Harvard Business Publishing

For sure using EQ in interviews will greatly help a company hire the best candidate to fill a position (and as you say, it's particularly important for a management position).
But if we take the question on the other side. How can we, as a candidate, understand what is the level of EQ of our next superior ?
Interviewing the candidate is only one part of the equation, make sure that the candidate will feel understood is also really important.
What would you suggest as a question a candidate should ask ?
Cyril

This is a great article around hiring based on EQ index (if I may use the word), the one common mistake I have seen being made when doing these kinds of behavior based interviews is the lack of awareness on the part of the interviewer or interview panel since sometimes (most of the times in interviews I have participated on in India) they seem to be radiating all the vibes which dont make for a conducive interview atmosphere, especially on evaluating EQ.

Any ideas around that in terms of prepping an interview panel in conducting interviews for evaluating EQ of a candidate ?

Anand Kumar

Cyril: "How can we, as a candidate, understand what is the level of EQ of our next superior..."

Ha ha, if they act more stupid that you in the interview, just walk out.

But nothing can really be explained in terms of only "intelligence" or even "emotional intelligence". As there are three qualities, not one or two, there is another dimension often left unexplored in the human psyche. Some would prefer it to remain so as it is a level beyond either cleverness or basic feeling.....

Quote from Amazon on a book about "SQ".....

"...as psychologists discovered ways and means to measure intelligence, Aristotle's definition of man as 'a rational animal' developed into an obsession with IQ. In the mid-1990s, Daniel Goleman popularized research into emotional intelligence, EQ, pointing out that EQ is a basic requirement for the appropriate use of IQ.....

There is enough collective evidence from psychology, neurology, anthropology and cognitive science to show us that there is a third 'Q', 'SQ' or Spiritual Intelligence. Unlike IQ, which most computers have and EQ which exists in higher mammals, SQ is uniquely human and, the authors argue, the most fundamental of the three. Strongly linked to humanity's need for meaning, SQ is what we use to develop our longing and capacity for vision and value. It allows us to dream and to strive..."

well i agee with Douglas Chalmers. we Indians strongly believe in SQ. Spirituality does not mean a blind faith in miracles. BHAGWAT GITA and GURU GRANTH all taught us spirituality is worship of work, justification of means and ends. it gives u emotional strength which is imperative for IQ. i remember long time back during my chilhood i asked my father what is the meaning of prayer and why do we need it. He told me that prayer is meant for strength. words hav meta-physical effects, we are energised by reciting some words. some phone hav more cosmic energy.
so we need to pray for this strength.

A great article about a very interesting book and subject. I think Anand Kumar hit the nail on the head as we say in US English by stating:

"The one common mistake I have seen being made when doing these kinds of behavior based interviews is the lack of awareness on the part of the interviewer or interview panel..."

This so very true as interviewers can fall into the "hire people who resemble me" trap if they have little or no global executive experience. Cultural Intelligence is essential when trying to read or interpret other people's behaviors. As an American living in France, I have learned that my "Can-do" attitude or my informal, friendly behaviors can be perceived as pushy and arrogant. My expressions of gratitude and positive reinforcement are not exactly European either i.e., perceived as superficial.

Human Beings are complex, so by being self aware: Knowing what makes me tick, motivate and innovate can enable me to better understand what makes me feel frustrated or elated in a different culture without expecting others to act or react like me. I can then step back, reflect and re-frame and not judge and complain. Cultural Intelligence allows me to do that which enables Emotional Intelligence.

Cyril and Anand: You both raise great questions--I'll look into them as the basis for a follow-up article on this topic.

Douglas and Mandeep: Very insightful. Douglas, who are the authors you are referring to? I'm interested in learning more about their work.

Maureen: Work on cultural intelligence is fascinating. Like you, I lived and worked as an American in France. I worked closely with French, British, and German nationals, as well as other Americans. The cultural contrasts, and misreadings, were at times quite striking. We were all fortunate, though, to be working in an institution that was, almost by definition, highly attuned to human commonalities despite cultural differences: an international school.

All,

Many excellent comments and points made and I do not wish to be negative, but... While I’m am aware of terms mentioned in this article and comments made. I’m at least somewhat aware of these ideas. However, I’m of the belief most hiring managers and HR people have no deep far reaching strategy in terms of hiring, they simply hire based upon their perception of skill compared against technical need. That’s about as deep as it goes, even among intelligent and well read hiring managers,“ The thoughts too often are, do I like this person and is he/she capable and that’s about it, the same as its always been.

Sorry.

You're quite right Mark. And that is the issue at hand.

Just look at the cost of a candidate that doesn't fit, the cost of replacing this person, the cost of a vacant post while trying to replace him/her.

What about the cost of a failed international assignment, this goes beyond the hire's salary or move expenses: the assignee, his / her family, the cost of repatriation , replacement, and especially the cost of a failed assignment from a personal point of view as well as the company's reputation of having sent an "ox in a china shop" because the person was chosen on intangibles which included behaviors inappropriate for the host country.

Just food for thought.
Maureen

An excellent article to kick off a great discussion. No easy answers to this stuff. What I see are those doing the interviews and trying to use EQ approaches, do not themselves believe or undersatnd what is happening. Consequently, the judgements being made about the the person being interviewed still boil down to the basic question, is this person I want sitting in the empty chair, "will we like him/her?'

Lots of materail out there that can be used to aid in this work. One question I have asked the client, seeking to use this approach to interviews, is: "what is it that draws you to an EQ approach?" and, "how does your organization use EQ in its approach to getting the daily and startegic tasks accomplished?"

So, what is the optium mix of consult vs the harsh realities of using EQ in a number of different capacities? Like KM, is the expectation that the orgranization becomes not only a learning community, using communities of practice, but also an EQ organization?

Regards,

Bill

At last...professional, experienced agreement wih the thoughts I have had as long as I have been an HR practitioner. On more than a few occasions I have had to turn down more "qualified" candidates because of EQ issues (and as often been accused of using woman's intuition in the place of cold hard paper in making these decisions)instead picking candidates who are less impressive academically but who have great attitudes and willingness to work. I am happy to report that I have never lost an EQ based decision and almost all of my sceptical bosses have rued their IQ-only-counts mindsets.

Thanks for the excellent comments. I am the author of the book The EQ Interview.

Maureen, Bill, and Mark make essential points regarding the need for strategy in the hiring function. Too often, strategy is lacking and that leaves hiring managers and interviewers in the position of hiring people they think they like or who they think may have the technical skills needed on the job. When approached strategically, specific EQ competencies would be understood as part of the unique competitive advantage of the organization and integrated into the hiring process. Maureen talks about the cost of a failed hire – one of which is the reputation of the company who puts a poor fit into an assignment. This cost, whether in a domestic or international assignment is great and speaks to the business need. When hiring is approached strategically, the hiring process would follow a plan that collects data through the interview process to support predefined essential EQ competencies.

Anand and Maureen talk about the need for the hiring or interviewing managers to be competent. I completely agree. In practice, I find that discussing the competencies not only improves the quality of the candidates, but it raises the expectations around EQ for those doing the hiring as well. I recommend a process for teaching and aligning the hiring managers to these concepts.

As Evelyn points out, the payoff for hiring the candidate with EQ is great. By formalizing a strategy, we take this from the subjective (Eveyln called it women’s intuition) to a more objective process.

Douglas and Mandeep – Your comments are very important. My model of emotional intelligence includes something I call “Mastery of Purpose and Vision.” Simply stated, it is an understanding of our innate meaning and purpose and alignment of our vision, values and behaviors to that end. It is the source of our authenticity. I did not include much discussion about it in The EQ Interview. I have written about it in a previous book – The EQ Difference.

Cyril – “How can a candidate understand the EQ of his superiors?” is a great question. I think what Douglas says in a joking manner is correct. Look for cues in the behavior of the hiring managers. Both verbal and non-verbal cues can give you some indication of how the manager will relate on the job. If he dismisses your answers or doesn’t appear to listen, or makes light of something, then, he may not be the best choice as a superior. I think your question in an indirect way, indicates the reason that EQ is important. When people have a choice, they choose to work for someone who demonstrates these competencies.

Thank you all for the excellent insights and discussion.

The organizations have made every effort to hire people involved, especially leaders with skills to recognize talent, hire them and keep them in business, and now more than ever these powers are necessary to overcome tense moments, and uncertain scenarios. Before those hiring happen so empirical, but Adele Lynn brings us concrete and specific ways to help all who need to find the right people, with suggestions of objective questions to be put to the applicants.
This would also help the interviewers in their self-development and knowledge.
The timing of the interview is unique and should be viewed not as a routine task, which seeks to fit the candidate profile within the tried, but to really listen this person who is in front of us, and try to understand her/him, with experiences, dreams, successes, failures, stories of life, especially values, and then we can see if this person could contribute to the organization and where he/she could feel performed with the challenges that he/she will face.

Having been in the recruiting game for a number of years, I know what happens when the focus is put on technical expertise and not emotional intelligence during the interview period. This article is a great summary of Lynn's newest book, The EQ Interview, and a must for everyone who thinks their behavioral interview questions are sufficient. They're not - you'll need to dig even deeper to find the best match for your open position.

As a work place consultant, I see few problems that don't originate with bad hiring decisions. Recruiting is fundamental - if your organization doesn't hire the right people in the first place, all the strategy and incentives in the world won't make the place run as it should.

I am on Evelyn Mungau's side. Over 23 years hiring people or assembling project teams has taught me this: When individuals trust each other, when openness and respect are high, the group almost always performs at a higher level than their individual skills would suggest. They are able to adjust for weaknesses. I have read several of Adele Lynn's other excellent books on EQ, and I frequently refer back to them for practical guidance in my business and personal life.

What I like best about Adele's work is its clarity. She takes on the complexities of how people relate and reduces them to simple truths.

Rob Beswick

Commenting from a non-HR background (IT), I've come to recognize the value of observing EQ not initially in our employee hiring practices, as my organization is small and turnaround is somewhat infrequent, but in the internships we've established with a local university.

Our relationship with the university brings 1-4 interns to our organization each semester (within the IT discipline), with the university selecting the individuals and us accepting those selections without question. The productivity/success of the internships each semester can, somewhat clearly, be traced back to the EQ of the individual students. We don't formally measure the EQ of any student during any point during their time here. However, we are afforded the opportunity to observer/evaluate the students over a 6-month period.

In my opinion, we very much benefit seeing what both success and failure looks like.

So, part of our hiring strategy is to first look towards our pool of past interns as candidates and then review performance with key staff members. Technical know-how within this review is important, especially in IT, as you might imagine, but non-technical staff will more typically point out characteristics of high/low EQ.

Which leads me to a question: Can EQ effectively be measured within the briefness of a somewhat regular and predictable interview process, whether that be a single interview or multiple interviews, for which candidates are typically prepared and at their "best", or would an organization benefit more, in the long run, from planning for a "probation" or "evaluation" period which might include a more thorough and measured EQ evalation?