News
December 19 - New site on Emotional Literacy in UK
A relatively new site (as of December 2001) to check out if you are interested in emotional literacy programs is http://www.nelig.com/ This is a site representing a group in England which is advocating a national emotional literacy program in the schools. They are defining emotional literacy much broader than how I define it on my site. They define it closer to a combination of emotional intelligence development, and social and emotional skills or competencies and character education. This is preferable, though, to calling it all emotional intelligence, as many have done. It currently does not have a lot of practical information on it with the exception of a few articles, but I expect they will be adding more resources in the future.
December 13 - Decisions always have an emotional component
From mindful-things.com/
Dec.
3, 2001 - Every time we make a decision, we use the emotional
part of our brain as well as the rational, no matter what we're
trying to decide. Dean Shibata, assistant professor of radiology
at the University of Washington in Seattle, scanned the brains of
six men and five women while they decided whether to take a warm
bath or eat a good meal, then choose between being in a car
accident or being robbed. The latter decision was supposed to be
based entirely on cost. The area that manages emotion was active
during both decisions, which goes some way toward explaining why
people with brain damage to the emotional area have difficulty
making normal everyday decisions. Dr. Shibata presented his
research findings at the recent annual neeting of the
Radiological Society of North America.
Here is another clip from an Australian paper on the same thing:
It's only logical to be a bit emotional
Seattle: Mr Spock notwithstanding, it seems there is no such thing as the completely logical mind. Research indicates that the mind engages its emotional centres even when making simple rational decisions, such as whether to wear a seatbelt, or choose cake rather than cod liver oil.
Scientists used to believe that emotional and logical decisions were made in different compartments of the brain, but brain scan imaging now shows that the two are "wired"together.
Dr. Dean Shibata, of the University of Washington, said: "Our imaging research supports the idea that every time you have to make choices in your personal life you need to 'feel' the projected emotional outcome of each choice-subconsciously, or intuitively".
You then make a choice based on your reading of that projected feeling, siad Dr. Shibata, who presented his finding s at a scientific meetings in Chicago.
The findings could eventually help improve drug treatments for mental illness and help surgeons to navigate around the brain.
They could also help explain why people who have suffered strokes or brain tumours in the prefrontal lobes of their brains, where emotions are processed, can have such a difficult time making even routine decisions, such as scheduling doctors'appointments, Dr Shibata said.
In the study, participants had their brains scanned while thinking about specific questions. First they were asked questions such as, "Which would you rather have- a car or a bike?" Next they were asked an impersonal question, such as "Which costs more, a car or a bike?"
The brain scans showed more activity in the ventromedial frontal lobe when people were making decision about preference, even though, on the surface, the preference decisions did not seem, particularly emotional.
December 2 - Note to EMONET members
In the past few days my name was mentioned a couple of times. I was called a disgruntled critic and my page on Dan Goleman was called an irate attack, if my memory serves.
I feel a little attacked and defensive myself, so I want to make this statement. I also feel misunderstood, so I want to help people understand me, if they are open to such understanding.
As for being disgruntled, yes, I would say it is fair to call me disgruntled at times. I will explain a few reasons why I sometimes feel disgruntled. But first I want to add that I feel labeled. Feeling labeled also feels offensive to me. I feel offended because there is more to me than my disgruntledness. I also feel a desire to make a positive change, for example, and I believe I am more than a critic. As I see it I am also providing valuable resources and information to many people, particularly those who do not have ready access to university libraries, as well as providing my own original ideas and sharing my own personal experiences.
As for labeling someone in general, I believe that labeling anyone hurts both the person labeled and the person doing the labeling. It creates an overly-narrow picture of the person labeled. Therefore it tends to misrepresent the person since it takes the whole of a person and reduces it to just one part (or perhaps two parts in my case). This hurts the person who labels because it effectively puts an end to their attempts to understand the person. Labeling serves as a shortcut to understanding, or pseudo-understanding. For example, when one asks why bin Laden might attack an office building and the answer is because he is "evil" or "crazy" then the labeler needs look no further for understanding and explanation. There is always more to a person than his label indicates, however. We all have feelings, needs, thoughts and beliefs which drive our behavior.
As I say this I realize I have labeled people myself so I do not feel self-righteous. Instead, I feel more self-aware and more committed to reducing my use of labeling.
As far as why I sometimes feel disgruntled, first I want to help others understand that my negative feelings often serve as the fuel which motivates me to write. By the way, it was also implied that my criticism of other writers in the field is not emotionally intelligent. I won't argue with this. I don't claim to be "emotionally intelligent" myself, though of course I would like to think of myself as such, as I believe everyone else would like to think of themselves, just as we all like to think of ourselves of intelligent.
When someone says or implies I am not emotionally intelligent, I do feel personally attacked and hurt. I assume, though, that this is exactly how the other person wants me to feel, as well as discredited, perhaps. Rationally, I understand that whoever says such things says them because they themselves feel hurt or threatened. I can understand this, but I would suggest that they express their feelings more directly. This is one area in which I may be setting a positive example, perhaps especially for those in academia who have little exposure to this style of communication. (Note on me and EI tests)
What I will say is that I am very emotional and very emotionally sensitive. Some psychologists would probably say I was bi-polar, in fact, and have me on medication. I am quite proud, though, of my commitment to managing my emotions with out drugs. I can't say I am always proud of how I have managed them, but at least I have managed them without drugs. Writing for me is definitely a form of therapy. I feel comfortable with others viewing what I write as partly the result of disgruntlement. In fact, I feel comfortable with others knowing that I at times feel intense resentment, rebelliousness and defiance. I believe, though, that there are valid reasons for such feelings, and at times these feelings help bring about needed social change. I am reminded of Maslow's provocative question: What shall we say of a well-adjusted slave?
I will share a few of the reasons for my feelings, in case you are not familiar with my background. First, I consider myself to have been emotionally and psychologically abused or at least damaged by my family. Even when in my thirties I felt mocked, judged, disapproved of, lectured to, invalidated, and rejected by members of my family. I now have very little contact with any of my family, of which I was the last of six children. In other words, as I was growing up I had 7 people judging me, telling what to do, etc. This is one logical reason I may at times feel resentful of authority and abuses of power.
While in public school I was hit with a board by the authority figures on two different occasions. Once when I was around 10 years old and once around 12. They called this being paddling, but I believe "paddling" is what you do in a canoe not something you call hitting a child with a board. Simply put, I resent being hit and I believe no child ever deserves to be hit.
At age 18 I was sexually abused by one of my university professors. The way the university responded by trying to protect itself instead of doing anything to investigate the abuse greatly lowered my respect for academia in general. In fact, it definitely caused some strong resentment for a time.
There have been many, many other instances when I challenged and questioned authority and the prevailing norms. From my experiences I did indeed build up a deep reservoir of resentment. This resentment helps explain my disgruntledness and irateness, and I ask for the understanding if not compassion of those who would otherwise judge me as simply a "disgruntled critic."
Beyond that, though, I want to add that I do view the field of emotional intelligence with almost a religious-type reverence. I have no other "religion" and I do not believe in supernatural higher powers. I simply believe in evolution and nature. We all need something to believe in though, and while I somewhat share Reuven Bar-On's fear that the field has become too much like a religious warground, it is this belief-inspired passion which drives me to try to make a difference where I can. I realize that my passion is at once one of my greatest potential assets and greatest potential liabilities.
Managing this passion is something I continue to strive at and continually desire to improve. I feel open to any constructive feedback, in fact, and I invite EMONET members to contact me personally if they so choose. I realize that many feel threatened by my unorthodox approach to this field and perhaps to life in general, but I will respect those who wish to enter into a serious dialogue with me about their concerns.
One reason, by the way, that I do feel so passionate about this field and about protecting its integrity, is that the work of Mayer, Salovey and Caruso, have given me the best theoretical framework I have found within which to organize my own beliefs. It has also provided me with the best working model to guide me in understanding myself and managing my own and others' emotions.
The work of Daniel Goleman, however, causes me to feel cynical and skeptical. I feel offended by what I perceive as the misuse of his power and influence and his misrepresentation of the academic work in the field. I also feel resentful of those who are profiting financially from the term emotional intelligence, particularly since I am giving away virtually all of my own ideas and efforts. When I see the EI Consortium drop their link to my site and I look at the some of the links which they currently have on their site under the guise of being helpful resources, and I consider the kinds of money the members and their friends are making from the interest in EI, my feelings of offense and resentment do sometimes reach the level of irateness.
But as my influence in the field and in society grows, as I spend more time away from the USA and as my own healing process moves forward, I feel myself feeling less negative and more positive. I feel more cooperative and less disgruntled and irate. Perhaps I will take another look at my page on Dan Goleman one day, for example. For now though I simply want to sincerely invite anyone who has any comments about how I can improve my site to contact me directly.
I have little doubt that some who have concerns with my site are afraid of contacting me since I am somewhat unpredictable as well as unconventional. I can understand this fear and I suppose for some in academia it is threatening to have someone from the outside criticizing their work and the work of their peers, especially when my site is now so highly ranked and my methods are so unconventional. (Such as my self-disclosure and expressing my true feelings with direct feeling words.) The web has allowed a new kind of exposure to what is traditionally a fairly secluded profession. I personally believe this has many potential benefits, yet I am also aware that it is possible for me to abuse my power, to act hypocritically, irresponsibly etc. This is another reason I invite others to send me their honest feedback since is obviously hard to see oneself in an objective light. This is why I feel appreciative when I get constructive criticism, as I believe each of you do when there is an underlying desire for the advancement of not only your own fields, but of humanity in general.
November 2
Sept 13 Fourth work exchange student visits
My fourth work exchange student, Sofie Janssens from Belgium, has been helping me with lots of things including typing, translation (from English to French), cleaning out my shed, cutting firewood and doing Internet research.
Sofie is my fourth visitor this year in Quebec. I also have had visitors from Australia, Montreal and New Foundland. Each student has helped me in their own way.
An online magazing for human resource managers, HR.com, recently published my first article on the web outside of my own site. I feel excited and proud! In the article I give what I believe is my best written statement yet on the problems with Goleman's definition of EI. I present a chart which I am quite proud of that summarizes what I see as the differences between Goleman's model and the Mayer Salovey model.
The editor of HR.com writes:
Daniel Goleman has come under some sharp criticism for how he promotes emotional intelligence. If you care about EQ then you should read Steve Hein's article on Understanding Emotional Intelligence.
You can see the article by logging in to the HR.com system as a guest, or by using my user name and password which are:
Username: steve.hein Password: belinda
The URL is hr.com/hrcom/index.cfm/WeeklyMag/94A83EB2-59C3-11D5-9AC6009027E0248F (now a broken link - Jan 2012)
You can also search HR.com for "emotional intelligence" to find the article. (Jan 2012 note - I haven't been able to find the article lately)
June 30 MSCEIT Availability
In May of 2001 I spoke with Jack Mayer and David Caruso about why the MSCEIT test was taking so long to be released by MHS. I felt very frustrated with what I heard. MHS has been promising to release the MSCEIT test for what seems to me to be a very long time. In May I was told that MHS was promising the test would be released in the "Second Quarter" of this year (IE by June). I wanted to hear directly from MHS, so I sent this message on May 13:
----
Hi,
I am the editor of the eqi.org site on emotional intelligence. I
would like to know approximately when the MSCEIT test will be
available. Many of my site visitors have written to ask me about
this.
Thanks.
Steve Hein
--
This was the reply I got:
--
Right now the MSCEIT
is in data collection. Any of your site visitors
interested in using a research version and making their data
available to us
should contact our research department via email.
Jodi Douglass -
Client Services Representative
Multi-Health Systems
Phone: 416-492-2627, ext. 322
Canadian toll free: 800-268-6011
U. S. toll free:
800-456-3003
---
Recently Jack Mayer told me MHS now says the test should be available around the first week of August. So today I am sent this message to MHS:
--
Date: June 30, 2001
To: ...
Subject MSCEIT
Hi, I am the editor of the site emotional intelligence site www.eqi.org. (No connection to the Bar-On EQi) Right now my site is the top ranked on EI according to google and I get around 3,000 hits per week. I regularly get a number of requests for information about the MSCEIT. As I understand it, the test is currently available for research use only. Could you please explain how the pricing works for this and also let me know when it will be available for purchase in non-research applications? I would like to post this information on my site. Thanks. Steve
--
I will keep you updated.
June 15 80% of success due to EI?
While doing some research for an article I am working on I checked to see who else might have been misled by Goleman's oft-repeated statement that IQ accounts for "at best" 20% of success in life. Here are a few examples of the consequences of Goleman's careless, if not deliberately misleading, presentation of the data. As far as I can tell Goleman has done very little to try to set the record straight.
I found many of these examples by searching google for "80% of success" and "emotional intelligence" By the way there is a bit of humor at the bottom of the list!
1. "...recent studies have shown that emotional intelligence predicts about 80 percent of a person's success in life. Carolyn R. Pool, Educational Leadership, May 1997 v54 n8 p12(3).
2. "In his groundbreaking book “Emotional Intelligence”, Daniel Goleman writes that social/emotional skills account for up to 80% of success in life." emotionallyintelligent.com/Main_Programming_in_Schools.htm
3."... success at work is 80% dependent on emotional intelligence and only 20% dependent on IQ," HR magazine, November 1997. as quoted on -- psc-cfp.gc.ca/research/personnel/ei_e.htm
4. "Research says over 80% of success comes from emotional intelligence...." -- coachingforexcellence.com/resources.htm#Emotional%20Intelligence
5. "Daniel Goleman, a brain researcher from Harvard, has discovered why people with a high IQ may flounder and those of modest IQ do surprisingly well. He explores a different kind of smarts called emotional intelligence. Research has demonstrated that 80% of success in life is related to EQ while 20% is related to IQ." -- cobb.k12.ga.us/~preventionintervention/program.htm
6. "While IQ predicts success about 20% of the time, behavioral scientists have discovered that 80% of success depends on emotional factors." -- lifeworksps25.com/leartobesmar.html
7. "In his best-selling book, “Emotional Intelligence”, an American author Daniel Goleman (1995) has made the term globally popular for the first time. He persuasively proposed, in his book, that a whole set of “soft skills”, e.g. self-awareness, self-motivation, empathy and self-control, were more or at least as important as purely “hard intelligence” in determining success. Goleman argued that emotional intelligence - actually another way of saying “emotional maturity,” - not only account for more than 80% of success in the workplace, but it also happens that without enough EQ many intellectual people do not succeed at all." -- consultthai.com/balanced.html
8. "As much as 80% of success in the workplace is based on self-management and social skills, not IQ or technical competency" -- regonline.com/evntinfo.asp?eventId=4179&cf=1
9. "According to contemporary research, the intelligence quotient contributes just 20 percent to success. In fact, 80 percent of success is attributed to other factors including 'emotional intelligence.' " cta.org/cal_educator/v1i7/diff_test.html
I also found this:
Woody Allen once said that 80% of success is showing up.
and this:
After twenty-five minutes any talk, 80% of the audience start thinking about something other than the speaker's focus. 85% of that 80% start thinking about sex.
rsa.org.uk/texts/acrobat/Roy_Blatchford.pdf
June 12 Abstract from dissertation on EI, IQ and job performance
Below is the abstract from a study of EI, IQ and job performance by Jamen Graves, Ph.D. Besides what is written in the abstract I want to add this quote from the dissertation, which I believe is an important finding to note in light of all the claims about EI:
...contrary to some findings (e.g., Goleman, 1998), emotional intelligence does not seem to overshadow cognitive ability in predicting performance. It appears that emotional intelligence and cognitive ability play equally important roles in explaining differences in people’s ability to (a) influence and (b) demonstrate interpersonal competence. (p. 190)
Another finding of interest is that Graves also uncovered no correlation between EI and race, though he did find a correlation between IQ and race.
====
Emotional Intelligence and
Cognitive Ability:
Predicting Performance in Job Simulated Activities,
Jamen Graves, Ph.D.
California School of Professional Psychology, San Diego
1999
Abstract
Three pivotal questions provided
the impetus for this study. First, is emotional intelligence
subsumed under cognitive ability or does it constitute a
distinct, albeit related, construct? Second, does emotional
intelligence predict behaviors that would likely generalize to
effective job-performance? And if so, would emotional
intelligence explain a unique portion of the criterion space that
traditional cognitive ability measures would otherwise miss?
To answer these questions, a research study was designed to
simulate an actual employee selection process. This study
required 150 participants (50% female) to complete two cognitive
ability tests, the Wonderlic Personnel Test and the Raven’s
Advanced Progressive Matrices, and an emotional intelligence test
(Mayer, Salovey, & Caruso, 1997). Then, on a separate day,
participants were called back to complete four job-simulated
activities that were designed to simulate actual work situations.
Peer and assessor performance ratings were collected at the
conclusion of the activities to serve as criterion measures.
Composite scores were created to reflect participants’
overall emotional intelligence, cognitive ability, and
performance in the job-simulated activities. Because the
emotional intelligence measure can be scored using a consensus or
expert key (Mayer et al., 1998), a separate emotional
intelligence composite was computed using each scoring key. A
separate performance composite was used for the assessor ratings,
the peer ratings, and both types of ratings combined.
Results show that emotional intelligence and cognitive ability
are correlated yet distinct constructs. In addition, emotional
intelligence, scored with the expert key, predicted between 6%
and 10% of the variance in each performance composite. In
addition, emotional intelligence and cognitive ability both
incremented each other in the prediction of the performance
composites. Together, the predictors accounted for 10%, 13%, and
17% of the variance in the peer, assessor, and combined
performance composites, respectively. Based on these findings,
emotional intelligence has the potential to increase the utility
of a selection process. The next step is to examine the degree to
which emotional intelligence predicts actual job performance in a
variety of occupations requiring interpersonal skills.
June 4 Update on the EI Consortium Conspiracy!
Well, it may not be a conspiracy. Then again, maybe it is. As you may know the EI Consortium recently dropped the link to my site. Now go see what other links they have and tell me if you think my site is more informational than some of the others. (www.eiconsortium.org/links.htm) What is an ad for the Rutgers Graduate Psych.department doing there, for example? And the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology??
My curiosty got the best of me, (or maybe that is the best of me!) so I went to look at the Society for I & O Psych. site. I didn't see anything about EI. So I did a search on emotional intelligence. (Here try it yourself: siop.org/_vti_bin/shtml.dll/search.htm) I found a long list of results. I was impressed. I thought, maybe I am mistaken, maybe this is a helpful site. So I tried the first one on the list, which had a point ranking of 175. This sounded like it probably had a lot of references to EI on it, so I was anticipating something big. What I found, though was a job posting for an OD consultant to work for the Hay Group! From October of 1999!! Read the job qualifications, by the way... somehow the EI skills were evidently left off the list!
Hmm. So I tried the next on the list. It turned out to be another job opening for another consultant.
Okay, let's try number three. This turns out to be an announcement for a workshop that is already over. Interestingly though, I see a familiar name. Marilyn Gowing, who is a member of the EI Consortium. I will say no more about this link.
I can't blame the folks for not liking me over there at the EI Consortium. But now I have written to both the webmaster and one of the consortium members to ask what is going on with the link to my site. It has been a few days now and I haven't heard from either of them, so I will be patient a few more days and then try again, or try another approach or both. While I at first felt amused by their dropping me, I am starting to feel more offended and injusted, if I can make up that word. My site is a valuable resource to the world and it serves a role in keeping people like Dan Goleman somewhat more honest. Right now I am also feeling ignored and this is sometimes equal to feeling provoked for me. I am not a person who takes injustice "lying down" as the saying goes. Check out my sexual abuse story if you have any doubt of what I can do when my ire is sufficiently aroused. And my motivation to take action and show up in person on campus recently was largely triggered by feeling ignored -- I mention that just in case anyone from the EI Consortium is reading this. I know what one person can do, and I know what one website can do. If anyone has any doubt of that, check out walmartsucks.com It is now the second ranked Walmart site on google after the official Walmart site. (You probably have to live in North America to understand this fully, but you will get the idea quickly.) It turns out this one lone individual has struck a chord which resonates with many, many people. Now I am not going to make a DanGolemansucks.com page. But it is an amusing thought! (and the domain is available - I just checked!!)
Anyhow, tonight, as I was doing some web work, I decided to move my Dan Goleman page up a bit on my home page. I took it from the "Everything Else" section and put it in the first column. I have also been adding to my section on how he is misleading the public and the other day I started a section on how he manipulates his readers.
You might think I sound resentful, bitter, and hostile. Well, those would be good guesses! Sometimes those emotions lead to important social change, though, so they are not always negative emotions. Remember what Maslow said: What shall we call the well-adjusted slave?
Something else which is starting to bother me is what Hay/McBer is doing under the name of EI and with the apparent full support of Goleman. If you go to the following link and read the section on "Why should I use the ECI over other instruments such as the Bar-On EQI or Salovey and Mayer’s instrument?" you may understand one of the reasons I am bothered, especially if you know a little about the ECI 360, the EQi and the MEIS/MSCEIT tests. I am now going to start referring to the ECI-360 as the CCI-360, by the way -- The "Corporate Competencies Inventory." Here is the link: trgmcber.haygroup.com/emotional-intelligence/EI_FAQ.htm
But tonight it is late and this reporter is tired. So I will say no more for now.
May 31 - EI Consortium Funded by Fetzer Institute
I just read that the EI Consortium got funding from something called the Fetzer Institute.(1) I find this incredulous. With all the money (easily over 1,000,000 US dollars) Dan Goleman has made off his 1995 and 1998 books, he actually had the nerve to ask someone else to fund his self-promotional project! I also feel inspired to bring more light to what is really happening over at the "consortium."
After a little more research I also found that they funded Goleman in 1992 and 1993 when he was collecting information for his 1995 book. (2) Very interesting. He is one clever guy!
--
Notes:
1. This is reported on the Consortium site. For example:
"The Consortium has been funded by the Fetzer Institute, a private foundation located in Kalamazoo, Michigan."
From "eiconsortium/research/technical_report.htm_"
"These guidelines emerged from a review of research conducted under the auspices of the Consortium for Research on Emotional Intelligence in Organizations, originally funded by the Fetzer Institute of Kalamazoo, Michigan. Consortium members were: Richard Boyatzis, Ph.D., Professor of Management and Associate Dean, Weatherhead School of Management, Case Western Reserve University; Robert Caplan, Ph.D., Professor and Director of the Organizational Psychology Program, George Washington University; Cary Cherniss, Ph.D., Professor of Applied Psychology, Rutgers University; Daniel Goleman, Ph.D., author and CEO of Emotional Intelligence Services; Marilyn Gowing, Ph.D., Director of Resources and Development, U. S. Office of Personnel Management, Washington, DC; Kathy Kram, Ph.D., Associate Professor of Management, Boston University; Richard Price, Ph.D., Professor of Psychology, University of Michigan; Mary Ann Re, Ph.D., Manager of AT&T Corporate Employee Research, AT&T; and Lyle Spencer, Jr., Ph.D., Hay Group Research Fellow, Author (Competence at Work), and Consultant.
eiconsortium.org/research/technical_report.htm
2. Social and Emotional Learning: From 1992 to 1993, the Fetzer Institute supported a pioneering inquiry by Daniel Goleman, Ph.D., that revealed forms of intelligence and ways of knowing relating to our emotions that, combined with our intellectual capacities, are critical to success. Dr. Goleman's work was published in his best-selling book, Emotional Intelligence.
Goleman also acknowledges the Fetzer Institute in his 1995 book with these words: Support from the Fetzer Institute in Kalamazo, Michigan, has allowed me the luxury to explore more fully what "emotional literacy" might mean..." (p. 341 Hardcover edition)
May 29 - EI Consortium drops link to my site!
Well, I guess Dan Goleman finally felt annoyed enough with me that he pressured Rob Emmerling, the webmaster at the EI Consortium, to drop the link from their site to mine! I feel amused. And inspired. And successful. I say successful because it seems Dan is getting increasingly defensive as more people visit my site and read about how he is misleading the public. I am actually starting to feel sorry for the guy.
At anyrate, when Rob first put the link on to my site I warned him that I was pretty critical of Goleman, but Rob said that was okay because they wanted to represent all sides of the EI debate. Rob and I have corresponded several times and he seems like a good guy to me. So I wrote to him today and asked what is up. I wonder if the other members of the consortium know about this. I have not been critical of the consortium website because I respect Rob, but I am starting to feel a bit more critical...
I am reading the Handbook of Emotional Intelligence, (Bar-On, Parker eds.) very carefully. It is taking a while to get through so I am giving updates on my progress. Here's the link: http://eqi.org/bar_on.htm
May 30 - Added what I have so far of my review of Lane's chapter on Level's of emotional awareness. (Chapter 8) Overall one of the best chapters in the book so far. I think I have written about as many pages as Lane has!
May 23 - I have added some comments from David Caruso (and my reaction to his comments) to my review of the Hedlund/Sternberg article (Chapter 7)
May 22 - Next Wolfe & Caruso workshop dates announced
The next workshop on EI tests and using the Mayer Salovey model of emotional intelligence in organizations will be held by Chuck Wolfe and David Caruso on August 1,2,3 in Connecticut, USA. I attended the last workshop and I will be writing up my notes about my experience later, but for now I will say that I recommend it with just a few reservations. (1) The workshop gives you a chance to spend time with two people who are literally at the forefront of the serious work in the field of emotional intelligence as a true intelligence. David Caruso is one of the two primary designers of the MEIS and the MSCEIT EI tests, and he is exceptionally knowledgeable about personality testing vs. testing for emotional intelligence. He is also exceptionally entertaining. He told me that some people said he was too "dry and academic" in his first two workshops, so he tried to liven up his approach. I would say he defintely succeeded. At one point he was jumping around "a la Tony Robbins" as one person put it! I believe on a deep level he truly feels passionate about his work and the EI movement. From what I saw, his passion came through and left an impact on us all.
Chuck is a polished trainer. You can tell he is comfortable with a group. He started out by having us begin a mood journal which we kept adding to and discussed at several points during the workshop. This helped us feel more connected and more like a community. In fact, we developed a mission statement and creating a community was one part of our mission. One thing which impressed me early on was that he asked for feedback at the end of the first day, rather than waiting till the end of the workshop, and he acted on the feedback the next day.
Chuck has been doing OD consulting for a number of years and it shows with the breadth of personal experiences and examples he incorporated into his talks. In an earlier life, Chuck was a highschool counselor. Thus, he could relate to the folks from both the educational world and the businessworld. His former counseling days also help him understand individual feelings and feel comfortable talking about them - something I suspect is very unusual for a corporate consultant.
In the past few years he has been working closely with David and with the Mayer Salovey model of EI. Chuck is the only person I know who is actually using the MS model in his consulting. He follows the MS four branch model very closely and does not mix in the mixed-up models which are being heavily marketed by so many consultants. Chuck offered me some new ideas on how to apply the MS model in real life. For example, he got me really thinking about how I want other people to feel. For several years I have done a lot of work on my own feelings -- learning to identify them, express them, manage them, get positive value from them -- but since the workshop I am much more aware of how my words and actions may be influencing other people's feelings, and how I can make relatively simple adjustments to help create more positive feelings and fewer negative ones.
David provides an insider's view of the history of emotional intelligence research and technical knowledge about tests; Chuck offers the practical application of the Mayer Salovey model. Together they make an effective team.
Till I write more later, I will conclude by saying that if you are really interested in emotional intelligence as distinct from a new measure of personality, then this workshop is the one you want to attend.
You can get more details on how to register etc. from Chuck Wolfe's site: cjwolfe.com
May 10 - Back in Canada.
After flying from Australia at the end of February and travelling by car for over one month from Texas to Florida to Indiana to New England, I am finally back in Quebec! It feels so good to be back. I have a little piece of land where I am surrounded by trees, hills, rivers, mountains, creeks and waterfalls. There is still snow on the mountaintops and even a little left on my land.
On the way here I went to Indiana University and filed an official complaint against the professor who sexually assaulted me when I was 18. I was hoping to meet with him in person, but did not have that chance. I did, however, talk to several people on campus including a very helpful student advocate. She started an official file on the professor, which helped me feel much more satisfied. I may write more about my visit to campus, but I will just say that I felt satisfied about a 9 by my efforts to call some attention to what happened. If you are interested, you can read more about the background on my abuse story page
While in New England I met Chuck Wolfe and David Caruso for the first time. I also met twice with Jack Mayer and attended a certification workshop led by Chuck and David. I will write more about all of this later.
Organizational Effectiveness & Management Development Consultant (Boston) Unique opportunity for a Ph.D. in psychology to help develop the leadership talent of major corporations. Working with senior psychologists in business settings, you will help executives develop their “emotional intelligence” through management assessments, coaching and ongoing development programs. To succeed in this key position you must have demonstrated experience in performance management and competency model development, excellent business acumen, and strong analytical, planning, project management and communication skills. Consulting experience desirable.
Contact:
Marcia O’Connor, National
Recruiting Manager
Address: Hay Group
100 Penn Sqaure East
The Wanamaker Building
Philadelphia, PA 19107
Fax:
215-861-2110
Posted October 29, 1999
Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. a nationwide leading environmental engineering firm is seeking an OD consultant located in corporate offices in White Plains, NY. Services we provide include executive coaching, leadership development, team building, organizational effectiveness, change management, and emotional intelligence training. Qualified candidate must have experience with organizational needs assessment, proposal writing, managing programs and developing long-term client relationships with grace and business acumen. Outstanding interpersonal communication skills, excellent writing ability, the capacity to get things done quickly, teamwork, collaboration and enthusiasm are a must. This candidate will have an M.A. and five (5) plus years experience or a Ph.D. and two (2) plus years experience. Some travel required. Excellent benefits package. Please send resume and salary requirements to Dana P. Middleton, 104 Corporate Park Drive, White Plains, New York 10602, email to dmiddleton@pirnie.com or fax to 914-641-2802. Please refer to Req#910 when applying. EOE, M/F/D/V
September 19, 2000
Collected Notes on EI Consortium
The EI Consortium is a group co-founded by Daniel Goleman. Its main function seems to be promoting the consulting services of its members and to get money through getting grants from government agencies etc. in the USA. I have been told it is very political and there is big money involved.
Thus, I feel very skeptical about their motives. But they do have some useful references on their site. The site address is "eiconsortium.org" - I have not created a link because I don't want to help their rankings, since they have dropped their link to my site. But I won't try to pretend they don't exist, as they seem to want to pretend that I don't exist.
May 31 - Consortium drops link to my site
June 4 - Comments on links at Consortium site
I have not scored myself completely on either the MEIS or the MSCEIT. I believe I got a perfect or nearly perfect score on one section of the MEIS -- the problem solving -- but there were other sections I did not have the patience to sit through, such as the section involving identifying emotion in designs, which I still haven't been able to take too seriously. Also, my curiosity lead me to flip back to the answer sheets in several spots to see how the test was scored, since I wanted to see how Mayer, Salovey and Caruso think.