Examining Leadership Theories and Emotional Intelligence Skills

      Leadership theories “distinguish leaders from non-leaders” (Davis, 2003, p. 10).  Researchers (Davis, 2003; Kezar, 2017; Leithwood, Jantzi, & Steinbach, 2000; Northouse, 2016; Sergiovanni, 2007; Spears & Lawrence, 2004; Yukl, 2006) identified various categories of leadership and found diverse models fit into one of the leadership categories.  For instance, Davis (2003) explicated six categories: “trait theories, power and influence theories, behavioral theories, contingency theories, cultural and symbolic theories, and cognitive theories” (p. 8).  By contrast, Yukl (2006) placed leadership theories into four process categories: dyadic, group, intra-individual, or organizational.  Emotional intelligence skills (EI) in relation to leadership theories continues to evolve.  Therefore, let’s review EI skills in relation to the primary elements comprising the invitational leadership model, participative leadership model, transformational leadership model, and servant leadership model.

      During the past two decades, transformational and servant leadership models received attention as excellent models to emulate (Davis, 2003; Leithwood & Duke, 1999; Leithwood, Jantzi, & Steinbach, 2000; Spears & Lawrence, 2004; Stone, Russell, & Patterson, 2004; Yukl, 2006).  Like invitational leadership, the transformational and servant leadership models also encourage leaders to support organizational members in empowering ways (Davis, 2003; Farling, Stone & Winston, 1999; Spears & Lawrence, 2004).  Although transformational and servant leadership models exhibit common characteristics, differences exist between the two models.

      “Transformational leadership involves strong personal identification of followers with the leader” (Rosenbach & Taylor, 1998, p. 3).  The transformational leader motivates “followers to perform beyond expectations by creating an awareness of the importance of designated outcomes” (p. 3) whereby “all followers share values and beliefs and are able to transcend self-interest and tie the goal to the higher-order needs of self-esteem and self-actualization” (p. 3).  As a result, followers create a mental image of the shared vision, converting shared goals into effective action.  Transformational leadership calls for a transforming experience for the leader and for the follower.  Therefore, “transformational leadership is a powerful stimulant to improvement” (Leithwood, Jantzi, & Steinbach, 2000, p. 37).

      Servant-leaders are value-driven and character-driven.  These qualities are typically exhibited through "increased service to others; a holistic approach to work; promoting a sense of community; and the sharing of power in decision making" (Greenleaf, 1997, p. 4).  Proponents of servant leadership emphasize collaboration and integrity, whereby communication and persuasion skills become extremely important (Smith, Montagno, & Kuzmenko, 2004).  Since a servant leader invests himself or herself in enabling others to do their best (Hall, 1991), then decision-making processes involving most of the stakeholders will typically result in consensus-building.  A servant leader's motivation focuses upon the personal growth of the follower.  The servant leader aspires to seeing the follower move toward self-actualization (Maslow, 1970).  Therefore, what differentiates a servant-leader from a transformational leader is the deep desire to pursue a preferred future from “the basis of humility, empathy, compassion, and commitment to ethical behavior” (Lad & Luechauer, 1998, p. 64).  This would not be possible without the presence of high emotional intelligence and experiential components expressed within the invitational leadership model.

      From the primary desire to serve, the servant-leader wants to help his or her followers "grow healthier, wiser, freer, more autonomous, and more likely themselves to become servants" (Greenleaf, 1977:13-14).  While the desire to serve is the primary motivation of the servant-leader, the conscious choice to meet other people's highest-priority needs grounds any aspiration to lead (Greenleaf, 1977).  Thus, servant leadership epitomizes a desire for social justice.  Listening, empathy, healing, awareness, persuasion, conceptualization, foresight, stewardship, commitment to growth of people, and building community are essential attributes of the servant leader (Spear, 2002).  People with high emotional intelligence are more likely to exhibit these attributes (Bradberry & Greaves, 2009). 

Based on previous research, conceptual and empirical gaps exist between servant leadership and charismatic transformational leadership models.  While charismatic transformational leadership has been systematically studied and developed into a rigorously tested theory, Bass (1999) still found servant leadership a movement rather than a tested theory.  Therefore, the need for empirical studies on servant leadership and related models continues.

      The skills exhibited by a transformational or a servant leader certainly require intellectual skills, experiential opportunities and heightened EI sub-skills such as self-awareness, self-management, social skills, and relationship management.  Spencer (2006) proposed a hybrid model of servant-leadership oriented toward empowerment for achieving the organization's objectives (para. 22).  Spencer posits trust and emotional intelligence must play a major role.  As noted by Burns and Martin (2010), invitational leadership provides the structure to guide today’s leaders through complex times.  A leader with high emotional intelligence optimizes the installation of trust (Bradberry & Greaves, 2009). 

      Invitational leadership grounded in social justice and high emotional intelligence (EI) should be reflected in school leaders that focus upon issues of social inclusion, mutual respect, care, equity, and justice.  Transformative leadership seeking social justice considers the impact of race, class, gender, and disability.  Invitational and transformational leaders promoting social justice address historically marginalized groups and conditions that impact student learning.  When an invitational leader hosts change, growth, and progress then the following metaphor is applicable: An effective leader is a welcoming host. 

      Citing Purkey (1992), Burns and Martin (2010) define invitational theory as “a collection of assumptions that seek to explain phenomena and provide a means of intentionally summoning people to realize their relatively boundless potential in all areas of worthwhile human endeavor” (p. 5).  Invitational leadership should address the global nature of human existence and opportunity (Purkey & Novak, 2016; Purkey & Siegel, 2013).  Thus, the invitational leadership model is a comprehensive design that is inclusive of many vital elements needed for the success of today’s educational organizations.  Synthesis of previous research on teachers’ affinity for invitational leadership and exhibition of skills evidenced by high emotional intelligence suggest presence of these skills should result in teacher leaders’ increased awareness of personally and professionally inviting leader behaviors.  Despite research by Anderson (2016) there continues to be a lack of empirical research on the potential relationship between traits associated with invitational leadership and the leader’s demonstrated high levels of emotional intelligence.  Further research in this regard will mitigate this gap.  In the interim, given emotional intelligence has been linked to effective leadership (Goleman & Boyatzis, 2002, 2008), there is sufficient rationale for revising the curriculum within educator preparation and school leadership programs to address the need for explicit development of emotional intelligence as an essential leadership skill.  

To Cite:

Anderson, C.J. (January 31, 2018) Examining leadership theories and emotional intelligence skills
             [Web log post] Retrieved from http://www.ucan-cja.blogspot.com/

References
Anderson, C.J. (2016). A correlational study examining demonstrated emotional

                intelligence and perceptions of school climate. ProQuest 1771637101

Bradberry, T. R, & Greaves, J., (2009) Emotional intelligence 2.0. San Diego, CA. TalentSmart

Davis, J. R. (2003). Learning to lead: A handbook for postsecondary administrators. Westport,

               CT: Praeger Publishers.

Farling, M. L., Stone, A. G., & Winston, B. E. (1999). Servant leadership: Setting the stage for

                empirical research. Journal of Leadership Studies, 6(1/2), 49-72.

Kezar A. (2017) Leadership in Higher Education, Concepts and Theories. In: Shin J.,

Teixeira P. (eds) Encyclopedia of International Higher Education Systems and

Institutions. Springer, Dordrecht.

Leithwood, K., & Duke D. (1999). A century’s quest to understand school leadership. In

                J. Murphy and K. Seashore-Louis (Eds.) Handbook of Research on Educational

               Administration (2nd edition). 45-72.

Leithwood, K., Jantzi, D., & Steinbach, R. (2000).Changing leadership for changing times,

               (pp. 21-39). Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press.

Northouse, P.G. (2016) Leadership: Theory and practice (7^th. Ed) Thousand Oaks: SAGE

Purkey, W. W. (1992). An introduction to invitational theory. Journal of Invitational Theory and 
              Practice, 1(1), 5-15.

Purkey, W. W., & Novak, J.M. (2016). Fundamentals of invitational education (2^nd ed). The
             International Alliance for Invitational Education. Retrieved from:

https://www.invitationaleducation.net/product-category/books/

Purkey, W. W., Schmidt, J. J., & Novak, J. M. (2010).From conflict to conciliation: How to

                defuse difficult situations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Purkey, W. W., & Siegel, B. L. (2013). Becoming an invitational leader: A new approach to

               professional and personal success. Atlanta, GA: Humanics. Retrieved from:

http://invitationaleducation.net/featuredbooks.html.

Rosenbach, W. E., & Taylor, R. L. (Eds.). (1998). Contemporary Issues in Leadership (4th ed.).

               Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Sendjaya, S., & Sarros, J. C. (2002). Servant leadership: Its origin, development, and application

                in organizations. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 9(2), 57.

Sergiovanni , T . J. ( 2007 ) Leadership as stewardship: ‘ Who’s serving who? ’ . The Jossey-

                Bass Reader on Educational Leadership , 2nd ed. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley and

                Sons, pp. 75 – 92 .

Spears, L. C., & Lawrence , M. (Eds.). (2002). Focus on leadership: Servant leadership for the

               21st century. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Spears, L., & Lawrence, M. (Eds.). (2004). Practicing servant leadership: Succeeding through

                trust,bravery, and forgiveness. San Francisco: CA, Jossey-Bass.

Stone, A. G., Russell, R. F., & Patterson, K. (2004). Transformational versus servant leadership:

                A difference in leader focus. Leadership & Organizational Development Journal,

                25(3/4), 349.

Yukl, G. (2006). Leadership in organizations (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall