Consider the following scenario:
A CEO with high emotional intelligence took over a medium-sized company. He had the vision to build the company, move into the global market, and merge into integrative markets and decentralized operations. His attributes were warm, generous, people-oriented, imaginative, daring, and humorous. His enthusiasm was boundless and spread like wildfire. His vision enabled him to focus on the long-term goals, and he celebrated the small wins with his colleagues. He was encouraging and open-minded. He surrounded himself with a diverse group of talented people, empowered them, recognized their strengths, and used this to motivate and inspire. He challenged the process, yet walked the walk and talked the talk. He had personal will and humility and acknowledged his mistakes. He recognized that charting a different course did not mean failure but renewed energy. He built the company over a 20-year span into a recognized leader in the industry. However, it was time to retire and turn over the reigns.
The successor was a CEO with low emotional intelligence. The new CEO was bright and had amazing technical skills. He was chosen for his perceived confidence, trustworthiness, and political savvy. However, he was characterized as loyal, stiff, realistic, and more task-oriented. He had a tendency to place blame on others, micromanage, and had difficulty reading people. He was oblivious to his effect on others and the change in culture. He centralized decision making due to his need to micromanage and his lack of trust in others. Within three years, the organization was failing.
QUESTION:
1. Analyze the relationship of emotional intelligence, personality, culture, and leadership in the scenario.
2. Examine this question through the elements of emotional intelligence and the differences between managers and leaders.
3. Evaluate the link between emotional intelligence and culture – does it exist or not. Explain your rationale.
4. Relate to leadership theory, emotional intelligence theory, and culture.
5. Include at least two scholarly resources to support critical thinking.