Increasing Employee Engagement and ’ Emotional Intelligence
Genos International has been working with IBM on a long-term basis and is constantly engaged in developing state-of-the-art-programs that focus on building skills throughout the management structure. All of our work with IBM to date has focused on using our emotional intelligence programs and assessments to hone mentoring and teaching competence. This case study focuses on one research project which was developed with Genos and IBM to determine the correlation between the emotional intelligence levels of IBM leaders and the employee engagement that resulted from their direct reports.
There is a wealth of literature showing that high levels of employee engagement and a greater experience of positive emotions among employees define high-performing workplaces (shown in the graph below).
We proposed that empirical evidence showing a relationship between a leader’s emotional intelligence and employee engagement would help further the business case that this is the key attribute in managers (i.e., their ability to perceive, understand and manage emotions) that helps facilitate a high-performance workforce where people are engaged and have positive emotional experiences.
Genos suggested that observational indications showing the correlation between the emotional intelligence of a leader and employee engagement would assist in strengthening the organizations stance that this was indeed the most important aspect of management (perception, understanding and the management of emotions) and would assist in encouraging high performance personnel where individuals are engaged in their work and experience positive emotional experiences within the workplace.
The Genos Solution
Genos assessed the emotional intelligence of over 200 leaders within the IBM framework, using the Genos Emotional Intelligence Leadership 360 Assessment. We then calculated the average emotional intelligence score through ratings given by others.
Genos also assessed the 438 employees who reported directly to these 200 leaders. This assessment was completed using the Genos Employee Engagement Survey, which we used to calculate each individual’s intellectual and emotional commitment to IBM. We calculated the results analytically be inviting candidates to indicate how strongly they demonstrate these four behaviors (two questions each): Praise, Persist, Perform Perfect.
I tell others how great this organization is to wor for whenever I have the chance.
I promote this organization as a great place to work.
My commitment to this organization remains unwavering even when the conditions become difficult.
I never think of leaving this organization even when other opportunities are ppresented to me.
I willingly perform above and beyond what is expected of me at work.
The way I feel about this organization motivates me to do everything I can to do make this organizaiton successful
I continuously seek to improve the way I do things for this organization
I am motivated to find new and innovative ways of doing things in this organization
All of our research and assessments revealed that there is indeed a strong relationship between the level of each leader’s emotional intelligence and their direct reports' engagement. In the graph below, each dot represents an employee's engagement score. The leader’s emotional intelligence score (percentile) is indicated on the x-axis on the graph; scores ranging from 1-39 are low, 40-59 represents an average score and any score above 60 is considered high.
As demonstrated in the graph, it is clear to see that being average or low in emotional intelligence results in significant variations in employee engagement (actively disengaged, not engaged, engaged). These types of engagement scores are typical in low performing and average performing organizations in terms of revenue. In contrast, high levels of emotional intelligence demonstrated (above 75%), result in high levels of employee engagement and are typical of high performing organizations.
Gallup’s research has very clearly demonstrated that organizations with high levels of engagement earn as much as 3.9 times the earnings per share than organizations with varied engagement results.