New maps of brain circuitry tell us that the brain is affected by our emotions in two ways: First, signals travel from the first brain to the rational brain and then back to the emotional brain whenever we mull something over for a while and become increasingly angry, determined, or hurt. The "mulling over" allows us to receive more precise data and this leads to good decision-making and more effective actions.
The second pathway is the route the signal takes as it travels to the emotional brain before going to the rational brain. This occurs when there is an immediate and powerful recognition of a specific experience as the emotional brain makes an association with some past event; we react strongly to something without really knowing why.
The brain seems to have one memory system for ordinary facts, and another for emotionally charged events. Emotional events appear to open additional neural pathways that make them stronger in our minds, which may explain why we never forget significant events. Occasionally we are propelled into action on the basis of these few rough signals before we get confirmation from the thinking brain. We have a rational brain that keeps us from being overpowered by strong emotional reactions, but the emotional brain should not be completely overshadowed by the rational one. The key is balance.
Additional conclusions from neuroscience:
Showing posts with label Defining Emotional Intelligence. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Defining Emotional Intelligence. Show all posts
The Science behind Emotional Intelligence - Neuroscience Research
5:29 AM | Defining Emotional Intelligence, Neuroscience Research, science Research | 0 comments »Defining Emotional Intelligence (EQ) - Overview
5:18 AM | Defining Emotional Intelligence, EQ | 0 comments »Jack walked into the office where three of his sales managers were reviewing the latest sales figures. So engrossed were they in discussing the disappointing results and what might be causing the sudden downturn in business, they did not hear him approach. Jack cleared his throat rather loudly, interrupting an obviously important and spirited discussion about work. "Kelly," he said firmly, "I need to see you about that Allied account. We need to get some information to corporate." He turned on his heels, leaving Kelly to wrinkle up her nose and explain to her colleagues that she would have to get back to them about continuing this analysis. She quickly followed Jack to his office.
Assuming that the information corporate needed did not represent a crisis, how would you assess Jack's handling of this situation? What effect did his approach have on Kelly and her colleagues?
Jack, like too many managers, used the "boss" technique to get what he wanted done. He demonstrated poor social skills and possibly did long-term damage to goodwill by first assuming that the obviously work-related discussion was not particularly important, and then by barging in on it. Kelly and her colleagues would have been much more interested in complying with Jack's request had he:
1. waited until there was a good stopping point in their conversation and they acknowledged his presence;
2. greeted them with a few pleasant words;
3. asked what they were discussing and appeared interested in hearing about it (after all, he needs to know about the sales figures, too);
4. explained what he needed and then asked for Kelly's input on when and how she could comply with his request for information from corporate;
5. exchanged pleasant conversation as he and Kelly walked to his office to work on the request.
This could indeed have been a crisis, but when the manager or the organization is always operating in crisis mode, there are usually management problems. It's probably safe to conclude that Jack's behavior in this situation is an example of low "Emotional Intelligence."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)