|
by Daniel Goleman
Dr. Goleman did an excellent job with his second book on Emotional Intelligence because he gives more detail on how to correct the lack of Emotional Intelligence in the business and professional world.
On page 26 he tells us how to do a check up on our missing competences for emotional intelligence( both personal and social competencies) and he also mentions that there must be a continious follow up on this program to achieve a lasting effect over the change of our un-wanted bad habits and he alos mentions the guidelines for emotional competence TRAINING which is very helpful in the seminars to train management executives.
Dr. Goleman explains also that it takes months to be able to modify our personality, so that some people will not dispair because they can not get an overnight change, it takes time, perseverance and practice to become a proficient and capable executive with good emotional intelligence. Dr. Goleman also explains the effect that stress has on CONTROL and how it affects mistakes, memory and health and overall management.
In other words Dr. Goleman is helping everybody to modify their personalities to be able to produce more with less stress and wear (or exhaustion).
|
Type 1 Type 2 Type 3 Type 4 Type 5 Type 6 Type 7 Type 8 Type 9 |
|
Index of More Articles about Leadership
|
The Stanford Marshmallow Experiment
In above video you will see kids participating in the Stanford Marshmallow Experiment. The Stanford Marshmallow Experiment must be the most astounding psychological study ever performed, or at any rate ranking right up there with some of the experiments done by Stanley Milgram. Who would ever guess that a brief observation of a four-year old alone with a marshmallow would be an excellent predictor of college entrance exam scores — twice as good a predictor as IQ test scores? In one of the most amazing developmental studies ever conducted, Walter Michel of Stanford created a simple test of the ability of four year old children to control impulses and delay gratification. Children were taken one at a time into a room with a one-way mirror. They were shown a marshmallow. The experimenter told them he had to leave and that they could have the marshmallow right then, but if they waited for the experimenter to return from an errand, they could have two marshmallows. One marshmallow was left on a table in front of them. Some children grabbed the available marshmallow within seconds of the experimenter leaving. Others waited up to twenty minutes for the experimenter to return. In a follow-up study (Shoda, Mischel, & Peake, 1990), children were tested at 18 years of age and comparisons were made between the third of the children who grabbed the marshmallow (the "impulsive") and the third who delayed gratification in order to receive the enhanced reward ("impulse controlled"). The third of the children who were most impulsive at four years of age scored an average of 524 verbal and 528 math. The impulse controlled students who scored 610 verbal and 652 math! This astounding 210 point total score difference on the SAT was predicted on the basis of a single observation at four years of age! The 210 point difference is as large as the average differences between that of economically advantaged versus disadvantaged children and is larger than the difference between children from families with graduate degrees versus children whose parents did not finish high school! At four years of age gobbling a marshmallow now v. waiting for two later is twice as good a predictor of later SAT scores than is IQ. Poor impulse control is also a better predictor of later delinquency than is IQ. Obviously there's a strong correlation between IQ and impulse control. People who do well in life have lots of both, and vice versa for those who don't do well. Sociologists have regaled us for years with their theories as to the causes of poverty: lack of education, structural causes, racism. But it seems that, at least where opportunity exists, the reason for differences in income and wealth is that the poor have high impulsivity.
|
Are You Staying True to Your Strengths?
The closer you stay to your innate strengths, the happier and more successful you'll be. Do you know what they are? Sam was focused on a car he was playing with. When I walked up to him, he looked up slowly, with confidence. Something told me not to talk to him like a preschooler.
Article to continue below-------------------------------------
"What's your name?" I asked him. "I am Sam," he said.
"Sam, I am?" I countered, laughing. (You know, Dr. Seuss) He looked back, curious but not amused.
Article to continue below------------------------------------
"I am Sam," he repeated, more firmly.
"Want to talk?" I asked.
"Okay," he said, centered. He put the car carefully aside. "Let's count backward from 10 in Spanish." Then he added, "You sit" pointing to the chair beside him. So I sat down and did what he said! I think I encountered a future CEO. He showed lots of innate strengths that would point to that. LEADING STRENGTHS Strengths show up early in childhood and continue with us throughout our life. They may be repressed, neglected, or even devalued, because someone's tried to make us "well-rounded," but they'll always be there. Knowing what yours are and staying close to them is the path to happiness. HOW DO YOU KNOW WHAT THEY ARE? You can take an assessment. StrengthsFinder(tm) is one. The VIA Signature Strengths(tm) is another. Also pay attention to these things: If you're asked to do something you've never done before and take to it like a duck to water. If you do something and the observer says "Where did that come from?" instead of "Can you teach me that?" When you do something so well you think everyone else can, they just aren't (why coaches are a good idea - to point this out ) When something gives you deep satisfaction, a sort of "flow" When you do it for fun SO WHAT DOES THIS LOOK LIKE IN REAL LIFE? Back to Sam. Later I heard him sing perfectly on-key, unlike most of the others in the class. This clinched it - he's left-brained. His idea of a "conversation" was to use numbers and a foreign language - symbolic - and music is a symbolic language. Math and music usually go together. He used little facial expression or gestures. He spoke directly in one-syllable words. He stayed on-task. Sam showed the innate strength of Self-assurance, Focus, and Command. People with Command feel comfortable giving orders and pressing their own opinions. People are drawn to them, says the assessment. They have presence. Sam didn't enjoy "idle conversation" like a Relator would, and didn't try to win me over, like a WOO (Winning Others Over) would. Find out what your strengths are and build your life around them. It works. Recommended reading: "Now, Discover Your Strengths."
|