment of emotionally intelligent work groups; and establishment of organizational leaders at all levels to foster and support emotional competence throughout the organization. Originality/value – This research contributes to the field by offering support for the effects the team leaders’ emotional intelligence has on the teams they lead as well as by showing how team level emotional intelligence affects team performance. This study adds to the body of literature in what is considered a relatively new area of study. The four key contributions of this research are: this research shows that the leader’s behaviors are important at the team level; this research further validates Wolff and Druskat’s (forthcoming) ECGN theory by lending support for the ECGNs as well as offering alternative clustering ideas for the norms; ECGNs were shown to be related to performance; and lastly this research extends the knowledge base about emotions in groups. Keywords Emotional intelligence, Social skills, Team leaders, Team working, Team performance Paper type Research paper

This research is based on the dissertation research of Elizabeth Stubbs (Stubbs, 2005). The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and not the US Navy.

Journal of Management Development Vol. 27 No. 1, 2008 pp. 55-75 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited 0262-1711 DOI 10.1108/02621710810840767

JMD 27,1

56

Introduction Emotional Intelligence competencies have been shown to be significantly related to individual performance (Boyatzis, 1982) both in cognitive tasks where the individual is under stress and in tasks where individuals are interdependent on one another (see Druskat and Jordan (forthcoming), for a review). At the team level, the study of emotions and the effects of emotions on team performance is a relatively new avenue of research. Since teamwork is an inherently social activity, emotions play an important role in team effectiveness. Druskat and Wolff (1999, 2001a, 2001b) proposed a model of emotional intelligence at the group level. Groups develop a set of behavioral norms labeled emotionally competent group norms (ECGN) that guide the emotional experience in the group. The degree to which a group develops these norms has been linked to team performance (Druskat et al., 2003). Understanding the factors that lead to the development of ECGNs would be beneficial for team development. The purpose of this research is to assess the relation between team leader emotional intelligence competencies and the emergence of emotionally competent norms in a team. Specifically, the present research examines the relationship between emotional intelligence of a leader, the group level emotional intelligence (GEI), and how both of these levels of emotional intelligence affect performance of the team. Definitions Team/group. Like Cohen and Bailey (1997), whose work is based on Hackman (1987), we define a team as “a collection of individuals who are interdependent in their tasks, who share responsibility for outcomes, who see themselves and who are seen by others as an intact social entity embedded in one or more larger social systems and who manage their relationships across organizational boundaries” (Cohen and Bailey, 1997, p. 241). The scope used in this research consisted of groups of individuals who worked together toward a common output, thus we refer to them as teams throughout the paper. Team effectiveness. Team effectiveness is a multidimensional construct (Goodman, 1979; Hackman, 1987; Sundstrom et al., 1990). The term team effectiveness entails both meeting customer specifications and being able to work together effectively in the future (Hackman, 1987). This view ensures that the team is not focused on customer satisfaction to the exclusion of concern with the well being of the team and its members, or vice versa. Defining emotional intelligence for the present study. While there are varying definitions of emotional intelligence, there is agreement in the literature that EI includes an individual having an awareness of and an ability to regulate their emotions. Salovey and Mayer’s (1990) theory of EI focuses on the emotional abilities that link emotion and individual cognition, where Goleman and Boyatzis’s theory focus on social and emotional competencies (Jordan and Troth, 2004; Matthews et al., 2002). This study utilizes the emotional intelligence theory advanced by Boyatzis and Goleman. This EI theory has evolved into four overarching clusters of EI skills: self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, and relationship management (Goleman, 2001; Boyatzis et al., 2000). The four clusters represent a recognition and regulation cluster for both the individual (self) and social competencies (other). Table I identifies the competencies in each cluster and their definitions.

Cluster

Competency

Definition

Self-awareness

Emotional self-awareness Accurate self-assessment

Awareness of one’s own emotional state Awareness of one’s own strengths, weaknesses, and performance Sense of one’s self-worth and capabilities

Self-management

Emotional self-control

Self-confidence

Transparency Adaptability Achievement orientation Initiative Optimism Social awareness

Empathy Organizational awareness Service orientation

One’s ability to monitor and regulate one’s emotional states and emotional impulses Maintaining standards of honesty and integrity Being flexible when dealing with change One’s own ability to set high standards, then achieve or exceed them Taking action on what needs to get done before they have been asked Optimistic outlook; persistence in pursing goals despite obstacles

Emotional intelligence competencies 57

Sensing and understanding what others are feeling Reading a group’s emotional currents and power relationships Ability to understand others’ needs and provide services to meet their needs

Relationship management Developing others

Sensing and bolstering others’ development needs Teamwork and collaboration Respecting, and collaborating with other team members while being cooperative and sharing Conflict management Negotiating and resolving disagreements Change catalyst Initiating or managing change Inspirational leadership Inspiring and guiding individuals and having them follow without force Influence Wielding effective tactics for persuasion

Source: Stubbs, 2005; Goleman, 1998; Boyatzis, 1982; Watkin, 2000

To examine the relationship between a team leader’s emotional intelligence and the development of group-level emotional intelligence, we used the above mentioned EI competencies. For a more robust discussion of the clusters and each competency see Stubbs (2005). Defining emotional intelligence at the team level. Druskat and Wolff (1999, p. 9) identified the existence of emotionally competent group norms (ECGNs) “that influence and manage the emotional process in a way that builds emotional capacity and develops social capital and leads to effectiveness”. These group norms are an indication of the group’s emotional intelligence and can help to determine if a group of individuals functions as a high-performing team (Goleman et al., 2002). Wolff and Druskat state that each of the ECG norms is related to the individual, group or cross-boundary (external) level. Within each of the three levels, there is at least one norm that is an awareness norm and one that is a regulation norm (see Table II for a

Table I. EI competency clusters and definitions

JMD 27,1

Levels

Dimensions

Norms

Definition

Individual

Group awareness of members

Interpersonal understanding

Group management of members

Confronting members who break norms Caring behavior

Understanding spoken and unspoken feelings, interests, concerns, strengths, and weaknesses of team members Open discussion of issues that have arisen on the team

58

Group

Group self-awareness

Group self-management

Cross-boundary (external)

Table II. Wolff and Druskat’s ECGN classification of norms

Underlying respect, appreciation and value members demonstrate to one another

Team self-evaluation

Team self-diagnosis; seeking information about their performance and comparing themselves with other teams in order to better their performance Creating resources Acceptance of emotions as part of the for working with group work and the expression and examination of team member feelings emotion Group’s self-efficacy; positive group Creating an affect and group members having an affirmative optimistic outlook environment Proactive problem Taking initiative to anticipate solving problems and resolving them prior to occurrence

Group social awareness

Organizational understanding

Group management of external relationships

Building external relationships

Understanding the environment and organizational system, of which the team is a part Team’s willingness to help other teams build positive contact with external constituents while obtaining external support and securing your team’s resources

Source: Stubbs, 2005; Druskat and Wolff, 1999; Hamme, 2003

definition of the norms). In this study, we use the following definition for group-level emotional intelligence: The ability of a team to generate operating norms that increase awareness of emotion and management of behavior in ways that have positive emotional consequences. The relation between team leader emotional intelligence and group emotional intelligence Team leaders are responsible for the success of the teams they lead. As such, they are not only responsible for their own emotions, but also for the emotions of the team they lead and the clients of the team (Rafaeli and Worline, 2001). To influence and move people, one must possess the knowledge and skills of emotional competencies (Boyatzis et al., 2002). Boyatzis (1982) defines such competencies as “the underlying characteristics of a person that lead to or cause effective and outstanding performance”. With teams being social in nature, it is logical that emotional intelligence would be an important factor in team leader effectiveness; and it has been

shown to be important for the success of managers and leaders (George, 2000; George and Bettenhausen, 1990; George, 1995; Gardner and Stough, 2002). Scholars have argued and shown that team leaders influence the processes, behaviors, norms, and climate of the team they lead (Kimberly, 1980; Schein, 1992; Dickson et al., 2001; Druskat and Wheeler, 2001). However, there has been a limited amount of research linking team leadership to performance. The empirical work that has been conducted has found that leadership has effects on team motivation, efficacy, and performance (Sivasubramaniam et al., 2002; George, 2000; Schein, 1985; Dickson et al., 2001); primarily through the development of the team’s climate. Goleman (2001) and Williams (1994) suggested that leaders who are emotionally intelligent are essential to developing a climate where employees are encouraged to perform to the best of their ability. When the leader is helping the team develop its norms, the climate that is developed maintains a consonance with the team leader’s individual personality (Dickson et al., 2001, p. 201). If the norms developed reflect the team leader’s personality, it could be argued that the emotional intelligence norms developed on the team would reflect the emotional intelligence competencies of the team leader. This research will examine the effect that 18 EI competencies have on the presence of GEI, and the effect of GEI on team performance (see Figure 1).

Emotional intelligence competencies 59

H1. The level of team leader EI is positively related to the presence of Emotionally Competent Group Norms. Emotional intelligence and teams Although there is a substantial body of literature on individual emotion and on emotional intelligence, there is mixed evidence regarding the effects of emotional intelligence in teams and work groups (Feyerherm and Rice, 2002; Jordan and Troth, 2004). Feyerherm and Rice (2002, p. 354) found that the higher the team leader’s emotional intelligence, the worse the team performed, however, they did find a positive correlation between the team leader’s ability to understand emotion and the performance on the customer service metric. Whereas Jordan and Troth (2004) and Offerman et al. (2004) found that teams with higher levels of EI performed better than teams with lower levels of EI. When assessing the team’s EI, all three research teams (Feyerherm and Rice, 2002; Jordan and Troth, 2004; Offermann et al., 2004) used measures that assessed each individual team member’s emotional intelligence. The current study varies from previous research in that we used a team-level measure to assess the team’s overall emotional intelligence. GEI has been shown to be significantly related to performance (Stubbs and Messer, 2002; Druskat et al., 2003). This research will further validate the findings that GEI

Figure 1. Hypotheses

JMD 27,1

effects team performance through the testing of the relationship between the ECGNs and team performance (Stubbs and Messer, 2002; Druskat et al., 2003). H2. There is a positive relationship between ECGN presence and team effectiveness.

60

Method The objective of this research was to assess the relationship between individual emotional intelligence competencies, team level emotional intelligence, and team effectiveness. This field study was a cross sectional examination of the EI and GEI norms that were present in teams and team leaders in a military organization. Sample and procedure A military sample was used. In each of two commands, both aircrew teams and maintenance teams participated. The maintenance teams served as direct support for the aircrew teams. A total of 349 aircrew and maintenance team members participated representing 81 aircrew and maintenance teams. Additionally, 70 team leaders and 73 managers (team leaders supervisors) rated team leaders’ emotional intelligence, 13 percent of the team leaders were women and 70 percent were men[1]. About 600 team members were asked to participate with 349 (58 percent) completing surveys. All participation was voluntary and everyone was given the opportunity to decline participation. Final team level data analysis was completed on a sample of 275 men and 50 women. There were 55 officers and 294 enlisted personnel who participated. On average, participants had been members of their teams for 14.6 months, and a member of the military for 74.8 months. Each team had a mean of 6.8 team members (Range ¼ 3 2 11; Median ¼ 6:5). Any team where the number of respondents was less then 50 percent of the total number of team members was not included in the analysis. The final sample consisted of 64 teams where the response rate represented at least 50 percent of the team members. Aircrew team leaders were officers (n ¼ 9)[2] and maintenance team leaders were senior enlisted personnel (n ¼ 49). Team leaders had been involved with their teams for 1-24 months, with the average being 10.6 months. Average military tenure was 210 months (17.5 years; range of 60-300 months). All participants in this study were either a team leader or member on a functioning military team. This population was used because the nature of military work requires the use of teams (Orasanu and Backer, 1996; Zaccaro et al., 1995). The teams that participated in this study were direct mission support aircrew teams as well as maintenance teams that support the aircrew teams. The aircrew teams are tasked to perform operational military flights on a regular basis. The teams are composed of a mission commander, two pilots, and individuals performing avionics type tasks. The maintenance teams are tasked to support the aircrew teams by performing needed maintenance on the aircraft. The team of maintainers are specialized mechanics who work together on one specific portion of the aircraft, i.e. engine, propellers, avionics, etc. Participant’s lives depend on their team members, and their support teams. All teams that participated have a direct role in mission accomplishment, and are able to see the results of their teamwork.

Measures Team leader emotional intelligence. To assess team leader emotional intelligence, the emotional competence inventory (ECI-2) was administered. The ECI-2 uses 360-degree feedback methodology to assess the emotional competencies of individuals (Wolff, 2006). The ECI-2 was developed by Richard Boyatzis and Daniel Goleman with the help of the Hay Group (McClelland, 1973; Boyatzis, 1982; Goleman, 1998; Boyatzis and Sala, 2004). The ECI-2 has an overall average internal consistency coefficient of 0.78 and the self-ratings have an overall average internal consistency coefficient of 0.63 (Wolff, 2006). The ECI-2 has been used in various venues, in particular, in assessing the relationship between an individual’s emotional intelligence and their leadership behaviors (McClelland and Boyatzis, 1982; Cavallo and Brienza, 2002; Boyatzis and Sala, 2004). The ECI-2 consists of 72 questions that assess 18 EI competencies. Participants rated frequency of use of each item on a one-to-five Likert scale ranging from never (1) to consistently (5). If an item was not applicable or the respondent did not feel they could accurately assess the ratee on a particular item, there was a space marked “don’t know” so participants were not forced into an answer. The ECI-2 is a proprietary instrument; information on the scales can be obtained from the Hay Group. Each team leader in the final sample had 2-14 raters rate their behaviors, with an average of 4.34 ratings completed for every team leader, excluding the self-rating. Cronbach’s alpha internal reliabilities were assessed for each scale. Most scales had acceptable reliabilities, with their alphas close to or above 0.70 (see Vogt, 1999), with the exceptions of emotional self-control, initiative, and conflict management. Reliabilities were: accurate self assessment, a ¼ 0:75; emotional self awareness, a ¼ 0:75; self-confidence, a ¼ 0:73; achievement orientation, a ¼ 0:69; adaptability, a ¼ 0:77; emotional self-control, a ¼ 0:42; initiative, a ¼ 0:16; optimism, a ¼ 0:78; transparency, a ¼ 0:70; empathy, a ¼ 0:83; organizational awareness, a ¼ 0:63; service orientation, a ¼ 0:83; change catalyst, a ¼ 0:60; conflict management, a ¼ 0:33; developing others, a ¼ 0:83; influence, a ¼ 0:74; inspirational leadership, a ¼ 0:87; teamwork and collaboration, a ¼ 0:67. The majority of the theorized scales were found to have acceptable reliabilities. Since overall individual emotional intelligence is being examined, we decided to drop the three competencies with low reliabilities. This leaves 15 competencies, which still provides a good indication of overall emotional intelligence that will allow us to test our hypotheses. We next tested the theoretical factor structure of the EI scales using AMOS 6. We examined each theoretical cluster (self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, and relationship management) separately due to the large number of variables. The results showed that the theorized factor structure did not produce a good fitting model. Although all values of RMSEA were acceptable (0.07-0.085), all but one NFI and RFI were below the acceptable 0.9 level (0.73-0.88). Group emotional intelligence. Team level emotional intelligence was assessed using the Group Emotional Intelligence measure developed by Druskat and Wolff and later refined based on work by Hamme (2003). Team member participants self rated their team’s behavior according to each of the nine ECG norms measured by the instrument. The ECGN scales are comprised of 57 questions, representing nine team norms. The nine scales were comprised of 5-8 questions, with one to three items in each scale reversed scored. Respondents rated each item on a one-to-seven Likert scale ranging

Emotional intelligence competencies 61

JMD 27,1

62

from very inaccurate (1) to very accurate (7). Interpersonal understanding was measured with six items, e.g. “On our team we make an effort to understand one another’s attitudes and views.” Confronting members who break norms was measured with six items, e.g. “In our group, we let members know if they do something considered unacceptable.” Caring behavior was measured with eight items, e.g. “We let members know that we value their contributions.” Team self-evaluation was measured with seven items, e.g. “On our team we often discuss what is helping or hurting our performance.” Creating resources for working with emotion was measured by six items, e.g. “When there is tension in our group, we acknowledge or talk about it”. Creating an affirmative environment was measured with five items, e.g. “When something goes wrong, we look at it as a challenge rather than an obstacle”. Proactive problem solving was measured with six items, e.g. “In our team we work hard to anticipate problems that might occur.” Organizational understanding was measured with seven items, e.g. “We understand how our work contributes to the company’s goals.” Building external relationships was measured with six items, e.g. “We build relationships with teams that can help make a difference in our performance.” Cronbach’s alpha internal consistency reliabilities were assessed for each GEI scale. All scales had acceptable reliabilities, with their alphas close to or above 0.70 (see Vogt, 1999): interpersonal understanding, a ¼ 0:83; confronting members who break norms, a ¼ 0:67; caring behavior, a ¼ 0:82; team self-evaluation, a ¼ 0:75; creating resources for working with emotion, a ¼ 0:75; creating an affirmative environment, a ¼ 0:70; proactive problem solving, a ¼ 0:75; organizational understanding, a ¼ 0:73; building external relationships, a ¼ 0:71. To test the proposed relationships, individual participant responses were aggregated to create a mean score for the entire team. The questions were written at the group level in order to capture group-level constructs, not individual attributes (Earley, 1999; Rousseau, 1985). This enabled the aggregation of the data to assess the norms present at the group level (Earley, 1999; Langfred, 2000). For all norms, intraclass correlations indicated that within group variance was less than the between group variance; with the variance being significantly greater for seven of the nine norms. Building external relationships and proactivity in problem solving were near significant (Stubbs, 2005). Using AMOS 6, we tested the theoretical factor structure of the GEI norms looking at each level separately due to the large number of variables. Although previous analyses (see Stubbs, 2005) showed the factor structure to produce good-fitting models for each factor, analysis with AMOS 6, which uses stricter standards for calculating fit indices (see Mayer et al., 2005), showed that the theoretical factors (individual, group, and cross-boundary) did not produce a good-fitting model. Although RMSEA was in an acceptable range (0.06 to 0.1) for the three factors, the NFI and RFI were below an acceptable 0.9 (ranging from 0.7 to 0.85). Team performance. As previously discussed, team effectiveness is defined as multidimensional; therefore, to assess team effectiveness, both objective and subjective measures were used. Subjective performance measures were gathered from upper level officers who had observed multiple teams within the command over time. This typically was an individual at least two levels above the team. Participants were asked to evaluate each of the teams under their management using a 7-point Likert scale. The subjective performance measure consisted of a 5-item questionnaire developed and

tested by Druskat et al. (2003). The following criteria were evaluated: efficiency in getting things done, quality of work, ability to be self-directed, performance against other teams that perform similar work, and ability to continue working together in the future. The responses to each question were totaled to produce a subjective rating of each team’s effectiveness. Each command provided the researchers with metrics used in their management process to measure team performance. A criterion for participation in the study was that effectiveness measures were recorded monthly and measured multiple criteria, thus each team had performance metrics calculated on multiple dimensions. Examples of the measures include: percentage of raw material waste; number of accidents; and percentage of flight objectives met. The objective performance rating was calculated from the percentage of goals attained by each team on each measure. The researchers collected objective performance data for the period preceding and following data collection. Performance measures were collected for a period of 2-8 months depending on availability of data. As previously discussed, team effectiveness is defined as multidimensional with both objective and subjective measures used. The measures were moderately positively correlated with one another, r ¼ 0:08, p ¼ 0:24. Subjective and objective performance scores were standardized within team type to minimize variations in reporting. The combined performance score was used for hypothesis testing. Results Exploratory factor analysis Because the confirmatory factor analyses failed to confirm the theoretical factor structure of either EI or GEI we performed an exploratory factor analysis. We first did a principal components analysis using an oblimin rotation with the 15 EI and 9 GEI competencies/norms entered simultaneously. The analysis showed two factors with all EI competencies loading on one factor and all GEI competencies loading on the other. We next examined EI and GEI competencies separately. This resulted in two EI factors (see Table III) and two GEI factors (see Table IV). The two GEI factors can be interpreted as the awareness norms and the regulation norms. Caring Behavior is a regulation norm that loaded highest on the awareness factor (0.58) but the loading on the regulation factor was comparable (0.44). Since it theoretically should be included with the regulation norms, we place it with the regulation factor in further analyses. It was difficult to interpret the two EI factors so we decided to use an overall mean value of the competencies for a measure of overall emotional intelligence. The final model we used to test our hypotheses is shown in Figure 2. SEM model testing hypotheses The model in Figure 2 was run with all team data using AMOS 6 and was not a good fit. Based on theoretical considerations the model was modified as shown in Figure 3. Specifically, Druskat and Wolff (2001b) argue that awareness precedes behavior, thus, it is reasonable to assume that the awareness norms will lead to regulation norms, which then affect performance. This modification highlights the fact that performance ultimately depends on behavior. Also, the link between EI and the Regulation Norms was not significant and was deleted from the model. All parameters are significant (one-tailed) and the model is approaching a good fitting model. Although NFI and RFI

Emotional intelligence competencies 63

JMD 27,1

64

Table III. Exploratory factor analysis of EI competencies (n ¼ 81)

Component 1 Accurate self-assessment Empathy Adaptability Change catalyst Teamwork and collaboration Inspirational leadership Developing others Optimism Transparency Self-confidence Organizational awareness Emotional self-awareness Achievement orientation Service orientation Influence

2

0.962 0.914 0.810 0.711 0.654 0.550 0.548 0.531

0.303 0.444 0.421 0.403 0.947 0.834 0.752 0.633 0.608 0.570 0.554

0.450 0.370

Notes: Extraction method: principal component analysis; Rotation method: Oblimin with Kaiser normalization

Component 1

Table IV. Exploratory factor analysis of GEI norms (n ¼ 81)

Creating resources for working with emotion Team self-evaluation Interpersonal understanding Caring behavior Organizational understanding Building external relationships Proactive problem solving Creating an affirmative environment Confronting members who break norms

1.009 0.941 0.783 0.578 0.561 0.477 0.409

2

0.442 0.319 0.941 0.814 0.509 0.474

Notes: Extraction method: Principal component analysis; Rotation method: Oblimin with Kaiser normalization

are less than the recommended 0.9 (Byrne, 2001), CFI is approaching an acceptable value of 0.95 (Byrne, 2001) and RMSEA is at the recommended 0.1 cutoff (Tabachnick and Fidell, 2001). To further understand the relationships between team leader’s emotional intelligence and the development of ECGNs, Table V shows the correlations between the two. We also ran a series of stepwise regressions with each ECGN as a dependent variable and all team leader emotional intelligence competencies as independent variables. The results of these analyses are shown in Table VI. Discussion This study showed that a team leader’s emotional intelligence affects team level emotional competence and team performance through the development of ECGNs.

Emotional intelligence competencies 65

Figure 2. Original SEM model

This study also supported that the emotionally competent group norms affect team performance. The four key contributions of this research are: (1) this research validated that leader’s behaviors are important in the development of team norms;

JMD 27,1

66

Figure 3. Modified SEM model

(2) this research further validates Wolff and Druskat (forthcoming) ECGN theory by lending support for the ECGNs as well as offers alternative clustering ideas for the norms; (3) ECGNs were shown to be related to performance; and (4) this research extends the knowledge base about emotions in teams.

CM 0.12 0.21 0.40 * * 0.32 * 0.32 * 0.36 * * 0.35 * * 0.50 * * 0.35 * * 0.24 0.27 * 0.45 * * 0.26 * 0.01 0.40 * * 0.30 * 0.38 * * 0.38 * *

IU 0.27 * 0.23 0.33 * * 0.30 * 0.25 * 0.38 * * 0.31 * 0.51 * * 0.43 * * 0.39 * * 0.43 * * 0.51 * * 0.31 * 0.02 0.44 * * 0.34 * * 0.36 * * 0.43 * *

0.30 * 0.23 0.39 * * 0.33 * * 0.35 * * 0.45 * * 0.23 0.51 * * 0.44 * * 0.36 * * 0.42 * * 0.50 * * 0.24 20.03 0.48 * * 0.37 * * 0.43 * * 0.49 * *

CB 0.26 * 0.20 0.29 * 0.31 * 0.28 * 0.44 * * 0.27 * 0.53 * * 0.41 * * 0.33 * * 0.51 * * 0.52 * * 0.34 * * 2 0.01 0.45 * * 0.31 * 0.41 * * 0.41 * * 0.23 0.19 0.26 * 0.22 0.20 0.35 * * 0.15 0.45 * * 0.35 * * 0.26 * 0.44 * * 0.44 * * 0.21 0.09 0.41 * * 0.30 * 0.38 * * 0.36 * *

0.21 0.17 0.39 * * 0.33 * * 0.32 * * 0.31 * 0.20 0.43 * * 0.32 * 0.32 * 0.38 * * 0.47 * * 0.25 * 0.06 0.32 * 0.29 * 0.40 * * 0.40 * *

Group emotional intelligence norms TSE CRWE CAENV 0.07 0.16 0.45 * * 0.34 * * 0.24 0.21 0.22 0.37 * * 0.33 * * 0.19 0.40 * * 0.43 * * 0.12 2 0.01 0.30 * 0.24 0.27 * 0.25 *

PPS

BREL 0.29 * 0.27 * 0.42 * * 0.34 * * 0.30 * 0.27 * 0.29 * 0.41 * * 0.35 * * 0.26 * 0.30 * 0.42 * * 0.29 * 0.24 0.38 * * 0.31 * 0.35 * * 0.41 * *

OU 0.29 * 0.30 * 0.34 * * 0.32 * 0.31 * 0.33 * * 0.19 0.40 * * 0.36 * * 0.33 * * 0.50 * * 0.53 * * 0.34 * * 0.20 0.35 * * 0.38 * * 0.40 * * 0.37 * *

Notes: * p , 0.05; * * p , 0.01; IU ¼ Interpersonal Understanding, CM ¼ Confronting Members who Break Norms, CB ¼ Caring Behavior, TSE ¼ Team Self-Evaluation, CRWE ¼ Creating Resources for Working with Emotion, CAENV ¼ Creating an Affirmative Environment, PPS ¼ Proactive Problem Solving, OU ¼ Organizational Understanding, BREL ¼ Building External Relations

Accurate self-assessment Emotional self-awareness Self-confidence Achievement orientation Adaptability Emotional self-control Initiative Optimism Transparency Empathy Organizational awareness Service orientation Change catalyst Conflict management Developing others Influence Inspirational leadership Teamwork and collaboration

Emotional intelligence competency

Emotional intelligence competencies 67

Table V. Correlations between team leader emotional intelligence and emotionally competent group norms

JMD 27,1

68

Table VI. Stepwise regressions

Std. Beta

Adj. R 2

0.87 20.46a

0.28

Optimism

0.45

0.19

Optimism Organizational awareness

0.35 0.27

0.28

Team self-evaluation

Organizational awareness

0.57

0.29

Creating resources for working with emotion

Optimism

0.43

0.17

Creating an affirmative environment

Organizational awareness Optimism

0.35 0.27

0.28

Proactive problem solving

Self-confidence Organizational awareness Emotional self-awareness

0.53 0.32 20.35b

0.3

Organizational understanding

Service orientation Organizational awareness

0.32 0.29

0.29

Building external relationships

Self-confidence

0.43

0.17

Group emotional intelligence norm

Team leader EI competencies

Interpersonal understanding

Service orientation Adaptability

Confronting members who break norms Caring behavior

Notes: One must be careful about interpreting the negative coefficients as the EI competencies are highly correlated; a Correlation of service orientation and adaptability ¼ 0:79; b Correlation of emotional self-awareness and self-confidence ¼ 0:70, correlation of emotional self-awareness and organizational awareness ¼ 0:42

Previous research has shown that leaders who are emotionally competent are better performers, more successful, are able to handle relationships successfully, and demonstrate a myriad of other traits (George, 2000; Goleman, 1998; Gabriel and Griffiths, 2002). With leaders having direct influence over their subordinates (Rafaeli and Worline, 2001), it is easy to see how a team leader’s EI influences the development of ECG norms in the team they lead. While earlier research established that an individual’s EI affects their performance, the present research now shows that a team leader’s EI affects team performance through the ECGNs that are established on the team they lead. Another contribution of this research is the validation it provides to the Wolff and Druskat ECGN theory. Results partially support the relationship between ECGN presence and team effectiveness. Specifically, it was found that awareness norms contribute to the development of regulation norms and that the regulation norms are related to performance. While this was not what was originally hypothesized in this research, the reason why this relationship is present is clear. On the individual level, one cannot have a regulation of emotions without having an awareness of their emotions first. It is logical that the same relationship would be present with the group level emotional intelligence; the group has an awareness of the emotion, which leads to the ability to regulate it. Limitations While the sample in this research provided a unique insight into military teams, the sample might have produced different results than industry teams would have. Teams

in private industry might not have the same consequences attached to their work as military teams. Wageman (1997, p. 50) stated that “in many USA companies, teamwork is an ‘unnatural act.’. . . given this culture and context, team members will balk at the idea of relying on one another to get work done”. Thus, because the effects assessed with this research were found in a culture where the outcome of team’s work has significant consequences, which is a less prevalent condition in industry, the results may not generalize to an industrial setting. The sample used in this research consisted of two types of teams, aircrews and maintenance teams. These types of teams are very different, and neither are highly interdependent. The Wolff and Druskat GEI theory is based on interdependent teams. While Stubbs and Messer (2002) found that task interdependence was not a moderating factor for GEI, the lack of interdependence on the teams in this study could have been a contributing factor to them not being more strongly related to performance. Implications for future theory and research This research provided an initial examination of the relationship between individual and group level emotional intelligence and their effects on group effectiveness. This research has sparked numerous additional questions to be addressed by future research. One area for future research to examine is that of the organizational culture and organizational climate. We would suspect that an organization’s climate would greatly influence GEI; the climate might directly affect the development of team norms, or the climate might influence the leader’s EI behaviors, which in turn would affect the team EI. The context in which a leader and a team are placed have been theorized and found to impact their success (Wageman, 1999; Hackman, 1999). Similarly, Ashkanasy et al.’s (2000) meta analysis on organizational culture and climate indicates that organizational climate does impact work processes. With context having an effect on groups and organizational climate affecting various work processes, it is reasonable to assume that organizational climate would affect ECGN development and sustainment. Current research is focusing on examining the presence and effects of GEI, research should also examine the prerequisites and conditions that are necessary for norm development. The development of team norms takes time; the amount of time necessary for a team to develop ECGNs has never been examined. Nor have the individual level traits necessary for ECGN development. When team members have worked together over time, they begin to develop relationships with one another and build trust in one another. Time on the team might be an important component for the development of group emotional intelligence, but it should be examined in conjunction with relationship and trust scales to assess the amount of variance each of these items account for. Additionally, another area of particular interest was the stepwise regression findings (Table VI). Results indicated that the individual EI competencies optimism, and organizational awareness were both frequent predictors for the ECGNs. There is a logical connection between optimism and the norms it is a predictor for; without optimism an individual most likely would not confront members who break norms or create resources for working with emotion as there would not be any perceived benefit. While the deductive reasoning on why these two competencies are

Emotional intelligence competencies 69

JMD 27,1

70

frequent predictors for ECGNs can produce compelling arguments, this demonstrates another area for further examination. With results indicating that team leader’s EI affects GEI development, it could be reasoned that individual group member EI would also effect overall group EI. Conversely, since team leader EI affects GEI development, research should examine if leader/mentor EI affects individual EI development. Another aspect of GEI development that should be researched is how team training on norm development impacts a group’s ability to develop emotionally competent group norms. This research took a snapshot view of the presence of team leader EI and team GEI; both of these variables could potentially be impacted with training. Lastly, this research was conducted on a military sample. While the military has been utilized in research for centuries, the teams in the military cannot be assumed to be representative of teams in industry. Future research should examine the relationship between team leader EI, group EI, and group effectiveness with a sample comprised of industry teams. Implications for practice The implications of the findings presented in this study are also important for practice. Information that will help corporations improve performance is always desired. This research provides implications for practice in three primary areas: (1) development and sustainment of emotionally intelligent managers and leaders; (2) development and sustainment of emotionally intelligent work groups; and (3) establishment of organizational leaders at all levels to foster and support emotional competence throughout the organization. Development of emotionally competent managers. Up to now, it has been widely known that individual EI affected individual performance, this research has shown that individual EI also affects team performance through the development of emotionally competent group norms. In light of these findings, corporations should be actively developing the emotional intelligence of their managers and leaders. This can be accomplished through multiple modalities including 360-degree feedback and executive coaching. Thus, this research as well as previous research would suggest that employing leaders with developed emotional competence will increase both their own personal performance (Boyatzis, 1982; George, 2000; Goleman, 1998) as well as that of the teams they lead. Development of emotionally competent work groups. With corporations always keeping a mindful watch on the bottom line, strategies to keep and sustain effective work teams are desired (Farren, 1999). This research supports the strategy of developing emotionally competent group norms throughout an organization to attain and sustain high performing work teams. Additionally, this research suggests that one means through which organizations can develop emotionally competent groups is to develop or hire emotionally competent managers who purposefully focus on developing ECGNs. Other precursors to ECGNs should be assessed in future research and incorporated into practice. Establishment of organizational leaders to foster an emotionally competent environment throughout the organization. Lastly, this research has indicated that managers affect the norms that are developed on the teams they lead. The relationship

of a manager or leader affecting the group they lead was also found in previous research (Schein, 1992; Dickson et al., 2001). The present research supported the notion of a manager affecting the team they lead by examining one level of an organization. One could conclude that the same relationship would be present at all levels of the organization. If the president of an organization was emotionally competent then he or she would develop emotionally competent group norms on the team of executive managers. In turn, each individual on the executive management team would influence the development of ECGNs on the teams he or she leads; the cycle would continue. Thus, in addition to developing emotionally competent first line leaders, organizations should develop emotionally competent executive leaders. In sum, this research indicates that industry should work towards developing both emotionally competent leaders as well as emotionally competent norms in their teams.

Notes 1. A total of 12 participants did not indicate their gender. 2. Not all participants indicated their rank.

References Ashkanasy, N.M., Wilderom, C.P.M. and Peterson, M. (2000), Handbook of Organizational Culture and Climate, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA. Boyatzis, R.E. (1982), The Competent Manager: A Model for Effective Performance, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY. Boyatzis, R.E. and Sala, F. (2004), “Assessing emotional intelligence competencies”, in Glenn, G. (Ed.), The Measurement of Emotional Intelligence, Novas Science Publishers, Hauppauge, NY, pp. 147-80. Boyatzis, R.E., Goleman, D. and Rhee, K.S. (2000), “Clustering competence in emotional intelligence”, in Bar-On, R. and Parker, J.D.A. (Eds), Handbook of Emotional Intelligence, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA, pp. 343-62. Boyatzis, R., Stubbs, E.C. and Taylor, S.N. (2002), “Competency development through an integrated MBA program: a longitudinal examination”, Academy of Management Learning and Education Journal, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 150-62. Byrne, B.M. (2001), Structural Equation Modeling with AMOS, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ. Cavallo, K. and Brienza, D. (2002), “Emotional competence and leadership excellence at Johnson & Johnson: the emotional intelligence and leadership study”, available at: www. eiconsortium.org/ Cohen, S.G. and Bailey, D.W. (1997), “What makes teams work: group effectiveness research from the shop floor to the executive suite”, Journal of Management, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 239-90. Dickson, M.W., Smith, D.B., Grojean, M.W. and Ehrhart, M. (2001), “An organizational climate regarding ethics: the outcome of leader values and the practices that reflect them”, The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 12, pp. 197-217. Druskat, V.U. and Jordan, P. ((forthcoming), “Emotional intelligence and performance at work”, manuscript submitted for publication.

Emotional intelligence competencies 71

JMD 27,1

72

Druskat, V.U. and Wheeler, J.V. (2001), “Managing from the boundary: the effective leadership of self-managing work teams”, paper presented at the Annual Academy of Management Meeting, Washington DC. Druskat, V.U. and Wolff, S.B. (1999), “The link between emotions and team effectiveness: how teams engage and build effective task processes”, Academy of Management Best Paper Proceedings, Organizational Behavior Division, 1999. Druskat, V.U. and Wolff, S.B. (2001a), “Building the emotional intelligence of groups”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 79 No. 3, pp. 81-90. Druskat, V.U. and Wolff, S.B. (2001b), “Group emotional competence and its influence on group effectiveness”, in Cherniss, C. and Goleman, D. (Eds), Emotional Competence in Organizations, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA, pp. 132-55. Druskat, V.U., Wolff, S.B., Koman, E.C.S. and Messer, T.E. (2003), “Emotionally competent group norms and group effectiveness”, paper presented at the Annual Academy of Management Conference, Seattle, WA, August. Earley, P.C. (1999), “Playing follow the leader: status-determining traits in relation to collective efficacy across cultures”, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 80, pp. 192-212. Farren, C. (1999), “A smart team makes the difference”, The Human Resource Professional, Vol. 12 No. 1. Feyerherm, A.E. and Rice, C.L. (2002), “Emotional intelligence and team performance: the good, the bad, and the ugly”, The International Journal of Organizational Analysis, Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 343-62. Gabriel, Y. and Griffiths, D.S. (2002), “Emotion, learning and organizing”, The Learning Organization, Vol. 9 No. 5, pp. 214-21. Gardner, L. and Stough, C. (2002), “Examining the relationship between leadership and emotional intelligence in senior level managers”, Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 68-78. George, J.M. (1995), “Leader positive mood and group performance: the case of customer service”, Journal of Applied Social Psychology, Vol. 25, pp. 778-94. George, J.M. (2000), “Emotions and leadership: the role of emotional intelligence”, Human Relations, Vol. 53 No. 8, pp. 1027-55. George, J.M. and Bettenhausen, K. (1990), “Understanding prosocial behavior, sales performance, and turnover: a group level analysis in a service context”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 75, pp. 698-709. Goleman, D. (1998), Working with Emotional Intelligence, Bantam Books, New York, NY. Goleman, D. (2001), “An EI-based theory of performance”, in Cherniss, C. and Goleman, D. (Eds), The Emotionally Intelligent Workplace, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA, pp. 27-44. Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R. and McKee, A. (2002), “The emotional reality of teams”, Journal of Organizational Excellence, Winter, pp. 55-65. Goodman, P.S. (1979), Assessing Organizational Change: The Rushton Quality of Work Experiment, Wiley, New York, NY. Hackman, J.R. (1987), “The design of work teams”, in Lorsch, J.W. (Ed.), Handbook of Organizational Behavior, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, pp. 315-42. Hackman, J.R. (1999), “Thinking differently about context”, in Wageman, R. (Ed.), Research on Managing Groups and Teams: Groups in Context, Vol. 2, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT.

Hamme, C. (2003), “Group emotional intelligence, the research and development of an assessment instrument”, unpublished dissertation, Rutgers State University of New Jersey, Piscataway, NJ. Jordan, P.J. and Troth, A.C. (2004), “Managing emotions during team problem solving: emotional intelligence and conflict resolution”, Human Performance, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 195-218. Kimberly, J.R. (1980), “The life cycle analogy and the study of organization: introduction”, in Kimberly, J.R. and Miles, R.H. (Eds), The Organizational Life Cycle, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA, pp. 1-17. Langfred, C.W. (2000), “Work-group design and autonomy: a field study of the interaction between task interdependence and group autonomy”, Small Group Research, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 54-70. McClelland, D.C. (1973), “Testing for competence rather than for ‘intelligence’”, American Psychologist, Vol. 28, pp. 1-14. McClelland, D.C. and Boyatzis, R.E. (1982), “Leadership motive pattern and long-term success in management”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 67 No. 6, pp. 737-43. Matthews, G., Zeidner, M. and Roberts, R.D. (2002), Emotional Intelligence, Science and Myth, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. Mayer, J.D., Panter, A.T., Salovey, P., Caurso, D.R. and Sitarenios, G. (2005), “A discrepancy in analyses of the MSCEIT – resolving the mystery and understanding its implications: a reply to Gignac (2005)”, Emotion, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 236-7. Offermann, L.R., Bailey, J.R., Vasilopoulos, N.L., Seal, C. and Sass, M. (2004), “The relative contribution of emotional competence and cognitive ability to individual and team performance”, Human Performance, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 219-43. Orasanu, J.M. and Backer, P. (1996), “Stress and military performance”, in Driskell, J.E. and Salas, E. (Eds), Stress and Human Performance: Series in Applied Psychology, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 89-125. Rafaeli, A. and Worline, M. (2001), “Individual emotion in work organizations”, Social Science Information, Vol. 40 No. 1, pp. 95-123. Rousseau, D.M. (1985), “Issues of level in organizational research: multilevel and cross-level perspectives”, in Cummings, L.L. and Staw, B. (Eds), Research in Organizational Behavior, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, pp. 1-38. Salovey, P. and Mayer, J.D. (1990), “Emotional intelligence”, Imagination, Cognition and Personality, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 185-211. Schein, E. (1985), Organizational Culture and Leadership, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA. Schein, E. (1992), Organizational Culture and Leadership, 2nd ed., Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA. Sivasubramaniam, N., Murry, W.D., Avolio, B.J. and Jung, D.I. (2002), “A longitudinal model of the effects of team leadership and group potency on group performance”, Group and Organizational Management, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 66-96. Stubbs, E.C. (2005), “Emotional intelligence competencies in the team and team leader: a multi-level examination of the impact of emotional intelligence on group performance”, unpublished dissertation, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH. Stubbs, E.C. and Messer, T.E. (2002), “Team effectiveness: assessing the impact of group emotional competency norms and the moderating role of task interdependence”, unpublished manuscript, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH. Sundstrom, E., DeMeuse, K.P. and Futrell, D. (1990), “Work teams: applications and effectiveness”, American Psychologist, Vol. 45 No. 2, pp. 120-33.

Emotional intelligence competencies 73

JMD 27,1

74

Tabachnick, B.G. and Fidell, L.S. (2001), Using Multivariate Statistics, 4th ed., Allyn & Bacon, London. Vogt, W.P. (1999), Dictionary of Statistics and Methodology, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA. Wageman, R. (1997), “Critical success factors for creating superb self-managing teams”, Organizational Dynamics, Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 49-61. Wageman, R. (1999), “How leaders foster self-managing team effectiveness: design choices vs hands-on coaching”, unpublished manuscript, Graduate School of Business, Columbia University, New York, NY. Watkin, C. (2000), “Developing emotional intelligence”, International Journal of Selection and Assessment, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 89-92. Williams, D. (1994), Leadership for the 21st Century: Life Insurance Leadership Study”, Hay Group, Boston, MA. Wolff, S.B. (2006), Emotional Competence Inventory (ECI), Technical Manual, Hay Group, McClelland Center for Research and Innovation, Boston, MA. Zaccaro, S.J., Gualtieri, J. and Minionis, D. (1995), “Task cohesion as a facilitator of team decision making under temporal urgency”, Military Psychology, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 77-93.

Further reading Argote, L. (1989), “Agreement about norms and work-unit effectiveness: evidence from the field”, Basic and Applied Social Psychology, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 131-40. Arrow, H., McGrath, J.E. and Berdahl, J.L. (2000), Small Groups as Complex Systems: Formation, Coordination, Development, and Adaptation, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA. Bain, P.G., Mann, L. and Pirola-Merlo, A. (2001), “The innovation imperative, the relationships between team climate, innovation, and performance in research and development teams”, Small Group Research, Vol. 32 No. 1, pp. 55-73. Barsade, S.G. and Gibson, D.E. (1998), “Group emotion: a view from top and bottom”, in Gruenfeld, D.H. (Ed.), Research on Managing Groups and Teams, JAI Press, Stanford, CT, pp. 81-102. Druskat, V.U. (1996a), “A team competency study of self-managed manufacturing teams”, unpublished dissertation, Boston University, Boston, MA. Druskat, V.U. (1996b), “Team-level competencies in superior self-managing manufacturing teams”, paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management, Cincinnati, OH. Ekman, P. (1984), “Expression and the nature of emotion”, in Scherer, K. and Ekman, P. (Eds), Approaches to Emotion, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 319-44. Feldman, D.C. (1984), “The development and enforcement of group norms”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 9, pp. 47-53. George, J.M. (1990), “Personality, affect, and behavior in groups”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 75 No. 2, pp. 107-16. Goleman, D. (1995), Emotional Intelligence, Why it Can Matter More than IQ, Bantam Books, London. Hiokawa, R.Y., DeGooyer, D. and Valde, K. (2000), “Using narratives to study task group effectiveness”, Small Group Research, Vol. 31 No. 5, pp. 573-91. Izard, C.E. (1991), The Psychology of Emotions, Plenum Press, New York, NY.

Kelly, J.R. and Barsade, S.G. (2001), “Mood and emotions in small groups and work teams”, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process, Vol. 86 No. 1, pp. 99-130. Kemper, T.D. (1978), A Social Interactional Theory of Emotions, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY. Lawler, E.E. (1998), Strategies for High Performance Organizations, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA. Lazarus, R.S. (1999), Stress and Emotions: A New Synthesis, Springer, New York, NY. Leeper, R.W. (1948), “A motivational theory of emotions to replace ‘emotions as disorganized response’”, Psychological Review, Vol. 55, pp. 5-21. Levy, R.I. (1984), “Emotion, knowing, and culture”, in Sweder, R.A. and LeVine, R.A. (Eds), Culture Theory: Essays on Mind, Self, and Emotion, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 214-37. McClelland, D.C. (1975), Power: The Inner Experience, Irvington, New York, NY. McClelland, D.C. (1998), “Identifying competencies with behavioral-event interviews”, Psychological Sciences, Vol. 9 No. 5, pp. 331-40. Paglis, L.L. and Green, S.G. (2002), “Leadership self-efficacy and managers’ motivation for leading change”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 23, pp. 215-35. Salovey, P., Bedell, P.T., Detweiler, J.B. and Mayer, J.E. (2000), “Current directions in emotional intelligence research”, in Lewis, M. and Haviland-Jones, J.M. (Eds), Handbook of Emotions, The Guilford Press, New York, NY, pp. 504-17. Solomon, R.C. (1984), “Getting angry: the Jamesian theory of emotion in anthropology”, in Sweder, R.A. and LeVine, R.A. (Eds), Culture Theory: Essays on Mind, Self, and Emotion, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 238-54. Stetzer, A., Morgeson, F.P. and Anderson, E.L. (1997), “Organizational climate and ineffectiveness: evidence from 25 outdoor work crew divisions”, Journal of Quality Management, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 251-65. Stubbs-Koman, E.C., Wolff, S. and Howard, A. (2007), “The cascading impact of culture: group emotional competence (GEC) as a cultural resource”, in Emmerlin, R. (Ed.), Emotional Intelligence: Theoretical and Cultural Perspectives, Nova Science Publishing, Hauppage, NY. Wageman, R. and Baker, G. (1997), “Incentives and cooperation: the joint effects of task and reward interdependence on group performance”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 18, pp. 139-58. Wolff, S.B. and Druskat, V.U. (1999), “Toward a socio-emotional theory of work group effectiveness”, Academy of Management Best Paper Proceedings, Organizational Behavior Division, 1999. Wolff, S.B. and Druskat, V.U. (2003), “Toward a socioemotional theory of work group effectiveness”, unpublished manuscript. Wolff, S.B., Druskat, V.U., Koman, E.C.S. and Messer, T.E. (2005), “The link between group emotional competence and group effectiveness”, in Druskat, V.U., Sala, F. and Mount, G. (Eds), Linking Emotional Intelligence and Performance at Work: Current Research Evidence with Individuals and Groups, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc., Mahwah, NJ. Corresponding author Elizabeth Stubbs Koman can be contacted at: [email protected]

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected] Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

Emotional intelligence competencies 75

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0262-1711.htm

JMD 27,1

Identifying competencies that predict effectiveness of R&D managers

76

Christine R. Dreyfus Dreyfus & Associates, Inc., Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA

Received 20 April 2007 Revised 20 August 2007 Accepted 31 August 2007

Abstract Purpose – The purpose of this research is to determine the competencies that predict highly effective performance in R&D managers and to explore where, along their career and life, managers develop these competencies. Design/methodology/approach – Participants were 35 scientists and engineers working as first level managers at a major US government research center in the Mid-West. Intended as a comprehensive inquiry into the competencies of R&D managers, three factors determined the design: establishing a criterion measure of performance to define Highly Effective and Typical groups; using a multi-trait, multi-method approach to measurement; and collecting data on competency development that preceded work history. Findings – Nine variables were found to differentiate the two groups of managers. These were similar enough to collapse into two competencies: managing groups and interpersonal sensitivity. For the highly effective managers who demonstrated these two competencies, development of their capability began at young ages and prior to work experience. Effective and regular use of the two competencies occurred later in life and typically as a result of taking on leadership roles outside the work setting. Originality/value – People skills are important to effective management of R&D; technical ability is not enough to be a highly effective manager of R&D; differences in learning styles are important in learning interpersonal skills; people skills can be developed; development does not mean training; and activities outside work are important in developing leadership competencies. Keywords Emotional intelligence, Competences, Management development, Research and development Paper type Research paper

Journal of Management Development Vol. 27 No. 1, 2008 pp. 76-91 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited 0262-1711 DOI 10.1108/02621710810840776

Introduction Although it is generally accepted that there are differences between high and low performers, the specific factors that account for these differences have been elusive in the research literature. The claim that competencies account for this difference is well known by practitioners and consultants, but except for a few studies (Boyatzis, 1982; Spencer and Spencer, 1993; Goleman, 1998) there is little evidence for this link in the research literature. This study was designed to address this issue directly with a group of managers of R&D. In addition, the argument as to whether performance differentiating factors, particularly competencies, are something a person is born with or are developed, continues in the field of management development. Where competencies in general are being discussed, or Emotional Intelligence and Social Intelligence competencies in particular, there have been few attempts to establish the plasticity of these characteristics (Boyatzis et al., 2002) A second part of this study was designed to explore how people who appear to have and use these competencies developed them.

Study design: Part One Intended as a comprehensive inquiry into the competencies of managers of R&D three factors were included in the design: (1) establishing a criterion measure of performance; (2) using a multi-trait, multi-method approach to measurement; and (3) collecting data on competency development that preceded work history. In Part One of the study a group of Highly Effective and Typical R&D managers were identified and the characteristics which differentiated the two groups were determined. Part Two of the study was designed to answer the question “how did the Highly Effective R&D managers develop these differentiating abilities?” Criterion measure of performance: Participants were selected from the first level of management in five departments of a major government research center in the Mid-West. The selection was made using a peer, supervisor, and subordinate nomination process. Employees were asked to list the names of individuals they considered to be most effective in their current role as a first level manager. Managers who were above the 50th percentile on the number of nominations from all three sources, or above the 75th percentile on two sources and above the 50th percentile on the third were placed in the Highly Effective group (n ¼ 19). Managers who were on or below the 50th percentile on the number of nominations from all three sources or received no nominations on two or all three sources of nomination were placed in the Typical group (n ¼ 16). All of the participants were male and the two groups did not differ in age, education, number of years at the research facility, number of years as a manager, number of hours of management training, or number of weeks of military training. Multi-trait, multi-method: Assessments were completed in two, two hour individual sessions. In the first session managers completed the Thematic Apperception Test (TAT), the Learning Styles Inventory (LSI), the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI), the Executive Skills Profile (ESP), and four Life Story questions. In the second session each manager was interviewed using a Behavioral Event approach and the interviews were scored for competencies. Assessment tools were chosen to cover the multiple levels at which emotional and social competencies exist; unconscious motivational/trait drivers (i.e. personality), self-image, and observed behaviors (Boyatzis, 1982). The TAT, LSI, MBTI were used to assess the managers’ motives and traits. Self-image can be inferred from self descriptions so the Executive Skills Profile, a card sort instrument, and Life Story questions were used to capture this aspect of management competency. The behavioral skill aspect of management competency was measured using a variation on the critical incident interview technique called The Behavioral Event Interview (BEI). TAT stories written by the managers were scored for Achievement, Power, Affiliation, and Activity Inhibition (McClelland, 1985; Smith et al., 1992). The Achievement motive is a measure of a person’s need to do better for the intrinsic satisfaction of doing better. The Power motive is a measure of a person’s desire to have an impact or be influential. The Affiliation motive is a measure of a person’s need to establish and maintain positive relationships with others. Activity Inhibition is a measure of a person’s disposition to control his/her own impulses.

Identifying competencies

77

JMD 27,1

78

For each of the four scales of the MBTI an individual is forced to choose between the preferences being measured: Extroversion/Introversion (EI), Sensing/Intuition (SN), Thinking/Feeling (TF), and Perceiving/Judging (PJ) (Myers and McCaulley, 1985). The EI scales reflect an orientation toward the outer world of people and objects (E), or the inner world of concepts and ideas (I). The SN scale reflects an orientation toward a process of reporting observable facts or events through one or more of the senses (S), or a less obvious process of intuition (N) which reports meanings, relationships and/or possibilities that have been worked out beyond the reach of the conscious mind. The TF scale reflects the reliance on thinking (T) to make decisions impersonally on the basis of logical consequences, or a reliance on feeling (F) to make decisions primarily on the basis of personal or social values. The PJ scale describes the process a person uses primarily in dealing with the outer world. A person who scores high for judgment (J) has indicated a preference for either thinking or feeling, while a person who score high for perception has indicated a preference for either sensing or intuition. Combinations of the four preferences result in sixteen possible types which each reflect the interplay of the preferences and attitudes. The Learning Style Inventory is a self-descriptive test, based on experiential learning theory, which assesses an individual’s orientation toward learning (Kolb, 1984). The LSI measures the relative emphasis that the respondent attaches to each of four learning modes; Concrete Experience (CE), Reflective Observation (RO), Abstract Conceptualization (AC), and Active Experimentation AE (AE). A person scoring high in Concrete Experience is characterized by a receptive, experiential approach to learning. The CE learner is highly intuitive and tends to be empathic, people oriented and not as interested in theory as in practice. People scoring high in Reflective Observation tend to rely on careful observation in making decisions and prefer more passive learning situations like lectures. Individuals with this learning style preference tend to be unbiased but cautious in their approach to learning. They are often introverts. A person scoring high in Abstract Conceptualization has an analytical, conceptual approach to learning. The AC learner focuses on building theories and systematic plans based on logic, concepts and analysis. High AC individuals are more oriented toward things and symbols than to people. Scoring high in Active Experimentation indicates a preference for using practical applications to influence people and change situations. Individuals with this learning preference want to be actively involved in taking in new information by “doing” and “feeling”. They dislike lectures and tend to be extroverts. Responses to the 12 items of the LSI were totaled to arrive at a score for each of the four orientations. Combination scores were computed to discover the extent to which abstractness was emphasized over concreteness (AC-CE) and the extent to which action was emphasized over reflection (AE-RO). The Executive Skills Profile is a card sort instrument designed to identify the managerial skills most critical to the effective performance of a specific management job and to assess a particular manager’s skill strength in those critical areas (Boyatzis and Kolb, 1995). To assess current skill level, the individual is first instructed to sort the 72 skill item cards into one of seven categories ranging from “I have no skill or experience in this area” (value of 1) to “I am a leader or creator in this area” (value of 7). Skill items are assigned the value of the category into which it was sorted. The final

score provides a self-assessment of the manager’s abilities on twelve scales of management behavior. To assess the skill level required by a specific management job, the manager sorts the 72 skill item cards into seven categories ranging from “Not relevant to my job”(skill value 1) to “A top priority in my job” (skill value 7). Item and scale scores are computed as in the skill strength. The final scale scores provide a measure of the manager’s assessment of the managerial skill level require by his current job. Four Life Story questions were adapted from work done in the area of identity and self concept (McAdams, 1985). The Life Story exercise was included in this study to represent a self-report measure of the managers’ self-image. Each question was presented to the manager at the top of a blank sheet of paper. Questions were: Think of your life (past, present, and future) as if it were a book. Most books are divided into chapters. Each chapter tells a kind of a story; that is, it has a plot. Think about this, then divide your life into chapters, give each chapter a name and for each provide a short (two-four sentence) plot summary. Try to think about the major events in your life as “turning points” leading form one chapter to the next. Many people report occasional “peak experiences.” These are generally moments or episodes in a person’s life which he or she feels a sense of transcendence, breakthrough, uplifting, or inner peace. These experiences vary widely. Some people report them to be associated with religious experiences. Others may find such a “high” in vigorous athletics, reading a good novel, an intellectual insight, artistic expression, working with a team to complete an innovative project, or simply talking with a good friend. Please describe in four-five sentences something you would consider to be a peak experience for you. Please be specific. Include what happened, who was there, how it felt, what you were thinking, and how (it at all) the experience changed you. A “nadir” is a low point. A nadir-experience is the opposite of a peak experience. Please think of your life. Try to remember a specific experience in which you felt a sense of disillusionment and/or despair. This would be one of the low points in your life. Even though this memory is undoubtedly unpleasant, please be specific (four-five sentences) and report as much detail as you did for the peak experience. In thinking about our life, who has had an important impact on your development? Who have been significant role models? Please list these individuals by name and write a sentence or two describing the impact each has had on your development. A sub-sample of six stories (three from highly effective managers and three from typical managers) was selected at random. The content of these stories was used to create a set of themes which seemed to differentiate the two groups (Boyatzis, 1998). Inter-rater reliability was established for scoring the themes with another sub-sample of fifteen randomly selected stories. Agreement between the two raters ranged from 100 to 75 percent with an average percent agreement of 79. The entire set of thirty-five stories was then rescored by one of the raters. The eight themes that emerged were: Proactive Attitude Toward Life, Reactive Attitude Toward Life, Human Frailty, Positive Managerial Role, Negative Managerial Role, Reflection, Developmental Focus, and Interpersonal Sensitivity. The Behavioral Event Interview is a semi-structured interview in which an individual is asked to recall and relate recent, specific events in which he felt effective in executing his job role. The interviewer uses probing, but nondirective questions to obtain an accurate account of an event. The behavioral event interview is thought to be

Identifying competencies

79

JMD 27,1

80

one of the most effective methods for assessing managerial behavior (Boyatzis, 1982; Spencer and Spencer, 1993). In an hour and a half interview managers were asked to relate three incidents in which they felt effective as a manager and three incidents in which they felt ineffective as a manager. Interviews were scored independently by two raters for frequency of occurrence of eighteen generic managerial abilities. Initial inter-rater reliability computed as percent agreement ranged from 94 to 38 percent. Any instance of disagreement in scoring was discussed by the raters until a final 100 percent rater agreement was reached. Study results: Part One Measures of the motives did not significantly differentiate the Highly Effective from the Typical managers. On the TAT, no significant differences were found between the two groups. No significant differences were found between the two groups of managers in their preferences on the MBTI scales. For the Extroversion/Introversion scale, both groups of managers preferred Introversion. On the Sensing/Intuition scale, scores for both groups were equal. Thinking was preferred over Feeling and Judging was preferred over Perceiving in both groups. Learning Style Inventory results indicated no significant differences between the two groups of managers in learning styles. Both the Highly Effective and Typical mangers showed a preference for the abstract over the concrete and the active over the reflective orientations. As expected these scientist/engineer managers tended to cluster in the Assimilator and Converger learning styles. The Assimilator style is most common in research scientists and Engineers prefer the Converger style (Kolb, 1984). The environment of this research facility, being more like a research university than other organizations employing engineers would tend to support the Reflective/Abstract style of Assimilators. Therefore, all three of the personality variables assessed were non-significant in predicting performance of the R&D managers. Two of the three measures of social-role and self-image abilities significantly differentiated the Highly Effective from the Typical managers. The average scores on the 12 scales of the Executive Skills Profile measuring job requirements showed no significant differences between the two groups of managers. The average scores on four of the 12 scales measuring individual skill levels were significantly different. Highly Effective managers scored higher on the Leadership scale, the Helping and Delegating scale, the Adapting scale, and the Setting and Managing to Goals scale, as shown in Table I. Item analysis of the 12 scales revealed several significant individual items as shown in Table II. Analysis of the Life Stories revealed a significant difference between the managers on three themes, Human Frailty, Interpersonal Sensitivity, and Reactive Attitude Toward Life, as shown in Table III. Of the fifteen abilities scored from the BEI, three Initiative, Managing Group Process, and Self-Confidence significantly differentiated the Highly Effective from the Typical managers, as shown in Table IV. A summary of the variables that significantly differentiated the Highly Effective from the Typical managers is shown in Table V.

Scale

Group

Mean

SD

Leadership skills

Highly effective Typical Highly effective Typical Highly effective Typical Highly effective Typical Highly effective Typical Highly effective Typical Highly effective Typical Highly effective Typical Highly effective Typical Highly effective Typical Highly effective Typical Highly effective Typical

29.32 25.94 29.74 28.63 30.11 27.13 29.89 26.81 28.74 27.30 24.58 25.31 25.21 23.13 19.71 18.38 20.89 20.31 27.63 24.63 27.37 25.50 31.11 28.94

5.5 4.2 4.9 3.1 4.6 4.3 4.9 5.3 4.7 4.0 4.1 4.3 5.9 4.7 5.7 5.6 4.4 5.4 5.3 4.2 5.9 4.6 5.0 6.3

Relationship skills Helping and delegating skills Adapting skills Information-gathering skills Information analysis skills Planning skills Quantitative data analysis skills Technology management skills Setting and managing goals Taking action skills Entrepreneurial skills

t 2.03 0.79

Group

Selling ideas or products to others

Highly effective Typical Highly effective Typical Highly effective Typical

5.16 3.94 5.26 4.56 5.47 4.81

Highly effective Typical Highly effective Typical Highly effective Typical Highly effective Typical Highly effective Typical

5.11 4.00 4.95 4.31 5.47 4.81 5.47 4.50 5.00 3.63

Having positive regard: cooperative, optimistic, appreciative attitude toward others Helping others gain opportunities to develop Understanding the reasons for a conflict or disagreement Identifying and defining problems Seeing how things fit into the big picture Selecting and assigning personnel: allocating resources

Mean

Identifying competencies

0.01 ns

1.96

0.01

1.79

0.04

0.97

ns

20.51

ns

1.14

ns

0.69

ns

0.35

ns

1.85

Item

Making oral presentations

p

81

0.03

1.03

ns

1.13

ns

t

p

2.38

0.02

1.72

0.09

2.00

0.05

2.77

0.009

1.78

0.08

1.79

0.08

2.65

0.01

4.01

0.000

Table I. Results of t-tests on executive skills profile skill assessment scales

Table II. Results of t-tests on executive skills profile individual skill items

JMD 27,1

Theme

Group

Proactive attitude toward life

Highly effective Typical Highly effective Typical Highly effective Typical Highly effective Typical Highly effective Typical Highly effective Typical Highly effective Typical Highly effective Typical

Reactive attitude toward life

82

Human frailty Positive managerial role Negative managerial role Reflection Developmental focus

Table III. Results of t-tests on life story themes

Interpersonal sensitivity

Competency

Group

Achievement orientation

Highly effective Typical Highly effective Typical Highly effective Typical Highly effective Typical Highly effective Typical Highly effective Typical Highly effective Typical Highly effective Typical Highly effective Typical Highly effective Typical Highly effective Typical Highly effective Typical

Initiative Conceptual thinking Developing others Directiveness Relationship building Accurate self-assessment Managing group process Understanding others Self-confidence Table IV. Results of t-tests on behavioral event interview competency scores

Analytical thinking Communication

Mean

SD

1.84 1.56 0.53 1.13 0.63 0.19 0.26 0.00 0.16 0.31 2.26 2.06 1.26 0.94 0.84 0.19

1.2 1.8 1.0 1.1 0.5 0.4 0.5 No variance 0.5 0.8 1.4 1.8 0.9 1.2 0.6 0.4

Mean

SD

1.63 1.63 2.52 1.81 3.26 2.93 1.58 1.06 0.26 0.44 0.63 0.69 0.11 0.63 0.89 0.38 0.47 0.56 0.53 0.25 0.47 0.69 0.26 0.25

1.0 1.1 1.3 1.2 1.4 1.4 1.3 1.0 0.6 0.6 1.0 0.9 0.3 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.8 0.8 0.5 0.4 0.6 0.8 0.7 0.6

t 0.54

p ns

1.73

0.04

2.87

0.00

0.70

ns

0.36

ns

0.91

ns

3.70

t 0.02 1.69 0.69 1.27

0.00

p ns 0.05 ns 0.10

0.87

ns

1.17

ns

2.23

0.01

2.10

0.02

0.33 1.68

ns 0.05

0.90

ns

0.06

ns

To determine the predictive strength of the multitrait-multimethod design of this study and to explore which combination of variables provided the best classification of Highly Effective and Typical managers, a discriminate function analysis was performed. In the first analysis, with all forty-five variables included, 100 percent of the cases were correctly classified into Highly Effective and Typical groups. In subsequent analyses the motive/trait, social role/self image, and skill variables were entered separately. The next best predictor of group membership was the function defined by the 16 self-image variables from the ESP and Life Story. This function correctly classified 88.6 percent of the sample and minimized misclassifications better than the functions defined by the motive/trait or skill variables. Self-image variables correctly classified 89.5 percent of the Highly Effective managers and 87.5 percent of the Typical managers. These results support the use of multi-trait, multi-method approach to assessments of managerial effectiveness and support the hypothesis that for managers of R&D managerial effectiveness is a function of self-image abilities. Results of the discriminate function analysis are shown in Table VI.

Identifying competencies

83

Study design and results: Part Two Nine variables (Managing Group Process, Initiative, Self-Confidence, Leadership, Helping and Delegating, Adapting, Setting and Managing to Goals, Human Frailty and Interpersonal Sensitivity) were found to significantly differentiate Highly Effective managers from Typical managers. These findings provided the basis for asking the question, “How did the Highly Effective managers develop the abilities that distinguish them from their Typical peers?” The approach to this inquiry is based on the view that abilities are developed over time and that people associate development with significant events and people. The first step in this investigation was to compare the significant variables for similarity of content. Eight of the variables were similar enough to be collapsed into two abilities: Managing Groups and Interpersonal Sensitivity. Data from 52 factorial studies on traits of leaders in the military, in industry, and in experimental groups (Bass, 1990) lends support for these two groupings. The Human Frailty item was dropped because it did not have enough elements in common with the other measures and was not easily thought of as an ability that is developed. Instrument

Variable

Behavioral event interview

Initiative Managing group process Self-confidence

Executive skills profile

Leadership Adapting skills Helping and delegating Setting and managing to goals

Life story

Human frailty Reactive attitude toward life Interpersonal sensitivity

Table V. Summary of variables which differentiated Highly Effective (n ¼ 19) from Typical (n ¼ 16) managers

JMD 27,1 Function All variables %

84

Table VI. Classification of Highly Effective (Group 1) and Typical (Group 2) managers by four discriminant functions

Group

No. of cases

1

19

2 % Percentage of grouped cases correctly classified: Motive and trait variables 1 % 2 % Percentage of grouped cases correctly classified: Social-role self-image variables 1 % 2 % Percentage of grouped cases correctly classified: Skill variables 1 % 2 % Percentage of grouped cases correctly classified:

16

Predicted group membership 1 2 19 100 0 100

0 0 16 0

100 19 16

13 68.4 5 31.3

6 31.6 11 68.8

17 89.5 2 12.5

2 10.5 14 87.5

14 73.7 1 6.3

5 26.3 15 93.8

68.8 19 16 88.6 19 16 82.9

Managing Groups was defined as: Stimulates members of a group to work effectively together by doing any or all of the following: explicitly communicates the need for cooperation and teamwork; acts to promote commitment to team or shared goals; creates symbols of group identity, pride, trust or team effort; inspires or motivates others; acts to involve all parties concerned in openly resolving issues. Interpersonal Sensitivity was defined as: Understands and responds to the experiences or needs of others by doing one or all of the following: expresses concern about and is influenced by the feelings or emotional experiences of others; helps others gain opportunities to develop their abilities; establishes trusting relationships in which honest feedback is given and received. Highly Effective managers scoring at or above the group average on all nine of the variables would clearly be above the norm for management ability and would represent the most highly effective of the group. Three of the nineteen Highly Effective managers met these criteria. To increase the size of the group for the development inquiry the criteria for inclusion was expanded to scoring at or above the median for the entire sample on seven of the nine significant variables. These criteria defined a natural, discontinuous break in the data at which the rest of the Highly Effective managers scored below the median on more than two of the nine significant variables. Seven additional managers were identified using the revised criteria. These ten Highly Effective managers were sent two Ability Development Inquiry worksheets, one for Managing Groups and one for Interpersonal Sensitivity. The worksheet asked them to relate when they first became aware of the ability, when they first used it, when they first used it effectively, and when they used it effectively and regularly. For each developmental timeframe, the managers were instructed to provide

a specific event or events, a year, and to identify what or who facilitated or provoked the events or events. In individual interviews the definitions of Managing Groups and Interpersonal Sensitivity were reviewed and managers were asked if they felt that they did demonstrate the ability. All confirmed that they did. Then developmental time lines were reviewed and the managers were asked to talk about the developmental events. Because ability development is thought to be a continuous process, occurring in incremental steps with adaptive time between the steps the managers were also asked to talk about what had transpired between the specified developmental timeframes. Four themes related to ability development were identified in the data collected on the Managing Groups ability: (1) managers were aware of the ability at an early age; (2) the use of the ability was related to actually leading a group; (3) effective use of the ability occurred after the participants started working; and (4) articulation of the concepts underlying Managing Groups was important to effective and regular use of the ability. Awareness of the Managing Groups ability came early. Seventy percent of the managers recalled being aware of Managing Groups before they entered college. Three recalled events related to participating in Boy Scouts at ages 11, 12, and 13. Three cited events involving their family or friends at ages 8 to 10, and one mentioned playing football at age 14. For all of these managers using the Managing Groups ability was related to being in an explicit leadership role within a group in contrast to being a group member. Six were involved in managing activities while in high school or college. Three organized and ran groups in the community, and one manager cited his experience as a new supervisor. In all of these situations the individual took an active role in directing the activities of a group. Effective use of the Managing Groups ability occurred after the managers had completed college and were working, but not always in their work setting. Effective use seemed to be situational. As individual contributors at work, they seemed unable to use Managing Groups until they were in charge of a group. For some, this occurred at work for others it was at church or in the community. Effective and regular use of the ability developed in work situations where getting the job done depended on a group effort. Some of the managers reported that they had to go against prevailing organizational norms in using this ability, but at the time, it seemed to be the only way to get the job done, as shown in the following quotes: [I] Had to use the team approach to survive. [I] didn’t know all the answers. [It was] Not in vogue yet. Was learning and growing as a manager. More narrowly focused on technical areas with small groups. The idea of teamwork was growing at the lab. Managing people with more experience [than I had], some of whom thought they should have had my job. I knew I needed their expertise. The culture at the time was very dictatorial. This was not a popular style even among my supervisors. [I] was caught between the two.

Identifying competencies

85

JMD 27,1

86

For all of the manager connecting the concept of Managing Groups to behaviors facilitated the transition from merely using the ability to using it effectively and regularly. For some training courses were important in this process as indicated by these quotes: ACE [Action for Competence and Excellence training] became the turning point. [I] began to see the relationship between the managers that I thought were effective and the behaviors that were discussed in the class. [I] Had to look around and see what worked and what didn’t. LEP [Leadership Education Program] exercises reinforced my positive feelings about group process and consensus. From LEP [I] learned about bringing people into the conversations. [I became] More sensitive to group process. [I] Became competent in use [of Managing Groups] as a result of training in the military. [We] Used material from the University of Alabama studies on group dynamics. [We] were taught negotiating skills, problem solving skills, brainstorming. [I learned] How to characterize a group by pointing out who was dominant.

For other managers activities outside of their work setting helped them to articulate the essence of the Managing Groups ability. The common element seemed to be situations in which the group process overshadowed the content as shown in these quotes: At church [you] have to be more diplomatic. Listen and let things happen. [I] realized that the activity in volunteer groups is more important than accomplishment. I got into an argument with the minister once about this. Once I realized that, I had an easier time. Church group easily lent itself to people expressing feelings and opinions. I became more comfortable operating in that type of exchange. Earlier I felt that there should be a logical flow. I became more accepting of less structure. [There] Has been a progression in how I acted, particularly as leader. Less concerned with flow and content and more attuned to group process. [In quality circle activities] being able to work with a group and watch the group activity and not worry about the problem to be solved. All I could focus on is the way the group worked. [I] Got very good at group dynamics. [I] Developed skills to where they were almost second nature. See the most important part I bring to a group is getting the group together and getting information out of people.

Three themes related to developing Interpersonal Sensitivity were identified: (1) managers’ awareness of the ability was elated to recognition of the positive or negative consequences of behavior; (2) intervention by others was important in developing the ability; and (3) both positive and negative situations ere important in developing the ability. Interpersonal Sensitivity was harder for the managers to articulate as an ability, yet all related events and people instrumental in their development. Two of the Highly Effective managers in the development study sub-sample felt Interpersonal Sensitivity was not something that they consciously used but was more a part of their general approach to life. Many others referred to the ability as a “gift” or personal style that some have and others do not. However, all of the sub-sample managers related that they were able to use the ability more effectively after they were aware of the positive

and negative impact that their behavior had on others. One manager described his experience this way: I can think of so many examples of being interpersonally insensitive, that it is frightening. I can remember some outstanding counterpoint experiences in my early career. Once I purposely embarrassed a superior in a public meeting over a technical point. I was trying to put myself forward intellectually. Intellectual ability is what I perceived to by a preferred quality. I went through a period when I was very opinionated and probably attempted to force my opinions on those around me. A close friend at work sensitized me to it. I have tried to move away from that [being opinionate], but it’s not a natural thing for me.

All ten of the managers reported that they were aware of the Interpersonal Sensitivity ability by the time they completed college. Interventions by others whether through family relationships, feedback or information in books were important sources of awareness and development. One manager reported an experience in college which provoked his awareness of the ability: In college [I] had a lecturer who talked about Human Engineering, how people are treated in organizations and human values. That left an impression on me. Making a contrast between engineering things and the world of interacting with people.

For other managers information from books had an impact on them: In high school I read a book by a physicist, Louis de Broghe, and wrote down a quote that I still carry with me in my wallet. The gist of what influenced me is that we should not ignore what is noble in acts conscientiously performed by anyone. In 1970, I read I’m OK, You’re OK. [I] was frustrated, went to the library and was looking through the psychology books and found it. [I] started looking at transactional analysis. [I] did some introspection and saw that I was not listening, was not empathizing. [I] was doing everything from a personal point of view. [I] started making a conscious effort to listen and empathize. [I] didn’t apply it very well until I saw that if worked. I practiced on my wife.

Both positive and negative situations were important in developing Interpersonal Sensitivity. Positive experiences were related to family relationships and values: During childhood growing up with an older brother and sister, and observing how my father and mother handled conflict situations, and tried to treat all three children equally and fairly. [Interpersonal Sensitivity] goes back to very early years. Early development and family situations strongly influenced overall idea of being sensitive to other people’s feelings in what you said and did. [It] Came out of family relationships and values. [It was a] Protestant upbringing, emphasis on the Golden Rule type thing.

Negative situations were more varied than the positive experiences but equally important for developing Interpersonal Sensitivity. For one manager it was fraternity hazing and college ROTC that provoked his awareness of the ability. Another manager described this poignant experience: In fifth grade my parents moved from the inner city to the suburbs. I was the only Italian kid in the class. I felt a substantial amount of discrimination. [I] went through all the ways of dealing with it, fight/flight, trying to ignore it. I’m not sure what it did to me, for me. In some ways it puts a shell around you, and in some ways it make you sensitive to other people’s needs.

Identifying competencies

87

JMD 27,1

Observing others who were insensitive also lead several of the managers to resolve: I’ll never treat others that way. There’s got to be a better way.

88

Part of my motivation for using it [Interpersonal Sensitivity] more and making it a routine was watching people who I thought were bad managers not using it. [I] always enjoyed being close to people and sharing emotional experiences. [I] tend to be close with people at work. [I] don’t separate that. I consider the typical engineer to be antisocial and distant. The first fellow I worked for here was quite closed. I always thought that I could make the job so much better if I had his job. I try to stimulate people to come together because I think that’s a better way. Working for managers that weren’t that way has helped me see that. [I] had a lot of negative role models at the lab and in the military. [I] decided that I wouldn’t treat people that way.

For all ten managers, effective use and effective and regular use of Interpersonal Sensitivity occurred after they had started work, but not always in work situations. Family situations or community activities were identified by four as provoking or facilitating effective and effective regular use of the ability. The Managing Groups and Interpersonal Sensitivity abilities which differentiated managers as Highly Effective were developed before these managers entered the work setting and long before they became managers. The manager’s effective use of the abilities was related to practice in his family, in community activities, and in the work setting. Interpersonal Sensitivity was seen by a few managers as a personal characteristic or trait rather than an ability. However, all managers reported conscious development of the ability. Feedback from a significant other (spouse, close friend), or introspective analysis of their own behavior were cited as important in developing interpersonal sensitivity. Both positive and negative role models were cited as important in becoming aware of and using this ability. Early family experiences and participation in organized activities such as scouting, sports, band, or clubs were important in becoming aware of the Managing Groups ability. Effective use of this ability was related to being in situations which required cooperation and teamwork. In some cases these situations were work related, but for these scientist/engineer managers who all started their careers as individual contributors, community and church activities provided the arena for development. Just being a member of a group was not sufficient. Leading the group was integral to developing the ability. In looking at the relationship between the development of the two competencies for these Highly Effective managers, awareness of Interpersonal Sensitivity (average age ¼ 14:2) came before awareness of Managing Groups (average age 18.1). However, their first use, effective use, and effective and regular use of Managing Groups (averages ages ¼ 23:8, 32.8, 41.4) preceded their first use, effective use, and effective and regular use of Interpersonal Sensitivity (average ages ¼ 28:1, 38.4, 45.3). The developmental patterns for the two competencies are shown in Figure 1.

Identifying competencies

89

Figure 1. Mean ages for developing managing groups and interpersonal sensitivity

Implications The conclusions drawn from this study have implications for management selection and development. People skills made a difference. The highly effective managers demonstrated more interpersonal ability than their average peers. They were concerned with developing and maintaining interpersonal relationships and seemed to see that as an important part of their role as a manager. Effective leaders have resonant relationships (Boyatzis and McKee, 2005) based on an openness to and an ability to tune in to others. The highly effective managers related situations in their Life Stories which opened them up to experiencing genuine concern for others which transcended their own personal needs. Technical ability is not enough. The importance of including social and emotional intelligence competencies in management education has been recognized for over two decades (Boyatzis et al., 2002). However, in technical education EI and SI competencies have only recently been a focus of study (Gregory, 2000; Palethorpe, 2006). In R&D and professional jobs where employees are recruited on the basis of their technical talent, equal emphasis should be placed on hiring criteria related to potential for people management skills. Differences in Learning Styles are important in learning interpersonal skills. The predominant Learning Style of the managers studied was abstract/reflective. Several of the Highly Effective managers used interpersonal abilities more successfully after they had developed a “concept” of the ability. This fits with their learning style. An individual who is reflective and abstract is not particularly attuned to the world of people and experience and may need coaching in how to be reflective on self and others.

JMD 27,1

90

People skills can be developed. Even the managers who reported being interpersonally insensitive early in their careers eventually learned ways to overcome this. While exposure to positive and negative role models, personal experiences and feedback contributed to greater awareness of interpersonal abilities, practice was the most important factor in using the abilities effectively. Brain research suggests that in developing EI/SI competencies in order to reach a point where a new habit replaces an old one individuals must engage in extensive practice (Goleman, 1998; Goleman et al., 2002). This highlights the importance of on the job, experiential learning rather than attending training courses in developing competencies. It also draws attention to the critical challenge of helping managers learn to learn from their on the job experiences. Development is not just training. Managerial skill assessment and planning for the next job should be an important part of the development of individual contributors. Development does not begin when an individual is promoted into a management job. Performance management processes can be designed such that managers and employees agree on expectations for leadership competencies as well objectives. Project assignments, role exchanges, and developmental assignments can be tailored for high potentials so that they are challenged to exhibit leadership in a variety of settings during their individual contributor years. Programs that provide time for reflection and self-exploration and stress the importance of learning to learn from these developmental assignments are a necessary part of the grooming for leadership positions. Activities outside of work are important. The managers with the most interpersonal ability had been engaged in leading groups outside of work prior to their promotion into management. Their actual experiences leading groups seemed to be the most significant factor in effectively using the abilities. References Bass, B. (1990), Handbook of Leadership, The Free Press, New York, NY. Boyatzis, R.E. (1982), The Competent Manager, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY. Boyatzis, R.E. (1998), Transforming Qualitative Information: Thematic Analysis and Code Development, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA. Boyatzis, R.E. and Kolb, D.A. (1995), “From learning styles to learning skills: the executive skills profile”, Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 10 No. 5, pp. 3-17. Boyatzis, R. and McKee, A. (2005), Resonant Leadership, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA. Boyatzis, R.E., Stubbs, E.C. and Taylor, S.N. (2002), “Learning cognitive and emotional intelligence competencies through graduate management education”, Academy of Management Journal on Learning and Education, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 150-62. Goleman, D. (1998), Working with Emotional Intelligence, Bantam Books, New York, NY. Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R.E. and McKee, A. (2002), Primal Leadership, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA. Gregory, S.T. (2000), “Schools are building a new breed of engineer – one with management savvy”, US News & World Report, Vol. 128 No. 14, pp. 86-8. Kolb, D.A. (1984), Experiential Learning, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. McAdams, D. (1985), Power, Intimacy and the Life Story, Dorsey, Homewood, IL.

McClelland, D. (1985), Human Motivation, Scott Foresman & Co., Glenview, IL. Myers, L.B. and McCaulley, M.H. (1985), A Guide to the Development and Use of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, Consulting Psychologists Press, Palo Alto, CA. Palethorpe, M. (2006), “Are you emotional but intelligent – or are you emotionally intelligent?”, Engineering Management, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 11-13. Smith, C.P., Feld, S.C. and Franz, C.E. (1992), “Methodological considerations: steps in research employing content analysis systems”, in Smith, C.P., Atkinson, J.W., McClelland, D.C. and Veroff, J. (Eds), Motivation and Personality: Handbook of Thematic Content Analysis, Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, pp. 515-36. Spencer, L.M. and Spencer, S.M. (1993), Competence at Work, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY. Corresponding author Christine R. Dreyfus can be contacted at: [email protected]

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected] Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

Identifying competencies

91

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0262-1711.htm

JMD 27,1

92 Received 20 April 2007 Revised 20 August 2007 Accepted 31 August 2007

A 20-year view of trying to develop emotional, social and cognitive intelligence competencies in graduate management education Richard E. Boyatzis Departments of Organizational Behavior, Psychology, and Cognitive Science, Case Western Reserve University, Ohio, USA, and

Argun Saatcioglu University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas, USA Abstract Purpose – Development of competencies needed to be effective managers and leaders requires program design and teaching methods focused on learning. The paper presents an update and a view of 20 years of attempting to develop these competencies. Design/methodology/approach – A total of 14 longitudinal studies of the impact of a particular MBA program on developing emotional, social and cognitive intelligence competencies are reviewed. Three new studies are to complete a 20-year perspective. This is a value added design. It asks how are the graduates different from when they entered the program? Findings – Emotional, social and cognitive intelligence competencies that predict effectiveness in management and leadership can be developed in adults through a graduate management program. These improvements can sustain out as far as seven years. But this degree of value added can be eroded by a tumultuous organizational climate. Research limitations/implications – It is a series of 17 longitudinal studies on one school. With support from four studies of a program for 45-65 year-old executives. Practical implications – Competencies needed to be effective can be developed. But that development can be eroded without continuous improvement and renewal. Originality/value – Few sets of multiyear, multi-cohort, multi-method, multitrait studies exist. This helps to build a new literature on learning and development, as well as focusing on development of competencies. Keywords Emotional intelligence, Cognition, Competences, Graduates Paper type Research paper

Journal of Management Development Vol. 27 No. 1, 2008 pp. 92-108 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited 0262-1711 DOI 10.1108/02621710810840785

While billions are spent trying to develop competencies each year, the results have been less than satisfactory. This does not even measure the millions of person hours spent in pursuit of competency development through performance reviews, training programs, coaching sessions, or workshops and courses in graduate or executive education (Boyatzis et al., 1995c). Some conclude from all this that effective leaders, The authors would like to give special thanks to Eileen O’Connell and Malcolm Allen who helped them collect and collate the new data reported here.

managers and professionals cannot be developed (Boyatzis et al., 1996; Boyatzis et al., 2002). This conclusion leads to a belief that effective leaders, managers and professionals are either they are born that way or people should just focus on their current, evident strengths and find jobs, careers, and organizational settings in which they will be effective. This paper is an extension of the earlier work last reported and summarized in Boyatzis et al. (2002). It brings a message of hope and humility in competency development. By building on earlier longitudinal studies (Boyatzis et al., 1995c; Boyatzis et al., 2002) and adding a few more cadres, we continue to show that emotional, social and cognitive intelligence competencies can be developed in adults. But the last two cadre of data reported here also show “cracks” and a breakdown of the effectiveness shown earlier, even dramatic success in developing these competencies can be eroded by destructive organizational practices. Preparing people to be effective One of the primary objectives of training and graduate management education is to prepare people to be outstanding managers, leaders, and professionals. To understand what graduate students may be learning requires that we need a model of human talent and to understand what the workplace needs for effective performance in terms of that mode. It could be said that developing human talent breaks down into three categories: helping people learn knowledge, helping them develop what to do with that knowledge, and to learn why they would use their knowledge and competencies. Development of knowledge means helping people develop the functional, declarative, procedural, and meta-cognitive knowledge needed. Examples of these types of knowledge are, respectively, market segmentation for a new product, the time it takes a polymer to set, calculating the present value of a capital acquisition, and ethical principles as applied in international business transactions. This knowledge is necessary but not sufficient for the leader, manager, or professional to add value to organizations. In this sense, knowledge bases are threshold talents (Boyatzis, 1982; Kotter, 1982; Luthans et al., 1988; Spencer and Spencer, 1993; Goleman, 1998). To be an effective leader, manager or professional, a person needs the ability to use knowledge and to make things happen. These can be called competencies, which Boyatzis (1982) defined as, “the underlying characteristics of a person that lead to or cause effective and outstanding performance”. Whether direct empirical research is reviewed from other articles in this special issue or the past literature (Bray et al., 1974; Boyatzis, 1982; Kotter, 1982; Thorton and Byham, 1982; Luthans et. al., 1988; Howard and Bray, 1988) or meta-analytic syntheses are used (Campbell et al., 1970; Spencer and Spencer, 1993; Goleman, 1998), there are a set of competencies that have been shown to cause or predict outstanding leader, manager or professional performance. Regardless of author or study, they tend to include abilities from three clusters: (1) cognitive intelligence competencies, such as systems thinking; (2) emotional intelligence competencies, or intrapersonal abilities, such as adaptability; and (3) social intelligence competencies, or interpersonal abilities, such as networking.

A 20-year view of competencies

93

JMD 27,1

94

Beyond knowledge and competencies, the additional ingredient necessary to outstanding performance appears to be the desire to use one’s talent. This seems driven by a person’s values, philosophy, sense of calling or mission, unconscious motives and traits (Boyatzis and Sala, 2004; Boyatzis, 2006). The motives and traits affect both the way a person sees the world, especially the perception of opportunities and challenges they perceive in the environment. But they also are persistent and generalized drivers. They arouse dispositional ways a person respond to his/her environment and create a focus for a person’s behavior. These three domains of capability or talent (i.e. knowledge, competencies, and motivational drivers) help us to understand what a person can do (i.e. knowledge), how a person can do it (i.e. competencies), and why a person feels the need to do it (i.e. values, motives, and unconscious dispositions). Our role in management education is to help people add value on each of these domains – to help them to prepare to be effective in their future jobs and careers. In management training, there is no fundamental question about purpose. The aim of development efforts is to help people become more effective. It requires development of competencies, as well as arousal of the appropriate motivation and value drivers. The question is whether the methods are effective or not. Do they produce an improvement in the competencies in use at work? Our observation is that many faculty members still see competency development as the responsibility of the career placement office or adjuncts hired to conduct non-credit workshops. So in universities, there is a double challenge. First, there is the question as to whether or not the methods yield graduates who can and will use the competencies to be effective. Second, are these competencies integrated into the curriculum. The second aspect raises the question, “Is it a main element in the program or school’s mission?” In other words, if faculty adopt the challenge of developing “the whole person”, competency development would be as fundamental to our objectives and methods as accounting. Outcome assessment in higher education asks, “What are our students learning?” From an outcome perspective, that is the question as to what the added value of spending time in a graduate management program. The early results from such studies were sobering with only one clear conclusion- students graduating from our colleges were older than they were when they entered. Evidence was reported of knowledge acquisition, improvement in competencies, including critical thinking, and shifts in motivation, but these were far less frequent than was predicted or expected (Winter et al., 1981; Mentkowski et al., 2000; Pascarella and Terenzini, 1991; Banta, 1993). Even before the humbling Porter and McKibbin (1988) report showed that MBA graduates were not fulfilling the needs of employers or the promise of the schools, the AACSB started a series of outcome assessment studies in 1978. They showed faculty to be effective in producing significant improvement of students with regard to some abilities (Boyatzis and Sokol, 1982; Development Dimensions International-DDI, 1985). Boyatzis and Sokol (1982) showed that students had significantly increased on 40 percent to 50 percent of the competencies assessed in two MBA programs, while DDI (1985) reported that students in the two MBA programs in their sample had significantly increased on 44 percent of the variables assessed. But, they also decreased significantly on 10 percent of the variables in the Boyatzis and Sokol study. When the overall degree of improvement in these abilities was .

calculated (Goleman et al., 2002), these studies showed about a 2 percent increase in emotional and social intelligence competencies in the one to two years students were in the MBA programs. To address program impact, as of the early 1990s, only a few management schools had conducted student-change outcome studies which compared their graduates to their students at the time of entry into the program (Albanese et al., 1990). Today, many schools have conducted other types of outcome studies, namely studies of their alumni or studies with employers and prospective employers (Kridel, 1998). Some schools have examined the student-change from specific courses (Bigelow, 1991; Specht and Sandlin, 1991). Student-change outcome studies have been a focus in undergraduate programs (Astin, 1993; Banta, 1993; Pascarella and Terenzini, 1991; Mentkowski et al., 1991; Winter et al., 1981), but still relatively little has been documented about the effects of graduate programs. This leaves the major question: Can MBAs and participants in executive education develop competencies that are related to outstanding managerial, leadership, and professional performance? A related question is how any institution can improve their impact and/or sustain their impact. Methods Overall design This study is an update of earlier published studies. It continues and builds on the earlier studies (Boyatzis et al., 1995b; Boyatzis et al., 1996; Boyatzis et al., 2002) using a combination of cross-sectional and longitudinal, time series data collected as part of a 50-year longitudinal study of multiple cohorts of MBA students at the Weatherhead School of Management (WSOM), Case Western Reserve University. The longitudinal study focuses on the impact of the MBA program on the development of cognitive, social, and emotional intelligence competencies. Since 1990, entering data have been collected during a required course called Leadership Assessment and Development (for a detailed description of the course and the longitudinal study, see Boyatzis, 1994, 1995, 2006; Goleman et al., 2002; Boyatzis et al., 2002). The course leads a student through assessments and activities about their dreams and aspirations, current behavior, strengths and gaps as a manager and leader, and culminates in the writing of a learning plan. Students pursue the learning plan through the remainder of the program and afterward. Data collected during the years of 1987-1989 reflect the results of students’ development prior to revisions in the MBA program and are considered baseline samples. Many of the results of the 1987-1996 studies have been reported in conference presentations, books, and journal articles. Boyatzis et al. (2002) summarized all of these 12 prior studies and added results for 2000 and 2001. This paper adds results from 2004, 2005, and 2006. The result is a set of data from 17 cross-sectional and longitudinal studies. The samples used in the earlier studies, as well as the additional samples first reported here are described in Table I. For clarification of sampling in each of the earlier years, see Boyatzis et al. (2002). Instruments All of the instruments used in these studies assessed competencies. In the earlier studies, five instruments were used. The Learning Skills Profile (LSP) is a card-sort

A 20-year view of competencies

95

JMD 27,1

96

Table I. Description of the samples and populations for the cohorts in this study

No. of MBAs Cohort 1987 FT 1988 FT 1990-1992 1991-1993 1992-1994 1993-1995 1998-2000 1999-2001 2000-2002 2002-2004 2003-2005 2004-2006 2005-2007 2006-2008 2007-2009

FT FT FT FT FT FT FT FT FT FT FT FT FT

n Entering

n Tested

No. of students Graduating

n Tested

% Female

Average Age

100 89 124 105 137 140 186 171 202 162 130 109 104 66

72 70 108 83 104 125 89 142

61 71 96b 71b 127b 146 191 169

27a 17a 71 58 58 77 56c 80c

164 113 136

108 104 104

31 31 37 30 45 35 25 35 32 36 28 38 18 31

26 26 27 27 27 27 29 27 28 27 27 28 28 27

USA News

FT Ranking

31 44 34 51 63 56 58 58 75

39 56 77 64 84 49 63 82

Notes: a Assessment was considered voluntary, but not everyone appeared at the orientation program for the full-time students. for the randomly selected samples; participation was voluntary, so all assessed had given their permission; all randomly selected samples were comparable with the populations from which they were drawn as to age, gender, GMAT, undergraduate GPA and percentage international students; b Some entering students did not graduate due to working toward a joint degree (e.g. MBA/JD) or transferring to the part-time program. Of those that permitted their data to be included in the study, some students were dropped from the final sample due to various unforeseen circumstances (e.g. incomplete assessments); c Samples for those graduating in 1997, 1998 and 1999 were lost due to a series of computer crashes. The 2003 graduating sample was lost due to data-entering errors. In 1997, participation in exit assessment near graduation became a required part of the program for full-time students. Part-time students were not approached for exit assessment

based on experiential learning theory (Kolb, 1984; see Boyatzis and Kolb (1991, 1995) for a discussion of the instrument’s reliability and validity). The Critical Incident Interview (CII), which is a one-hour, audiotaped interview (Flanagan, 1954; Boyatzis, 1982; Spencer and Spencer, 1993) coded for the competencies. The Group Discussion Exercise (GDE) is a 45 minute, videotaped simulation, coded for the competencies. The Presentation Exercise (PE) is an assessment of an individual’s Oral Communication ability, also coded for the competencies (Boyatzis, 1998). For all of the coded from qualitative sources, two or three people independently coded the interviews and videotapes. In this research, the coders averaged 89-90 percent inter-rater reliability on 16 of the competencies. The Self-Assessment Questionnaire (SAQ) is a 73-item questionnaire in which the participants are asked to assess the frequency with which they demonstrate each behavior. The External Assessment Questionnaire (EAQ) is the informant, or 360, variation of the SAQ. In 2002, five of the cognitive competencies were dropped because they did not predict effectiveness in management, leadership or professional jobs. They were threshold competencies, predicting average from poor performance (Boyatzis, 1982). In the late 1990s, the SAQ and EAQ were expanded and adapted to more directly assess emotional and social intelligence competencies (Boyatzis and Sala, 2004). The new

test was called the ECI. A special version of it, called the ECI-U, WSOM Version was used in the new outcome studies. The ECI-U, WSOM Version assessed several of the cognitive competencies most directly linked to effectiveness in leadership, management, and professional jobs. The ECI-U, and its base test, the ECI and ECI-2 showed reliability and validity in numerous studies (summarized in Boyatzis and Sala, 2004). The ECI-U, WSOM Version had 75 percent of items that were the same or very close in wording to the original SAQ/EAQ. All of the 17 scales in the SAQ/EAQ were included in the ECI-U. Eight new scales were added. The scales that were the same on the SAQ/EAQ and ECI-U WSOM version (71 percent of the ECI-U WSOM Version) were: Achievement Orientation (earlier called Efficiency Orientation, Planning was folded into Achievement Orientation); Adaptability (earlier called Flexibility); Emotional Self-Control (earlier Self-Control); Self-confidence; Empathy; Conscientiousness (earlier called Attention to Detail); Initiative; Conflict Management (earlier called Negotiating); Communication; Developing Others; Influence (earlier called Persuasiveness); Building Bonds (earlier called Networking); Teamwork (earlier called Group Management); Cultural Awareness (earlier called Social Objectivity); Systems Thinking; and Pattern Recognition. The following scales were added in the ESCI-U: Emotional Self-Awareness; Accurate Self-Assessment; Trustworthiness; Optimism; Organizational Awareness; Service Orientation; Inspirational Leadership; and Change Catalyst.

Results Findings reported in Boyatzis et al. (2002) are summarized in Tables II and III for full time MBAs. As shown in Table IV, students statistically significantly improved on each of the 21 competencies as viewed by others with the EAQ in the 2001 sample and all 16 competencies assessed in the 2004 sample. Using the Self Assessment Questionnaire, students significantly or near significantly improved on 15 of the 21 competencies in the 2001 sample and improved on all 16 in the 2004 sample. As shown in Table V, students significantly improved on competencies in both years, as viewed by others: Accurate Self-Assessment, Initiative, Adaptability, Emotional Self-Control, Achievement Orientation, Optimism, Empathy, Cultural Awareness, Communications, Conflict Management, Influence, Building Bonds, Systems Thinking and Pattern recognition. They did not improve, as viewed by others in either year on: Self-confidence, Organizational Awareness, Inspirational Leadership, Change Catalyst, Developing Others and Teamwork. They improved in their own eyes from 2003 to 2005 but not in 2004 to 2006 in: Emotional Self-Awareness, Trustworthiness, Conscientiousness, nor Service Orientation. Building Bonds was the only competency others saw their improvement in 2003-2005 but not in 2004-2006. They saw themselves, in these two cohorts improving most of the competencies. They did not improve in either cohort in Emotional Self-Awareness and Teamwork. They improved in 2003-2005 but not in 2004-2006 in: Achievement Orientation and Conscientiousness. They did not improve in 2003-2005 but saw themselves improving in 2004-2006 in: Optimism, Empathy, Organizational Awareness, and Cultural Awareness.

A 20-year view of competencies

97

Action initiative Goal setting

Some improvementc

No improvement

Information gathering Sense making Leadership Relationship Helping

Information analysis Theory building Quantitative analysis Use of technology

1987-1989 Program Relationship management Goal setting Action Initiative Self-confidence

Cognitive

Relationship

Leadership Helping

Self-management

Sense making Information gathering Information analysis Theory building Quantitative analysis Use of technology

1990-2001 Program Relationship management

Cognitive

Notes: a Adjusted for native English-speaking as well as the entire sample; b Strong Improvement is classified as significant or near significant improvement on 0.666 of the cohorts assessed; c Some Improvement is classified as significant or near significant improvement on 1 or more up to 0.333 of the cohorts assessed

Self-confidence

Strong improvementb

Table II. Summary of the Time Series results of learning skills for full-time MBAsa Self-management

98

Evidence of value-added

JMD 27,1

Evidence of value added

Self-management

Relationship management

Cognitive

Strong improvementb

Efficiency orientation Planning Flexibility Self-confidence Self-control Initiative

Empathy Networking Oral communications Group management

Pattern recognition System thinking

Some improvement

c

Attention to detail No improvement Decrease

A 20-year view of competencies

99 Negotiating Developing others Persuasiveness (in 2)

Social objectivity

Persuasiveness (in 1)

a

Notes: Results from coding of behavior shown in audiotapes of the CII, videotapes of the GDE and Presentation Exercise, adjusted for native English-speaking sample as well as the full sample; b Strong Improvement is significant or near significant results on 0.66 or more of the cohorts with 1 measure or 0.33 to 0.5 of the cohorts on all measures; c Some Improvement is significant or near significant results on 1 cohort on 1 measure

Discussion To aid in the comparison, results of the competency development, or the lack thereof, is shown in Table VI for 1987 through 2006 for full-time MBAs at WSOM. In contrast to earlier studies, it appears that MBAs can develop emotional intelligence and cognitive competencies crucial to effectiveness as a manager and leader during their program. The research question posed in this paper is supported by the multi-method, multi-trait, multi-cohort data offered. The results are from the eleven cohorts of full-time MBAs. The summaries show a dramatic improvement over the impact of the baseline program in all three clusters. As mentioned earlier, the baseline impact of the WSOM MBA program was consistent with earlier AACSB studies (Boyatzis and Sokol, 1982; DDI, 1985) and the Porter and McKibbin (1988) study – MBA programs primarily improve a person’s analytic ability. While these results are important to managerial and leadership effectiveness, they are only part of the recipe for outstanding performance and contribution to organizations. Many faculty discussions, prior to implementing aspects of a program to work on the emotional and social intelligence competencies involve some faculty’s fears that improvements in emotional and social intelligence abilities would detract from the improvement of cognitive abilities. The earlier studies showed that was not the case, and even enhanced development of critical thinking ability. The differences between the impact of the program shown in Table VI reveals some difference between self-report and changes behaviorally observed by others. This could be the result of different standards, perceptions, or developmental progress. That is, the difference between the behavior others see and what a person senses within himself/herself may be a function of different processes. For example, it is possible that a person feels he/she has changed a great deal, but the change is too small to be apparent to others. In addition, some competencies are easier to observe than others. Another possibility is that the person senses a change in himself/herself before he/she shows this in their behavior, or shows it consistently enough for others to notice.

Table III. Summary of the results from direct behavioral measures for full time MBAs up to 2004a

Table IV. Comparison of full-time entering and graduating MBA students’ scores on the EAQ and SAQ 2.3-3.3 2.3-3.2 2.0-3.0 2.4-3.2 2.1-3.0 2.2-3.1 2.1-3.1 2.3-3.2 2.1-3.1 2.1-3.0 2.3-3.3 2.1-3.1 2.2-3.1 2.2-3.1 2.3-3.3 2.2-3.1 2.1-3.1 2.0-3.0 2.0-3.2 2.0-3.0 2.4-3.4

2 10.0 * * * * 2 8.6 * * * * 2 10.8 * * * * 2 8.3 * * * * 2 10.0 * * * * 2 8.6 * * * * 2 8.9 * * * * 2 9.5 * * * * 2 10.0 * * * * 2 10.1 * * * * 2 8.6 * * * * 2 9.2 * * * * 2 11.1 * * * * 2 9.5 * * * * 2 10.5 * * * * 2 9.8 * * * * 2 8.6 * * * * 2 10.1 * * * * 2 7.8 * * * * 2 7.7 * * * * 2 10.2 * * * *

25.6 * * * * 24.8 * * * * 27.9 * * * * 21.6 * * 23.4 * * * * 24.1 * * * * 23.8 * * * * 22.2 * * 24.5 * * * * 24.5 * * * * 25.2 * * * * 25.2 * * * * 23.2 * * * * 22.6 * * 25.6 * * * * 27.3 * * * *

3.3-3.4 3.3-3.4 2.8-3.1 3.3-3.4 3.2-3.3 3.1-3.2 3.2-3.4 3.2-3.3 3.1-3.2 2.8-3.0 3.2-3.4 3.0-3.2 3.2-3.3 3.1-3.2 3.0-3.3 3.0-3.2

EAQ 2002-2004 n ¼ 108 t 3.0-3.0 2.8-2.9 2.4-2.7 2.7-2.9 2.6-2.8 2.9-3.0 2.5-2.7 3.1-3.2 3.0-3.0 2.7-2.8 2.9-3.0 2.8-2.9 2.7-2.8 2.7-2.7 2.9-3.1 2.7-2.8 2.6-2.7 2.5-2.7 2.4-2.8 2.3-2.5 3.0-3.2 21.1 21.7 * * 22.6 * * 22.3 * * 22.8 * * 22.1 * * 22.9 * * 22.0 * * 20.6 22.6 * * 20.9 21.5 * 20.9 20.8 24.4 * * * * 21.6 * 20.8 22.9 * * * 22.8 * * * 21.5 * 23.9 * * * *

SAQ 1999-2001 n ¼ 71 t

2.7-3.0 3.0-3.2

3.0-3.2 3.0-3.20 2.4-2.9 2.9-3.0 3.0-3.2 2.8-3.2 2.8-3.1 3.2-3.4 2.9-3.3 2.7-3.0 3.0-3.3 2.8-3.1 2.9-3.2 2.8-3.1

2 3.5 * * * * 2 4.0 * * * *

3.9 * * * * 2 3.0 * * * * 2 6.0 * * * * 2 3.9 * * * * 2 2.8 * * * * 2 5.2 * * * * 2 2.8 * * 2 2.9 * * * * 2 5.7 * * * * 2 5.5 * * * * 2 4.8 * * * * 2 4.7 * * * * 2 4.3 * * * * 2 3.8 * * * *

SAQ 2002-2004 n ¼ 91 t

Notes: Matched-pair t-tests were run with the “t” reported because a longitudinal design was used; significance levels are one-tailed: * p , 0.10; * * p , 0.05; * * * p , 0.01; * * * * p , 0.001

Efficiency orientation Planning Initiative Attention to detail Self-control Flexibility Self-confidence Empathy Social objectivity Persuasiveness Networking Negotiating Group management Developing others Oral communication Use of concepts Systems chinking Pattern recognition Quantitative analysis Use of technology Written communication

EAQ 1999-2001 n ¼ 80 t

100

Skill scale

JMD 27,1

Systems thinking Pattern recognition

2 1.9 * * 2 2.4 * * *

2 0.7 2 3.0 * * * 2 1.8 * 2 0.1 2 2.9 * * * 2 1.0 2 3.4 * * * * 2 1.18

2 1.8 * * 2 0.6 2 1.1 2 2.0 * * *

2 2.8 * * * 2 2.7 * * * 2 6.3 * * * * 2 1.2 2 0.7 2 2.8 * * * 2 1.7 * *

3.5-3.7 3.84.0

3.5-3.7 3.5-3.9 3.5-3.7 3.5-3.7 3.7-3.9 3.7-3.9 3.8-3.9 4.0-4.1

3.9-4.0 4.0-4.2 3.8-3.9 3.9-4.0

3.7-3.9 3.7-3.8 3.4-3.7 3.8-3.9 4.0-4.2 3.7-3.9 4.0-4.0

3.9-4.0 4.0-4.2 3.8-3.9

2 3.4 * * * * 2 1.3 2 1.8 * * 2 1.8 * * 2 1.0 2 3.04 * * * * 2 1.5 * 2 1.8 * * 2 2.0 * 2 1.6 * 2 1.4 * 2 2.8 * * * 2 2.4 * * * 2 2.1 * * 2 2.1 * * 2 1.5 * 2 1.7 * * 2 3.3 * * * * 2 1.3 2 2.3 * * 2 2.2 * *

3.7-3.9 3.7-3.8 3.4-3.5 3.7-3.8 4.1-4.2 3.6-3.9 4.0-4.2 3.9-4.0 3.9-4.1 3.9-4.0 3.9-4.0 3.6-3.8 3.6-3.8 3.4-3.6 3.5-3.7 3.7-3.8 3.7-3.8 3.8-4.0 4.1-4.2 3.4-3.6 3.6-3.7

2 1.3 2 2.4 * * * 2 1.1 2 0.6 2 2.7 * * * 2 4.2 * * * * 2 2.3 * * 2 2.0 * * 2 2.4 * * * 2 2.5 * * * 2 1.4 * 2 1.3 2 3.9 * * * * 2 3.3 * * * *

2 2.6 * * 2 2.0 * * 2 4.1 * * * * 2 1.4 * 2 2.3 * * 2 2.4 * * * 2 0.1

2 1.1 2 2.4 * * * 2 1.8 * *

Self 2004-2006 n ¼ 74 t 3.9-4.0 3.9-4.1 3.8-4.0

2 0.6 2 2.6 * * 2 2.1 * *

Self 2003-2005 n ¼ 92 t

Note: Matched-pair t-tests were run with the “t” reported because a longitudinal design was used; Significance levels are one-tailed: * p , 0.10; * * p , 0.05; * * * p , 0.01; * * * * p , 0.001; a Entering and graduating scores were rounded to one decimal point. This created visual anomalies in significance reported

Cognitive

3.8-3.9 3.9-3.9

3.8-3.9 3.8-4.0

Inspirational leadership Communication Conflict management Change catalyst Influence Developing others Building bonds Teamwork and collaboration

Relationship management

22.5 * * * 25.4 * * * *

3.9-3.9 3.9-4.0 3.7-3.8 3.8-3.9 3.8-4.0 3.9-3.9 4.1-4.2 4.3-4.3

Empathy Service orientation Organizational awareness Cultural awareness

Social awareness

3.9-3.9 3.9-4.0 3.6-3.7 3.8-3.8 3.9-4.0 3.9-3.9 4.1-4.2 4.2-4.3

4.0-4.0 4.2-4.2 4.2-4.2 4.1-4.2

22.3 * * * 21.4 * 20.7 21.9 * *

4.0-4.1 4.2-4.3 4.2-4.2 4.1-4.1

Emotional self-control Achievement orientation Initiative Trustworthiness Conscientiousness Adaptability Optimism

Self-management

20.7 22.9 * * * 23.9 * * * * 21.2 24.0 * * * * 20.4 21.0 20.4

4.0-4.1 4.0-4.0 3.6-3.8 4.1-4.1 4.4-4.4 4.0-4.1 4.2-4.3

23.6 * * * * 23.5 * * * * 27.3 * * * * 21.4 * 21.9 * 24.5 * * * * 21.9 * *

4.0-4.1 3.9-4.0 3.7-3.9 4.0-4.1 4.3-4.4 4.0-4.1 4.2-4.3

Emotional self-awareness Accurate self-awareness Self-confidence

Self-awareness 2 1.2 2 2.4 * * * 2 0.9

4.0-4.0 4.1-4.2 4.2-4.2

21.9 * * * 21.4 * 20.8

4.0-4.1a 4.1-4.2 4.1-4.1

Scale

Cluster

Other 2004-2006 n ¼ 104 t

Other 2003-2005 n ¼ 104 t

A 20-year view of competencies

101

Table V. Comparison of full-time entering and graduating MBA students’ scores on the ECIU (scales in italics were added and did not appear in the SAQ/EAQ)

Table VI. Summary of competency improvement from 1987 to 2006 in full-time MBAs na na U ,

na na na na

na na na

na na U na , , na na na na

na na U na U U na na na na , na na na U na na na na U na na U U U

na U U na U

na na U U U U na na U na U na na

na na U U U U na na U na U na na U na na U na U U U U U U U U

U U

U

U U U U U U U

U U

U U U

U U U U U U U U U U U U U

U U U U U U U U

na na U U U U na na na na U na na , na U , na , , U U U U

na na U U U U na na U na U na na U na U U na U U U U U U

na na U U U U na na U na U na na U na na U na U U U U U U

U U

U

U

U U

U

U U

U

U U U

U U U

U

U U

U

U U U U U U U U U

U U

Notes: na ¼ not assessed; ,¼ some evidence among that assessed; blank entries ¼ significant or near significant evidence on all or most of the measures assessed for that competency

Emotional self-awareness Accurate self-assessment Self-confidence Emotional self-control Achievement orientation Initiative Trustworthiness Conscientiousness Adaptability Optimism Empathy Service orientation Organizational awareness Cultural awareness Inspirational leadership Communications Conflict management Change catalyst Influence Developing others Building bonds Teamwork Systems thinking Pattern recognition

Self-assessment Behavioral through other (360 informants) Pre-1990 1990-1996 1999-2001 2002-2004 2003-2005 2004-2006 1990-1996 1999-2001 2002-2004 2003-2005 2004-2006

102

Competency

JMD 27,1

Rhee (1997) interpreted this as a sensitization effect. He studied 22 of the full-time graduates of the 1995 cohort by interviewing and testing them about every six weeks throughout their two-year program. His sample showed dramatic improvement on all of the scales in the Learning Skills Profile and direct behavioral results slightly less than the overall 1995 sample, which were considerably less dramatic than the self-report results. The disparity could have been the result of the Hawthorne Effect, or the result of cognitive dissonance reduction. An MBA might say to himself/herself, “I have spent all this time and money, I must have changed.” But that would cause a self-justifying distortion in the self-report data, not the direct behavioral data. Regardless of the causes of the observed differences, the multi-method, multi-cohort results provide increased confidence when we observe results from both self-report and measures directly assessing behavior demonstrated in audiotapes of work samples and videotapes of their behavior in simulations. There may also be cohort effects. For example, the class graduating in 2005 appeared to improve on fewer of the competencies than the 2006 cohort in their own view. But in the view of others, they improved more than the 2006 cohort. Another source of confusion in monitoring impact over the 20 years is the occasional change in tests. Although this results from a desire to improve tests and evolution of methods, it makes comparisons across many years more difficult. As was described earlier, the shift to a 360 was a dramatic change in method to one considerably less labor intensive. The shift from the SAQ/EAQ to the ECI-U was a slight shift in the items, with eight scales added. The 17 scales that were the same used items that were, on the whole, either identical are had slight wording changes. The increased impact of the program shown in the time series results may have been the result of factors other than the curriculum change. A review of the full-time faculty teaching in the school showed that from 1988-1989 to 1993-1995, 67 percent of the faculty were the same. Although the program did not change its admissions procedures and criteria during this period, as the new program became known it resulted in applications and enrollment by students with higher scores on measures like GMAT, undergraduate GPA, the percentage of females in the program, and higher scores on some of the competencies measures used across the cohorts in the time series. Even with this increase in entering ability, the improvements noted after the program changed were significant and dramatic. So these aspects of the school and program did not appear to have an impact on competency improvement up to 1996. As shown in Table I, the full time MBA program at WSOM grew in numbers (i.e. enrollment) as well as national (US News and World Reports) and international (Financial Times) rankings up to 1998/1999. Then a series of internal changes created an atmosphere of tumultuous change. Following the departure of a charismatic Dean, there was a succession of succession of 3 interim Deans, interspersed with 3 relatively short-term Deans between the Summer of 1998 and the Summer of 2006. The decrease in domestic full time MBA enrollments nationwide, along with decreases in international students due to financial crises in their home countries, 9/11, SARS, visa difficulties and opening of hundreds of MBA programs in other countries affected WSOM. WSOM suffered from dramatic decreases in part time MBA and EMBA enrollments, and a downturn in custom, executive education. Morale among the faculty

A 20-year view of competencies

103

JMD 27,1

104

dropped while most staff were reassigned in the University or laid off. Full time faculty decreased by over 33 percent while staff levels were cut in half. What caused these dramatic improvements in cognitive and emotional intelligence competencies from the MBA program of the 1980s? Unfortunately, we did not have a research design in place to make specific attributions. But the components of the MBA program that were changed from the earlier program included: . an explicit philosophy of education and pedagogy (Boyatzis et al., 1995c); . a course on Leadership Assessment and Development using Intentional Change Theory as the basis for its design (Boyatzis, 1994, 1995; Goleman et al., 2002; Boyatzis, 2006); . a focus on specific competencies in selected courses while addressing course material, such as the marketing course that assessed students on the presentation skills or the operations management course using group projects assessing their group process competencies; . a dramatic increase in the percentage of courses requiring field projects in companies, group work, and student collaboration; and . opportunities to participate in voluntary activities, such as a chapter for Habitat for Humanity and functional clubs, like the marketing club (which the part-time students did not have the time nor inclination to participate in). Our interpretation has been that the leadership course and the wide range of learning activities integrated into the MBA program caused the results. What caused the decrease in impact of the full time program in 2005 (15 percent of the competencies assessed in earlier years did not improve in 2003-2005) and even worse (25 percent of the competencies assessed in earlier years did not improve in 2004-2006) in 2006 from earlier years? The results were alarming, but looked worse because of the addition of a lack of improvement on 3 and 5 of the new competencies assessed in the ECI-U. Although we cannot be sure, we suspect the dramatic drop in morale among the faculty and staff, as well as continuing fall in the national and international rankings invaded the classrooms, student-faculty-staff interactions, as well as donor support and employer interest. From a positive case study of how to improve the impact of an MBA on competency development WSOM became a case study in erosion. Amid all of the changes in the school during the 1998 to 2006 period, one was not paying as much attention to the strategic threats and opportunities identified in the two earlier strategic plans, in 1990 and 1995. The irony is that the faculty foresaw the drop in enrollments and had planned for alternative ways to grow the school. It included the need to continually innovate in the MBA program. Although many attempts were made during this period, they did not arouse nor meet with the enthusiasm of the late 1980s through mid 1990s. Faculty and staff became defensive and many narrowed our focus to “our courses, students, and research.” Successive strategic plans did not have the commitment of the majority of the faculty. It seemed that coalitional protectionism infected the school. And then, for some faculty who had been involved and drivers of many earlier innovations, they just gave up trying. So while other schools and programs continued to innovate and stretch the boundaries of what can be done to advance learning, we were falling behind – we were not keeping

up with our competition. One conclusion is that we did not renew ourselves or our program sufficiently. In Chapter 10 of Boyatzis et al. (1995c), the importance of maintaining the “vigil” and continuing to innovate and assess the effectiveness of experiments was emphatically stated. We claimed that regressive forces of stress alone could cause a school and its programs to slip (for a more detailed description of this process of creeping dissonance, see Boyatzis and McKee, 2005). But, added to the stress of the work, the threat of decreasing enrollments were new levels of competition and alternatives for students. The value of an MBA has been called into question (_____). All of these forces are regressive, provoking a defensive response that inhibits innovation, creative thinking and healthy degrees of organizational cooperation (Boyatzis and McKee, 2005). With continuing international distinction for our Masters in Organization Development, Supply Chain, Executive Doctorate in management, EMBA (the latter reversed the enrollment erosion in 2005), and undergraduate programs, and a new popular Dean, the faculty and staff began to revive the spirit that drove the dramatic improvements in the early 1990s during the Summer of 2006. There is a belief that since we reversed our misfortune once, we can do it again. Time will tell! What if learning were the purpose of education? Borrowing from the title of Chapter 10 of Boyatzis et al.’s (1995b) book for the subtitle of the implications section of this paper, we can offer a promising answer. An MBA education can help people learn the cognitive, social and emotional intelligence competencies needed to be outstanding managers and leaders. But we cannot use the typical lecture and discussion methods with their focus on knowledge acquisition only. The other major message of this update to the earlier studies is that it is difficult for an institution to sustain that contribution over time and an atmosphere of continuous improvement sufficient to stay abreast of a prospective student’s alternatives (i.e. our competition). A more holistic approach (i.e. developing knowledge, competencies and values) can help dramatically improve our impact and the relevance of an MBA to their future work organizations. Even here there is some doubt as to the knowledge retention of MBAs. In one study, professors administered the final example from the required course in accounting following the regular taking of the exam (Specht and Sandlin, 1991). They reported the half -life of knowledge was six weeks. And we also need healthy organizational environments within our schools. We are not immune to the same things we criticize in other organizations. One implication of these results should be to encourage schools to conduct outcome assessment studies to determine what their students are learning. Another implication is to be wary of the threatened distraction from our mission of preparing people to manage and lead. This wariness should result in a focus on renewal, adaptation and resilience in our institutions. References Albanese, R., Bernardin, H.J., Connor, P.E., Dobbins, G.H., Ford, R.C., Harris, M.M., Licata, B.J., Miceli, M.P., Porter, L.W. and Ulrich, D.O. (1990), “Outcome measurement and management education: an Academy of Management task force report”, paper presented at the Annual Academy of Management Meeting, San Francisco, CA.

A 20-year view of competencies

105

JMD 27,1

106

Astin, A.W. (1993), What Matters in College? Four Critical Years, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA. Banta, T.W. (Ed.) (1993), Making a Difference: Outcomes of a Decade of Assessment in Higher Education, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA. Bigelow, J.D. (Ed.) (1991), Managerial Skills: Explorations in Practical Knowledge, Sage, Newbury Park, CA. Boyatzis, R.E. (Ed.) (1982), The Competent Manager: A Model for Effective Performance, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY. Boyatzis, R.E. (1994), “Stimulating self-directed change: a required MBA course called Managerial Assessment and Development”, Journal of Management Education, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 304-23. Boyatzis, R.E. (1995), “Cornerstones of change: building a path for self-directed learning”, in Boyatzis, R.E., Cowen, S.C. and Kolb, D.A. (Eds), Innovation in Professional Education: Steps on a Journey from Teaching to Learning, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA, pp. 50-94. Boyatzis, R.E. (2006), “Intentional change theory from a complexity perspective”, Journal of Management Development, Vol. 25 No. 7, pp. 607-23. Boyatzis, R.E. and Kolb, D.A. (1991), “Assessing individuality in learning: the learning skills profile”, Educational Psychology, Vol. 11 Nos 3/4, pp. 279-95. Boyatzis, R.E. and Kolb, D.A. (1995), “Beyond learning styles to learning skills: the executive skills profile”, Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 3-17. Boyatzis, R. and McKee, A. (2005), Resonant Leadership: Renewing Yourself and Connecting With Others through Mindfulness, Hope, and Compassion, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA. Boyatzis, R.E. and Sala, F. (2004), “Assessing emotional intelligence competencies”, in Geher, G. (Ed.), The Measurement of Emotional Intelligence, Novas Science Publishers, Hauppauge, NY, pp. 147-80. Boyatzis, R.E. and Sokol, M. (1982), A Pilot Project to Assess the Feasibility of Assessing Skills and Personal Characteristics of Students in Collegiate Business Programs, report to the AACSB, St Louis, MO. Boyatzis, R.E., Cowen, S.S. and Kolb, D.A. (Eds) (1995a), Innovation in Professional Education: Steps on a Journey from Teaching to Learning, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA. Boyatzis, R.E., Renio-McKee, A. and Thompson, L. (1995b), “Past accomplishments: establishing the impact and baseline of earlier programs”, in Boyatzis, R.E., Cowen, S.S. and Kolb, D.A. (Eds), Innovation in Professional Education: Steps on a Journey from Teaching to Learning, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA. Boyatzis, R.E., Stubbs, E.C. and Taylor, S.N. (2002), “Learning cognitive and emotional intelligence competencies through graduate management education”, Academy of Management Journal on Learning and Education, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 150-62. Boyatzis, R.E., Leonard, D., Rhee, K. and Wheeler, J.V. (1996), “Competencies can be developed, but not in the way we thought”, Capability, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 25-41. Boyatzis, R.E., Baker, A., Leonard, D., Rhee, K. and Thompson, L. (1995c), “Will it make a difference? Assessing a value-based, outcome oriented, competency-based professional program”, in Boyatzis, R.E., Cowen, S.S. and Kolb, D.A. (Eds), Innovating in Professional Education: Steps on a Journey from Teaching to Learning, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA, pp. 167-202. Bray, D.W., Campbell, R.J. and Grant, D.L. (1974), Formative Years in Business: A Long Term AT&T Study of Managerial Lives, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY.

Campbell, J.P., Dunnette, M.D., Lawler, E.E. III and Weick, K.E. (1970), Managerial Behavior, Performance, and Effectiveness, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY. Development Dimensions International (DDI) (1985), Final Report: Phase III, report to the AACSB, St Louis, MO. Flanagan, J.C. (1954), “The critical incident technique”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 51, pp. 327-35. Goleman, D. (1998), Working with Emotional Intelligence, Bantam, New York, NY. Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R.E. and McKee, A. (2002), Primal Leadership: Realizing the Power of Emotional Intelligence, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA. Howard, A. and Bray, D. (1988), Managerial Lives in Transition: Advancing Age and Changing Times, Guilford Press, New York, NY. Kolb, D.A. (1984), Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Kotter, J.P. (1982), The General Managers, Free Press, New York, NY. Kridel, J. (1998), personal communication from the Director of Professional Development Programs for the AACSB, St Louis, MO. Luthans, F., Hodgetts, R.M. and Rosenkrantz, S.A. (1988), Real Managers, Ballinger Press, Cambridge, MA. Mentkowski, M. (2000), Learning that Lasts: Integrating Learning, Development, and Performance in College and Beyond, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA. Mentkowski, M., Rogers, G., Deemer, D., Ben-Ur, T., Reisetter, J., Rickards, W. and Talbott, M. (1991), “Understanding abilities, learning and development through college outcome studies: what can we expect from higher education assessment?”, paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL. Pascarella, E.T. and Terenzini, P.T. (1991), How College Affects Students: Findings and Insights from Twenty Years of Research, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA. Porter, L. and McKibbin, L. (1988), Management Education and Development: Drift or Thrust into the 21st Century?, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY. Rhee, K. (1997), “Journey of discovery: a longitudinal study of learning during a graduate professional program”, unpublished dissertation, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH. Specht, L. and Sandlin, P. (1991), “The differential effects of experiential learning activities and traditional lecture classes in accounting”, Simulations and Gaming, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 196-210. Spencer, L.M. Jr and Spencer, S.M. (1993), Competence at Work: Models for Superior Performance, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY. Thornton, G.C. III and Byham, W.C. (1982), Assessment Centers and Managerial Performance, Academic Press, New York, NY. Winter, D.G., McClelland, D.C. and Stewart, A.J. (1981), A New Case for the Liberal Arts: Assessing Institutional Goals and Student Development, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.

Further reading Ballou, R., Bowers, D., Boyatzis, R.E. and Kolb, D.A. (1999), “Fellowship in lifelong learning: an executive development program for advanced professionals”, Journal of Management Education, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 338-54.

A 20-year view of competencies

107

JMD 27,1

108

Barlow, D.H. (1988), Anxiety and Disorders: The Nature and Treatment of Anxiety and Panic, The Guilford Press, New York, NY. Dewey, J. (1938), Experience and Education, Kappa Delta Pi Series, Collier Books, London. Leonard, D. (1996), “The impact of learning goals on self-directed change in management development and education”, unpublished doctoral dissertation, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH. Wheeler, J.V. (1999), “The impact of social environments on self-directed change and learning”, unpublished doctoral dissertation, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH. Corresponding author Argun Saatcioglu can be contacted at: [email protected]

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected] Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0262-1711.htm

The impact of learning goals on emotional, social, and cognitive intelligence competency development David C. Leonard Duke Corporate Education, Durham, North Carolina, USA

The impact of learning goals

109 Received 20 April 2007 Revised 20 August 2007 Accepted 31 August 2007

Abstract Purpose – The purpose of this research is to empirically examine the efficacy of setting multiple goals targeting complex competencies with a variety of time horizons pursued across a number of years. Most research conducted in the areas of goal setting examines an individual’s ability to achieve a single goal targeting a simple skill or behavioral change within a short time period. Design/methodology/approach – In this longitudinal study competency development is assessed over time periods ranging from nine months to four and half years and examined using both self-reported change and behavior change demonstrated through critical incident interviews. Findings – Progress over the study reveals that establishing learning goals is particularly important to the development of competencies. Subjects developed significantly more on competencies for which they set goals than on other competencies. They also demonstrated greater competency development when goals were remembered. Research limitations/implications – Subjects were studied during a specific life change event – completion of an MBA program. Their particular education environment was designed to support and encourage change. It undoubtedly contributed to their development during the study. Results therefore may not generalize to broader populations. However, the results reveal clear implications for management education in both academic and corporate education settings. Practical implications – This study highlights important elements in the development process that when included enhance competency development and provide insight into the mechanisms underlying intentional change theory. Originality/value – The research evaluates the complexity and difficulty involved in competency development. It provides empirical evidence to support goal setting and intentional change theories. Keywords Competences, Target markets, Emotional intelligence, Cognition Paper type Research paper

Setting goals has become such an implicit aspect of management and organizational functioning people just assume it works. The concept is that by setting a goal, we move our efforts and decisions toward it more efficiently and effectively. It gives our functioning purpose and focus. The origins of goal-setting theory Goal setting research has evolved from two relatively independent streams of research. The first originates in experimental psychology. The second is more applied and found mainly in management theory (Locke and Latham, 1990). From the experimental psychology literature, goal setting theory’s earliest origins (early 1900s) are found in

Journal of Management Development Vol. 27 No. 1, 2008 pp. 109-128 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited 0262-1711 DOI 10.1108/02621710810840794

JMD 27,1

110

the work of Germany’s Wurzburg school (see Ryan, 1970, for an overview). It was there while studying mental processes Kulpe and his colleagues employed the term “task” to define “that which the subject was asked to do”. Their research reveals tasks completed earlier in time can affect later task performance, and volitional effort increases as the difficulty of a task increases (Ach, 1935). At roughly the same time, William James (1904, p. 486) examined the concept of “will” or conscious volition. He describes the process of volitional effort as “. . . if we believe that the end is in our power, we will that the desired feeling, having, or doing shall be real; and real it presently becomes . . . ”. According to James, “will” allows an individual to hold an idea in consciousness, where it can be verbalized and translated into volitional effort or purposeful action. Lewin (1961) builds upon the early concept of volitional effort through his construct of “intention”. His research reveals the difficulty of the task has a greater influence on performance than had previously been thought. He argues the intention to perform a task leads to a level of internal tension that is maintained until the task is performed. Intention is similar to the psychoanalytic construct of “drive” in that both operate as motivators of action. Once initiated intention and drive push an individual toward action. The resulting action reduces the drive or internal tension. They are dissimilar in that drives are usually considered to be unconscious, while intention is a conscious process (Freud, 1926; Lewin, 1961). Together, Lewin and James’ work stimulated a significant body of research generally combined under the heading of motivation. This research area includes work conducted by Rotter (1966), Bandura (1977), and McClelland (1961, 1987) among others. Their work identifies and describes a variety of constructs through which individuals interpret their inner reasons (i.e. intention) for engaging in purposeful action or goal setting. Rotter (1966) proposed the idea of locus of control. He suggests people have a general tendency to believe the control of events in their lives is either internal or external to themselves. Individuals with an internal locus of control tend to believe in their own competence to control events, while those with an external locus of control believe others or events primary influence their circumstances. Such personal attributions of control significantly influence an individual’s understanding of their internal motivation and impact their beliefs about the effectiveness of their future action. Locus of Control is an early version of Bandura’s (1977) concept of self-efficacy, an individual’s expectation they can achieve a desired outcome or goal. Individuals with high self-efficacy have strong expectations about their competence to perform in a variety of settings. They are confident they will be successful and view their efforts as directly linked to success and goal achievement. Individuals with high self-efficacy set challenging goals and believe they are capable of attaining them. McClelland (1961, 1987) studied three motives including the Need for Achievement which is the drive to excel, to achieve, and to succeed. He demonstrated individuals high in need for achievement differentiate themselves from others by their need to improve their performance and exceed standard performance levels. Recent research on goal orientation has produced somewhat paradoxical results (VandeWalle et al., 2001). This work reports setting a goal invokes defensiveness and a need to prove one can succeed, which thereby reduces success on goal attainment. Some of this confusion is resolved in Latham et al.’s (2004) study that shows focusing on a specific goal can improve performance, if that goal requires learning or adaptation.

The second evolutionary path of goal setting originates in the work of Frederick Taylor (1967), the father of Scientific Management (Locke and Latham, 1990). In his book, Principles of Scientific Management, published in 1911, Taylor identifies two motivational tools: task and bonus. Within a work setting he advocates clearly defined work standards and performance goals, rewarded by large bonuses. Taylor’s ideas eventually play a critical role in the emergence of Management by Objectives, or MBO programs (see Wren, 1987 for an overview). MBO advocates establishing organizational goals, then distributing supporting goals in each organizational department or level. In this way each functional group is working toward objectives which allow the organization to meet its ultimate goals. At its essence MBO is goal setting applied to a macro or organizational setting. Emerging from such a diverse conceptual history, goal setting theory has become one of the most generative theories in the behavioral sciences. In their book, A Theory of Goal Setting and Task Performance, Locke and Latham (1990) examine and synthesize the research findings of over 500 studies exploring the effects and effectiveness of goal setting. They conclude goal setting theory has become one of the best documented and more universally accepted theories in psychology and the social sciences (Locke and Latham, 1990). At its basis, goal setting theory states goals regulate human behavior by providing an object of purpose or intent. In other words, once individuals define a purpose (goal), they direct their behavior (task performance) towards accomplishing it. The degree to which the purpose is clearly defined and challenging to achieve affects the focus and amount of energy dedicated to the task performance (Locke, 1968; Kolb and Boyatzis, 1970a; see Locke and Latham, 1990, for a review). Applications of goal-setting theory Applications of goal-setting theory are most commonly found in organization development, management education, behavior change and athletic training literature. Early work in the area of organization development and managerial training was driven by a push for job enrichment. In an effort to create a more challenging and data rich working environment goal setting and specific performance feedback was introduced through MBO programs. With increasingly challenging goals and detailed feedback it was believed workers would experience more excitement and satisfaction in their jobs (Locke and Latham, 1990). As a result of early MBO and goal setting applications, much of the research conducted in this area has examined the efficacy of quantifiable goals to increase production rates and improve productivity (Odiorne, 1978; Nordstrom et al., 1988). In addressing productivity, researchers have tended to examine discrete job elements rather than sophisticated and complex competencies. The exceptions are a few studies examining the effectiveness of goal setting with competencies like time management (Wexley and Baldwin, 1986), and negotiation (Stevens et al., 1993). Another body of literature examining the effectiveness of goal setting is behavioral change in therapeutic relationships. Goal setting is a common technique used in a variety of therapeutic philosophies. It is a proven part of a therapy in helping individuals lose weight (Taylor et al., 1991), stop smoking (Mullen and Tabak, 1989), reverse eating disorders (Thornton and DeBlassie, 1989), improve speech problems (Stevens and Roulstone, 1991), address alcoholism (Wing, 1991) and learn stress

The impact of learning goals

111

JMD 27,1

112

reduction techniques (Lloyd, 1986). This research, however, often suffers from a challenge found in other fields of study. The goals used in therapeutic behavior change rely heavily on base line quantifiable behavior measures. A final body of literature and research that has applied goal setting to individual development is athletic training. Goal setting is a successful part of basic skill development in both baseball (Burton, 1989) and field hockey (Lee, 1989). Its effectiveness in the development of sophisticated athletic competencies, however, is less clear (Burton, 1989). When goal setting has targeted more complex competencies or the holistic complexity of multiple competencies little improvement has been discovered. It should be noted not all studies have found positive effects for goal setting in the development of simple skills. There have been numerous studies finding no impact or mixed results. These results, however, are generally attributed to the lack of consistency in goal setting strategy (i.e. process and content of goal setting) and methodological flaws (Locke, 1991). Unlike laboratory settings where isolation of goal setting is possible, research in the areas of job competency development, therapeutic relationships, and athletic competency development has usually failed to separate the effects of goal setting from participation in the developmental program, where goal setting is part of the developmental experience. Usually subjects participating in the training/goal setting condition are compared with subjects receiving no training and establishing no goals. Missing from the goal setting literature is a robust examination of the efficacy of goal setting when complex emotional, social and cognitive intelligence competencies are the development target (Boyatzis, 1982, 2006b; Goleman, 1998, 2006). To understand the competency development process other literature must be reviewed. Competency development and intentional change In his book, Using Learning Contracts, Knowles (1975) describes how he applied self-directed learning in his classroom through the use of learning contracts. He advocates students establish clear learning objectives, identify learning strategies and necessary resources, determine evidence of accomplishment, create validation criteria (i.e. how one will measure/judge level of performance), and establish a date for completion. Each of these five components of a learning contract is negotiated with the instructor until both parties agree they are specific and appropriately difficult. The student then follows his or her learning contract in addition to attending occasional class lectures and meeting with her learning support group. Although one is tempted to believe Knowles’ claims of effectiveness based on his passionate description of success, he provides no research to validate the over all effectiveness or relative effectiveness of learning contracts to other teaching methods. When students’ learning competencies and other personality variables are considered self-directed learning strategies fare better. It appears individuals with highly sophisticated learning competencies and those internally motivated to learn benefit more from self-directed learning strategies than other students (Fry, 1972). Most research, however, finds little differential influence on the amount of knowledge a student learns, leaving the most promising conclusion to be self-directed learning is at least as effective as traditional didactic methods of instruction (Candy, 1991).

Intentional Change Theory (ICT) advances self-directed learning strategies by providing a model for how individuals’ self-direction and discovery can lead to successive improvements in behavior and subsequent competency development (Kolb and Boyatzis, 1970b; Boyatzis, 2006a). ICT proposes an individual’s change process involves five “discoveries”: (1) understanding the ideal self and creating a personal vision; (2) comparing the real self to the ideal self – a personal assessment of strengths and weaknesses; (3) creating a learning agenda or plan to close the gaps between real and ideal; (4) experimenting and practicing new competencies and behaviors; and (5) identifying and building trusted relationships that support and encourage each step in the change process. By their nature the five discoveries are discontinuous. Each discovery can start and stop over time. They may also need to occur multiple times before an individual reaches as trigger point where their abilities have changed sufficiently to manifest new behaviors and a new level of performance. Completion of all five discoveries is required to achieve desired and enduring change, learning and development. In 1990 the Weatherhead School of Management at Case Western Reserve University redesigned its MBA program based on Intentional Change Theory (Boyatzis, 2006a). These changes included innovations such as the Leadership Executive Assessment and Development (LEAD) course (Boyatzis, 1994), inclusion of self-directed learning teams, focus on group projects, emphasis on extra-curricular activities, and varied learning opportunities for students (see Boyatzis, 1994, 1995 for a full description of the new MBA program and learning environment). A series of longitudinal studies begun the same year reveal people can make significant improvements in their emotional, social, and cognitive intelligence competencies given the right interventions and learning environment. Results from the studies also show individuals continue to demonstrate enhanced performance on the complex competencies developed during the MBA program for long periods of time (Boyatzis et al., 1995b). While these studies demonstrate the development of complex competencies is possible through the application of Intentional Change Theory (Boyatzis et al., 1995a; Boyatzis et al., 2002), they do not probe nor explain the mechanisms that produced the change, such as goal setting. Research hypotheses – the efficacy of goal setting on competency development There are clear gaps in the literature. Most goal setting research has examined an individual’s ability to achieve a single goal targeting a simple skill or behavior change within a short time frame. The focus has been on instrumental change in a single behavior. How effective is goal setting when an individual sets multiple goals to develop complex competencies and pursues these goals over a number of years? What role does the learning environment play in the effectiveness of goal setting? Unfortunately, the literature reveals few useful insights (Schmidt et al., 1984; Ivancevich, 1974, 1976; Nemeroff and Cosentino, 1979).

The impact of learning goals

113

JMD 27,1

114

Recent work by Boyatzis et al. described earlier reveals development of complex competencies is possible through the application of Intentional Change Theory. It also recognizes the importance of the learning environment during the change process. Their work, however, is silent on the mechanisms that underlie the change process, especially the possible role and efficacy of goal setting in the development process. This study addresses the gaps found in the literature by directly examining the effects of goal setting on the development of emotional, social, and cognitive intelligence competencies. To add to the empirical understanding of goal setting and intentional change theory the following hypotheses are examined: H1. Individuals who establish a goal to improve/increase a specific competency will demonstrate greater development of that competency than those not targeting it in a goal statement. H2. Individuals who remember their goal to improve/increase a specific competency or competency will demonstrate greater development of that competency than those who do not remember their goal.

Methods Design In this longitudinal study of goal setting and competency development, the length of time across which change is examined ranges from nine months (students enrolled a full-time MBA 42 hour program) to 54 months (students enrolled in a part-time MBA 60 hour program). The study was conducted as part of a 50 year longitudinal study of competency development and career experiences of MBA students being conducted at Case Western Reserve University (Boyatzis et al., 1995a; Boyatzis et al., 2002; Boyatzis, 1994).

Subjects To be considered for the study a student had to have graduated from the MBA program and given their informed consent to be included in the longitudinal study. A total of 214 students were eligible to participate out of a population of 270. The research team was unable to contact 53 of the eligible students. Of the 161 students contacted, ten declined to participate, 44 agreed to participate but did not return questionnaires and/or participate in a scheduled interview, one was dropped from the study because they were enrolled in the joint JD/MBA program, one was dropped because of the sequencing of their required courses, and five were dropped as a result of audio equipment problems. 73 subjects participated in the interview segment of this study and completed all questionnaires. The remaining 27 subjects completed only the questionnaires. Of the 100 subjects, 36 percent were female, 7 percent were African American, 18 percent were Asian/Pacific Islander, 68 percent were Caucasian, 6 percent were other, and 3 percent did not indicate their ethnicity. 80 percent were United States citizens. Subjects’ age upon entering the MBA program ranged from 22 to 43 with a mean age of 26.98 (SD ¼ 3:80) and a median age of 26.

Assessment instruments Determining the degree of competency development Two assessment instruments were used to determine the degree of competency development subjects achieved during their MBA program: the Learning Skills Profile (Boyatzis and Kolb, 1991), and the Critical Incident Interview (Flanagan, 1954; Boyatzis, 1982; Spencer and Spencer, 1993). The Learning Skills Profile (Boyatzis and Kolb, 1991) is a modified Q-sort instrument. It is based on an executive competency model which organizes 72 diverse competencies required in a variety of jobs into 12 competency scales. Each scale is composed of 6 competency items. The 12 scales include Leadership, Relationship, Help, Sense Making, Information Gathering, Information Analysis, Theory, Quantitative, Technology, Goal Setting, Action, and Initiative. Subjects are instructed to sort 72 cards each containing one competency, into one of seven categories: (1) I have no competency or experience in the area; (2) I am now learning this competency or activity; (3) I can this with some help or supervision; (4) I am a competent performer in this area; (5) I am an above average performer in this area; (6) I am an outstanding performer in this area; and (7) I am a leader or creator in this area. Scale scores are then computed by adding the six item scores. For this study, subjects completed the LSP upon entering the MBA program and at graduation.The Critical Incident Interview (Flanagan, 1954; Boyatzis, 1982; Spencer and Spencer, 1993; Boyatzis, 1994) is a behavior sampling techniques in which an interviewer obtains accounts of work related events. The Critical Incident Interview is cited as one of the most effective methods for assessing competency related behavior (Campbell et al., 1970). For this study, a Critical Incident Interview (CII) was conducted for 45 minutes with each subject at the beginning of their MBA program and again at graduation. During the interview subjects were asked to describe specific incidents where they felt effective and ineffective in a work setting. The interviews were conducted by trained interviewers and recorded on audiotape. The entering and graduating audiotapes were later independently coded by two trained coders for frequency of occurrence (number of incidents in which an competency was demonstrated) for 16 competencies: Efficiency Orientation, Planning, Initiative, Attention to Detail, Self-control, Flexibility, Empathy, Persuasiveness, Networking, Negotiating, Self-confidence, Group Management, Developing Others, Systems Thinking, Pattern Recognition, and Social Objectivity (Boyatzis, 1982, 1994, 1998). Coders had a median inter-rater reliability of greater than 0.89 with expert coders. Following independent coding, all disagreements in coding were discussed by the two coders and the creator of the coding manual until 100 percent agreement was achieved. The use of the Learning Skills Profile and the Critical Incident Interview at the beginning and end of the subjects’ MBA program (Boyatzis, 1995) provided a pre-goal setting and a post-goal setting measure of subjects’ demonstrated competency (CII) and

The impact of learning goals

115

JMD 27,1

116

self-reported (LSP) competency levels. It is from these pre/post measures the influence of goal setting on competency development and personal change can be assessed.

Identifying targeted and remembered competency goals Three data sources were used to identify competency goals and determine if they were remembered across the study. They included subjects’ learning plans written during their first semester in the MBA program (Boyatzis, 1994), the MBA Career Progress Study Questionnaire (Boyatzis et al., 1995b), and a learning goals interview created for this study. Learning plans are a direct outcome of students’ required participation in an MBA course entitled Leadership Executive Assessment and Development (LEAD) (Boyatzis, 1994). During the course, students move through the first three discoveries of Intentional Change Theory (ICT) (Boyatzis, 2006a). They develop a learning plan which targets emotional, social and cognitive intelligence competencies they want to develop, improve, and/or change during the program. They also identify actions they will take to achieve their competency development goals. The MBA Career Progress Study Questionnaire (Questionnaire) was designed as a data collection instrument for Case Western Reserve University’s MBA outcome study (Boyatzis et al., 1995b). It was completed by students at graduation and was designed to elicit a variety of demographic data and information concerning students’ experiences while in the MBA program. It also elicits data on how students think they have changed while working toward their MBA degree. Subjects record goals they remember from their learning plan and the amount of progress they have made. Progress is measured on a seven point scale with 1 representing low progress and 7 representing high progress. The learning goals interview was designed for this study. It begins with the goals subjects remember from their learning plans and recorded on their MBA Career Progress Questionnaire. Interviewers use the protocol to probe for additional goals subjects may remember from their learning plan, check the accuracy of subjects’ understanding of their goals and progress, and collect additional information on subjects’ non-remembered goals.

Targeted competency goals To determine which competencies subjects’ wanted to improve or develop while in the MBA program all goals, sub-goals, action steps, and goal discussion sections in their original learning plan were coded for the 16 competencies examined in the Critical Incident Interview (CII) and for the 12 Learning Skills Profile (LSP) competency scales. Coding for the sixteen competencies examined in the CII followed coding guidelines developed by Boyatzis (1982 1998). If a competency was identified at least once in any part of the original learning plan the competency was classified as “targeted” (i.e. the subject had established a goal to develop the competency). Coding for the LSP competencies required one of the scales’ component competencies to be evident in the learning plan. If a component competency was identified at least once in any part of the original learning plan the competency scale was classified as “targeted”.

Remembered competency goals During the learning goals interview subjects were asked if they remembered any additional goals from their learning plan that were not written on the MBA Career Progress Study Questionnaire. Any additional goals subjects recalled were added to their Questionnaire. Interviewers then reviewed each goal recorded on the Questionnaire to determine if it was present in the subject’s learning plan. If it was present it was classified as “remembered”. If it was not part of their original learning plan it was classified as “new goal”. If the researcher could not determine whether the goal was part of the learning plan, the subject was given their learning plan and asked for assistance. Subjects’ full discussion of their remembered goals (i.e. goal statement and all supporting and clarifying comments) from the transcripts of the learning goals interview was coded using the 16 competencies examined in the CII and the 12 scales of the LSP. If a competency was evident during the discussion of at least one remembered goal it was classified as “remembered”. If it was not present in any part of the discussion of the remembered goals it was classified as “not remembered”. Examination of the “new goals” revealed they were primarily generated by subjects who had substantially changed their career objectives. To determine if subjects had changed both their goals and the competencies originally targeted in their learning plan or just the goals to align with their new career aspirations, the discussions of the new goals were also coded using the 16 competencies examined in the CII and the 12 LSP scales. If a competency identified in the “new goals” had been originally targeted (i.e. included in a subject’s original learning plan) it was classified as “remembered”. Results Hypothesis 1 – Individuals who establish a goal to improve/increase a specific competency will demonstrate greater development of that competency than those not targeting it in a goal statement A change score (graduating score minus entering score) was calculated for each competency in the CII and LSP scale. The change scores for the competencies targeted in goal statements were them summed creating a Targeted Total Change (TTC) score for each subject. Similarly, the change scores for the competencies not targeted were summed to create a Not Targeted Total Change (NTTC) score. Paired Sample t-tests reveal subjects in the full sample demonstrated significantly higher TTC scores (m ¼ 2:23) than NTTC scores (m ¼ 0:96) in the CII (t ¼ 2:18, df ¼ 72, p , 0.05). No differences are observed in the LSP. Subjects in the full sample reported similar TTC scores (m ¼ 26:59) and NTTC scores (m ¼ 35:22) (t ¼ 1:15, df ¼ 72, p . 0.10). Due to possible effects of English fluency, all statistical tests were conducted on the full sample and the sub-sample of native English speakers. Native English speakers show the same pattern of results for the CII and LSP as the full sample. In the rest of the discussion of results, differences between the full sample and native English speakers sub-sample are only mentioned if there is a change of significance or direction. The specific competencies measured in the CII and LSP were examined using Repeated Measures Mixed ANOVAs. Significant or near significant improvement on the following competencies is shown from entering to graduation on CII – Efficiency Orientation, Planning, Attention to Detail, Flexibility, Networking, Negotiating,

The impact of learning goals

117

JMD 27,1

118

Self-Confidence, Group Management, Pattern Recognition and Social Objectivity), and all 12 of the LSP scales. Only Persuasiveness shows a significant or near significant decrease. Results from the full sample reveal subjects who targeted Negotiating demonstrated near significantly higher scores than those who did not. No main effect for targeting/not targeting a competency is observed in the LSP, as shown in Tables I and II. Entering and graduating scores differ significantly with the conditions of targeted and not targeted for Initiative, Negotiating, and Systems Thinking. Near statistically significant interactions are observed for Attention to Detail and Group Management, as shown in Table I. On the LSP a significant interaction is also observed for Sense Making Skills, as shown in Table II. Near significant interactions are also observed for Self-confidence for the native English speaking sub-sample. On the LSP a significant interaction is observed for Relationship Skills, and a near significant interaction is observed for Theory Skills for the native English speakers (see Table III). The following interaction patterns are consistent for the full sample and native English speakers. Interactions for Attention to Detail, Negotiating, Group Management, and Sense Making competencies indicate all subjects improved in the frequency with which they demonstrated these competencies from entering to graduating, but those who targeted the competency in a goal statement demonstrated greater improvement than those who did not target it. The interactions for Initiative and Systems Thinking reveal subjects who did not target the competency decreased in the frequency with which they demonstrated it from entering to graduating, while subjects who targeted it increased in their use of the competency. For the native English speakers only, the interactions for Self-confidence, Relationship, and Theory Skills reveal all subjects improved in their use of these competencies from entering to graduating but those who targeted the competencies improved more than subjects who did not target it. Hypothesis 2 – Individuals remembering their goal to improve/increase a specific competency will demonstrate greater development of that competency than individuals who do not remember the goal Because the full-time students sub-sample was the only group of subjects for which an accurate record of the number of goals included in their learning plans could be determined, they are the appropriate sub-sample for this analysis. No significant correlations are observed between the number of goals subjects remembered and their reported progress made on their goals (r ¼ 0:03, n ¼ 54), total change in the CII (r ¼ 2 0:07, n ¼ 54), total change on the LSP (r ¼ 2 0:13, n ¼ 54), and total change on the LSP adjusted for entering scores (r ¼ 2 0:15, n ¼ 54). Following the same procedure described with H1, the change scores for competencies targeted in remembered goal statements were summed to create a Remembered Total Change (RTC) score for each subject. Similarly, the change scores for competencies targeted in not remembered goal statements were summed to create a Not Remembered Total Change (NRTC) score. Change scores for competencies not targeted were not included in the analysis. Paired Sample t-tests reveal subjects in the full sample demonstrated significantly higher RTC score (m ¼ 1:73) than NRTC scores (m ¼ 0:49) in the CII (t ¼ 2:42, df ¼ 72, p , 0.01). Subjects in the full sample also reported significantly higher RTC

2.10 2.36 1.42 0.32 0.41 0.06 1.31 2.52 0.83 0.03 0.63 0.12 0.52 0.93 0.74 0.27

2.46 2.77 1.35 0.82 0.49 0.22 1.44 2.20 1.31 0.23 0.80 0.36 0.43 1.05 1.18 0.50

2.26 2.56 1.56 0.60 0.43 0.18 1.40 2.28 1.12 0.08 0.74 0.23 0.51 0.98 1.02 0.35

31 14 17 55 34 52 38 15 13 51 27 33 50 43 26 35

2.30 2.57 1.21 0.53 0.48 0.10 1.39 2.43 1.02 0.18 0.69 0.25 0.44 0.10 0.90 0.42

42 59 56 18 39 21 35 58 60 22 46 40 23 30 47 38

4.50 2.53 0.18 6.64 0.21 0.79 0.64 2.48 4.91 1.25 0.96 2.11 0.30 0.47 6.53 1.79

A 0.06 0.00 3.26 0.12 0.21 0.18 0.03 0.55 0.21 0.33 0.12 0.04 0.18 0.02 0.44 0.22

0.34 0.50 8.31 1.06 0.21 0.14 0.40 0.37 0.97 0.81 0.13 0.30 0.19 5.07 0.11 0.15

MS B A £ B 4.04 * * 2.82 * * 0.28 14.01 * * * * 0.55 5.93 * * * * 0.79 2.54 6.55 * * * 10.41 * * * * 7.37 * * * * 12.27 * * * * 0.57 0.93 9.49 * * * * 4.53 * *

A

A £ B 0.30 0.56 13.14 * * * * 2.22 * 0.55 1.02 0.48 0.38 1.29 6.75 * * * 1.03 1.77 * 0.36 10.03 * * * * 0.17 0.38

F B 0.05 0.00 2.90 0.20 0.46 1.35 0.03 0.51 0.24 2.35 * 0.45 0.14 0.41 0.02 0.97 0.41

is (df ¼ 1, 71); The number of subjects in each between subject category (i.e. not targeted/targeted, respectively) is presented under each mean; The first MS and F is for the Main Effect of the within variable (A) entering/graduating, the second is for the Main Effect of the between variable (B) targeted/not targeted, and the third is for the interaction (A £ B); Self-Control, Flexibility, Negotiating, Self-Confidence, Group Management, and Social Objectivity distributions were normalized using a log linear transformation. Significance levels are reported using these transformations but actual (non-normalized) means are reported for ease of interpretation

Notes: Significance levels are reported for repeated measures mixed ANOVA as one-tailed probability ( *p, 0.1; * *p , 0.05; * * *p , 0.01, * * * *p , 0.001), except when in the opposite direction to that predicted, in which case two-tailed tests are applied; The degrees of freedom for all ANOVAs

Efficiency orientation Planning Initiative Attention to detail Self-control Flexibility Empathy Persuasiveness Networking Negotiating Self-confidence Group management Developing others Systems thinking Pattern recognition Social objectivity

CII competency

Variable A Within subjects Entering mean Graduating mean

Variable B Between subjects Targeted Targeted mean mean n n

The impact of learning goals

119

Table I. Repeated measures mixed ANOVAs – CII competencies targeted/not targeted

Table II. Repeated measures mixed ANOVAs – LSP competencies targeted/not targeted 28.78 31.28 29.98 28.52 28.40 29.63 26.87 26.94 25.44 29.54 31.10 30.42

27.75 31.43 28.63 27.21 26.77 26.51 25.83 24.17 23.56 27.89 30.66 28.85

16 38 49 27 14 27 44 48 42 10 32 18

27.67 30.24 29.91 28.35 27.90 26.97 25.00 24.42 22.52 27.66 29.61 29.81

57 35 24 46 59 46 29 25 31 63 41 55

112.39 28.43 61.06 71.54 95.52 124.78 288.00 896.06 804.80 196.45 130.17 123.64

0.16 50.46 49.99 42.89 27.13 19.41 23.55 2.00 38.06 0.83 39.07 23.74

MS B

14.00 9.77 14.39 31.09 3.85 15.23 18.84 9.39 20.83 3.45 2.67 17.39

A £ B

B 0.00 1.27 1.17 1.26 0.87 0.93 0.43 0.02 0.26 0.03 0.85 0.54

7.12 * * * * 2.36 * 4.73 * * 6.04 * * * * 7.08 * * * * 10.28 * * * * 14.49 * * * * 37.24 * * * * 35.32 * * * * 12.12 * * * * 6.71 * * * * 6.98 * * * *

F A

0.89 0.81 1.12 2.63 * * 0.29 0.92 0.95 0.39 0.91 0.21 0.14 0.98

A £ B

targeted/targeted, respectively) is presented under each mean; The first MS and F is for the Main Effect of the within variable (A) entering/graduating, the second is for the Main Effect of the between variable (B) targeted/not targeted, and the third is for the interaction (A £ B)

Notes: Significance levels are reported for repeated Measures Mixed ANOVA as one tailed probability ( *p , 0.1; * *p , 0.05; * * *p , 0.01, * * * *p , 0.001); The degrees of freedom for all ANOVAs is (df ¼ 1, 71); The number of subjects in each between subject category (i.e. not

26.65 30.39 28.57 27.05 26.27 27.85 23.97 21.65 20.64 26.01 29.18 28.24

A

120

Leadership Relationship Help Sense making Information gathering Information analysis Theory Quantitative Technology Goal setting Action Initiative

LSP competency

Variable A Within subjects Entering mean Graduating mean

Variable B Between subjects Targeted Targeted mean mean n n

JMD 27,1

Competency Initiative ( p ¼ 0.000) Attention to detail ( p ¼ 0.07) Negotiating ( p ¼ 0.005) Group management ( p ¼ 0.09) Systems thinking ( p ¼ 0.001) Sense making ( p ¼ 0.05) Native English speakers only Self-confidence ( p ¼ 0.07) Theory ( p ¼ 0.08) Relationship ( p ¼ 0.02)

Targeted/not targeted

Entering

Graduating

n

NT T NT T NT T NT T NT T NT T

1.88 0.96 0.45 18 0.06 0.00 0.15 0.09 1.11 0.75 26.96 27.13

1.24 1.45 0.75 88 0.10 0.36 0.30 0.42 0.84 1.25 27.46 29.57

17 56 55 18 51 22 33 40 43 30 27 46

NT T NT T NT T

0.83 0.62 24.80 22.73 32.10 29.37

0.87 0.85 26.43 26.65 32.77 30.77

23 39 35 27 30 32

Notes: Significance levels are reported for Repeated Measures Mixed ANOVA as one-tailed probability. Negotiating and Group Management distributions were normalized using a log linear transformation. Significance levels are reported using these transformation but actual (non-normalized) means are reported for ease of interpretation

scores (m ¼ 18:70) than NRTC scores (m ¼ 7:64; t ¼ 2:93, df ¼ 72, p , 0.01) on the LSP. Results for native English speakers are consistent. Repeated Measures Mixed ANOVAs reveal the full sample’s entering and graduating scores differ significantly with the conditions of remembered and not remembered for Networking, Group Management, and Social Objectivity. A near significant interaction is also observed for Negotiating. No interactions are observed in the LSP. The same set of interactions is observed with the native English speakers. The interaction for Networking, however, is near significant and the interaction for Negotiating is significant. Interactions for Negotiating, Group Management, and Social Objectivity reveal all subjects improved in the frequency with which they demonstrated the competencies from entering to graduating, but those who remembered their goals demonstrated greater improvement than those who did not remember them. The interaction for Networking reveals subjects who did not remember this goal decreased in the frequency with which they demonstrated the competency from entering to graduating, while those who remembered the goal increased in their use of the competency. These patterns are consistent for the full sample and the native English speakers. Subjects in the full sample demonstrated significantly higher graduating than entering scores in the CII for Efficiency Orientation, Planning, Initiative, Attention to Detail, Negotiating, Self-Confidence, Group Management, Pattern Recognition, and Social Objectivity. They also reported significantly higher graduating than entering scores on the LSP in Leadership, Sense Making, Information Gathering, Information

The impact of learning goals

121

Table III. Interaction means – targeted/not targeted competencies with entering and graduating CII and LSP scores, full sample

JMD 27,1

122

Analysis, Theory, Quantitative, Technology, Goal Setting, Action, and Initiative Competency. The decreasing number of significant findings is due to the number of subjects eliminated from the analysis who did not target the competencies in a goal statement. Native English speakers demonstrated significantly higher graduating than entering scores in the CII for Planning, Attention to Detail, Negotiating, Self-confidence, Pattern Recognition and Social Objectivity. They also demonstrated near significantly higher graduating scores for Efficiency Orientation, Initiative, and Group Management. On the LSP subjects reported significantly higher graduating than entering scores in Leadership, Sense Making, Information Gathering, Theory, Quantitative, Technology, Goal Setting, and Action Competency. They also reported near significantly higher graduating scores for Relationship, Help, Information Analysis, and Initiative Competencies. The decreasing number of significant findings is due to the number of subjects eliminated from the analysis who did not target the competencies in a goal statement. Results from the full sample reveal subjects who remembered goals targeting Negotiating and Social Objectivity demonstrated near significantly higher scores than those who did not remember those goals. On the LSP subjects who remembered goals targeting Leadership and Goal Setting Competencies demonstrated significantly higher scores than those who did not remember these goals. Results from the native English speakers reveal the same patterns. The effect for Negotiating, however, is significant, while the effect for Leadership competencies is near significant. Correlations reveal no significant relationships between the number of goals remembered and the four total change measures. This analysis therefore offers no support for H2. The results from the Paired Sample T-test examining subjects’ total remembered and not remembered change (RTC and NRTC) scores, however, strongly support the . They reveal targeting a competency and remembering the goal leads to greater competency development than if the goal is not remembered. This is true for the full sample and the native English speakers. The interactions from the Repeated Measures Mixed ANOVAs offer detailed support for H2 by examining specific competencies. Results indicate remembering a goal which targets Negotiating and Group Management leads to additional competency development beyond the change observed when it is simply targeted. Those who remembered goals which target Networking and Social Objectivity also appear to change more than those who did not remember these goals. This pattern suggests certain competencies require conscious awareness to develop, while others (those demonstrating change by simply targeting them in a goal statement) may be enhanced with less conscious effort. This may be especially true when an individual’s environment provides opportunity for development but does not require the competency to be used. Discussion The astute researcher may have already determined a total of 60 statistical tests (native English speaking sub-sample) were calculated to examine the specific competencies and total change scores in each of the targeted and remembered conditions. The tests

reveal 18 significant findings, triple what would be expected by chance. Therefore the findings of the study appear to identify stable differences in the various conditions and not chance occurrences. The following conclusions can be drawn from the findings: . targeting emotional, social and cognitive intelligence competencies in development goals results in significant behavioral; and . targeting and remembering the goals results in significant behavioral and self-report change.

The impact of learning goals

123

Table IV presents the various competencies under the conditions where change is observed. No significant results are found for eight competencies assessed in the CII and seven examined on the LSP. When targeted in goal statements, subjects evidence a greater degree of positive change on six competencies in the CII and three competencies on the LSP. When goals were remembered subjects demonstrate higher degrees of positive change on four additional competencies. In total subjects demonstrate higher positive change scores as a result of one of the treatment conditions on eight of the 16 competencies (one-half) assessed in the CII and five of the 12 (more than one-third) assessed on the LSP. When examined together, a positive change is observed in the treatment conditions for 46 percent of the competencies assess in the LSP and CII. The act of establishing goals for complex competencies leads to greater change or competency development than if no goals are established. Subjects in both the full sample and the native English speaking sub-sample demonstrate significantly higher Targeted Total Change (TTC) scores than Not Targeted Total Change (NTTC) scores in the CII. Subjects demonstrate more change on the competencies they targeted in No significant findings Critical Incident Interview (CII) Efficiency orientation Planning Self-control Flexibility Empathy Persuasiveness Developing others Pattern recognition Learning Skills Profile (LSP) Help Information gathering Information analysis Quantitative Technology Action Initiative

Significant for targeted

Significant for remembered

Attention to detail Initiative Negotiating Self-confidence Group management Systems thinking

Negotiating Networking Group management Social objectivity

Relationship Theory Sense making

Leadership Goal setting

Note: The Critical Incident Interview was not coded for the following competencies: Written and Oral Communication, Use of Concepts, Theory Building, Use of Technology, and Quantitative Analysis

Table IV. Summary of results for the specific competencies

JMD 27,1

124

their learning plans than on those not included in their plans. Therefore it seems reasonable to conclude the act of having set a goal in the past (whether remembered or not) is a sufficient unconscious stimulus to facilitate demonstrated behavior change. Similar differences, however, are not observed on the self-reported measure of change. The LSP reveals no difference in subjects’ targeted change scores versus not targeted total scores. Additional analyses identified the specific competencies where the act of goal setting facilitates greater competency development. These competencies include Initiative, Attention to Detail, Negotiating, Self-Confidence, Group Management, Systems Thinking, Sense Making, Theory, and Relationship Competencies. With the exception of Initiative and Systems Thinking, all subjects increased in their use of these competencies but those who created goals evidenced greater positive change. Because all subjects generally improved in their competency levels, it seems reasonable to conclude environmental forces were present which facilitated general competency development. This is certainly the intent of the new MBA curriculum created at CWRU (Boyatzis et al., 1995b). Innovations such as the Leadership Executive Assessment and Development Course (Boyatzis, 1994), the inclusion of self-directed learning teams, the focus on group projects, and emphasis on club and extra-curricular activities, and the increased academic standards create rich and varied learning opportunities for students. As a result, the educational environment requires students to use many of the competencies examined in this study, especially those which have been demonstrated to increase with the simple act of goal setting. Given this pattern it also seems reasonable to conclude when an individual’s environment requires they use a certain set of competencies and provides multiple opportunities to develop or enhance that competency set, the simple act of goal setting (whether the goal is later remembered or not) acts as a sufficient unconscious stimulus to facilitate change. Subjects in both the full sample and the native English speaking sub-sample demonstrate significantly higher Remembered Total Change (RTC) scores than Not Remembered Total Change (NRTC) scores in both the CII and LSP. Subjects demonstrate and report more change on the competencies they targeted and remembered from their learning plans than on the competencies they did not remember. This suggests conscious awareness of one’s goals leads to overall change beyond that attained by the simple act of goal setting. Conclusions and implications The findings of this study strongly support the theory of goal setting and advance its rich empirical history. Goal setting is as beneficial to the process of developing multiple complex social, emotional and cognitive intelligence competencies pursued over varied time horizons as it is to simple skill development and focused behavior change. The findings also validate the power of intentional change theory (ICT). They highlight the importance of ICT’s third discovery, creating a learning plan, and provide insight into the importance of the learning environment during the change process. The findings also provide insight into two mechanisms that underlie and empower the intentional change process – goal setting and conscious, focused, volitional effort. Future research needs to further explore the qualitative characteristics of learning goals that drive competency development. For example the specificity of the goal and

its degree of difficulty may influence the efficacy of the development process. Personal commitment to the goal and to the change process would also likely strengthen or diminish the power of the goal setting. Future research is also needed to understand other mechanisms which affect the change process. These include the learning environment and the dynamics behind each of the five discoveries. While continued research is indicated, there are important applications of the current findings that can be used now to dramatically enhance individual development in both academic and corporate education settings. Individuals pursuing competency development objectives clearly benefit from the freedom, autonomy, and accountability of being in charge of their learning experience. While learning contracts have been demonstrated to be effective in a variety of educational settings (Knowles, 1975), the current research suggests far more is possible. Because remembering goals is important, special attention needs to be given to helping students identify in their learning plans sources of environmental feedback t to keep them focused on their goals and help them measure their progress. Academic programs need to include mechanisms through which students are able to recall, review, and revise their learning plans periodically. In a two year program the end of each semester or the beginning of each academic year would be good times for these activities. The current research suggests an individual’s environment plays a critical role in determining how concentrated and intentional their development efforts need to be to achieve their objectives. If their environment requires the use of competencies they want to develop and provides multiple developmental opportunities simply setting a goal should lead to some increase in competency development. On the other hand, if the environment does not require the use of the competencies conscious awareness and concentrated effort will be needed. This applies in academic settings as well as corporate ones. The implications are clear: . students, managers, and leaders can benefit from autonomy, personal accountability, and opportunities to experiment with new behaviors in their learning environment; . setting personal learning/development goals is facilitative of competency development in education and work settings; and . periodic opportunities to recall, review progress, and revise learning plans are necessary to optimize competency development. Corporate America spends millions of dollars each year to train and develop an effective work force, management team, and senior leaders. This research highlights the importance of intentional change and specifically goal setting for competency development. A common practice in corporate education programs is to end with a brief goal setting or “at home application” session. It usually occurs after several days of learning just before the participants return to work. By this time in the program previous sessions have often run long and everyone is tired (including the educators). As a result individual development planning is often given cursory attention and generally ignored by the participants.

The impact of learning goals

125

JMD 27,1

126

The current research suggests instead of waiting until the end of a program and giving it “the time that remains”, goal setting and the creation of learning plans need to be a primary element. Goal setting and elements of the intentional change process need be introduced early and reinforced throughout. Across the program participants need time to reflect, integrate insights, identify application opportunities, and target continued learning goals. How this is best accomplished will vary greatly depending on the content of the program, the participants, and the support mechanisms available in the workplace following the program. If participants leave a program without a clear understanding of their current competencies and what they need to demonstrate in the future, personally meaningful and challenging development goals to work toward, and a clear plan for how they will find support and practice new behaviors in their day to day work environment the return on investment will be sub-optimized. An often overlooked point of leverage is ensuring participants identify mechanisms to share their development goals with others in the work place following the program. Boss, peer and direct report observations can help clarify, refine and support the change process. Feedback in the context of day to day work is particularly helpful in refining the focus of development goals and identifying the most effective development strategies to pursue. Feedback collected from work colleagues is also an effective way to assess progress against learning goals and identify opportunities to revise objectives during the change and development process. References Ach, N. (1935), Analyse des Willen, Urban und Schwarzenberg, Berlin. Bandura, A. (1977), “Self-efficacy: towards a unifying theory of behavioral change”, Psychological Review, Vol. 3, pp. 191-215. Boyatzis, R.E. (1982), The Competent Manager: A Model for Effective Performance, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY. Boyatzis, R.E. (1994), “Stimulating self-directed learning through the managerial assessment and development course”, Journal of Management Education, Vol. 18, pp. 304-23. Boyatzis, R.E. (1995), “Cornerstones of change: building a path for self-directed learning”, in Boyatzis, R.E., Cowen, S.S. and Kolb, D.A. (Eds), Innovation in Professional Education: Steps on a Journey from Teaching to Learning, Jossey- Bass, San Francisco, CA, pp. 50-94. Boyatzis, R.E. (1998), Transforming Qualitative Information: Thematic Analysis and Code Development, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA. Boyatzis, R.E. (2006a), “Intentional change theory from a complexity perspective”, Journal of Management Development, Vol. 25 No. 7, pp. 607-23. Boyatzis, R.E. (2006b), “Using tipping points of emotional intelligence and cognitive competencies to predict financial performance of leaders”, Psicothemia, Vol. 17, pp. 124-31. Boyatzis, R.E. and Kolb, D.A. (1991), “Assessing individuality in learning: the learning competency profile”, Educational Psychology, Vol. 11, pp. 279-95. Boyatzis, R.E., Cowen, S.S. and Kolb, D.A. (1995a), Innovation in Professional Education: Steps on a Journey from Teaching to Learning, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA. Boyatzis, R.E., Stubbs, E.C. and Taylor, S.N. (2002), “Learning cognitive and emotional intelligence competencies through graduate management education”, Academy of Management Journal on Learning and Education, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 150-62.

Boyatzis, R.E., Baker, A., Leonard, D., Rhee, K. and Thompson, L. (1995b), “Will it make a difference? Assessing a value based, outcome oriented, competency based professional program”, in Boyatzis, R.E., Cowen, S.S. and Kolb, D.A. (Eds), Innovation in Professional Education: Steps on a Journey from Teaching to Learning, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA, pp. 167-202. Burton, D. (1989), “The impact of goal specificity and task complexity on basketball competency development”, Sport Psychologist, Vol. 3, pp. 34-47. Campbell, J.P., Dunnette, M.D., Lawler, E.E. and Weick, K.E. (1970), Managerial Behavior, Performance, and Effectiveness, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY. Candy, P.C. (1991), Self-Direction for Lifelong Learning, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA. Flanagan, J.C. (1954), “The critical incident technique”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 51, pp. 327-58. Freud, S. (1926), Introductory Lectures on Psychoanalysis, Allen & Unwin, London. Fry, J.P. (1972), “Interactive relationship between inquisitiveness and student control of instruction”, Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 63, pp. 459-65. Goleman, D. (1998), Working with Emotional Intelligence, Bantam Books, New York, NY. Goleman, D. (2006), Social Intelligence, Bantam Books, New York, NY. Ivancevich, J.M. (1974), “Changes in performance in a management by objectives program”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 19, pp. 563-74. Ivancevich, J.M. (1976), “Effects of goal setting on performance and job satisfaction”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 61, pp. 605-12. James, W. (1904), The Principles of Psychology, Holt, New York, NY. Knowles, M.S. (1975), Self-Directed Learning: A Guide for Learners and Teachers, Association Press, New York, NY. Kolb, D.A. and Boyatzis, R.E. (1970a), “On the dynamics of the helping relationship”, Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 267-89. Kolb, D.A. and Boyatzis, R.E. (1970b), “Goal setting and self-directed behavior change”, Human Relations, Vol. 23 No. 5, pp. 439-57. Lee, C. (1989), “The relationship between goal setting, self-efficacy, and female field hockey team performance”, International Journal of Sport Psychology, Vol. 20, pp. 147-61. Lewin, K. (1961), “Intention, will and need”, in Shipley, T. (Ed.), Classics in Psychology, Philosophical Library, New York, NY. Lloyd, C. (1986), “The process of goal setting using goal attainment scaling in a therapeutic community”, Occupational Therapy in Mental Health, Vol. 6, pp. 19-30. Locke, E.A. (1968), “Toward a theory of task performance and incentives”, Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, Vol. 3, pp. 157-89. Locke, E.A. (1991), “Problems with goal setting research in sports and their solutions”, Journal of Sports and Exercise Psychology, Vol. 13, pp. 311-16. Locke, E.A. and Latham, G.P. (1990), A Theory of Goal Setting and Task Performance, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. McClelland, D.C. (1961), The Achieving Society, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, NY. McClelland, D.C. (1987), Human Motivation, Cambridge University Press, New York, NY. Mullen, P. and Tabak, E. (1989), “Patterns of counseling techniques used by family practice physicians for smoking, weight, exercise, and stress”, Medical Care, Vol. 27, pp. 694-704.

The impact of learning goals

127

JMD 27,1

128

Nemeroff, W.F. and Cosentino, J. (1979), “Utilizing feedback and goal setting to increase performance appraisal interviewer competencies of managers”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 22, pp. 566-76. Nordstrom, R., Rucker, G. and Hall, R.V. (1988), “Performance management in city government: a case study”, Public Personnel Management, Vol. 17, pp. 159-65. Odiorne, G.S. (1978), “MBO: a backward glance”, Business Horizons, Vol. 10, pp. 14-24. Rotter, J.B. (1966), “Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement”, Psychological Monographs, Vol. 80, pp. 1-28. Ryan, T.A. (1970), Intentional Behavior: An Approach to Human Motivation, Ronald Press, New York, NY. Schmidt, K.H., Kleinbeck, U. and Brockman, W. (1984), “Motivational control of motor performance by goal setting in a dual task situation”, Psychological Research, Vol. 46, pp. 129-41. Spencer, L.M. and Spencer, S.M. (1993), Competence at Work: Models for Superior Performance, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY. Stevens, C.K., Bavetta, A.G. and Gist, M.E. (1993), “Gender differences in the acquisition of salary negotiation competencies: the role of goals, self-efficacy, and perceived control”, Journal of Applied Psychology., Vol. 78, pp. 723-35. Stevens, L. and Roulstone, S. (1991), “Speech therapists and teachers working together: a model for the 1990s”, Educational and Child Psychology, Vol. 8, pp. 84-92. Taylor, C., Agras, W., Losch, M. and Plante, T. (1991), “Improving the effectiveness of computer assisted weight loss”, Behavior Therapy, Vol. 22, pp. 229-36. Taylor, F.W. (1967), Principles of Scientific Management, Norton, New York, NY. Thornton, L. and DeBlassie, R. (1989), “Treating bulimia”, Adolescence, Vol. 24, pp. 631-7. VandeWalle, D., Cron, W.L. and Slocum, J.W. Jr (2001), “The role of goal orientation following performance feedback”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 86 No. 4, pp. 629-40. Wexley, K. and Baldwin, T. (1986), “Post training strategies for facilitating positive transfer: an empirical exploration”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 29, pp. 503-20. Wing, D.M. (1991), “Goal setting and recovery from alcoholism”, Archives of Psychiatric Nursing, Vol. 5, pp. 178-84. Wren, D.A. (1987), The Evolution of Management Thought, Wiley, New York, NY. Further reading Boyatzis, R.E., Leonard, D., Rhee, K. and Wheeler, J.V. (1996), “Competencies can be developed, but not the way we thought”, Capability, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 25-41. McKee, A.M. (1991), “Individual differences in planning for the future”, unpublished doctoral dissertation, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH. Seijts, G.H., Latham, G.P., Tasa, K. and Latham, B.W. (2004), “Goal setting and goal orientation: an integration of two different yet related literatures”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 47 No. 2, pp. 227-39. Corresponding author David C. Leonard can be contacted at: [email protected] To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected] Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0262-1711.htm

The impact of social environments on emotional, social, and cognitive competency development Jane V. Wheeler Department of Management, College of Business Management, Bowling Green State University, Bowling Green, Ohio, USA

The impact of social environments 129 Received 20 April 2007 Revised 20 August 2007 Accepted 31 August 2007

Abstract Purpose – The purpose of this research is to examine the interactions between individuals and the social environment as individuals engage in self-directed learning, a predecessor to intentional change theory. The individuals are graduates of a part-time MBA program and the social environment is the life sphere framework introduced with this study. Self-directed learning refers to the learning agendas that these people outlined for themselves when they first entered the MBA program. Design/methodology/approach – Longitudinal assessment data were collected using the critical incident interview, the learning skills profile, and the life sphere interview. Correlations were run testing the hypotheses: as the number of life spheres, relationships, or activities increases, so will the demonstration of the targeted competencies; and if the participant is able to work on developing these competencies in the life sphere that he or she designates as primary to the learning goal, then the demonstration of these competencies will improve. Findings – The number of life spheres, relationships, and activities does impact positively on the demonstration of these competencies and those participants for whom the work organization life sphere is primary to learning goal achievement showed improved demonstration of the targeted competencies. Research limitations/implications – The study needs to be replicated with a larger sample size. This initial study was merely exploratory in nature. Originality/value – As society approaches the virtual office it makes sense that it will get what it needs, when it needs it – no matter where one is or to whom one is talking. With these changes has come the need to find resources in places and from people that may not have been considered previously. The relationships and activities in one’s social environment are more critical than ever before. Keywords Social environment, Competences, Self managed learning Paper type Research paper

Intentional Change Theory (ICT), part of the larger literature on adult education and development (Boyatzis, 2006a), involves using a learning-centered teaching methodology (Bilimoria and Wheeler, 1995). Unlike the more traditional teaching philosophies where the teacher dictates what is to be taught, this pedagogical philosophy involves a teacher or coach helping an adult understand what he or she wants to learn. The individual and the entire learning process (i.e. educational objectives, methods, and actions) become the focus of the classroom (Boyatzis et al., 1995a; Kolb and Boyatzis, 1970). As this philosophy is implemented, individuals take control of their learning. In addition, Boyatzis (1999) suggests that as individuals are involved in ICT, it becomes self-directed learning. They are aware of the change occurring and understand their change process. Hence, actions are taken that allow the

Journal of Management Development Vol. 27 No. 1, 2008 pp. 129-145 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited 0262-1711 DOI 10.1108/02621710810840802

JMD 27,1

130

individual to move in directions that are personally consistent with their values and desires (Candy, 1991; Knowles, 1975). The work of Boyatzis (1999, 2001, 2006b) provides the foundation for the present study’s approach to development. Boyatzis describes a process that begins with development of a personal vision (i.e. the Ideal Self), then moves to an assessment of the person’s Real state. From a comparison of these two states emerges an understanding of both the person’s Strengths and Gaps. The person then articulates a Learning Agenda which results in Experimentation and Practice, all the while using supportive Relationships. The process loops back onto itself and repeats. Where the present study hopes to make one of its contributions is elaborating in more specific terms regarding the Experimentation, Practice, and Relationships stages of the model. From the perspective of the present study, the action steps typically include relationships and activities engaged in specifically to facilitate the Experimentation and Practice stages of the process. Relationships refer to any interpersonal associations or connections in support of developing the learning goal; and activities refer to any deeds or tasks that support the attainment of the learning goal. Yet, what is not known is the impact of relationships and activities as well as the larger social environment on these learning goals and associated action steps. H1. The higher the average number of relationships used in working on the learning goal across the person’s life spheres (i.e. those LSs in which the person is working on the learning goal) the greater the degree of success in achieving the learning goal. H2. The higher the average number of activities used in working on the learning goal across the person’s life spheres (i.e. those LSs in which the person is working on the learning goal) the greater the degree of success in achieving the learning goal. The next hypothesis examines the impact of multiple life spheres on learning goal achievement. It stems from the general inquiry asking what will happen to the person’s learning if the number of life spheres where the person can work on the respective learning goal increases. Behavior is a function of the person and the environment (Lewin, 1935, p. 14). The person’s environment may be delineated using the Life Sphere Framework, a framework introduced with this paper. Lewin (1936) first described life space “as the ‘totality of possibility of possible events’”. This project attempts to build on Lewin’s ideas. Yet, in contrast to Lewin’s definition that includes the person’s physical, social, and psychological environment, the present construct of life sphere de-emphasizes the importance of the physical environment. Rather, this project defines life spheres as the psychosocial settings within which a person functions. The present study suggests that a life sphere is held together by common interests, purposes, visions, or goals. More recent theorists have attempted to expand Lewin’s ideas. Lee (1985) described four life space types: home-based, work-based, conjoint, and diffuse. The conjoint type balances high quality and high quantity time between work and home; the diffuse type balances high quality and high quantity spent in places other than work or home. Mayer et al. (1998) use a systems approach in defining three dimensions of a life space: “the molecular-molar dimension”, “the internal-external dimension”, and “the organismic-constructed dimension”. Essentially, they distinguish the different

dimensions based on whether it denotes a more biological reference or a more external reference. Morf (1989) depicts work and life spheres. He divides the life sphere into five subspheres: close social relationships (family, other social relationships, and love), leisure (leisure, recreation, and play), arms length social relationships (social, community and civic activities, community, and politics), education (unstructured self-development, personal growth and fulfillment, and art), and religion (religion and church). Similar to the life space discussion above, the work and life spheres include aspects of the environment, personal characteristics of the individual, and aspects of the person’s behavior. But, in contrast to the above discussion, Morf spends little time talking about the actual physical environment. More recently, the life sphere literature shows the construct being used in model formation. As an example, Clucas (1997) used life spheres to develop the human/technology interaction model. The model evaluates the human interactions with technology from three different perspectives: the civic-life sphere, the personal-life sphere, and the work-life sphere. Bronfenbrenner (1979, p. 8) provides further insight into the life sphere structure. He describes the ecological environment as a set of nested structures similar to a set of Russian dolls: each layer extends further beyond the person such that he discusses “molar activity, dyad, role setting, social network, institution, subculture, culture”. Bronfenbrenner’s (1979, p. 11) description of the microsystem is of particular importance to the present study. He lists “activities, roles, and relations in which the person engages” as the three factors making up the microsystem. The present study’s Life Sphere Framework uses a similar structure. The present research study attempts to enhance and expand the framework in three ways. First, the present study uses the term “life sphere” in a more generic sense, it is no longer used to define only the personal part of the individual’s life. Second, the present study does not use the “subspheres” concept. Rather, because life sphere is now a generic term, any categorization is done at the life sphere level. Third, the present study introduces seven generic life spheres categories: Work Organization; Family; Personal Leisure Other than with Family; Professional Affiliations or Clubs Apart from Work Organization; Community and Civic Activities; Church, Religious Membership and Spiritual Participation; and Education Separate from Work Organization. H3. The higher the number of life spheres used in working on the learning goal the greater the degree of success in achieving the learning goal. H4a. Individuals who are able to work on the learning goal in the life sphere(s) designated by the individual as primary to the learning goal will have greater success achieving the learning goal than those individuals who are not able to work on their learning goal in the life sphere(s) designated by the individual as primary to the learning goal. H4b. Individuals who designate the Work Organization life sphere as primary to the learning goal and are able to work on the leaning goal in that life sphere will have greater success achieving their learning goals than those who do not designate the Work Organization life sphere as primary to the learning goal.

The impact of social environments 131

JMD 27,1

132

Methods Data and sample Part-time graduating MBA students who gave their written and informed consent regarding their participation in an on-going 50-year Longitudinal Outcome Study (Boyatzis, 1994, 1995) comprised the population for the present post-graduation study. An additional stipulation was necessary when determining the sample. Only those participants who completed the same assessment instruments at both entering and graduating could be contacted at post-graduation. This resulted in 54 possible participants. The mean age at entry was 28, 16 were women, and all were American. Similar studies had previously established the comparability of the respective sample to the specific MBA population (Boyatzis et al., 1995a; Boyatzis et al., 1996; Boyatzis and Renio, 1989; Boyatzis et al., 1995b). The three data-gathering points were: (1) during the participants’ first semester in the part-time MBA program, Time 0 (T0); (2) during the participants’ final semester, Time 1 (T1); and (3) between 18 and 30 months after the participants graduated from the MBA program, Time 2 (T2). The first data gathering point, T0, occurred during the participants’ enrollment in an initial assessment course. During this course the participants were assessed against a model of competencies that have been found to differentiate the superior performing manager from the average performing manager (Boyatzis, 1982). As part of this assessment process, the students completed both the Critical Incident Interview and the Learning Skills Profile – two instruments designed to gauge how well the students demonstrated those skills deemed necessary to be effective managers. The participants also completed Values exercises designed to assist in the understanding of what is important to them and why. With these reflections, they generated a Personal Vision in essay form describing what they wanted out of life and what was important to them. Next, the participants, using the assessment data and a new awareness of their desired career path, determined their current level of demonstration for each competency as well as each competency’s targeted level of demonstration if the desired future career path was to be achieved. Then, the participants, in the semester’s final weeks, wrote in-depth Learning Plans that included a summary of the semester’s insights regarding the participants’ values, competencies, and career aspirations. The Learning Plan also included between two and ten very specific learning goals that addressed the remainder of the participant’s enrollment in the part-time MBA program as well as the initial stages of the participant’s desired career. Sub-goals, action steps, and evidence of how the participant will know that the learning goal has been completed were included as part of the Learning Plan as well. Finally, the students, as they wrote their learning goals, identified those competencies that must be targeted for further development if the learning goal is to be reached. The next data gathering point, T1, occurred between 3 and 5 years after the participants entered the part-time MBA program, just prior to the participant’s graduation. At that time both the Critical Incident Interview and the Learning Skills Profile were re-administered. The final data point, T2, occurred between 18 and 30

months after graduation. The Critical Incident Interview and the Learning Skills Profile were administered for a third time. In addition, a new interview protocol, the Life Sphere Interview, was also administered. Recruitment at both T1 and T2 included sending introductory letters and making follow-up phone calls. Attempts were made at T2 to contact and interview all 54 potential participants. In total, 30 participated, 4 refused to participate, 4 did not show up for the arranged meeting, and 16 could not be found.

The impact of social environments 133

Measures The Critical Incident Interview (CII) was a forty-five minute audio taped interview (Flanagan, 1954; Boyatzis, 1982; Raven, 1992; Spencer and Spencer, 1993). During the CII the participant described in detail approximately four episodes when he or she felt either effective or ineffective in a work type situation. The interviews were then coded independently by two coders who had demonstrated inter-rater reliability of 89 percent against an expert coder (i.e. a professional who had used the code in previous validation studies). Once the coding was completed, any coding disagreements were reconciled until 100 percent agreement was reached between the two coders and the expert coder. Campbell et al. (1970) cited this interview technique as one of the most effective techniques for assessing skill-related behavior. The code was a model of managerial competencies that have been found to differentiate the superior performing manager from the average performing manager (Boyatzis, 1982). The sixteen competencies are: Efficiency Orientation, Planning, Initiative, Attention to Detail, Self-Control, Flexibility, Persuasiveness, Self Confidence, Empathy, Networking, Negotiating, Group Management, Developing Others, Social Objectivity, Systems Thinking, and Pattern Recognition. The Learning Skills Profile (LSP) measures the self-reported change on a set of scales similar to the competency model discussed above. The LSP, a self-administered card sort, measures the respondent against 12 behavior scales (Boyatzis and Kolb, 1991, 1995). The respondent sorts 72 cards into seven stacks. The corresponding categories range from (1) “I have no skill or ability in this area” to (7) “I am a creator or leader in this area”. The twelve scales are: Leadership, Relationship, Help, Sense Making, Information Gathering, Information Analysis, Theory, Quantitative, Technology, Goal Setting, Action, and Initiative. For added clarity and consistency while conducting the present study’s analysis the LSP scales were converted to CII competencies using the conversion table (see Table I) as mapped out by Boyatzis et al. (1995a). Written at T0 by the participants, the Learning Plan learning goals included a list of those competencies that the participant decided he or she must target for further development if the learning goal was to be reached. It was these targeted competencies that were used in the present study’s analysis. The participant listed these targeted competencies as part of the learning goal write-up. Completed during the T2 assessment session, the Life Sphere Interview was designed to gauge the impact of life spheres, relationship, and activities on the Learning Plan learning goals. During this 60-minute audio taped interview the participant was shown the original Learning Plan that was saved from T0 and was asked the same three questions for each learning goal: (1) Which life spheres (i.e. work organization; family; personal leisure other than with family; professional affiliations or clubs apart from the work organization;

JMD 27,1

134

Table I. Converting the Learning Skills Profile (LSP) scales to the Critical Incident Interview (CII) competencies

CII Competency

LSP scale

Efficiency orientation Planning Initiative Attention to detail Self-control Flexibility Empathy Persuasiveness Networking Negotiating Self-confidence Group management Developing others Systems thinking Pattern recognition Social objectivity

Scale 9 – Action Scale 8 – Goal setting Scale 10 – Initiative Not applicable Not applicable Item 2:40 – “Adapting to changing circumstances”a Scale 12 – Relationship Scale 11 – Leadership Scales 12 and 3 – Relationship and information gathering Item 11:40 – “Negotiating” Total LSP score Item 11:50 – “Building team spirit” Scales 1 and 8 – Help and goal setting Scale 5 – Theory Scale 2 – Sense making Scale 3 – Information gathering

Notes: a Each LSP scale is made up of six items or questions. For this situation the best conversion match was at the item level, not the scale level

community and civic activities; church, religious membership, and spiritual participation; and education separate from the work organization) supported the specific learning goal? (2) What is the rank order of the life spheres that you mentioned for each goal? (3) For each life sphere that you mentioned, what activities or relationships did you find most useful/helpful as you worked on this learning goal prior to graduation? Since graduation? Simultaneous to answering these questions the participant was asked to complete the Life Sphere Questionnaire. The questionnaire was designed to capture the participant’s responses, therefore allowing the researcher and the respondent to have an immediate visual display of the answers provided. Because much of the interview required the participant to elaborate on answers that were just given previously, this questionnaire facilitated the completion of the T2 assessment session. In addition, the questionnaire served to provide some of the data necessary during the analysis phase of the present study. The questionnaire provided the data necessary to determine each participant’s primary life sphere in support of the participant’s learning goals. This data was found by determining the mean ranking across the learning goal for each life sphere. Next, the relationships and activities that supported each learning goal as identified by the participant that were answered during the Life Sphere Interview were counted independently by two counters. Initial inter-rater reliability using two-tailed Pearson correlations (Boyatzis, 1998) was 0.6573 for activities (n ¼ 91, p ¼ 0:000) and 0.7647 (n ¼ 961, p ¼ 0:000) for relationships. All disagreements were reconciled until 100 percent inter-rater reliability was reached. Each learning goal write-up included several competencies that needed to be developed if the learning goal was to be achieved. Because of this relationship between

the learning goal and the targeted competencies, the dependent variable is being operationalized as the increased demonstration of the competencies selected as learning goals during the post-graduate learning period (T2). This variable was calculated by subtracting the T2 CII results from the T1 CII results and T2 LSP results from the T1 LSP results. The targeted competencies were taken directly from the Learning Plans written at T0. The independent variable is a function of the following variables: . the number of relationships across life spheres that were used in the learning; . the number of activities across life spheres that were used in the learning; . the number of life spheres in which the individual worked on the learning goals; and . the ability to do the learning in the life spheres designated as primary. For each hypothesis, the term “Individuals” refers to the graduates of the part-time MBA program. The term “Work on” refers to actions taken in pursuit of the learning goal and in which life sphere(s) these actions were taken. This data, as described above, was determined through the participant’s responses to the Life Sphere Interview and Questionnaire. Finally, because the present study is part of the larger Longitudinal Outcome Study (Boyatzis, 1994, 1995) it might make sense to compare the results of the present study with the results of the larger Longitudinal Outcome Study. Results For H1 there were either statistically significant or near significant positive correlations for four of the 16 critical incidence interview competencies: Efficiency Orientation, Initiative, Self-Control, and Negotiating. One of the CII competencies, Networking, had a statistically significant negative correlation. The LSP converted scales had no statistically significant or near significant positive correlations and one statistically significant negative correlation, Negotiating/Negotiating. The results suggest that H1 is very weakly supported by the CII behavioral change data (see Table II). For H2, only two competencies were near significantly positively correlated with improvement on the targeted competencies: Self-Control (r ¼ 0:292, p , 0.01, n ¼ 21) and Negotiating (r ¼ 0:299, p , 0.10, n ¼ 20). The results suggest that H2 is not supported (see Table III). For H3 there were either statistically significant or near significant positive correlations for three of the CII competencies: Efficiency Orientation, Initiative, and Flexibility; and for nine of the 14 converted LSP scales: Efficiency Orientation/Action, Initiative/Initiative, Empathy/Relationship, Persuasiveness/ Leadership, Networking/Relationship and Information Gathering, Self Confidence/Total LSP Score, Developing Others/Help and Goal Setting, Systems Thinking/Theory, and Pattern Recognition/Sense Making. There were no statistically significant or near significant negative correlations for either the CII behavioral change or LSP self-report data. The results suggest that H3 is somewhat supported (see Table IV).

The impact of social environments 135

JMD 27,1

136

Table II. A comparison of the mean number of relationships per learning goal with the demonstration of the targeted critical incident interview competencies and the targeted learning skills profile converted scalesa,b

Table III. A comparison of the mean number of activities per learning goal with the demonstration of the targeted critical incident interview competencies and the targeted learning skills profile converted scales

Competency/scales

n

Efficiency orientation Planning Initiative Attention to detail Self-control Flexibility Empathy Persuasiveness Networking Negotiating Self-confidence Group management Developing others Systems thinking Pattern recognition Social objectivity

15 24 19 8 21 21 15 22 21 20 19 27 21 17 20 19

Critical incident interview Mean SD r 20.07 0.21 0.00 0.00 20.24 0.05 0.93 0.45 0.00 20.05 20.05 0.11 0.10 20.06 0.10 20.58

1.53 1.25 1.05 0.76 1.04 0.80 1.49 1.01 1.41 0.76 0.23 0.70 0.62 1.30 1.37 1.17

0.367 * 20.090 0.325 * 20.136 0.307 * 0.072 0.054 20.137 20.672 * * *c 0.613 * * * 0.066 0.142 0.060 20.186 20.080 20.155

n

Learning skills profile Mean SD r

14 23 20 na na 20 15 21 21 19 19 26 21 16 19 19

2 2.14 2 0.65 2 0.85 na na 0.30 2 0.27 0.71 1.33 2 0.11 3.26 2 0.19 2 0.95 0.94 2.05 0.05

4.07 4.11 3.69 na na 1.38 3.90. 4.44 7.44 1.15 33.53 1.67 6.73 4.78 4.08 3.05

20.127 20.176 0.291 na na 20.244 20.319 20.016 20.086 20.493 * *c 20.053 20.122 0.205 20.304 20.051 20.093

Notes: aAs explicitly mentioned by the participant in the Learning Plan learning goals; bSignificant levels are one-tailed tests based on Pearson correlations: * p , 0.10; * * p , 0.05; * * * p , 0.01; cA two-tailed significance level is reported because the results are in the opposite direction of predicted improvement

Competency/scales

n

Efficiency orientation Planning Initiative Attention to detail Self-control Flexibility Empathy Persuasiveness Networking Negotiating Self-confidence Group management Developing others Systems thinking Pattern recognition Social objectivity

15 24 19 8 21 21 15 22 21 20 19 27 21 17 20 19

Critical incident interview Mean SD r 20.07 0.21 0.00 0.00 20.24 0.05 0.93 0.45 0.00 20.05 20.05 0.11 0.10 20.06 0.10 20.58

1.53 1.25 1.05 0.76 1.04 0.80 1.49 1.01 1.41 0.76 0.23 0.70 0.62 1.30 1.37 1.17

0.029 0.027 20.021 0.035 0.292 * 0.078 0.111 20.225 20.264 0.299 * 20.039 0.090 20.101 20.243 20.044 0.010

n

Learning skills profile Mean SD r

14 23 20 na na 20 15 21 21 19 19 26 21 16 19 19

22.14 20.65 20.85 na na 0.30 20.27 0.71 1.33 20.11 3.26 20.19 20.95 0.94 2.05 0.05

4.07 4.11 3.69 na na 1.38 3.90 4.44 7.44 1.15 33.53 1.67 6.73 4.78 4.08 3.05

2 0.079 2 0.143 0.248 na na 2 0.320 2 0.265 2 0.096 2 0.240 2 0.324 2 0.084 2 0.096 2 0.082 2 0.055 0.015 2 0.181

Notes: As explicitly mentioned by the participant in the Learning Plan learning goals; Significant levels are one-tailed tests based on Pearson correlations; * p , 0.10

Finally, for H4 the analysis was done with the life sphere chosen by the participant as primary in terms of the learning goals (i.e. the participant chose that life sphere more times than the other life spheres as most important in terms of supporting the learning goal achievement). In the end, because of the low number of chosen cases for the life

Competency/scales Efficiency orientation Planning Initiative Attention to detail Self-control Flexibility Empathy Persuasiveness Networking Negotiating Self-confidence Group management Developing others Systems thinking Pattern recognition Social objectivity

Critical incident interview n Mean SD r 15 24 19 8 21 21 15 22 21 20 19 27 21 17 20 19

20.07 0.21 0.00 0.00 20.24 0.05 0.93 0.45 0.00 20.05 20.05 0.11 0.10 20.06 0.10 20.58

1.53 1.25 1.05 0.76 1.04 0.80 1.49 1.01 1.41 0.76 0.23 0.70 0.62 1.30 1.37 1.17

0.457 * * 0.054 0.343 * * 20.107 20.204 0.407 * * 0.256 0.134 20.045 0.239 20.045 0.094 20.284 20.094 0.092 20.251

n

Learning skills profile Mean SD r

14 23 20 na na 20 15 21 21 19 19 26 21 16 19 19

22.14 20.63 20.85 na na 0.30 20.27 0.71 1.33 20.11 3.26 20.19 20.95 0.94 2.05 0.05

4.07 4.11 3.69 na na 1.38 3.90 4.44 7.44 1.15 33.53 1.67 6.73 4.78 4.08 3.05

0.569 * * 0.095 0.477 * * na na 2 0.043 0.446 * * 0.624 * * * 0.467 * * 0.058 0.685 * * * 0.027 0.473 * * 0.381 * 0.528 * * 0.159

Notes: As explicitly mentioned by the participant in the Learning Plan learning goals; Significant levels are one-tailed tests based on Pearson correlations: * p , 0.10; * * p , 0.05; * * * p , 0.01

spheres except Work Organization, Pearson correlations were run only for those participants who chose the Work Organization primary. As a result, H4a that looks at what happens when any one of the seven life spheres is chosen as primary cannot be tested by the existing data. Both the behavioral change and self-report data, however, seem to support Part B. Regarding the Work Organization life sphere, there were either statistically significant or near positive for five of the sixteen CII competencies: Initiative, Attention to Detail, Flexibility, Negotiating, and Pattern Recognition. The LSP self-report data supported Part B as well. Twelve of the Work Organization life sphere correlations were either statistically significant or near significant positive correlations: Efficiency Orientation/Action, Planning/Goal Setting, Initiative/Initiative, Empathy/Relationship, Persuasiveness/Leadership, Networking/Relationship and Information Gathering, Negotiating/Negotiating, Self Confidence/Total LSP Score, Developing Others/Help and Goal Setting, Systems Thinking/Theory, Pattern Recognition/Sense Making, and Social Objectivity/Information Gathering, as shown in Table V. In terms of the Life Sphere Framework Kendall tau_b rank order correlations were run to test the various relationships amongst the life spheres. The Family and the Church life spheres have a statistically significant positive relationship (see Table VI); the Family and the Community Civic life spheres have a statistically significant negative relationship; the Church and the Community Civic life spheres have a statistically near significant negative relationship; and the Church and the Professional Affiliations have a statistically negative relationship. In addition, there were four other statistically significant or near significant negative relationships: Work Organization and Family; Professional Affiliations and Family; Personal Leisure and Professional Affiliations; and Professional Affiliations and Education. There was one other

The impact of social environments 137

Table IV. A comparison of the mean number of life spheres per learning goal with the demonstration of the targeted critical incident interview competencies and the targeted learning skills profile converted scales

JMD 27,1

138 Table V. A comparison of the mean number of life spheres per learning goal with the demonstration of the targeted critical incident interview competencies and the targeted converted learning skills profile scales, for those participants whose primary life sphere is the work organization

Competency/scales

Critical incident interview Mean SD r

Mean

Efficiency orientation Planning Initiative Attention to detail Self-control Flexibility Empathy Persuasiveness Networking Negotiating Self-confidence Group management Developing others Systems thinking Pattern recognition Social objectivity

0.14 20.14 20.18 0.14 0.18 0.09 0.95 0.32 20.09 0.00 20.05 0.05 0.27 20.14 0.50 20.27

2 1.55 0.68 0.55 na na 0.64 0.05 0.27 1.18 2 0.14 5.23 0.05 2 0.18 1.73 2.00 1.14

0.146 0.263 0.414 * * 0.376 * * 0.161 0.428 * * 0.086 0.199 0.230 0.361 * * 20.070 20.071 0.186 20.199 0.389 * * 20.120

0.550 * * * 0.352 * 0.396 * * na na 2 0.007 0.624 * * * 0.650 * * * 0.601 * * * 0.389 * * 0.638 * * * 0.216 0.497 * * * 0.325 * 0.298 * 0.380 * *

3.61 4.36 3.71 na na 1.40 5.07 4.40 7.73 0.64 32.76 1.84 7.31 4.24 3.46 3.90

Notes: As explicitly mentioned by the participant in the Learning Plan learning goals; Significant levels are one-tailed tests based on Pearson correlations: * p , 0.10; * * p , 0.05; * * * p , 0.01; n ¼ 22

Life sphere n a

1. WO 2. FM 3. PS 4. PF 5. CC 6. CH 7. ES

Table VI. Rank order correlations of the life sphere rankings

1.36 1.32 1.22 0.83 0.85 0.75 1.17 1.04 1.34 0.69 0.21 0.65 0.55 1.28 1.41 1.08

Learning skills profile SD r

1

30 1.000 30 20.392 * * * 24 0.229 * 23 20.150 25 0.202 16 20.033 30 0.123 30 1.000

n

2

n

3

30 24 23 25 16 30

1.000 20.062 20.249 * 20.423 * * * 0.386 * * 20.216 *

24 19 21 13 24

1.000 20.431 * * 20.067 20.238 20.036

n

4

n

5

n

6

23 1.000 21 0.134 25 1.000 13 20.434 * * 14 20.284 * * 16 1.000 23 20.225 * 25 20.013 16 0.111

Notes: Significant levels are one-tailed tests based on Pearson correlations: *p , 0.10; * *p , 0.05; * * *p , 0.01

statistically near significant positive relationship: Work Organization and Personal Leisure (see Table VI) The final area to be reviewed is the comparison of the critical incident interview competencies and the learning skills profile scales demonstrated at entry (T0), graduation (T1), and post graduation (T2) for both the present study sample and Longitudinal Outcome Study sample. Because the present study was part of the Longitudinal Outcome Study this comparison sheds more light on the present study’s results. When t-tests are run using the entire present study sample regardless of what was targeted or where the learning occurred, there was limited change from the time of the graduation assessment (T1) to the time of the post-graduation assessment (T2). In fact, as noted in Tables VII and VIII, only two competencies had a statistically significant positive change: Empathy and Persuasiveness; two scales had a

Comp.

Entry Mean

Grad. (T0) Mean

EOe PLAN INIT ATD SC FLEX EMP PER NET NEG SELF GM DO ST PR SO

1.50 2.33 0.90 0.40 0.40 0.10 1.70 2.47 0.73 0.07 0.87 0.20 0.57 1.03 0.80 0.53

2.10 2.63 1.03 0.47 0.80 0.27 1.70 2.57 0.97 0.20 1.00 0.13 0.43 1.43 0.87 0.90

Present study sample b Grad. Post-grad. (T1) (T2) ta Mean Mean 2.26 * * 1.07 0.66 0.39 2.35 * * 1.72 * * 0.00 0.35 0.94 1.28 2.11 * * 2 0.53 2 0.78 1.93 * * 0.34 1.88 * *

2.10 2.63 1.03 0.47 0.80 0.27 1.70 2.57 0.97 0.20 1.00 0.13 0.43 1.43 0.87 0.90

2.27 2.63 0.87 0.63 0.73 0.33 2.67 2.97 0.97 0.20 0.97 0.23 0.53 1.20 1.13 0.57

ta 0.66 0.00 20.82 1.04 20.36 0.53 4.57 * * * * 2.18 * * 0.00 0.00 21.00 0.83 0.90 21.00 1.09 21.62

Longitudinal outcome study samplec,d (T0) (T1) Mean Mean ta 1.72 2.33 0.93 0.43 0.43 0.07 1.57 2.41 0.70 0.11 0.80 0.15 0.44 1.09 0.72 0.48

2.24 2.63 1.13 0.56 0.56 0.30 1.81 2.50 0.87 0.22 0.94 0.22 0.52 1.39 0.94 0.81

3.00 * * * 1.56 * 1.30 * 0.88 1.02 2.86 * * * 1.16 0.46 1.03 1.35 * 2.67 * * * 0.78 0.56 1.88 * * 1.45 * 2.57 * * *

Notes: a Matched-pair t-tests were run with the “t” reported because a longitudinal design was used; Significance levels are one-tailed: * p , 0.1; * * p , 0.05; * * * p , 0.01; * * * * p , 0.001; b n ¼ 30; c n ¼ 54; d The Outcome Study Sample ¼ all graduates of the part-time MBA program for two years who participated in the Outcome Study; e EO ¼ Efficiency Orientation, PLAN ¼ Planning, INIT ¼ Initiative, ATD ¼ Attention to Detail, SC ¼ Self-Control, FLEX ¼ Flexibility, EMP ¼ Empathy, PER ¼ Persuasiveness, NET ¼ Networking, NEG ¼ Negotiating, SELF ¼ Self-Confidence, GM ¼ Group Management, DO ¼ Developing Others, ST ¼ Systems Thinking, PR ¼ Pattern Recognition, SO ¼ Social Objectivity

statistically significant or near significant positive change: Sense Making and Theory; and one scale had a near significant negative change: Action. These data offer more insight when they are compared the same change data but from the earlier period – the time of entry (T0) to the time of graduation (T1). There was significant change in both the CII and the LSP scale. Six competencies had statistically significant positive change during the earlier period: Efficiency Orientation, Self-Control, Flexibility, Self Confidence, Systems Thinking, and Social Objectivity. Nine scales had a statistically significant or near significant positive change during the earlier period: Help, Information Gathering, Information Analysis, Theory, Quantitative, Technology, Goal Setting, Initiative, and Leadership. None of the competencies and scales had a statistically significant or near significant negative change during the earlier period (sees Tables VII and VIII). Discussion The present study asked the question “How does the social environment effect competency development?” After reviewing the findings above we are able to conclude that one’s social environment does in fact support competency development. The data suggests that competency development is enhanced when we are able to work on our learning goals with multiple relationships and multiple life spheres. Additionally, the

The impact of social environments 139

Table VII. A comparison of the critical incident interview competencies demonstrated at entry (T0), graduation (T1), and post-graduation (T2), for both the Longitudinal Outcome Study Sample and the Present Study Sample

28.28 26.31 25.52 27.21 23.59 23.03 24.17 24.86 28.83 28.24 25.59 29.55

SHe SSM SIG SIA STH SQ STE SGS SA SI SL SR 29.52 27.34 27.24 28.90 26.34 27.24 27.93 28.38 29.97 29.97 27.00 30.17

Grad. (T1) Mean 1.62 * 1.21 1.90 * * 1.63 * 2.57 * * * 3.04 * * * 2.85 * * * 3.15 * * * 1.06 1.47 * 1.39 * 0.52 29.52 27.34 27.24 28.90 26.34 27.24 27.93 28.38 29.97 29.97 27.00 30.17

28.59 28.72 28.07 29.86 27.52 26.86 27.24 28.38 28.72 29.41 27.28 30.38

Post-grad. (T2) Mean 21.20 1.84 * * 1.14 1.17 1.45 * 20.42 20.75 0.00 21.76 *f 20.73 0.37 0.24

ta

26.55 26.21 25.33 27.10 24.30 24.10 24.49 25.30 28.22 28.22 24.88 29.21

27.69 27.82 27.13 29.36 26.69 27.64 27.28 28.36 29.90 29.55 26.94 29.70

2.01 * * 2.69 * * * 3.09 * * * 3.49 * * * * 3.00 * * * 4.17 * * * * 3.34 * * * * 4.57 * * * * 2.39 * * * 2.00 * * 2.68 * * * 0.69

Notes: a Matched-pair t-tests were run with the “t” reported because a longitudinal design was used; Significance levels are one-tailed: *p , 0.1; * *p , 0.05; * * *p , 0.01; * * * *p , 0.001; b n ¼ 29; c n ¼ 67; d The Outcome Study Sample ¼ all graduates of the part-time MBA program for two years who participated in the Outcome Study; e SH ¼ Help, SSM ¼ Sense Making, SIG ¼ Information Gathering, SIA ¼ Information Analysis, STH ¼ Theory, SQ ¼ Quantitative, STE ¼ Technology, SGS ¼ Goal Setting, SA ¼ Action, SI ¼ Initiative, SL ¼ Leadership, SR ¼ Relationship

Entry (T0) Mean

Table VIII. A comparison of the learning skills profile scales demonstrated at entry (T0), graduation (T1), and post-graduation (T2), for both the Longitudinal Outcome Study Sample and the Present Study Sample Longitudinal outcome study samplec, d (T0) (T1) Mean Mean ta

140

Comp.

Present study sampleb Grad. (T1) ta Mean

JMD 27,1

data suggests that for those of us whose primary life sphere in support of our learning is the Work Organization life sphere, then as we increase the number of life spheres we work on our learning goals in, the greater the success we will have in reaching our goals. Further, the present study offers insight in terms of the Life Sphere Framework as well as additional insight regarding what happens when the sample is expanded to include the larger Outcome Study as well. As a first step in our discussion it is worth noting which competencies make up the various categories. For purposes of this study, the following categories were applied: Emotional competencies – Efficiency Orientation, Planning, Initiative, Attention to Detail, Self-Control, Flexibility; Social competencies – Empathy, Persuasiveness, Networking, Negotiating, Self Confidence, Group Management, Developing Others; Cognitive competencies – Systems Thinking, Pattern Thinking, Social Objectivity. In terms of relationships, a few conclusions can be made. First, there is a positive relationship between the number of relationships across life spheres and the increased demonstration of the competencies. It makes sense that there is a positive relationship between increasing demands and challenges on the participant and demonstration of those competencies that involve getting the job done. This seems to make sense in that the participant may need to find ways to manage the potentially increased complexity resulting from the increase in relationships. Second, there does not seem to be a relationship between the number of relationships across life spheres and the increased demonstration of the Cognitive competencies. This also seems to make sense in that the Cognitive competencies (i.e. Systems Thinking and Pattern Recognition) involve the individual participant’s cognitive capabilities. Third, the Social competencies, where we would expect a positive relationship, there is data that suggests a potentially negative relationship. In general, the need to get the job done (i.e. Emotional competencies) relative to the other clusters may be so strong that it takes precedence over any other cluster. Further, we can also look at the participant’s work environment. It may be that the participants were working in environments that don’t support the demonstration of the Social competencies. In terms of activities, the results suggest that the number of activities do not matter. In other words, as there are more things to do, the participant may have to pick and choose which things require involvement; hence, the person has to spend more time holding back until the right activities appear. Selectivity of actions and priorities may be critical to the iterative nature of competency development. The conclusions involving the life spheres are fairly self explanatory. As the participant finds new arenas to practice the different competencies, these competencies will in fact improve. Further, when the participants are able to designate the Work Organization as primary to the learning goals, then there will be increased demonstration on those competencies that must be demonstrated if the learning goal is to be reached. Three of the seven generic life spheres (i.e. Work Organization, Family, and Education Separate from Work Organization) were chosen by all participants as being part of their respective social environments. As a result, these three life spheres act as anchors for the Life Sphere Framework. The importance of both the Work Organization and the Family life spheres is fundamental to the Life Spheres Framework. The importance of the Education Separate from Work life sphere may be a remnant from their recent MBA experience and therefore an artifact of their recent

The impact of social environments 141

JMD 27,1

142

shared experience. As the participants continue to pursue their post-MBA lives other experiences, and therefore other life spheres, may become increasingly important. Once the anchor life spheres are named, we can then begin to explore the other relationships amongst the various spheres. There are two other conclusions to be made. First, the relationship between Family and Church appears strong. All participants who chose Family as primary in support of their learning goals also designated Church as part of the respective learning goal social environments. This stands in contrast to the 8 or 36 percent of the participants who chose the Work Organization as primary and designated the Church life sphere as part of their respective learning goal social environment. Second, the Work Organization and the Personal Leisure is a little less obvious. Sixteen of the 22 participants who chose the Work Organization as primary also chose the Personal Leisure as part of their learning goal social environment. A possible explanation may lie in the marriage and family demographic data. Six of the 16 participants just mentioned are single and three are newly married. Only six of the married participants have children. Hence, it may be that those participants who chose Work Organization as primary are not as involved in family obligations, and are able to spend more time with themselves and with their friends. One final point regarding the Family life sphere group involves an apparent life stage shift. The Family life sphere chosen as primary in support of the learning goals is slightly older; with a larger percentage being men. In addition, a relatively larger number of this group is married and a larger percentage has children than those who did not chose this life sphere. Given these data it makes sense that the end of MBA studies marks the end to their “Adolescence” life stage. They now seem to be moving into the “Marriage and Family Building” life stage. Data provided by the US Commerce Department, and interpreted by Gail Sheehy (1995), show that the transition between these two life stages seems to occur at about age 30. Needless to say, the participants seem to be right on course. The final data to be concluded involves comparing the critical incident interview and the learning skills profile scales demonstrated at entry (T0), graduation (T1), and post-graduation (T2) for both the Longitudinal Outcome Study and the Present Study. The significant changes in data, for the most part, that occurred from the time of graduation to the time of post-graduation occurred on those CII competencies and LSP scales that had not experienced significant change during the earlier period. As a result there seems to be a long-term broadening or balancing in the participants’ demonstration of both the competencies and scales. In other words, the participants are showing an improvement on more and more competencies over time. Conclusion After reviewing the findings, we can support the observation that one’s social environment does in fact support competency development. The data suggests that competency development is enhanced when we are able to work on our learning goals with multiple relationships and in multiple life spheres. Further, the data suggests that for those of us whose primary life sphere in support of our learning is the Work Organization, then as we increase the number of life spheres we work on our learning goals in, the greater success we will have in reaching those goals. The data also provides insight into the Life Sphere Framework.

Two-thirds of all entrants into the work force from 1990 to 2005 were women and minorities. Further, companies are continuing to employ fewer people, be less hierarchical, and more service focused. The employees, in turn, are growing in terms of being constant learners with an ever increasing capacity for higher-order thinking. We are seeing more and more the effects of these changes. On-line teaching, remote offices, and the internet are but a few of the changes that have been observed. Hence, as we approach the virtual office it seems to make sense that we will continue to get what we need, when we need it – no matter where we are or who we are talking to. With these changes has come the need to find resources in places and from people that may not been considered previously. Since we are spending more time on the road or in our home, we have increasingly more opportunities to seek out help and guidance. Hence, the present study’s findings regarding both life spheres and relationships seem accurate. It is worthwhile to work with a larger sample to understand the impact of the life spheres on learning as well as to understand the Life Sphere Framework in general. A preliminary analysis regarding the life sphere concepts has been provided. It may also be worthwhile to analyze the data further to determine whether or not there are any additional findings that can be applied. Specifically, as we understand the various places where we work and play we can begin to adapt training classes that will focus on all the dimensions of the person. Just as working is no longer being limited to the traditional office, living is no longer being limited to the home. People are more and more finding ways to get the job done on their own time and in their own ways. With this new found freedom comes a need for new and different ways to learn, grow, and train. Virtual classrooms and on-line teaching are but a few of the methods being explored. Further, training classes at remote locations targeting the whole person are being offered. For practitioners this opens up new areas of exploration that have yet to be discovered. References Bilimoria, D. and Wheeler, J.V. (1995), “Learning-centered education: a guide to resources and implementation”, Journal of Management Education, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 409-28. Boyatzis, R.E. (1982), The Competent Manager: A Model for Effective Performance, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY. Boyatzis, R.E. (1994), “Stimulating self-directed learning through the Managerial Assessment and Development course”, Journal of Management Education, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 304-23. Boyatzis, R.E. (1995), “Cornerstones of change: building a path for self-directed learning”, in Boyatzis, R.E., Cowen, S.C. and Kolb, D.A. (Eds), Innovation in Professional Education: Steps on a Journey from Teaching to Learning, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA, pp. 50-94. Boyatzis, R.E. (1998), Transforming Qualitative Information: Thematic Analysis and Code Development, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA. Boyatzis, R.E. (1999), “Self-directed change and learning as a necessary meta-competency for success and effectiveness in the 21st century”, in Sims, R. and Veres, J.G. (Eds), Keys to Employee Success in the Coming Decades, Greenwood Publishing, Westport, CT. Boyatzis, R.E. (2001), “Developing emotional intelligence”, in Cherniss, C. and Goleman, D. (Eds), The Emotionally Intelligent Workplace: How to Select for, Measure, and Improve Emotional Intelligence in Individuals, Groups, and Organizations, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA, pp. 234-53.

The impact of social environments 143

JMD 27,1

144

Boyatzis, R.E. (2006a), “Using tipping points of emotional intelligence and cognitive competencies to predict financial performance of leaders”, Psicothemia, Vol. 17, pp. 124-31. Boyatzis, R.E. (2006b), “Intentional change theory from a complexity perspective”, Journal of Management Development, Vol. 25 No. 7, pp. 607-23. Boyatzis, R.E. and Kolb, D.A. (1991), “Assessing individuality in learning: the learning skills profile”, Educational Psychology, Vol. 11 Nos 3/4, pp. 279-95. Boyatzis, R.E. and Kolb, D.A. (1995), “Beyond learning styles to learning skills: the executive skills profile”, Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 3-17. Boyatzis, R.E. and Renio, A. (1989), “The impact of an MBA program on managerial abilities”, Journal of Management Development, Vol. 8 No. 5, pp. 66-77. Boyatzis, R.E., Renio-McKee, A. and Thompson, L. (1995a), “Past accomplishments: establishing the impact and baseline of earlier programs”, in Boyatzis, R.E., Cowen, S.S. and Kolb, D.A. (Eds), Innovation in Professional Education: Steps on a Journey from Teaching to Learning, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA. Boyatzis, R.E., Leonard, D., Rhee, K. and Wheeler, J.V. (1996), “Competencies can be developed, but not in the way we thought”, Capability, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 25-41. Boyatzis, R.E., Baker, A., Leonard, D., Rhee, K. and Thompson, L. (1995b), “Will it make a difference? Assessing a value-based, outcome oriented, competency-based professional program”, in Boyatzis, R.E., Cowen, S.S. and Kolb, D.A. (Eds), Innovating in Professional Education: Steps on a Journey from Teaching to Learning, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA, pp. 167-202. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979), The Ecology of Human Development, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA. Campbell, J.P., Dunnette, M.D., Lawler, E.E. III and Weick, K.E. (1970), Managerial Behavior, Performance, and Effectiveness, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY. Candy, P.C. (1991), Self-Direction for Lifelong Learning: A Comprehensive Guide to Theory and Practice, Jossey Bass, San Francisco, CA. Clucas, S.R. (1997), “Construction as a curriculum organizer for technology education”, unpublished doctoral dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA. Flanagan, J.C. (1954), “The critical incident technique”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 51, pp. 327-35. Knowles, M.S. (1975), Self-Directed Learning: A Guide for Learners and Teachers, Association Press, New York, NY. Kolb, D.A. and Boyatzis, R.E. (1970), “Goal setting and self-directed behavior change”, Human Relations, Vol. 23 No. 5, pp. 439-57. Lee, M.D. (1985), “Life space structure: explorations and speculations”, Human Relations, Vol. 38 No. 7, pp. 623-42. Lewin, K. (1935), A Dynamic Theory of Personality: Selected papers (Adams, D.K. and Zener, K.E., Trans.), McGraw-Hill, New York, NY. Lewin, K. (1936), Principles of Topological Psychology (Heider, F. and Heider, G.M., Trans.), McGraw-Hill, New York, NY. Mayer, J.D., Carlsmith, K.M. and Chabot, H.F. (1998), “Describing the person’s external environment: conceptualizing and measuring life space”, Journal of Research in Personality, Vol. 32, pp. 253-96. Morf, M. (1989), The Work/Life Dichotomy: Prospects for Reintegrating People and Jobs, Quorum Books, New York, NY.

Raven, J. (1992), “A model of competence, motivation, and behavior, and a paradigm for assessment”, in Berlak, H., Newmann, F.M., Adams, E., Archbald, D.A., Burgess, T., Raven, J. and Romberg, T.A. (Eds), Towards a New Science of Educational Testing and Assessment, State University of New York Press, Albany, NY, pp. 85-116. Sheehy, G. (1995), New Passages: Mapping Your Life across Time, Random House, New York, NY. Spencer, L.M. Jr and Spencer, S.M. (1993), Competence at Work: Models for Superior Performance, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY. Further reading Boyatzis, R.E. and Sala, F. (2004), “Assessing emotional intelligence competencies”, in Geher, G. (Ed.), The Measurement of Emotional Intelligence, Novas Science Publishers, Hauppauge, NY, pp. 147-80. Boyatzis, R.E., Stubbs, E.C. and Taylor, S.N. (2002), “Learning cognitive and emotional intelligence competencies through graduate management education”, Academy of Management Journal on Learning and Education, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 150-62. Festinger, L.A. (1957), A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance, Stanford University Press, Palo Alto, CA. Flanagan, R.Y. (1994), “Construct validation of the life sphere questionnaire: an investigation of high school students and incarcerated juvenile delinquents”, unpublished doctoral dissertation, California School of Professional Psychology, Fresno, CA. Goleman, D. (1998), Working with Emotional Intelligence, Bantam, New York, NY. Goleman, D. (2006), Social Intelligence, Bantam Books, New York, NY. Griffith, J.C. (1966), “Self-directed behavior change: research and theory”, unpublished manuscript, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA. Kolb, D.A., Winter, S.K. and Berlew, D.E. (1968), “Self-directed change: two studies”, Journal of Applied Behavioral Studies, Vol. 4, pp. 453-71. McClelland, D.C. (1965), “Toward a theory of motive acquisition”, American Psychologist, Vol. 20, pp. 321-33. Winter, S., Griffith, J. and Kolb, D. (1968), “The capacity for self-direction”, Journal of Consulting Psychology, Vol. 32, pp. 35-41. Zacks, J. (1965), “Collaborative therapy for smokers”, unpublished thesis, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA. Corresponding author Jane V. Wheeler can be contacted at: [email protected]

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected] Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

The impact of social environments 145

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0262-1711.htm

JMD 27,1

The beat and rhythm of competency development over two years

146

Kenneth S. Rhee

Received 20 April 2007 Revised 20 August 2007 Accepted 31 August 2007

Department of Management and Marketing, College of Business, Northern Kentucky University, Highland Heights, Kentucky, USA Abstract Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to show that research supports competencies can be developed in adults; however, even in these “model programs” for developing emotional intelligence and social intelligence competencies, little is known about what goes on inside the “black box” of change. How does the change occur? Design/methodology/approach – In an attempt to help adults develop emotional, social, and cognitive intelligence competencies, the model of intentional change theory was applied during the first of the required courses, entitled Leadership Assessment and Development in the Master of Business Administration program at Weatherhead School of Management, Case Western Reserve University. About 26 students in the program were solicited to participate in the longitudinal study, where they were assessed periodically for competency development (about six to eight weeks) during their two-year program. Findings – The results indicated that certain type of competencies were developed much earlier in the program (e.g. technology and quantitative), while other competencies were developed during the summer break (e.g. help and relationships) or toward the end of the program (e.g. informational analysis, theory, and goals and action). Students’ career aspiration also had an impact on the rhythm and flow of competency development – while career changers steadily improved throughout the program, career explorers had spurts of improvement throughout the program, indicating their uncertain pattern of development. Overall, students’ opportunity mode and desire for continuous learning significantly impacted their competency development. Originality/value – The study raised certain implications for competency development. The relationship between opportunity utilization and intentional change – how to maximize given opportunities while seeking out new and noble opportunities – raised a question about how to structure formal competency development in organizations, especially when it comes to one’s professional development. The study could not infer the underlying causal relationships between competency acquisition, program structure, subject content and initial competency demonstration level, given the limited sample size and the exploratory nature of the study. Keywords Competences, Self development, Career development, Professional education Paper type Research paper

Journal of Management Development Vol. 27 No. 1, 2008 pp. 146-160 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited 0262-1711 DOI 10.1108/02621710810840811

Research supports competencies can be developed in adults (Boyatzis et al., 1996; Boyatzis et al., 2002; Cherniss and Adler, 2000). However, even in these “model programs” for developing emotional intelligence and social intelligence competencies, little is known about what goes on inside the “black box” of change. How does the change occur? Intentional change theory (ICT) describes a discontinuous, non-linear process of competency development (Boyatzis, 2001; Boyatzis, 2006). The process emerges as

self-awareness grows, where a state of self-focused attention in which individuals develop and articulate a personal vision or Ideal Self (Boyatzis, 2006). Then they evaluated their current life and behavior – the Real Self (Boyatzis, 2006), and positive physiological forces driven by the Ideal Self create a motivation to grow (Boyatzis et al., 2006; Goleman et al., 2002; Boyatzis and McKee, 2005). The dissatisfaction with one’s current state could also produce the motivation to move toward the ideal state (Higgins, 1987). ICT has also been compared to a cybernetic model of self-regulation (Carver and Scheier, 1982) that depicts a discrepancy-reducing feedback loop that allows individuals to make “self-corrections”. In an attempt to help adults develop emotional, social, and cognitive intelligence competencies, the model of ICT was applied during the first of the required courses, titled Leadership Assessment and Development in the Master of Business Administration program at Weatherhead School of Management, Case Western Reserve University. During the course, students have the opportunity to develop their personal vision, and then discover their current strengths and developmental needs and to define and outline their learning and developmental objectives. As part of the course, students are assessed at the beginning of the course and receive feedback on their assessment. They interpret their own assessment data and produce an individualized learning plan to work on their developmental needs. The course is built on the belief that “people learn most effectively when they are in control of the learning process and can choose developmental activities best suited to their personal situation” (Boyatzis, 1995, pp. 51-54). The purpose of this paper is to examine the rhythm and flow of the intentional change process during the duration of the graduate management program. The study focused on the competency development process of students and their learning during the graduate management program. This study was conducted as part of a larger longitudinal study at Weatherhead School of Management designed to understand the process of change, where the students’ development, outcome assessment research was conducted to measure students’ development in the program (Boyatzis et al., 1995; Boyatzis and Renio, 1989; Boyatzis et al., 2002). Methodology This was an exploratory, inductive study of the change process over two years. During the required MBA course called Managerial Assessment and Development (Boyatzis, 1994, 1995), first-year students went through a systematic assessment and development process. At the beginning of the semester, students were assigned to small groups called executive action teams (EATs) of about 12 students based on a stratified random sample of their learning styles (Kolb, 1984). Two EATs (about 26 students) were asked to participate in this research study. Students were periodically assessed from the beginning of the first year to the end of the second year. Special permission was sought from each student prior to conducting the study. A total of 25 out of 26 students who were solicited for the study participated. Of those, 8 were women and 17 were men. The average age of the participants at the time of entry was 26 years with a median of 25 and range of 22 to 43. Five students or 20 percent of the sample were international students. Of those who participated in the study, 4 students dropped out of the study at various phases of the study. One of them was in a join BA/MBA program and graduated a year earlier. Another decided to pursue a PhD

Beat and rhythm of competency development 147

JMD 27,1

148

program instead of completing the MBA program. A third student dropped out of the program with no apparent reason at the beginning of his second year. A fourth student left the program one semester early to pursue a joint international degree at Thunderbird. Data collection The research participants were interviewed every six to eight weeks during the program for the total of ten times. In addition to the in-depth interview, a number of self-reported instruments including the Learning Skills Profile were administered. The Learning Skills Profile (LSP) is a modified Q-sort instrument designed to assess the learning skills of individuals along a variety of different professions (Boyatzis and Kolb, 1991, 1995). The LSP consists of 72 skill cards that are grouped under 12 scales and four quadrants. The 12 scales are help, sense making, information gathering, information analysis, theory, quantitative, technology, goal setting, action, initiative, leadership, and relationship skills. The participants were asked to rate their current skill level by sorting each card into one of the seven envelopes labeled from “I have no knowledge or skill in this area” to “I am a leader or creator in this area”. The in-depth interview was semi-structured interview designed to collect information on their awareness and direction of change. The interview went from general (“What’s new with you?”) to specific (“Have you looked at your learning plan recently?”). The questions were arranged to encourage interviewees to reflect on their progress of intentional change process. In addition to periodic in-depth interviews, student’s behavioral change was measured using a modified critical incident interview (Boyatzis, 1982; Flanagan, 1954; Spencer and Spencer, 1993). The interview was conducted at entry and graduation, audio taped, and coded for 16 leadership skills by advanced doctoral students and one faculty member. The interrater reliability among the coders was 0.89 (Boyatzis, 1995). Each interview was coded by two independent coders and later reconciled to full agreement with a third coder. All interviews were randomly coded to minimize any coding bias. The interview was coded for the following leadership competencies: efficiency orientation, planning, initiative, attention to detail, self-control, group management, developing others, systems thinking, pattern recognition, and social objectivity. Results A Repeated Measures Analysis of Variance with repeated contrast was performed on each Learning Skills Profile scale from Time 1 to Time 11 in order to examine the rhythm of students’ change. The multivariate test showed Help, Sense Making, Information Gathering, Information Analysis, Theory, Quantitative, Technology, Goal Setting, Action, Initiative, and Leadership scales to be statistically significant, as shown in Table I. Also the total score (sum of all the scales) was also significant, Wilk’s l ¼ 0:269, exact F (5, 16Þ ¼ 8:14, p ¼ 0:001. The univariate test of contrast between each successive period indicated that even though all but the relationship scale showed significant or near significant change between entry and graduation, the significant contributing scores came from different time periods. For Help scale, the period between T5 and T6 was statistically significant, F(1, 20Þ ¼ 6:624; p , 0.05. For Information Gathering scale, the periods between T2 and

T1 27.60 26.35 26.85 26.35 24.45 21.55 18.05 25.40 30.00 26.50 25.05 30.50 308.65

M 4.97 5.28 5.24 5.22 6.25 10.34 10.65 4.25 5.43 7.14 7.63 6.05 45.88

SD

T2 28.60 26.80 27.85 28.00 24.90 25.35 21.20 27.25 28.60 27.10 26.45 30.25 322.3

M 6.52 6.02 4.04 5.37 6.30 8.31 9.03 5.45 4.66 5.52 6.44 5.70 47.43

SD

Notes: n ¼ 20; * p , 0.05; * * p , 0.01; * * * p , 0.001

Help Sense making Information gathering Information analysis Theory Quantitative Technology Goal setting Action Initiative Leadership Relationship Total

Scales

T5 29.10 27.85 29.65 28.60 26.75 27.70 24.20 27.75 30.30 28.95 28.10 30.45 339.4

M 5.46 5.87 5.71 6.51 6.73 9.00 9.80 5.25 5.08 5.71 5.65 5.33 58.61

SD

T6 30.45 28.95 28.75 29.45 27.50 27.55 24.05 28.45 29.60 28.85 28.60 31.90 344.1

M 5.66 5.72 5.24 6.52 7.28 8.46 9.43 5.66 5.17 5.82 6.28 4.62 59.84

SD 29.70 29.80 30.05 29.85 28.75 27.80 25.25 30.10 30.00 29.95 29.05 31.65 351.9

T8 4.32 4.93 4.29 5.07 5.41 7.18 8.82 4.56 4.87 4.76 4.45 3.94 48.78

T11 30.95 30.20 31.10 31.60 30.00 29.30 26.20 30.10 31.60 31.45 30.65 32.20 365.35

M 4.63 6.03 5.24 4.92 6.55 7.60 8.28 4.79 4.21 4.36 5.25 4.53 51.41

SD

F 5.18 * * 9.06 * * * 3.09 * 11.2 * * * 4.76 * * 4.57 * * 8.05 * * * 11.3 * * * 4.51 * * 4.88 * * 7.47 * * * 1.37 8.14 * * *

Wilk’s l 0.37 0.25 0.49 0.21 0.39 0.40 0.27 0.21 0.40 0.38 0.29 0.69 0.27

Beat and rhythm of competency development 149

Table I. Repeated measures analysis of the learning skills profile for the program duration (T1 to T11)

JMD 27,1

150

T5, and T6 and T8 were nearly significant, F(1, 20Þ ¼ 3:409, p , 0.1; (1, 20Þ ¼ 2:943, p ¼ 0:1. For Information Analysis scale, the period between T8 and T11 was significant, F(1, 20Þ ¼ 11:005, p , 0.01. For Theory scale, the period between T8 and T11 was nearly significant, F(1, 20Þ ¼ 3:267, p , 0.1. For Quantitative scale, the periods between T1 and T2; T2 and T5 were statistically significant, and T8 and T11 was nearly significant, F(1, 20Þ ¼ 6:185; p ,0.05, F(1, 20Þ ¼ 5:663; p , 0.05, F(1, 20Þ ¼ 3:577; p , 0.1, respectively. For Technology scale, the periods between T1 and T2; T2 and T5 were significant, F(1, 20Þ ¼ 6:45, p , 0.05 and F(1, 20Þ ¼ 10:059, p , 0.01, respectively. For Goal Setting, the period between T6 and T8 was significant, F(1, 20Þ ¼ 7:361, p , 0.05. For Action scale, the period between T8 and T11 was statistically significant, F(1, 20Þ ¼ 6:050, p , 0.05. For Initiative scale, the period between T2 and T5 showed near significant change, F(1, 20Þ ¼ 3:122, p , 0.1, and the period between T8 and T12 showed significant change, F(1, 20Þ ¼ 4:43, p , 0.05. For Leadership scale, the period between T2 and T5 was nearly significant, F(1, 20Þ ¼ 3:561, p , 0.1, and the period between T8 and T11 was significant, F(1, 20Þ ¼ 7:795, p , 0.05. For Relationship scale, the period between T5 and T6 was nearly significant, F(1, 20Þ ¼ 2:949, p ¼ 0:1. Finally, for the total score, the period between T2 and T5 showed nearly significant change and the period between T8 and T11 was significant, F(1, 20Þ ¼ 3:243, p , 0.1 and F(1, 20Þ ¼ 7:057, p , 0.05 respectively. These findings are summarized in Table II. The overall improvement observed by graduation seemed to be coming substantially and equally from the first year (8/19 changes) and the second year (9/19 changes), with some changes from the summer (2/19 changes). Furthermore, certain types of competencies were developed much earlier in the program (e.g., technology and quantitative) while other competencies were developed during the summer break (e.g., help and relationships) or toward the end of the program (e.g., informational analysis, theory, and goals and action). This might be attributable to the structure of the program: Eighty percent of the courses taught in the first semester could be considered technical and quantitative. The improvement could have been reinforced by the fact that most study participants came into the program with those two at a lower level than others, as shown in Figure 1.

T1

Table II. Summary of competency development from the learning skills profile

Help Sense Information gathering Information analysis Theory Quantitative Technology Goal setting Action Initiative Leadership Relationship Total scores Notes: * p , 0.1; * * p , 0.05

T2

T5

T6

T8

** *

** **

* ** * *

** ** **

** ** **

* * * *

**

Beat and rhythm of competency development 151

Figure 1. Learning skills profile time series

The rhythm and flow of students’ competency development was also examined by looking at several characteristics of the MBA students including their career expectations and the flow of their experiences during the program. The first characteristic examined was a person’s expectation regarding their career aspirations. Students were classified into three broad categories based on their career aspirations mentioned in their interviews during the first semester: career changers, career enhancers, and career seekers, as shown in Table III. Career changers had already embarked on one career but wished to change their careers. They tended to be more mature and had at least several years of work experience. They came into the program with some sense of career direction. They wanted to use the program as a transition to a different career path.

n Age at entry % Female % Married GMAT total score Undergraduate GPA

Changers

Enhancers

Explorers

10 28.1 20 33a 578a 3.01b

5 27.2 0 25c 555c 2.57d

7 23.7 71 29 545 3.11e

Notes: a n ¼ 9; b n ¼ 6; c n ¼ 4; d n ¼ 1; e n ¼ 5

Table III. Demographics of career changers, enhancers, and explorers

JMD 27,1

152

The career enhancers were the ones who wanted to utilize their MBA to enhance their careers once they returned to their already chosen field. Most of the international students belonged to this category. Most international students were sponsored by their companies and came here to learn more about American management system as well as American lifestyle. They often called this “internationalizing”. Others who belonged to this category had already lined up jobs after graduation either through family or network ties. The career explorers were still in the exploratory phase of their career. They were mostly straight out of college, or had not had a full-time job prior to entering the program. Given their different career expectations, it was asked whether career changers, enhancers, and explorers perceived following a somewhat different path of competency development during the program. For this analysis, a Time £ Career Expectation Category Repeated Measures Analysis of Variance with repeated contrast was performed on each LSP scale as well as Total Scores from T1 to T11. The multivariate test indicated that Help (Wilk’s l ¼ 0:339, exact F(5, 13Þ ¼ 5:069, p , 0.01), Sense making (Wilk’s l ¼ 0:255, exact F(5, 13Þ ¼ 7:582, p , 0.005), Information Gathering (Wilk’s l ¼ 0:519, exact F(5, 13Þ ¼ 2:414, p , 0.01), Information Analysis (Wilk’s l ¼ 0:203, exact F(5, 13Þ ¼ 10:238, p , 0.001), Theory (Wilk’s l ¼ 0:388, exact F(5, 13Þ ¼ 4:102, p , 0.05), Quantitative (Wilk’s l ¼ 0:303, exact F(5, 13Þ ¼ 5:974, p , 0.05), Technology (Wilk’s l ¼ 0:229, exact F(5, 13Þ ¼ 8:743, p , 0.01), Goal Setting (Wilk’s l ¼ 0:210, exact F(5, 13Þ ¼ 9:774, p , 0.001), Action (Wilk’s l ¼ 0:397, exact F(5, 13Þ ¼ 3:953, p , 0.05), Initiative (Wilk’s l ¼ 0:315, exact F(5, 13Þ ¼ 5:646, p , 0.001), Leadership (Wilk’s l ¼ 0:208, exact F(5, 13Þ ¼ 9:880, p , 0.001), and Total Scores(Wilk’s l ¼ 0:255, exact F(5, 13Þ ¼ 7:587, p , 0.005) were statistically significant (see Table IV for means). The results also indicated significant Time £ Career Expectation interaction on Help (Wilk’s l ¼ 0:283, exact F(10, 26Þ ¼ 2:288, p , 0.005) and Theory (Wilk’s l ¼ 0:112, exact F(10, 26Þ ¼ 5:166, p , 0.001), and near significant interaction on Leadership (Wilk’s l ¼ 0:328, exact F(10, 26Þ ¼ 1:937, p , 0.1), and Relationship (Wilk’s l ¼ 0:325, exact F(10, 26Þ ¼ 1:963, p , 0.1). Upon closer examination, several patterns among three career expectation categories emerged. The career changers overall had a lower score at the time of entry but their scores improved steadily during the program. The career enhancers had much higher entry scores than the career changers but their scores remained stable throughout the program. The scores for the career explorers fluctuated more during the program than those of changers or enhancers. It was likely that the career changers had much more realistic perception of their competencies at the time of entry, or perceived that career change required certain competencies. Career explorers had spurts of improvement throughout the program, indicating their “uncertain patterns of development”. Given the multivariate findings, a One Way Analysis of Variance was performed for each LSP time period (T1, T2, T5, T6, T8, and T11) to test for career expectation differences across the LSP scale scores. The results indicated that there was no significant difference among different LSP scales at Time 1 as shown in Table V. At Time 2, Information Gathering scale scores showed a significant difference among three categories, F(2, 24Þ ¼ 5:283, p , 0.05, and Technology scale scores showed a near significant difference, F(2, 24Þ ¼ 2:662, p , 0.1). At Time 5, Information Analysis,

LSP Scales Help Changers Enhancers Explorers Sense making Changers Enhancers Explorers Information gathering Changers Enhancers Explorers Information analysis Changers Enhancers Explorers Theory Changers Enhancers Explorers Quantitative Changers Enhancers Explorers Technology Changers Enhancers Explorers Goal setting Changers Enhancers Explorers Action Changers Enhancers Explorers Initiative Changers Enhancers Explorers Leadership Changers Enhancers Explorers Relationship Changers Enhancers Explorers Total scores Changers Enhancers Explorers

T1

T2

T5

T6

T8

T11

25.6 31.0 27.8

25.0 30.8 32.2

28.4 30.8 28.7

29.9 33.0 29.2

30.2 29.0 29.5

30.3 32.2 30.8

25.3 29.4 25.3

25.8 29.4 26.2

28.9 29.8 24.7

30.8 28.4 26.7

30.0 31.0 28.5

30.1 33.2 27.8

25.1 30.4 26.5

25.1 31.0 29.3

28.1 32.6 29.5

28.9 30.4 27.2

29.8 31.0 29.7

30.2 32.2 31.5

28.4 26.8 22.8

29.8 27.0 26.2

31.9 28.2 24.0

32.7 29.6 24.5

31.1 30.4 27.5

32.9 32.0 29.3

25.9 25.8 21.2

26.8 25.2 21.8

30.2 27.6 20.8

33.1 25.6 20.7

29.8 30.2 26.0

32.2 32.2 24.8

24.6 18.0 20.0

26.8 25.0 23.5

30.3 27.6 23.8

30.4 26.8 23.8

29.4 28.0 25.2

31.1 31.6 24.7

23.7 11.8 14.8

26.8 15.0 18.0

30.6 18.0 19.8

31.1 18.2 18.3

29.9 20.2 22.5

30.4 23.6 22.0

24.9 26.8 25.0

27.2 28.6 26.2

29.8 27.2 25.2

31.3 27.0 25.3

31.7 30.0 27.8

30.8 31.2 28.2

29.0 31.2 30.5

27.4 29.2 29.8

31.0 30.2 29.3

31.0 28.8 28.2

30.2 29.8 29.8

31.3 31.8 31.8

26.3 28.6 25.0

27.8 28.6 24.8

30.8 28.8 26.3

32.2 27.4 25.0

31.2 29.0 28.8

32.2 30.6 31.0

24.9 28.2 22.7

25.6 29.0 25.7

29.0 29.4 25.7

30.1 29.4 25.7

30.8 28.8 26.7

31.9 30.6 28.8

26.9 32.0 34.7

26.9 31.6 34.2

28.1 32.6 32.2

31.6 32.8 31.7

30.8 31.8 32.8

30.3 34.2 33.3

310.6 320.0 296.3

320.9 330.4 317.8

357.1 342.8 310.0

373.1 337.4 306.2

364.9 349.2 334.8

373.9 375.4 344.2

Beat and rhythm of competency development 153

Table IV. Time-series learning skills profile scores of career changers, enhancers, and explorers

Table V. Comparison of LSP scores of career changers, enhancers, and explorers across different time period CC . CEN . CE * *, a

CEN . CE . CC *, a

T2

CC . CE . CEN *, a

CC . CEN . CE *, b CC . CEN . CE *, b

T5

CC . CEN . CE * *, b

CC . CEN . CE * *, b

CC . CE . CEN *, a, b CC . CEN . CE * *, b

CC . CEN . CE *, b CC . CEN . CE *, a, b

T6

T8

T11

CC . CEN . CE *, b

CC . CEN . CE *, b, c

154

Notes: n: Career changers ¼ 10; Career enhancers ¼ 5; Career explorers ¼ 7; CC ¼ Career Changers, CEN ¼ Career Enhancers, CE ¼ Career Explorers; * p , 0.05. * *; p , 0.1;a Post hoc analysis shows significant contribution comes from between Career Changers and Enhancers; b Post hoc analysis shows significant contribution comes from between Career Changers and Explorers; c Post hoc analysis shows significant contribution comes from between Career Enhancers and Explorers

Help Sense Information gathering Information analysis Theory Quantitative Technology Goal setting Action Initiative Leadership Relationship Total scores

T1

JMD 27,1

Theory, and Technology scale scores showed significant differences, F(2, 24Þ ¼ 3:656, p , 0.05; F(2, 24Þ ¼ 4:059, p , 0.05; F(2, 24Þ ¼ 4:300, p , 0.05 respectively. At Time 6, Information Analysis, Theory, and Technology showed significant differences, F(2, 24Þ ¼ 5:331, p , 0.05; F(2, 24Þ ¼ 11:927, p , 0.000; F(2, 24Þ ¼ 6:462, p , 0.01 respectively. Goal Setting, Initiative, and Total Scores showed near significant differences, F(2, 24Þ ¼ 3:443, p , 0.1; F(2, 24Þ ¼ 2:926, p , 0.1; F(2, 24). At Time 8, only Technology scale scores showed near significance, F(2, 24Þ ¼ 2:712, p , 0.1. At Time 11, Theory and Technology showed significant differences, F(2, 24Þ ¼ 4:193, p , 0.05; F(2, 24Þ ¼ 3:552, p , 0.05 respectively. The biggest gap appeared at the beginning of the second year between the career changers and explorers; however, by the end of the program, most of the gaps observed earlier disappeared. The career changers, despite starting at a lower level than either enhancers or explorers on many competency areas, steadily improved their competencies throughout the program, especially during their first year and the summer. The examination of the flow of students’ experience in the graduate program revealed some interesting themes. For instance, contrary to the initial conjecture, it was not students’ sense of efficacy at the time of entry but rather their level of self-efficacy at the end of the first semester set the tone for the students during the rest of the program. Depending on the adaptation strategy employed by the students, they could be classified as operating with a survival or opportunistic mode. For students who were in the survival mode during the first semester, it was difficult for them to see beyond the short-term demands of the courses and therefore the structure imposed on them by the program. On the other hand, students who entered the program in the opportunistic mode experimented with their behaviors and explored different opportunities presented in the program during the first semester. As such, their expectation and behavior were consistent with a learning orientation mode described in the career and life stages theory proposed by Boyatzis and Kolb (1994). It was not surprising to find that students who had both learning orientation and were operating out of the opportunity mode were feeling a lot more self-efficacious at the end of the first semester. Students’ summer internship served an important role in students’ change by providing a reality check, and the on-campus recruiting facilitated students obtaining their internships; however, at times the convenience of obtaining their summer internship early in the process often curtailed students’ exploration and search efforts later in the process. Since during the internship, student had the opportunity to assess the long-term viability of their chosen career or experiment with newly acquired behaviors or competencies during the first year, those students who had found their internships early in the program often returned to their second year with a sense of “disorientation“ or “regret”. Contrary to the first year, where every aspect of their experiences (classes, new location, and new classmates) was new, the second year provided an evolutionary change for most students. One of the challenges was to find new opportunities. More importantly, it was how they perceived the familiar experiences they encountered in the second year that contributed to their learning experience. It was found that students’ perception of routine versus non-routine opportunities or experiences impacted their learning. Whether or not students perceived their experience as routine

Beat and rhythm of competency development 155

JMD 27,1

156

– “I’ve done this many times and nothing is new” or non-routine – “Every time I do that, I learn something new. It’s always a challenge” influenced their degree of change from any given event or opportunity. If the activity was perceived to be routine, then students often approach the task with high degree of efficiency and often ignored effectiveness. Students who perceived the activity as non-routine approached the activity as a learning experience and were able to articulate their learning from each experience. High and low changers The second characteristic of students explored in the study was high and low improvement in competency development. To examine this characteristic, a change measure was calculated as the sum across all competencies of the number of times the person demonstrated each competency in the graduating interview minus the number of times the person had demonstrated that competency in the entering interview. High changers (n ¼ 5) as compared to low changers (n ¼ 7) were the same age (26 years old at entry into the program), more female (60 percent v. 14 percent), and more married (40 percent v. 14 percent). The LSP data were examined first. The results indicated that as early as the end of the first semester, the high changers showed a greater degree of improvement on Information Analysis, Theory, Quantitative, Technology, Goal Setting, Initiative, and Total scores as shown in Tables VI and VII. Also consistent with the overall data, certain scales that are related to more “interpersonal” areas showed difference in later time period (T5 and T6). The competency data were then examined to see if any initial individual differences contributed toward the behavioral changes. Initial differences in the demonstration of competencies and knowledge areas were nonexistent between high and low changers. This suggested that the development of competencies depended more on students’ change process than their initial capabilities. This was further illustrated by students’ own perception of improvement at the end of the program. The high changers thought T1 Highb Lowb Mean Mean

Table VI. Comparison between high and low changers on LSP time series

t

High Mean

T2 Low Mean

t

High Mean

T5 Low Mean

t

Help 27.00 27.29 20.089 27.60 29.29 20.380 31.00 28.29 0.868 * * a Sense 26.40 26.29 0.035 28.80 24.71 0.909 30.80 28.43 0.566 Info gathering 24.40 27.86 21.057 27.00 28.71 20.757 30.00 30.71 20.202 Info analysis 29.00 25.00 1.239 33.00 25.14 3.285 * * 34.80 25.71 3.352 * * * Theory 25.80 22.43 0.914 29.40 18.43 4.139 * * * 30.40 24.71 1.689 * Quantitative 26.40 16.00 1.627 * 30.40 19.57 2.268 * * 34.00 24.43 2.153 * * Technology 25.20 11.86 1.989 * 28.20 14.43 3.552 * * * 31.20 19.14 2.665 * * Goal setting 24.80 23.14 0.607 30.20 21.71 3.305 * * * 32.20 25.43 3.448 * * * Action 31.00 28.14 1.078 28.80 27.29 0.497 33.00 29.14 1.731 * Initiative 26.20 25.14 0.225 29.60 24.57 1.906 * * 33.40 27.86 2.548 Leadership 24.20 25.00 20.175 27.40 25.14 0.518 30.20 27.71 0.939 Relationship 29.40 32.00 0.783 29.60 30.57 20.238 30.40 32.29 20.619 Total 319.80 290.14 1.288 350.00 289.57 3.135 * * * 381.40 323.86 2.61 * * Notes: * p , 0.10; * * p , 0.05; * * * p , 0.01; High changers: n ¼ 5; Low changers: n ¼ 7

Help Sense Info gathering Info analysis Theory Quantitative Technology Goal setting Action Initiative Leadership Relationship Total

High Mean

T6 Low Mean

t

30.8 32 29.8 34.8 32.2 32.6 31.4 32 30.6 32.4 30.4 32.8 381.8

29 26 28 25.6 22.8 24.2 17.2 24.2 27.8 25.2 25.4 29.6 305

0.489 1.785 * 0.519 3.137 * * * 2.57 * * 1.927 * 3.301 * * * 4.894 * * * 1.32 2.803 * * 1.549 * 1.218 4.299 * * *

High Mean

T8 Low Mean

t

31.40 32.60 30.80 33.80 31.60 32.60 32.20 32.40 31.80 32.80 31.00 32.60 385.60

28.57 29.57 29.71 28.00 24.86 23.00 19.57 26.43 27.86 27.14 27.00 31.43 323.14

0.941 0.869 0.416 2.874 * * * 2.699 * * 2.72 * * 3.055 * * 3.5 * * * 1.554 * 2.841 * * * 1.925 * * 0.409 3.4 * * *

High Mean

T11 Low Mean

t

33.60 33.80 31.80 36.80 35.80 33.80 32.20 33.40 32.60 34.80 34.40 34.60 407.60

30.14 31.00 31.71 29.86 26.71 26.71 21.43 28.29 30.14 29.71 28.57 32.71 347.00

0.936 0.72 0.022 3.196 * * * 2.676 * * 1.792 * 2.676 * * 1.94 * * 0.989 2.256 * * 1.797 * 0.702 2.22 * *

Notes: * p , 0.10; * * p , 0.05; * * * p , 0.01; High changers: n ¼ 5; Low changers: n ¼ 7

they improved more on the competencies that are considered closely related with leadership (Boyatzis, 1982; Spencer and Spencer, 1993). The low changers on the other hand, perceived they improved more on technical knowledge and skills. This trend was also replicated in the LSP data. The high changers perceived they improved more on Help, Leadership, and Theory skills. Discussion The time-series LSP results indicated that students did not perceive they were developing all of their competencies at the same time. Certain competencies such as Technology and Quantitative were improved almost immediately, whereas the SI competencies were developed toward the latter part of the program. Since those two areas were one of the lowest rated skills at the time of entry, students felt they needed to improve those competencies first. However, it was also probable that the heavy emphasis of quantitative and technology-oriented courses in the first semester contributed to or reinforced students’ change in the early part of the program. On the other hand, students perceived their SI competencies such as leadership, relationship, and help at a much higher level and therefore did not see the immediate need for development, and the program structure did not attend to this area in the beginning. It is also possible that certain competencies are more easily acquirable than others, but such question could not be answered in this research. Career Changers who had had the opportunity to reflect about their future career choice on or before the start of the program quickly jumped on their career path and were able to focus their energy and attention on their career path throughout the program. However, career explorers who were not certain of their future career direction were not able to jump start their job search. Some of the career explorers were able to take advantage of their uncertainty to explore a wide variety of opportunities. However it was not unusual for some students to follow a zigzag path. It was clear that if the late bloomers had been forced to decide on their career at the beginning of the

Beat and rhythm of competency development 157

Table VII. Comparison between high and low changers on LSP time series

JMD 27,1

158

program, they would not have made the same choices as they had later. Given that students were at different places in the career selection, the process of self-direction was helpful for those who needed time to explore and discover the “right” path for themselves. It is apparent that students who belong to the career changers group benefited most from the program. Of all the high changers, 80 percent of them were career changers, while greater than 80 percent of the low changers were either career enhancers (46 percent) or career explorers (46 percent). The results raised the question as to how we can help students who are in different stages of career selection process. The individualized learning plan each student completes at the end of the first semester might be a step in the right direction, but perhaps each student needs more coaching and counseling. The results raised certain implications for competency development. One of the findings is the relationship between opportunity utilization and intentional change. It is a question of how to maximize their learning in given opportunities as well as how to continue to expand their opportunities into new directions. For graduate management programs, it is a question of how to expand resources available to students within and outside the program as well as how to encourage students to maximize their learning within the resources provided in the program, or how to redefine the program to involve “outside” experiences. It may also be a question of students’ balancing recurring opportunities with new opportunities. In management development, an ideal development environment is where a learner is exposed to a balanced mixture of situations where both learning (new opportunities) and performance (recurring experiences) take place. Perhaps this ideal mixture of learning and performance is what makes adults grow (e.g., too much recurring experiences might lead to boredom while too much noble experiences might lead to instability and diffusion of efforts). Thus, another question is what educational institutions can do to guide or encourage students’ learning orientation or opportunistic mode. As educators, we may need to take the approach that students come to our programs to learn, not to receive certification. Professional management programs should not only train their students for leadership competencies but also train their students for life by encouraging life-long learning and change. The emotional roller coaster experienced by students each semester, added to the trials and tribulations of the first semester, may build character for some students, but may in fact inhibit some students’ learning. Students who would like to be learning-oriented often succumb to the performance pressures of the first semester. Certain programs have started to experiment with either a pass-fail system, qualitative feedback, or a portfolio system, but this issue still warrants further reflection. This study raised a few interesting implications for intentional changers. It will be interesting to discover what strategies or processes are used by intentional changers or learners to deal with the limited time resources in the program? How can you balance short-term objectives with long-term objectives? Is your outlook different from those who are not intentional changers? In the same vein, what made some of you more proactive than others? Rather than being stumped or stymied by limited resources or familiar opportunities, some students continued to learn from their experiences and maintain their sense of individuality in the face of competing demands and time pressures.

The longitudinal study was conducted initially as an exploratory study, and the findings reported here should not be treated as universals but rather multiple snapshots of students’ experience in a graduate management program. Furthermore, any conclusions drawn from using statistical analyses should be treated as probabilistic, not deterministic, especially given the small sample size. This research employed a homogenous sample. The research was limited to one educational institutional setting (Weatherhead School of Management) and one area of career focus (management). WSOM students could have been “pre-selected” in terms of their socioeconomic status, school’s geographical location, and the reputation of the school. It could be argued that experiences they faced during the program were unique and different from the experiences faced by other students in different programs, and therefore could not be generalized onto other samples. The second limitation of this study was the small sample size (approximately 25). When the study calls for “depth” rather than “breadth” as a result of the topic selected, the sample size may need to be compromised for the type and amount of information that can be collected. The larger sample size would however have increased the statistical power of the findings. The results indicated the importance of students pursuing intentional change in the program and for adults in any competency development program. It was often easy for students to become passive and overtaken by the program structure. Especially, during the first semester, it was easy for many students to see only the short-term benefits of coursework. In addition, the results from the Learning Skills Profile showed students developed different skills at different time period of the program. However, the current research could not infer from the data the underlying causal relationships between competency acquisition, program structure, subject content, and initial competency demonstrated level. Future studies that isolate the competency or knowledge acquisition process can contribute toward our increased understanding of students’ learning and program design. The results from such study and additional studies on individual differences can shed some light about why certain individuals seem to be more opportunistic than others, and why certain individuals are more inclined to grow and develop. References Boyatzis, R.E. (1982), The Competent Manager, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY. Boyatzis, R.E. (1994), “Stimulating self-directed learning through the Managerial Assessment and Development course”, Journal of Management Education, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 304-23. Boyatzis, R.E. (1995), “Cornerstones of change: building the path for self-directed learning”, in Boyatzis, E., Cowen, S.S. and Kolb, D.A. (Eds), Innovation in Professional Education: Steps on a Journey from Teaching to Learning, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA, pp. 50-91. Boyatzis, R.E. (2001), “Developing emotional intelligence”, in Cherniss, C. and Goleman, D. (Eds), The Emotionally Intelligent Workplace, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA, pp. 234-53. Boyatzis, R.E. (2006), “Intentional change theory from a complexity perspective”, Journal of Management Development, Vol. 25 No. 7, pp. 607-23. Boyatzis, R.E. and Kolb, D.A. (1991), “Assessing individuality in learning: the Learning Skills Profile”, Educational Psychology, Vol. 11, pp. 279-95. Boyatzis, R.E. and Kolb, D.A. (1994), “Modes of growth and adaptation throughout career and life”, unpublished manuscript, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH.

Beat and rhythm of competency development 159

JMD 27,1

160

Boyatzis, R.E. and Kolb, D.A. (1995), “From learning styles to learning skills: the Executive Skills Profile”, Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 10 No. 5, pp. 3-17. Boyatzis, R.E. and McKee, A. (2005), Resonant Leadership: Renewing Yourself and Connecting with Others through Mindfulness, Hope, and Compassion, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA. Boyatzis, R.E. and Renio, A. (1989), “The impact of an MBA program on managerial abilities”, Journal of Management Education, Vol. 8, pp. 66-77. Boyatzis, R.E., Smith, M. and Blaize, N. (2006), “Developing sustainable leaders through coaching and compassion”, Academy of Management Journal on Learning and Education, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 8-24. Boyatzis, R.E., Stubbs, E.C. and Taylor, S.N. (2002), “Learning cognitive and emotional intelligence competencies through graduate management education”, Academy of Management Journal on Learning and Education, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 150-62. Boyatzis, R.E., Leonard, D., Rhee, K. and Wheeler, J. (1996), “Competencies can be developed, but not in the way we thought”, Capability, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 25-41. Boyatzis, R.E., Baker, A., Leonard, D., Rhee, K. and Thompson, L. (1995), “Will it make a difference? Assessing a value-added, outcome-oriented, competency-based professional program”, in Boyatzis, R.E., Cowen, S.S. and Kolb, D.A. (Eds), Innovation in Professional Education: Steps on a Journey from Teaching to Learning, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA, pp. 167-202. Carver, C.S. and Scheier, M.F. (1982), “Control theory: a useful conceptual framework for personality – social, clinical, and health psychology”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 92, pp. 111-35. Cherniss, C. and Adler, M. (2000), Promoting Emotional Intelligence in Organizations, American Society for Training and Development, Washington, DC. Flanagan, J.C. (1954), “The critical incident technique”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 51, pp. 327-35. Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R. and McKee, A. (2002), Primal Leadership: Realizing the Power of Emotional Intelligence, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA. Higgins, E. (1987), “Self-discrepancy: a theory relating self and affect”, Psychological Review, Vol. 94, pp. 319-40. Kolb, D.A. (1984), Experiential Learning: Experience as a Source of Learning and Development, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Spencer, L.M. and Spencer, S.M. (1993), Competence at Work: Models for Superior Performance, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY. Further reading Boyatzis, R.E., Renio-McKee, A. and Thompson, L. (1995), “Past accomplishments: establishing the impact and baseline of earlier programs” in Boyatzis, R.E., Cowen, S.S. and Kolb, D.A. (Eds), Innovation in Professional Education: Steps on a Journey from Teaching to Learning, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA, pp. 95-119. Corresponding author Kenneth S. Rhee can be contacted at: [email protected]

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected] Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

Call for papers Journal of Management Development Special Issue on

The use and abuse of storytelling in organizations Guest Editors Adrian Carr, Principal Research Fellow, University of Western Sydney, Australia Cheryl Lapp, President, Labyrinth Consulting, British Columbia, Canada In 2003, it was estimated there were some 15,000 fulltime and part-time management or leadership coaches world-wide; and growing at a rate of about 40 per cent per year (Arnaud, 2003, p. 1133). As a process of adult education in the workplace, the mere need for coaching can be taken to infer that the learner or prote´ge´ is somehow deficient: ‘‘Subordinates must be advised on how to do their jobs better and to be coached to better performance. Coaching problems are usually caused by lack of ability, insufficient information or understanding, or incompetence on the part of the subordinates’’ (Whetton and Cameron, 1998/2002, p. 222). More and more we can note that workplace adult educators such as coaches use storytelling as learning and development tools to identify these deficiencies. ‘‘‘The shortest route between two people is a story’, says Dianna Carr, a senior storyteller at Envisioning + Storytelling, one of the world’s most successful story management consultancies’’ (Taylor, 2006, p. 2). Whilst some are very skeptical about the idea that individual and group performance can be improved through coaching, others have viewed coaching as a panacea for much that causes organizations to fail. Some have even suggested that coaching is a pragmatic way of filling the void that has been created by the failure of management and organization theory to provide managers with unambiguous advice about how to manage. The stories that the coaches draw upon to assist leaders and managers to improve their performance, in our view, is not really storytelling as such, but STORYSELLING (Carr and Lapp, 2005a, b, 2006, 2007; Lapp and Carr, 2007). Much of the management literature about stories and storytelling treat stories as

though they are simply ‘‘neutral’’ objects rather than exploring the manner in which the story and dialogue is constructed to convince the ‘‘listener’’ to accept the story. The crisis of confidence that may be generated by the perceived need to engage a coach, in our view, creates part of the psychological conditions for stories to be effectively ‘‘sold’’ to the listener. Others have carried cautionary notes and pleas to understand the motivation and psychodynamic processes that are engaged in the telling of stories, in the literature on storytelling. Gabriel (2004, p. 29), for example, suggests: Instead of accepting all voices of experience as equally valid and equally worth of attention, I would argue that it is the job of researchers to interrogate experiences, seeking to examine not only their origins, but also those blind spots, illusions, and self-deceptions that crucially and legitimately make them up. Far from being an unqualified source of knowledge, experience must be treated with the same skepticism and suspicion with which we approach all other sources of authoritative knowledge.

At the present time, what eludes us is breadth and depth of analysis of how coaches use stories and for what reasons. The purpose of this call is to identify and analyse the instrumentality of storytelling in organizations. In so doing, the invitation for contributors is to explore connections among and including but not limited to: storytelling; storyselling; critical theory and psychodynamics as they pertain to leadership and management development in organizations. It is intended that this special issue of JMD will be published in 2010. This is an early call for papers with the

Call for papers

References

Carr, A.N. and Lapp, C.A. (2007), ‘‘The ontology of emergent stories of leadership in organisations: understanding the significance of the ‘third man’ (beyond the I-We dialectic of George Herbert Mead)’’, EJROT – The Electronic Journal of Radical Organizational Theory, 5th Biannual International Critical Management Studies Conference Publications, Manchester, July 11-13, 2007, available at: www.mngt.waikato.ac.nz/ejrot/ cmsconference/2007/proceedings/emergentstory/ proceedings_emergentstory.asp

Arnaud, G. (2003), ‘‘A coach or a couch? A Lacanian perspective on executive coaching and consulting’’, Human Relations, Vol. 56, pp. 1131-54.

Gabriel, Y. (2004), ‘‘Introduction’’, in Gabriel, Y. (Ed.), Myths, Stories, and Organizations, Oxford University Press, New York, NY, pp. 1-9.

Carr, A.N. and Lapp, C.A. (2005a), ‘‘Wanted for breaking and entering organisational systems in complexity: Eros and Thanatos’’, Emergence: A Journal of Complexity Issues in Organisations and Management, Vol. 7, Nos. 3 and 4, pp. 43-52.

Lapp, C.A. and Carr, A.N. (2007), ‘‘The dialectics of storytelling and storyselling: sometimes the facts get in the way of the story’’, EJROT – The Electronic Journal of Radical Organizational Theory, 5th Biannual International Critical Management Studies Conference Publications, Manchester, July 11-13, 2007, available at: www.mngt. waikato.ac.nz/ejrot/cmsconference/2007/proceedings/ emergentstory/proceedings_emergentstory.asp

guest editors requiring submissions no later than April 30, 2009. Contributors should send their manuscripts by email to both Adrian Carr ([email protected]) and Cheryl Lapp ([email protected]). Contributors should consult the web page for JMD at The Notes for Contributors (which also show how the references should be formatted as required by the publisher) that can be found at: www.emeraldinsight.com/info/journals/jmd/notes.htm

Carr, A.N. and Lapp, C.A. (2005b), ‘‘Wanted for breaking and entering organisational systems in complexity: Eros and Thanatos’’, in Richardson, K., Snowden, D., Goldstein, J.A. and Allen P.M. (Eds), Emergence: Complexity & Organisation (2005 Annual), ISCE Publishing, Mansfield, MA, pp. 89-104. Carr, A.N. and Lapp, C.A. (2006), Leadership Is a Matter of Life and Death: The Psychodynamics of Eros and Thanatos Working in Organisations, Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke.

Taylor, T. (2006), ‘‘Individually wrapped: what we consume brands each of us as the ultimate product: a boutique individual’’, enRoute, June, pp. 1-3, available at: enroutemag.com/e/june06/essay_a.html Whetton, D.A. and Cameron, K.S. (2002), Developing Management Skills, Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ (originally published in 1998).