Emotional Intelligence | Stevehein.com
Travis Bradberry
* Under construction
I decided to start this page after I saw how the Wikipedia page on EI has become an advertisement for Travis and his products.
I feel discouraged to see someone coming straight out of a PhD program in Psychology then both endorsing and profitting from Daniel Goleman's definition of emotional intelligence, while largely igorning the work of Mayer and Salovey, the most respected researchers in the field of emotional intelliegence.
Examples of Claims Made by Travis and his Marketing People
Example 1
Decades of research show that EQ predicts success on the job over any other skill, including IQ and technical expertise. For leadership positions, EQ accounts for nearly 80% of job performance
Source: http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache:hNl26STQ7tQJ:www.business.uq.edu.au/research/emonet/resources/can_you_develop_eq_online.pdf+bradberry+emonet&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2
Example 2
The Emotional Intelligence Appraisal™ is a survey suite that measures emotional intelligence (EQ) quickly and accurately.
....the Emotional Intelligence Appraisal™ is a valid and reliable test of job performance..
http://www.eiquickbook.com/me/help.php#q14
Example 3
An analysis comparing leader emotional intelligence scores on the test to key financial indicators shows leaders who are high in emotional intelligence are 20% more productive than their low EQ counterparts. This amounts to $250,000 more productivity for each leader high in emotional intelligence.
http://www.eiquickbook.com/me/help.php#q17
Evidence that Travis endorses the work of Daniel Goleman
from http://www.e-learningguru.com/interviews/interview_bradberry.htm
Kevin: Travis, the focus of much of your work is on Emotional Intelligence and there's a lot of people out there that would probably say, you know, Daniel Goleman's got that thing cornered. How did you decide that you had something to contribute in this area, and what's your angle with emotional intelligence?
Travis: Yeah, I think it really relates to what we're talking about in terms of the purpose of TalentSmart because we like Dan Goleman's model, I mean all our products and assessment is created in his model with his permission.
(This surprised me to find because I when I first started reading things about Travis's products and I read something about the four parts of EI, I assumed he meant Mayer and Salovey's four branches
Kevin: You published the EI Quick Book with Fireside; when was it released?
Travis: It was released on June 7.
Kevin: What's the reaction been thus far?
Travis: The reaction has been good. I think the core of the book is the work that we've done with our Emotional Intelligence Appraisal Assessment which is a twenty-eight question measure of Daniel Goleman's model of emotional intelligence...
Here is an article which talks about how fast Bradberry started making money once he got his PhD.
http://www.fastcompany.com/fast50_05/profile/?bradberry88
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8214937/site/newsweek/
mentions his wife, but doesn't name her. I am wondering if Greaves is his wife.
Some letters Travis wrote on EMONET
Meg,
I know that some ei instruments, when validated for selection,
are powerful
predictors of job performance. Reuven Bar-On's EQ-I is an
excellent example
with many studies showing its powerful predictive validity. This
exacerbates
the problem because some ei tests are quite good (and in my
opinion) are
worthwhile. Unfortunately, at least where I live, there are a lot
of limits
on what you can and can't do for fear of liability. There is no
law
forbidding the use of psychological assessments for selection,
but the
number of lawsuits is on the rise. I'm privy to some information
on the kind
of $ that big companies are paying to defend such suits
nationwide in the US
(more than 3/4 of which are settled out of court for large lump
sums) and I
have to take the stance to protect my clients against liability
as a test
publisher. Well, I don't have to (and I'm not saying I'm right).
I just
choose to and it helps that my test was just released in 2003 at
the start
of all this. Makes it easy to take a stand.
I think "emotional intelligence" is particularly
vulnerable because it
sounds "bad" to the layperson. I mean, it sounds like
something a shrink
would use. I'm guessing "personality" has liabilities
as well being in the
psychological domain, though the term is not the hot button that
emotional
intelligence is. I met with a client last week who uses Gallup's
"Strengths
Finder" assessment for selection. If I was defending a suit,
I'd much rather
explain that I assessed someone's strengths to a judge than their
emotional
intelligence.
Travis
"Travis Bradberry, Ph.D."
<
trb@TALENTSMART.COM> | Save Address
DATE: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 17:23:03 -0800
TO: <EMONET-L @ LIST.PACE.EDU>
SUBJECT: Re: EI used for selection
>>> trb@TALENTSMART.COM 02/26/04 12:36p.m.
>>>
We've tested more than 20,000 people worldwide using the
Emotional
Intelligence Appraisal, a 28-item test that delivers an overall
EQ score and
a score for each of the four skills from Daniel Goleman's model,
as seen in
Primal Leadership.
Looking at the worldwide sample, we find:
1) Slightly higher scores for women (statistically significant
difference in
scores from men)
2) Non-significant difference for region worldwide
3) Small differences for job function (only engineers and the
unemployed
scored significantly lower than other groups)
4) HUGE differences for job title. Specifically, EQ climbs as you
go from
individual contributors, to line supervisors, to middle
management, and then
it drops sharply as you move from Directors, to V.P.'s, Senior
V.P.'s, and
C-level execs. A very interesting graph.
Most of the findings are summarized in the following doc, and the
graph of
EQ and job title is there as well. It's the second white paper
down in the
left-hand column:
http://www.talentsmart.com/learn/
Best,
~ Travis
Travis Bradberry <trb @
TALENTSMART.COM> | Save Address
DATE: Tue, 11 May 2004 16:46:54 -0700
TO: <EMONET @ LISTSERV.BUSINESS.UQ .EDU.AU>
SUBJECT: Re: EI Abilities and Effective Leadership -
Recent Research + MSCEIT
I don't see an over abundance of promotion in the EI assessment
world. I see the opposite. But, when it comes to leadership or
personality assessments, it seems that consumers know all about
them and are quite opinionated as to why they'll use the CCL 360
or the PDI 360 or for "personality" the DISC versus
extended DISC versus MBTI versus the Strengths Finder or
whatever!
But the same consumers are "assessing" the EQ of
thousands of employees using a cosmo quiz their local consultant
made-up the week before to add to the training program. Too many
consumers are far from understanding the theoretical and
methodological distinctions that we discuss on this list--and
many of them that I've run into don't have the same problem when
it comes to other forms of assessment. I think promotion (My
dictionary defines as "encouragement for the growth or
development of something") is precisely the problem.
Consumers aren't discriminating because they know nothing about
it. I scratch my head when a VP of HR walks up to me at a trade
show and we start talking about EQ and he or she says "you
can test for this stuff?" <cringe>
Speaking of which, Peter Salovey gave me a new book at the Nexus
conference in January that he and Jack Mayer edited which reviews
and summarizes the latest research on the MSCEIT. Susan, it's
probably just what you are looking for. Here is the description
on Amazon and the link to it:
" Emotional Intelligence: Key Readings on the Mayer and
Salovey Model
Book Description
This book of readings, collected and edited by the co-founders of
Emotional Intelligence, Dr. Peter Salovey and Dr. John Mayer,
introduces the theory, measurement, and applications of the EI
ability model. Salovey and Mayer carefully selected their most
up-to-date book chapters and peer-reviewed articles to present
the transition from origination, development, and present state
of Emotional Intelligence.
amazon.com/exec
Best,
TravisBradberry
jul 2 not in top five hundred when i added him to the site.