Emotional-Social Intelligence, Leadership, and Gender

There is an ever-growing body of research dedicated to the examination of the role non-cognitive factors play in helping people succeed in both life and the workplace. When Salovey and Mayer used the term emotional intelligence in 1990, they were aware of the previous work on non-cognitive aspects of intelligence. They described emotional intelligence as a form of social intelligence that involves the ability to monitor one’s own and others’ feelings and emotions, to discriminate among them, and to use this information to guide one’s thinking and action (Salovey & Mayer, 1990). Salovey and Mayer’s definition of emotional intelligence is “a set of skills hypothesized to contribute to the accurate appraisal and expression of emotion in oneself and in others, the effective regulation of emotion in self and others, and the use of feelings to motivate, plan, and achieve in one’s life” (Ibid p. 1). Importantly, they and most other researchers involved in this area of science view emotional intelligence as part of social intelligence, “which suggests that both concepts are related and may, in all likelihood, represent interrelated components of the same construct” (Bar-On, 2005, p. 189).

Charles Darwin published the first known work in the area of emotional-social intelligence in 1872. Darwin’s book The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals stated that the emotional system is necessary for survival and provides an important signaling system within and across species. Darwin further proposed that facial expressions, physical manifestations of emotional-social responses, are innate and universal. During the course of his research, he found that certain expressions even transcended species. Thus, emotional and social responses could be innate and universal as well. Paul Ekman, former Professor of Psychology in the Department of Psychiatry at University of California San Francisco, would probably agree. Ekman (1972) and Biehl et al. (1997) found there are six or seven universally recognized facial expressions that cross all literate and pre-literate cultures. In addition to working as a professor in the field of human emotions, Ekman also once served as the Chief Psychologist for the United States Army. His theories and related work regarding emotions and micro facial expressions has been supported by the National Institute of Mental Health, the National Science Foundation, and the Advanced Research Projects Agency of the U.S. Department of Defense. He has actively trained people how to manipulate and control their emotions via emotional expressions. Subconscious, immediate biases and judgments that people make within split seconds of seeing someone’s visage were discovered through his research. His work currently centers around empathy development in relation to emotional-social situations. He believes there are several skills that can be learned that can make people more emotionally-socially intelligent (Ekman, 2012). He, like Peter Salovey, believes that emotions can help us to think and act in rational ways within organizations (Brackett, Rivers & Salovey, 2011).

These theories smack psychological Behaviorists and anthropological cultural relativists of the early Twentieth Century in the face. The Behaviorists felt that learning is responsible for all that we do and all that we are; thus, people merely emulate “appropriate” emotional-social responses from their experiences. Parents, then, can be held responsible for the psychoses and neuroses of their children. These theorists believed that if only children were raised exactly alike and in exactly alike environments, all children would be “healthy, creative, and productive” (Ekman, 1998, p. 367). Cultural relativists of this time period produced multiple accounts of people who have thrived in a wide variety of experiences based on their relative cultures. They negated Darwin’s proposal that a frown is a frown regardless of place, time, or culture. Darwin’s theories on emotional and social behaviors suffered many critics, including Margaret Mead, who firmly entrenched herself in the cultural relativist camp. She was a student of Franz Boas who once stated, “Civilization is not something absolute, but…is relative and…our ideas and conceptions are true only so far as our civilization goes” (Boas, 1887, p. 589). Darwin’s emotional and social universality views also challenged the claims of racists and others during his time and in later decades, including some who belonged to the Nazi Party; these people believed that Europeans descended from different progenitors than other people did, such as Africans. The world view held by certain people in certain cultures during certain situations does not allow for the potential of universal emotional and social responses. It does, ironically, allow for adaptation based neither upon individual experience nor neurological plasticity, but on cultural and situational influence only.

Nearly everyone in the field of education has heard of B.F. Skinner, but far fewer know of Edward Thorndike. Notably, Skinner’s work relied very heavily on Thorndike’s earlier work. Thorndike was a contemporary of Pavlov, but it was he who introduced the concept of reinforcement and operant conditioning, not Pavlov or Skinner (Skinner, 1937; Thorndike, 1901). Additionally, he was one of the first to apply psychological principles in the areas of teaching and learning (Thorndike, 1913; Thorndike, 1932). Like several prominent researchers of his era, he was a proponent of eugenics. He argued that, “selective breeding can alter man's capacity to learn, to keep sane, to cherish justice or to be happy. There is no more certain and economical a way to improve man's environment as to improve his nature” (Thorndike, 1913, p. 281). Perhaps because such “selective breeding” for the “good” of the human race was ethically impossible, he continued on with his work in the area of behavioral psychology. His “Law of Effect” proposed that incidents that occur just prior to a satisfying state will likely be repeated, and, conversely, incidents that occur just prior to a dissatisfying state will be avoided. His “Law of Exercise” proposed that conditions become strengthened with practice, and weaken when practice is discontinued. Practices related to effective leadership and learning to lead effectively through emotional-social intelligence reflect these laws. Thorndike determined there were important distinctions among three broad classes of intellectual functioning. Standard intelligence tests of his time measured only "abstract intelligence.” Yet, also important to Thorndike, interestingly, were "mechanical intelligence - the ability to visualize relationships among objects and understand how the physical world worked," and social intelligence – “the ability to function successfully in interpersonal situations” (1920). His laws applied to all of these areas. Thorndike called for instruments to develop measures for these other types of intellect. Perhaps as a reflection of early work in the study of genetics, at the turn of the Twentieth Century, Thorndike developed the theory of psychological connectionism (Plucker, 2012). He hypothesized that bonds between stimulus and response take the form of increased neural connections. Thorndike was correct in his hypothesis. There are observable biological correlates to operant conditioning and learning.

Several researchers have studied and identified neurons that suggest such neurons encode for conditioned stimuli (Richardson & DeLong, 1991; 1986). Specifically, DeLong and Richardson looked at nucleus basalis neurons, which release acetylcholine throughout the cerebral cortex. The activities of these neurons also cause plasticity in cortical regions and it is suggested that dopamine is activated; the dopamine pathways are expressed much more densely onto the frontal cortex region. In other words, the bonds to which Thorndike first referred absent today’s technological tools actually exist and make people more intelligent and positive, particularly in social situations. Research exploring the neural circuitry that governs emotional awareness (Lane & McRae, 2000), as well as additional emotional and social aspects of this concept (Bar-On et al., 2003; Bechara et al., 2000; Damasio, 1994; Goleman, 2006; Lane & McRae, 2004; LeDoux, 1996), has as Bar-On puts it “begun to provide tangible evidence of the anatomical foundations of this wider construct which some have questioned as an intangiable myth” (Bar-On 2012, p. 32; Davies et al., 1998; Matthews et al., 2003; Zeidner et al., 2001).

Technology is clearly now advancing both physical and social science. Although the neural substrates of emotional intelligence are still largely unknown, it is certain that the prefrontal cortex plays a critical role in emotional regulation. Multiple recent studies have shown that there is a definitive link between brain activity and emotional-social intelligence levels. These studies indicate that despite normal cognitive IQ levels, individuals who suffer from lesions in the ventromedial prefrontal cortex, amygdala, and insula have severe deficits regarding somatic states (emotional signaling). Kilgore and Yurgelon (2007) measured neural functioning through the utilization of fMRIs and CT scans and measured emotional-social functioning via the Emotional Quotient Inventory (EQ-i) instrument. The individuals in their study had no history of psychopathy based on DSM-IV criteria. The results were compared with a different population who had similar lesions outside of these critical emotion regulating areas. Deficits in the prefrontal cortex, amygdala, and insula lead to poor judgment in emotional and social decision making (Bar-On et al., 2003; Kilgore & Yurgelon, 2007). Individuals with such deficits were also found to have difficulties in relating to others in general emotional-social contexts.

Recent research validates the theory that there may be other sub-types of emotional-social intelligence and that these may operate somewhat independent of each other. It also indicates that the identification of specific substrates related to emotional-social intelligence might actually be possible. In a long-term follow-up study of Vietnam veterans who sustained head trauma, researchers studied what they termed strategic and experiential emotional intelligence as measured by location of injuries using the Analysis of Brain Lesions software (ABLe), CT scans, and the MSCEIT test for emotional intelligence. The results revealed that key competencies underlying emotional intelligence depend on distinct neural prefrontal cortex substrates. Two important discoveries were made: “First, ventromedial prefrontal cortex damage diminishes Strategic EI, and therefore, hinders the understanding and managing of emotional information. Second, dorsolateral prefrontal cortex damage diminishes Experiential EI, and therefore, hinders the perception and integration of emotional information” (Krueger et al., 2009, p. 5). Strategic and experiential emotional intelligence align to ability and trait emotional-social intelligence. Just as the parietal lobe regulates certain cognitive functioning such as speech, vision, and mathematical computation that can be altered by trauma, cancer induced tumors, and ill/good use, the regions of the brain that control emotions and social interaction can also be damaged, studied, and perhaps changed to create more effective leaders.

In 1920, Thorndike defined social intelligence as "the ability to understand and manage men and women, boys and girls, to act wisely in human relations” (Thorndike 1920, p. 228). His work focused on describing, defining, and assessing socially competent behavior. He believed that intelligence should be defined in terms of greater or lesser ability to form connections. Assessments were still, however, desperately needed during his time. Edgar Doll finally published the first instrument designed to measure socially intelligent behavior in young children in 1935. Doll worked in New Jersey and served as the Director of Research at the Training School in Vineland, New Jersey. During an era dangerously obsesssed with genetic engineering, he studied eugenics in the 1930s. He created and introduced into the field of social engineering “The Vineland Scale.” This instrument was “originally devised to measure the social abilities of persons suspected of mental deficiency, in order to satisfy the first criterion of mental deficiency, social incompetence” (Doll, 1937, p. 197). The instrument design was similar to Binet and Simon’s scale of general intelligence and was a succession of behavioral items that reflect personal independence and social responsibility. Like a standard test for cognitive intelligence, its scale reflects 100 as an average score with a standard deviation of 15 points. It was the first test of its kind.

Others soon followed suit. “Possibly influenced by Thorndike and Doll, David Wechsler included two subscales (‘Comprehension’ and ‘Picture Arrangement’) in his well-known test of cognitive intelligence that appear to have been designed to measure aspects of social intelligence” (Bar-On, 2006, p.14). Wechsler once stated that intelligence is the “aggregate or global capacity of the individual to act purposefully, to think rationally, and to deal effectively with his environment” (Wechsler, 1958, p. 7). As early as the 1940s, Wechsler suggested that affective components of intelligence may be essential to success in life. A year after the first publication of this test in 1939, Wechsler described the influence of non-intellective factors on intelligent behavior which was yet another reference to this construct (Wechsler, 1940). In the first of a number of publications following this early description, Wechsler argued that models of intelligence would not be complete until these factors can adequately be described (Bar-On 2006; Wechsler, 1943). Emotional adeptness is inherent in Thorndike and Wechsler’s theories of intelligence when applied to social contexts.

The term “emotional intelligence” was used in research literature in later decades to describe emotional-social identities and adaptations similar to those Wechsler, Doll, and others had attempted to identify and quantify years earlier. The term “emotional intelligence” first appeared in a book by Van Ghent (1961), and this term was again seen in an article published in German by Leuner (1966) entitled Emotional Intelligence and Emancipation. Because the former was unrelated to psychology and the latter was published in German, the concept remained largely unnoticed. Bar-On contends that he was the first to use the term in English in 1980 in his unpublished dissertation. It was again utilized in Wayne Payne’s doctoral thesis A Study of Emotion: Developing Emotional Intelligence (1985). Howard Gardner used the similar terms “interpersonal intelligence”, the capacity to understand others, and “intrapersonal intelligence”, the capacity to understand oneself, in his 1983 publication. However, it was Salovey and Mayer who popularized the term and initiated a research program intended to develop valid contemporary measures of emotional-social intelligence and to explore its significance. Salovey and Mayer found in one study that when a group of people saw an upsetting film, those who scored high on emotional clarity (which is the ability to identify and give a name to a mood that is being experienced) recovered more quickly than those who did not (Salovey, Mayer, Goldman, Turvey, & Palfai, 1995). In another study, individuals who scored higher in the ability to perceive accurately, understand, and appraise others’ emotions were better able to respond flexibly to changes in their social environments and build supportive social networks (Salovey, Bedell, Detweiler, & Mayer, 1999). Their studies gained quite a bit of attention in their field. Unfortunately, few of the authors from the 1960s to 1980s really created working definitions of emotional intelligence. Salovey and Mayer, on the other hand, presented the most enduring and influential definition of emotional intelligence to date in 1990—emotional intelligence is “the ability to monitor one’s own and others’ feelings, to discriminate among them and to use this information to guide one’s thinking and action” (p. 189). They later refined this definition and broke it down into four related abilities: (1) the ability to accurately perceive emotions, (2) the ability to access and generate emotions to assist thought, (3) the ability to understand emotions (i.e., their causes and consequences, and the relationships between them) and (4) the ability to reflectively regulate emotions so as to promote emotional and intellectual growth (Mayer & Salovey, 1997; Mayer, Salovey & Caruso, 2004). The general public, through Salovey and Mayer’s book and a Time magazine article that featured their work, was soon entranced.

Daniel Goleman’s seminal work, Emotional Intelligence (1995), first introduced in an article in 1990, was a result of him becoming aware of Salovey and Mayer’s work. Goleman, a science writer for The New York Times, was already writing about brain and behavioral research, as he was a trained Harvard psychologist who had worked with, among others, David McClelland, well-known for his work in the areas of motivation and achievement. McClelland was very concerned with how little traditional cognitive tests reveal what it takes to be successful in life (Cherniss, 2010). IQ by itself, he and others determined, was an unreliable predictor of job performance. Hunter and Hunter (1984) estimated that at best IQ accounts for about 25 percent of the variance. Sternberg (1996) pointed out that studies vary and that 10 percent may be a more realistic estimate. In some studies, IQ accounts for as little as 4 percent of the variance (Cherniss, 2010). Emmerling and Goleman (2003) discovered that the predictive validity of using IQ for determining work success rises with the level of supervisory/leadership position that requires multiple task complexities. Suggesting a definite interaction between cognitive and emotional interaction within the brain, the ability emotional intelligence perspective conceives emotional intelligence as “the cooperative combination of intelligence and emotion” (Mayer et al., 2004, p. 197). Emotional intelligence is intelligence operating on emotional information (Mayer et al., 2004) and is viewed as “a member of a class of intelligences including the social, practical and personal intelligences” (Mayer et al., 2004, p. 197). In accordance with these views, ability emotional-social intelligence, as defined by individuals such as Salovey, has continued to be measured using IQ-like performance tests (Bar-On et al., 2005; Salovey & Grewal, 2005).

There are other instruments that have been developed to measure both trait- and ability-based emotional and social intelligence. Perez et al. (2005) assert that perhaps some researchers, in a hasty attempt to create measures of the emerging constructs of emotional and social intelligence, overlooked the difference between typical versus maximal performance (Ackerman & Heggestad, 1997; Hofstee, 2001). Early researchers in the field may have been unaware that, depending upon the then unidentified differences of either trait or ability emotional and social intelligence, they were actually not operationalizing the same construct. This led to conceptual confusion and conflicting findings that opened up the area of research to intense criticism. Eysenck, for example, stated in his 2000 book Intelligence: A New Look, "[Goleman] exemplifies more clearly than most the fundamental absurdity of the tendency to class almost any type of behavior as an 'intelligence'... If these five 'abilities' define 'emotional intelligence', we would expect some evidence that they are highly correlated. Goleman admits that they might be quite uncorrelated, and in any case if we cannot measure them, how do we know they are related? So the whole theory is built on quicksand: there is no sound scientific basis” (p. 109). He claims that the term emotional intelligence itself “brings together two unrelated things—neuroticism and intelligence—in one ugly hybrid” (ibid, p. 110). Locke claims that the concept of emotional intelligence is a misinterpretation of the intelligence construct. He states that it is not another form of intelligence—just intelligence related to the ability to grasp abstractions (2005). Other researchers have concerns regarding self-report measures and how they correlate to personality dimensions (Landy, 2005). However, the prominent view in the literature supports trait emotional and social intelligence and reinterprets it at times as a collection of personality traits (Mikolajczak et al., 2007; Smith et al., 2008).

Petrides and Furnham (2000; 2001) theorized that there are separate and distinct emotional and social intelligence constructs—trait and ability—and that these must be measured quite differently. Some early generic measures for the generalized construct included simulation and assessment centers that were developed by Thorton and Byham (1982). Critical incident interviews, first utilized by Flanagan in 1954, were also used and adapted to include biodata methods by Dailey in 1975. Dailey also developed the Behavioral Event Interview (BEI), a semi-structured, interview process, to investigate emotional-social competencies during recall of events in which people felt particularly “effective.” A competency can be defined as a capability or ability. Later, Rubin (1986), added strands of autobiographical research to what Flanagan and Dailey had originally developed. Ability emotional and social intelligence, as defined by Salovey and Mayer, is measured through instruments such as the MSCEIT, an assessment based on a series of emotion-based problem solving items. It has received some criticism because scoring is based on social norms. Currently, the trait model is generally measured through self-reporting techniques, while the ability model is more often measured through performance-based or observational models (O’Sullivan, 2007; Petrides & Furnham, 2001).

Salovey and Mayer, prominent researchers of ability emotional-social intelligence since 1990s, proposed a model that identified four different factors of emotional intelligence: 1. Perceiving Emotions—the ability to correctly identify how people are feeling; 2. Using Emotions to Facilitate Thought—the ability to create emotions and to integrate a person’s feelings into the way she thinks; 3. Understanding Emotions—the ability to understand the causes of emotions; and 4. Managing Emotions—the ability to create effective strategies that use one’s emotions to help her achieve a goal (Mayer et al. 2000). The Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT), the most prominent measure of ability emotional intelligence, became the result of their research in the field of the ability-based model of emotional-social intelligence. This test has right and wrong answers and questions are posed to assess emotional-social ability based on competence and emotional experience. Ideally, according to the test developers, the results can then be used for strategic decision making regarding the emotional-social management process. The MSCEIT attempts to measure strengths and weaknesses and potentially offers pathways for additional training in the enhancement of emotional and social abilities. It attempts to measure the experiential and strategic aspects of emotional-social intelligence. It is concerned with the differentiation of emotional processes and contents, cognitive processes and contents, and the postulated performance requirements of the Four Branches. The main criticism of Salovey et al.’s work is that the interplay of emotional and cognitive processes is not clarified by the Four-Branch-Model and that some Branches contain behavioral and knowledge requirements. It is a theoretical model that mixes cognitive and personality traits. Some critics argue that the MSCEIT is unreliable because cognitive ability variables in the instrument are measured via self-report (Perez et al., 2007; Tapia, 2001). Perez et al., however, found the Salovey Mayer model has correlates between actual and self-estimated scores of approximately r=.30 (Furnham, 2001; Paulhus et al., 1998). Roberts et al. (2001) assert that the MSCEIT merely measures conformity as best responses are merely based on consensus. There are no objectively correct answers, leading people to question whether or not emotional-social intelligence is really an intelligence at all or simply a behaviorally or culturally learned response. Answers are only considered “correct” if the majority of respondents deem them so.

Contrary to the ability perspective which was theory driven and then empirically tested, the trait emotional intelligence perspective was empirically driven and then theorized. In order to facilitate emotional intelligence testing in research, educational and business settings, several authors translated ability models into self-report instruments (Schutte et al., 1998). Through meta-analyses of both ability and trait measures, even critics of the concepts found that trait ability retained some predictive validity for job performance after controlling for The Big Five and IQ (Harm & Credé, 2010; Joseph, Newman, & MacCann 2010). The high correlations found between self-reported emotional intelligence scores and personality traits led Petrides and Furnham (2001) to coin the term “trait emotional intelligence.” From the trait emotional intelligence perspective, emotional intelligence is a constellation of emotion-related dispositions capturing the extent to which people attend to, identify, understand, regulate, and utilize their emotions and those of others. Greater trait emotional intelligence corresponds to a profile of dispositions that leads to greater adaptation. Some claim the trait emotional intelligence perspective views emotional intelligence as a cluster of lower-order personality traits (Petrides, Pita & Kokkinaki, 2007). Emotional intelligence, therefore, encompasses two kinds of variance: one portion of variance already covered by established personality taxonomies (e.g., the Big Five) and one portion of variance that lies outside these dimensions (Petrides et al., 2007). In accordance with this view, trait emotional intelligence is often evaluated using personality-like questionnaires.

Goleman, with his conceptual framework of a mixed model of emotional-social intelligence, emphasized the physiological components of the construct. He cited evidence from neuroscience, biology, and medical studies that indicated specific psychological states and resultant behaviors associated with higher and lower levels of emotional-social intelligence. He developed a theory that incorporated and predicted the relationship among a person’s neural circuits and endocrine processes, unconscious dispositions (motivations and traits), values and operating philosophy, separate competencies, and competency clusters (1995). This was based on earlier postulations and observations that the arousal of the power motive both causes and is affected by arousal of a person’s sympathetic nervous system (McClelland, 1985). When this reaction occurs, a person is more likely to exhibit behaviors associated with the competencies of influence, inspirational leadership, or change catalyst (Boyatzis, 2009; McClelland, 1975). Petrides et al. (2004) furthered the conceptual framework of trait-based emotional-social intelligence. Petrides et al. created the Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire (TEIQue) that asserts to measure emotional-social intelligence as a personality trait rather than an intelligence ability. In the test, four facets are specifically measured: (1) well-being, (2) self-control, (3) emotionality, and (4) sociability. There are strong correlations between the Big Five and the Petrides et al. TEIQue. Their research and that of others show that jobs that require higher levels of emotional labor can more accurately be assessed regarding potential positive performance utilizing emotional intelligence tests (Joseph & Newman, 2010).

According to Boyatzis, the assessment of emotional competencies began as a search for early identification of talent (McClelland et al., 1958). These were considered part of one’s personality, an ability. These underlying characteristics determined one’s effectiveness or superiority in regard to performance. This line of thought led to Boyatzis’ development of a measure of emotional competencies called the Emotional Competence Inventory (ECI) and the later versions of the same, the ECi-2 and the ECi-U (university version). These were rewritten in 1999 with research staff from the McClelland Center for Resarch and Innovation. Latter versions were released in 2007. In response to criticism denying emotional-social intelligence as an actual intelligence, Boyatzis and Sala (2004) attempted to classify the concept by asserting that it was (1) related to neural-endocrine functioning, (2) differentiated as to the type of neural circuitry required, (3) related to life and job outcomes, and (4) sufficiently different from other personality constructs. They felt that the concept as an intelligence added value to the understanding of human personality and behavior. Boyatzis and Sala’s model separates emotional-social intelligence from simply a constituent ability or personality construct. As a result, Boyatzis and Sala proposed there are separate neuro-endocrine pathways associated with emotional-social intelligence. They claimed that the construct should actually be able to predict neural and endocrine (i.e., hormonal) patterns within the individual (Boyatzis & Sala, 2004). This came as a result of an expansion of Boyatzis’ earlier 1982 theory regarding characteristic traits that lead to or cause effective or superior performance. Boyatzis specifically believed that an emotional intelligence competency is an ability to recognize, understand, and use emotional information about oneself or others that leads to or causes effect or superior performance. Bar-On shares the belief that competencies are a critical component that can lead to or cause outstanding leadership performance. This clearly exceeds Mayer, Caruso, and Salovey’s 1999 link between emotional-social intelligence and experience and age.

Physiological information related to emotional-social intelligence cannot be ignored. Stress from activation of self-control in emotional-social situations absent acute awareness of natural or “learned” appropriate and effective reactionary behaviors can produce measurable effects such as elevated blood pressure and decreased levels of both immunoglobulin A and natural killer cells. During such a process, the prefrontal cortex neural circuits become activated (Davidson et al., 2000; Lee et al., 2009). Beyond neurological changes that occur during emotional-social interactions, there are other physiological implications that can be noted as well. The impact of personal and professional relationships can be assigned value through the Humanistic Operating Philosophy (Boyatzis, 2007). This philosophy determines the impact of personal relationships. Positive relationships have positive effects on leaders’ health. Research has shown that the impact of such relationships arouse the affiliation motive which activates an individual’s parasympathetic nervous system (Boyatzis et al., 2006; Schultheiss & Wirth, 2008). This arousal, in distinct contrast to the stress created by the activation of self-control mechanisms within the brain, results in decreased blood pressure and increased healthy immune system functioning (Sapolsky et al., 2004).

So, the age old question of nature versus nurture surfaces in organizational theory. Can people in an organization, whether it be a family, a business, or a school system, behave only in the manner in which they have been genetically or behaviorally and/or culturally programmed or can they change their personal and professional paths (and neural pathways)? The field of affective neuroscience and genetic expression continues to provide some answers. According to some leading researchers in this field, experience and adaptation can overcome genetic dispositions for adult behavior (Davidson et al., 2000; Lee et al., 2009). Essentially, neural circuits and tendencies can, according to quantitative science, be rewired. If this is the case, as neuroscience suggests, emotional-social competencies create arousals that, over time, create different neural pathways at biological levels. Hence, educational leaders can potentially be better trained, even on the neural and physiological levels.

Bar-On defines emotional-social intelligence as “an array of non-cognitive capabilities, competencies, and skills that influence one’s ability to succeed in coping with environmental demands and pressures” (Bar-On, 1997, p. 14). He approaches emotional-social intelligence in a multifactorial manner. There are two main facets of the Bar-On model of emotional-social intelligence. First, there is the theory, or conceptual framework, of it. Secondly, there is the psychometric measurement tool related to it. Bar-On developed the EQ-i after seventeen years of research devoted to emotional-social intelligence research. During his doctoral work, he identified and clustered various emotional and social competencies, skills, and facilitators thought to impact human effectiveness and well-being, defining the individual clusters of competencies, skills and facilitators that emerged. The assessment was “originally constructed as an experimental instrument designed to examine the concept of emotional and social functioning” (Bar-On, 2001, p.363). Unlike Salovey and Mayer’s MSCEIT that shows overlaps to traditional intelligence tests, the EQ-i shows stronger overlaps to traditional personality measures. It shows a high correlation to traditional personality measures regarding the Big Five (Ciarrochi et al., 2000). This is likely due to the contention that the instruments are measuring two separate deviations of the overarching construct of emotional and social intelligence. Daniel Goleman, author of Emotional Intelligence, regarding Reuven Bar-On once stated, “I think you may be ahead of everyone in already having developed an EQ scale. This is a promising, pioneering effort in assessing key elements of emotional intelligence” (1996, p. 3). Unlike IQ that remains relatively stable over time, according to Bar-On, emotional and social intelligence can change over time.

The EQ-i was developed to measure the mixed conceptual model of emotional and social intelligence articulated by Bar-On. He hypothesized that effective emotional and social functioning should eventually lead to a sense of psychological well-being. It was also reasoned that the results gained from applying such an instrument on large and diverse population samples would reveal more information about emotionally and socially intelligent behavior as well as the underlying construct of what [he referred to] as emotional-social intelligence (Bar-On, 2007). The original normative sample for the EQ-i included individuals from every Canadian province and from nearly all the states in the United States. The gender and age composition of the sample included 49% males and 51% females from 16 to 100 years of age. The sample was 79% White, 8% Asian-American, 7% African-American, 3% Hispanic, and 1% Native American (2% of the respondents did not identify their ethnicity) (Bar-On, 1997). While this original sample contained mostly White respondents, thousands of additional administrations more accurately reflect the overall demographics of the United States. The instrument has been used tens of thousands of times. Regarding reliability specifically, the EQ-i was the first test of emotional intelligence to be peer reviewed in the Buros Mental Measurement Yearbook of 2001. The EQ-i contains 133 items which produce an overall Emotional Quotient (EQ) score, five scales and fifteen sub-scales. The five scales are: (a) Intrapersonal, (b) Interpersonal, (c) Adaptability, (d) Stress Management, and (e) General Mood. The continued reliability for assessing soft skills related to leadership and organizational success continue to be good through Bar-On’s initial and revised EQ-i. The instrument is currently used worldwide in many private sector companies.

Going back in history, empirical studies continually illustrated the importance of emotional-social intelligence via various measures. In the 1950s, eighty Ph.D. students in a graduate program for science at Berkley engaged in a comprehensive battery of interviews, IQ tests, and personality tests. In the 1990s, when they were in their seventies, these people were tracked down and re-evaluated. Estimates of their success were based on resumes, evaluations of experts in their own fields, and sources such as American Men and Women of Science. It was discovered through this research that social and emotional abilities were four times more important than IQ in determining professional success and prestige (Feist & Barron, 1996). Clearly, a relatively high IQ is necessary to be admitted into and to graduate from a Ph.D. program in science at Berkley. However, this follow-up study suggests that it might be equally important to be able to persist in professional social settings and to negotiate well with colleagues and subordinates. This holds true for leaders in today’s educational organizations as well.

Emotions play a powerful and central part in everyday life. They are especially important for leaders. In a sense, everyone within an organization serves in a potential leadership role, particularly in the military. Stubbs, whose dissertation advisor was Boyatzis, conducted an investigation involving 422 military personnel in eight-one military teams in 2005. The results, using a structural equation model, show that team leader emotional intelligence is significantly related to the presence of emotional competency group norms in the teams they lead and that emotionally competent group norms are related to team performance (Stubbs, 2005). The study also showed that team leadership had a direct effect on team performance.

After years of research, the United States Army adopted a psychological training leadership development program required of all personnel in 2009. As many military, educational, and business leaders are aware, emotional and social intelligence can be overestimated by anyone, particularly leaders (Cortina et al., 2004). “Resiliency Training,” based on emotional-social intelligence foundations, requires that all 1.1 million U.S. Army soldiers complete workshops intended to strengthen their emotional resilience. The previous Army definition of leadership in Field Manual (FM) 22-100, Army Leadership, is more prescriptive than that used by Northouse (2007) who defined leadership as “a process whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goal” (2007, p.3). The Field Manual says that "leadership is influencing people-by providing purpose, direction, and motivation-while operating to accomplish the mission and improve the organization" (FM p. 1-4, 2007). This, still, however, implies that leadership is a one-way action. The leader simply provides purpose, direction, and motivation, and the followers are influenced. In fact, in the next sentence the Field Manual defines "influencing" as "getting people to do what you want them to do" (FM p. 1-4, 2007). In other words, to the Army leadership was, prior to the recent changes in leadership development after research initially conducted in 2005, simply telling people what one wanted them to do and that was good enough. There was no provision for subordinate input and no requirement for subordinate belief in the goals, tasks, visions, or leaders themselves. The U.S. Army intended to change this notion with their Master Resilience Training designed by the University of Pennsylvania (Reivich et al., 2011). This ten day program design is based on emotional-social intelligence and its purpose is to assist soldiers in becoming emotionally competent leaders in any situation. Soldiers are required to participate in activities devoted to “ABCs” (activites, behaviors, and consequences), energy management (relaxation/meditation techniques), problem solving, cultivating gratitude, minimizing catastrophic thinking, analyzing “icebergs” (deeply held beliefs), evaluating explanatory styles, and processing “thinking traps” of emotions and behaviors (Reivich, Seligman & McBride, 2011). As of 2012, all U.S. Army soldiers are required to participate in the Global Assessment Tool to measure psychological and emotional health. Recent results from this annual assessment show an improvement in emotional-social intelligence as related to resiliency and leadership. They also show improvements in depression and Post-Traumatic Stress in soldiers who have served tours (sometimes multiple) in Iraq. The Master Resilience Training aspect of Comprehensive Soldier Fitness is working well (Vergun, 2012). According to the conclusion of an Army report, released January 2012, covering a 15-month period of statistical evaluation based on the philosophies, psychological, and physiological bases of emotional-social intelligence, there are many aspects of resilience and leadership stability and endurance that are teachable and that the soldiers are measurably learning.

The search for effective, competent leaders is now extending into the realms of social media, perhaps the most contemporary measure of social interaction. In a recent study conducted by Kluemper, Rose, and Mossholder, published in the February 2012 Journal of Applied Social Psychology, personality and social traits evident on social media sites were used to predict success and leadership potential in professional settings. The purpose of Kluemper et. al.’s research was to examine the feasibility of using applicant personal information currently available on social networks to improve employment selection decisions and leadership potential. “A lot of actions are taken based on Facebook profiles— people are hired, fired, suspended—but this was the first study to systematically examine whether using Facebook to help make such decisions has any validity,” (King, 2012, p. 2; Kluemper, 2012). The researchers asked approximately 500 college students to complete a standard battery of personality and IQ tests and to allow three reviewers access to their Facebook pages. They devised a scoring system to accurately compare impressions gleaned from each source. Later, the team followed up by obtaining a performance review from the employers of students who had graduated. In this study, raters used fifteen questions from the IPIP (International Personality Item Pool) to rate participants’ Facebook profiles for the Big Five (openness, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, neuroticism) in 2007 and 2008. According to the authors, many indicators of personality can be found on a person’s Facebook page. Facebook page document reviews and codings revealed stronger correlations to candidates’ likelihood to excel in a job or potential leadership position than the usual personality surveys employers traditionally had them complete. For example, the number of friends that a person has is related to extraversion, and someone high in conscientiousness may be more careful regarding the types of posts he or she writes or comments on. Someone high in agreeableness may be more trusting and therefore post more personal information. The researchers found that raters showed good agreement about the personality ratings, and that they were fairly consistent. The ratings based on Facebook profiles showed pretty good agreement (r = .23 – .44) with self-ratings, which is about what would be expected based on past research looking at the accuracy of ratings from friends and family. In other words, Facebook profiles seem to be a fairly accurate way of getting personality ratings. In addition, the Facebook ratings were more strongly related to job performance than were self-ratings. The researchers discovered that those rated highest by the Facebook reviewers were more likely to be thriving than those rated highest by standardized tests. Similarly, among students who were still in college, higher ratings from the Facebook reviewers proved to be a better predictor of academic success than IQ scores. Overall, considering the Big Five, Facebook ratings seem to provide a curious and accurate window into people’s emotional and social intelligence in relation to the workplace. Trait trumped ability in this study. Social media shows promise in identifying potential employees and leaders who are emotionally and socially competent.

Transformational leadership is an area of political science and psychological science that has been growing ever more prominent over the last few decades. It is important to be aware of one’s leadership style in order to recognize one’s strengths and needs (Hersey & Blanchard, 1993). Some theorists, such as Sergiovanni (2006), view educational leaders such as principals as instructional leaders and transformational leadership as the optimal style to meet the needs of all stakeholders in schools. Potentially, these beliefs can lead to shared decision-making and effective curricular and instructional processes that result in positive student gains. Sergiovanni’s work shows that such leaders can make these things happen by inspiring and empowering all organizational members to focus on a common vision and to take ownership of processes through collaboration and the development of norms and commitments. It focuses on shared beliefs and teamwork. The process rather than the results are tantamount to achieving what is desired for the organization. All members are given opportunities to communicate the best way to achieve end results which better ensures a strong culture and commitment level. Effective leaders must be committed to implementing collaboration, participation, and leadership for all members within an organization (Lezotte & McKee, 2006). Regarding school systems, as Lezotte and McKee (2006) assert, “whatever model of school improvement is chosen, the degree to which a school or district is successful in implementing positive and sustainable change depends on a very important factor: an effective leader” (p.xii). Leithwood et al., found that educational leadership contributes to student learning in schools nearly as much as instructional practice (2004). Further, they identified three practices that are essential to successful school leadership. These include: helping staff establish and understand the goals that are the foundation of a shared vision for an educational institution; building capacity and using all organizational members’ strengths regarding decision-making; and changing organizational characteristics to strengthen school culture and to build the collaborative process. Leithwood with Jantzi (2008) later refined the concept of transformational leadership as a process by which high levels of commitment to the organization and its tasks lead to goal attainment. Transformational leadership taps into the intrinsic motivations of individuals that make up an organization. Transformational leadership is that which “facilitates a redefinition of a people’s mission and vision, a renewal of their commitment and the restructuring of their systems for goal accomplishment. It is a relationship of mutual stimulation and elevation that converts followers into leaders and may convert leaders into moral agents. Hence, transformational leadership must be grounded in moral foundations” (Leithwood, as cited in Cashin et al., 2000, p.1). It is an educational leader’s ability to focus those within an organization on the mission and challenges faced by the organization and it also deals with how followers perceive the actions of such leaders (Wheatley, 2001).

An obvious off-shoot of effective educational leadership is teacher efficacy. Schools in New Jersey are continually engaged in reform movements with the aim of greater student achievement. James MacGregor Burns introduced the term transformational leadership to the masses in his 1978 book entitled Leadership. He described it as a process by which leaders and followers raise themselves to greater and greater levels of motivation and morality. He, like the best transformational leaders, focused people on long term commitment to ideals and values rather than short term tasks. Burns was influenced by Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs and believed that effective leaders understand the highest levels of self-actualization for themselves and for their followers. With that in mind, effective leaders also pay attention to the individual subordinate by understanding and sharing in unique individuality (Smith et al., 2004). For transformational leaders, participatory management is critical. When leaders broaden and elevate the interests of their constituents, when they generate acceptance and awareness of mission and purpose, and when they motivate organizational stakeholders to look beyond their own self-interest for the good of the organization as a whole, this is when transformational leadership occurs (Bass, 2000). Such educational leaders articulate a clear vision for the school system, explain how to attain the vision, lead by example, and empower followers.

Appealing to emotional-social intelligence constructs, transformational leadership requires leaders to be both task- and people-centered. Transformational leaders focus on the beliefs, needs, and values of their followers (Turan & Sny, 1996). Educational leaders must focus attention on the managerial aspects of their organizations while also being attentive to interpersonal relationships, teacher development, school improvement initiatives, and capacity development. Vision building and intellectual stimulation have significant effects on teacher commitment and extra effort within the context of educational reforms (Geijsel et al., 2003). Intellectual stimulation turns attention to new aspirations and new ways of accomplishing goals (Bass & Avolio, 1994). Through the appeal to high ideals, attitudes and assumptions can be changed via the building of commitment to common goals and objectives (Friedman, 2004). Korkmaz (2007) found that transformational leadership has a positive effect on job satisfaction which leads to a strong impact on school climate. When educators have opportunities to make important educational decisions and influence student performance, they feel empowered. Empowerment helps employees to take personal interests in improving organizations. Teacher empowerment is promising regarding the improvement of educational settings for both teachers and students (Leithwood & Jantzi, 2006; Marks & Printy, 2003). Empowerment suggests a philosophy of teamwork, collegiality, participatory decision-making, and problem solving without the constraints of a bureaucratic organization (Short & Greer, 1997). Teachers and all stakeholders within educational organizations need to feel like they have some autonomy, some locus of control. They need to feel like their decisions have impact and importance if they are to contribute in an influential manner to organizational and student outcomes.

Is a person a true leader if no one is following? Leadership exists within emotional-social interactions. Effective educational leaders must create, articulate, and communicate visions that people actually believe for themselves and want to truly follow if reforms are to be meaningful, worthwhile, and lasting. What followers gain in the leadership-follower exchange must be worth their efforts. Commitment rather than compliance is critical. Transformational leadership is emotionally charged and empathetic (Martin et al., 2001). The efforts of all stakeholders transcend economic or punitive sanctions. Unlike transactional leaders who focus on rewards and punishments, transformational leaders meet the needs and desires of their followers instead of driving them through the exercise of power. Burns’s (1978) narrative study of political leaders provided the impetus for the development of contemporary leadership theory. He determined that leadership could be characterized as either transactional or transformational, with the object of transactional leadership being the creation of “a bargain to aid the individual interests of the persons or groups going their separate ways” (p. 425). Conversely, Burns’ transformational leadership theory inspires the belief in followers that “whatever the separate interests [they] might hold, they are presently or potentially united in the pursuit of ‘higher’ goals, the realization of which is tested by the achievement of significant change that represents the collective or pooled interests of leaders and followers” (p. 426). Transformational leadership helps people to find meaning in their work in schools. Transformational leaders serve as living examples and role models for all constituents. Great educational leaders do not practice leadership; they live it. They empower stakeholders to gain autonomy, choice, control, and responsibility. It is important to note that when leaders develop a trustworthy system, people move much faster to elicit change (Kouzes & Posner, 1998).

There have been relatively few studies that examine the relationship between emotional-social intelligence, leadership, and gender related issues. Mandell and Pherwani (2003), however, found a significant, predictive relationship among the emotional-social intelligence, leadership, and gender intersections. This empirical study examined the possible interactive relationships among these variables as related to organizational outcomes. Their 2003 study found through regression analysis of self-report data that emotional intelligence scores could predict the transformational leadership behaviors of the leaders studied. While no significant difference between gender and prediction of transformational leadership style (p>.05) was found, significant differences were found between both transformational leadership style and emotional intelligence and also the emotional intelligence scores of male and female managers.

In 2011, Herbert explored similar topics in her doctoral work. She investigated the correlation between transformational leadership practices, emotional intelligence, and leadership effectiveness in school leaders. The study included thirty elementary, middle, and high school principals and sets of five to seven teachers who worked with each administrator. Emotional intelligence scores for the principals were obtained via the MSCEIT, and teacher completed complementary observed leadership behavior questionnaires. Her work concluded that a positive correlation existed between emotional intelligence and transformational leadership (Pearson’s r(30)=.37, p<.05). Positive relationships between leadership effectiveness and both emotional intelligence (Pearson’s r(30)=.38, p<.05) and transformational leadership practices (Pearson’s r(30)=.90, p<.01) were also evident.

Researchers Brown and Reilly (2008) also explored these interrelated topics. Their study was conducted in a large manufacturing firm that was an affiliate of an international technology company. Two-thousand four-hundred and twenty-five questionnaires were completed, of which two-thousand four-hundred and eleven were usable for the purposes of the study. A minimum of three unique follower reports were available for 161 managers and supervisors who had also completed the EQ-i. The follower assessments of leadership behaviors of managers and supervisors represented the aggregated sentiment of 2,411 followers. Managers/supervisors in the study had an average of 178 months of longevity in the company, 28 percent identified themselves as female, 72 percent as male. Thus, at the end of the data collection period, gender identification, emotional-social intelligence scores, follower assessments of transformational leadership behaviors, follower assessments of unit effectiveness, satisfaction levels with supervision, and willingness to expend extra effort ratings were available for 161 working leaders/managers. The possibility of a difference in leadership styles of males and females was tested by comparing respective mean scores on the component and composite transformational leadership measures utilizing analysis of variance (ANOVA). In this sample, utilizing over 2000 follower reports of 161 managers in the same organization, there is absolutely no support for the proposition that men and women differ in any respect in their use of transformational leadership behaviors. ANOVAs were also run for emotional components. A significant difference was found in support of greater emotionally intelligent female leaders in interpersonal, intrapersonal, and adaptability areas. Significant ranges also approached the area of mood. There was also some statistical information noted in the area of stress management. It is essential to realize that the failure to find definitive and extensive statistical links among emotional-social intelligence, transformational leadership, and gender is “hardly the last word” on the relationship among these topics (Brown & Reilly, 2008, p.8). Studies such as these continue to present emotional-social intelligence, leadership, and gender as useful constructs for further study.

Gender is one variable that one would think is fairly easy to evaluate quantitatively regarding the basic number of educational leadership positions held in New Jersey public school systems. Surprisingly, however, this particular statistic is absent from all published information provided by the New Jersey Department of Education. Educational leadership preparation program statistics indicate women are actively training to become school leaders in greater numbers than men. New Jersey, through the NJEXCEL program, offers alternative paths to school administrative certification. In 2004, the majority of people participating in the NJEXCEL program were women. According to the most recent available statistics, females represented 76% of all participants in this program (ed.gov/admin/recruit/prep/alternative/edlite-figure1.html “Characters of Profiled Programs”). Additionally, the majority of people in New Jersey who participated in graduate level programs that culminate in graduate degrees that might enable them to be certified as both principals and superintendents were women as well (New Jersey Commission of Higher Education, 2011). The New Jersey Commission on Higher Education 2011 statistics, unfortunately, do not current disaggregate data according to graduate level program and gender. Confoundedly, neither the United States nor the New Jersey Department of Education disaggregate educational leadership positions held data according to gender.

Regarding graduate programs in all public universities in New Jersey in 2011 in general, 52.3% of the students graduating from Doctoral programs and 62.6% of the students graduating from Masters programs were female (FY11 IPEDS Completion Survey Results). Despite the fact that women make up 75% of the nation’s teaching force (U.S. Department of Education, 2005) and 75% of New Jersey’s teaching force (D’Amico, 2010), only approximately 15-18% of the nation’s superintendents are women (de Santa Ana, 2008; Grogan & Brunner, 2005). Although women comprise over 70% of the candidates for superintendent vacancies, fewer than 10% of the positions are actually filled by women (Brunner, 1999). In 2013, approximately 75% of public school teachers are female and 4.3 million of the general population of adults are female and 4 million of the general population are male (U.S. Census, 2010). As noted in Shakeshaft’s 2007 research, the Center for Educational statistical report for the United States Department of Education [2003-2004 SASS Report] “does not indicate the percentage of females in the principalship, although the question was included on the survey” (p. 24). In 2012, gathering reliable data based on gender statistics continues to prove to be a difficult task. As Tyack and Hansot first reported in 1982, the continuing absence of this type of data has historical precedent (Lumby, 2011): “Amid proliferation of other kinds of statistical reporting is an age enamored of numbers—reports so detailed that one could give the precise salary of staff in every community across the county and exact information in all sorts of other variables—data by sex became strangely inaccessible. A conspiracy of silence could hardly have been unintentional” (Tyack & Hansot, 1982, p. 13).

At the onset, the figures above appear to represent an advancement for women in educational leadership, considering that early 1990s research showed that women held just 5% of the superintendent positions, 20.6% of assistant superintendent positions, and 30% of the principals across the United States (Restine, 1993). If this concept of progress is accepted, however, one must ponder what it means for women to make “advancements” in this field, particularly in New Jersey. Women still appear to be underrepresented in educational leadership positions, despite holding the largest percentage nation-wide in both the teaching profession and educational leadership preparation programs (Grogan & Brunner, 2005; Shakeshart, 1999). It is necessary to examine the factors that contribute to the current percentages of female representation in school leadership positions in New Jersey. These findings will enhance the primary aim of analyzing the role of emotional-social intelligence and leadership skills in relation to potential variables related to gender.

Fair representation—what does it really mean? As Lumby recently pointed out, “Selecting a comparator population presents technical issues, and deciding what might be the goal presents social justice issues” (2011, p.2). Clearly, a purely quantitative methodology to study the gender differences in school leadership positions imposes some limits; the foremost limitation being the resounding absence of data. In order to truly understand the differential phenomenon, perhaps new studies must be conducted that specifically analyze gender. My study entails collecting and analyzing data related not only to emotional-social intelligence and leadership, but also to the schoarship of gender study. Viewing the issue through the lenses of emotional-social intelligence, leadership, and gender, it is hoped that richer insight will be yielded. Narrative and ethnographic approaches offer data “that are rich enough to pursue analysis of how particular characteristics and contexts moderate self-perception and the response of others; interpretation becomes not the mathematics of social justice, but listening to the dissonant music of inequality” (Lumby, 2011, p.3). This current study might yield qualitative data in addition to the dominant quantitative data. While quantitative data analysis is helpful in evaluation because it provides quantifiable and easy to understand results, qualitative data may offer a more complete story. My study is not about the absence of women (Shakeshaft, 1999), a theme upon which many early feminist thinkers relied. It is instead about the presence of them and all that such presence entails.

Contemporary gender research regarding similarities and differences in leadership has generally come as a result of women holding more and more leadership roles in corporations, politics, and government. While women have made great strides in these arenas, they are still underrepresented at the higher levels of such organizations (Fortune, 2007). Perhaps there is something, commonly referred to as a “glass ceiling,” that is stopping women from advancing to the highest levels of professional achievement (Morrison, White, & Van Velsor, 1987). The idea is that “systemic impact is created via formal systems (such as performance evaluations, promotions, training, etc.) and informal systems (such as who talks with whom, who gets to attend which events, etc.) such that it impedes the advancement of women to higher levels” (Kent, Blair, & Rudd, 2010, p. 53). That this organizational result exists has been widely verified (Eagly & Karau, 2002; Fletcher, 2004; Heilman et al., 2004; Lyons & McArthur, 2007). These studies showed that there may actually be different styles of leadership employed by men and women, which could account for the disparity in promotion to higher level leadership positions. Perhaps female and male teachers are identified differently as potential leaders. An examination of class placement is warranted because “class identity becomes salient when [an] individual moves from one context to another” (Frable, 1997, p. 139). As stated in the Center for Women’s Global Leadership statement of Rutgers University (2011), “Central to the realization of the human rights of women is an understanding that women do not experience discrimination and other forms of human rights violations solely on the grounds of gender, but for a multiplicity of reasons, including ages, disability, health status, race, ethnicity, caste, class, national origin and sexual orientation.” To a certain extent, as Rutgers University recognized, discrimination in women's lives may be present in organizations for a multitude of reasons. However, the structures of many organizations, particularly local school systems in New Jersey, perhaps do not necessarily support the implementation of such an understanding.

Interest in gender related injustice blossomed from social justice theory with particular goals to analyze social problems more fully. The notion that multiplicities play a role in inequality goes back to DuBois (1903) when he posited that the concepts of race and class, in addition to gender (what he deemed a “personal characteristic”), be considered in any discussion relating to the topic. These concepts open additional questions at play when examining relative inequalities. Crenshaw’s work shows that systems of oppression can converge to create complex forms of inequality that are different from singular categorizations of inequality. As Crenshaw and others point out, gender related disadvantage or exclusion can be based on multiple factors rather than just a single one. As Shields (2008) states, “The facts of our lives reveal that there is no single identity category that satisfactorily describes how we respond to our social environment or are responded to by others” (p. 304). The facts of the lives of many serving in New Jersey’s schools do the same.

The study of leadership and gender related injustice has roots in Max Weber and Georg Simmel’s theories from the early Twentieth Century (Collins, 2004). Class as a social construct was not viewed as such until the early to mid-Twentieth Century. This came about as a result of workers’ movements. Weber was concerned with understanding the complexities that status and power bring to Marx’s idea of class stratification (Cox, 1950). The realization of the understanding and application of Marx’s theories has proven somewhat elusive regarding social change. The concepts of class consciousness and social change were much more difficult to achieve than Marx thought, according to Weber. For example, some have found that “status group affiliation and differences in power create concerns that may override class issues” (Collins, 2000, p. 287). Group affiliation and power differentials sometimes result in different “life chances.” The socially conditioned emergence of different life chances has been defined as a form of exploitation (Giddens, 1973). While Marxist and Weberian notions of exploitation dealt primarily with exchanges of capital and production, other researchers are attempting to investigate how organizational structures themselves may impose harm on employees (Segre, 2010). Regardless of any formally bestowed rights, inequality may cause subconscious groupthink exclusionary practices. Furthermore, Simmel was concerned with social relationships. He found that if people lived in small, rural communities, their relational and social structures were “organic” and involved little choice. He believed that social structures and settings were strongly influenced by group membership. In his view, people in such structures will have overlapping work, schooling, and religious groups that result in social homogeneity. What Simmel coined as “rational” group membership prevails in more modern, urban social structures. In such settings, people tend to see themselves as individuals with freedom of choice. In Simmel’s scheme, however, “this freedom and individuality is offset by increasing levels of anomie and the blasé attitude” (Collins, 2000, p.8). From a pupil’s perspective, it is important to consider the classroom environment. From an employee or potential educational leader’s perspective, it is important to consider the work environment. The social interaction within a classroom, for example, sometimes defines children for their entire schooling experience. In a workplace, the same dynamic can also occur, legitimizing the status quo. It might well be important to an individual’s career path to have access to certain conversations, privileges, or events if one is to advance her career. In a sense, both of Simmel and Weber’s theories are essential when contemplating contemporary small and large New Jersey school districts and the potential and actual leaders’ professional trajectories.

While the goals of gender research are many—i.e., equitable pay, equal access to education, inclusive visions of citizenship—the main objective is to bring “awareness and capacity to the social justice industry in order to expand and deepen its interventions” (Crenshaw, 2012). The core elements of a gender-based approach have been articulated in the Beijing Platform for Action and in the outcome document from the Special Session of the General Assembly entitled "Women, 2000: Gender, Equality, Development and Peace for the Twenty-First Century.” The Beijing Declaration (2000) calls for governments to "intensify efforts to ensure equal enjoyment of all human rights and fundamental freedoms for all women and girls who face multiple barriers to their empowerment and advancement.” Certainly, it can be recognized that perceived professional classes and gender provide different experiences that influence an individual’s career path. Yet, one must go beyond these general categories in order to truly examine the many barriers women face in the workplace and to possibly develop and expand interventions.

Gender and leadership is an “area with many unanswered questions” (Smith, Matkin, & Fritz, 2004, p. 52). Oppression produces different opportunities for a person. This can lead to structural discrimination where the policies of a dominant gender or class group and the behaviors of individuals who implement them control the organization. Where such policies might be neutral in intent, there is a potentially harmful or differential effect on other gender and class groups. Unwitting prejudice and stereotyping can be detected in the processes, attitudes, and behaviors of those in control. This provides a systematic way in which social norms and practices perpetuate to advantage certain groups over others. Molloy et al., (2003) warn that lifting one aspect of oppression, emphasizing one aspect over another, creates the danger of hierarchy. As Ferree notes, “The understandings of all forms of inequality are mutually stretched and bent as they encounter each other” (2009). Potential causes of career oppression are dynamic—they are as animated and living as the individuals who experience them.

There are many realities in the lives of female school leaders. Some researchers have proposed that motherhood, the responsibility of combining care for offspring and work, creates yet another important intersection within the complex patterns of inequality and privilege (O’Hagan, 2010) that may vary according to individual circumstances. In contemporary society, many women are expected to devote significant effort to the development of both their children and their careers. Women are expected to “navigate the terrain between motherhood and paid work with little social support” (Cook, 2009, p.I). Numerous studies have demonstrated that the work/life interface has significant personal and organizational outcomes (Allis & O’Driscoll, 2008; Casper & Harris, 2008; Giardini & Kabst, 2008). Many families today are “nontraditional” with larger and larger percentages of children being reared by single parents over the last few decades. In a recent review of the work/life literature, Casper et al. (2007) found that married individuals comprised 83% of the sample population of the 225 studies published between 1983 and 2003 dealing with the work/life interface. People who do not belong to such a group, single mothers, for example, are largely unrepresented as they are less likely to be depicted in the literature. As the Sloan Foundation’s Christiansen and Gomery put it, “Two parent families now have three jobs but only two people to do them. Single parents who work for pay have an even more difficult task juggling their responsibilities at work and home” (Bailyn et al., 2001, p. 5). Regardless of individual opinion, statistics show that the family concept has clearly been redefined over the last few decades. Beck-Gernsheim (2002) argue that more inclusive and relevant studies that mirror the reality of contemporary social organizations are necessary in order to understand work experiences of contemporary family members. To date, analyses are limited due to a lack of this type of perspective.

There are consequences to using categories when describing certain phenomenon. McCall (2005) suggests three potential problems when using gender to categorize exclusively. These include: anticategorical complexity—which insists that categorizing the complexity of people is inevitably reductive and simplistic and in itself causes harm; intercategorical complexity—which accepts that it may be necessary to utilize existing multiple and changing categories of individuals to explore the flows of inequality; and intracategorical complexity—which accepts categorization but focuses on the experience of those who cross boundaries of categories. Lundy (2011) states, “the challenge is to investigate adequately and understand the effects of gender as moderated not only by individuals’ other characteristics, but also as mediated by the context within which they function.” This echoes Crenshaw who noted, “The problem with identity politics is not that it fails to transcend difference, as some critics charge, but rather the opposite—that it frequently conflates or ignores intragroup differences” (Crenshaw, 1994, p.1242). Regarding limitations on career aspirations, social structures matter. If a person is female and single-parenting in a predominately “traditional” organizational structure, this can have a critical impact on her professional career path. Women’s experiences are often shaped by other identities in their lives. In the Twenty-First Century, female educational leaders embody many identities.

In many instances, female leaders do not fit the traditional mold of the “Ideal Worker.” Hence, the talents of many are potentially underutilized due to policy, scheduling, and practice issues. While the Feminist Movement brought about many positive and significant changes to the lives of women and the world, it also failed to bring about organizational change within employment situations that might need to better reflect the changing demographic of workers. Society has changed, but organizational structures largely have not. The culture of today’s educational institutions as places of employment often emphasizes twenty-four hour, seven days per week availability. This imposes new implications for the non-work aspects of peoples’ lives. The myth of the Ideal Worker is a concept of total devotion to career, the ability to alter schedules at the drop of a hat, the implicit understanding that work always comes first because someone else will care for other domestic issues at home: “The ideal-worker norm, framed around the traditional life patterns of men, excludes most mothers of childbearing age” (Williams, 2000, p. 2).

Since the 1950s, the sharpest workforce increase is among mothers of young children (Aguilar, 2012). Acker (2006) uses the term “class” to refer to “enduring and systematic differences in access to and control over resource for provisioning and survival” (p. 445). She and others note that there are still very distinct systems of class differences regarding gender and the work-life interface in many organizations. Interlocked practices and processes result in organizational inequality and the reproduction of inequalities. In contrast to McCall’s approach (2005) regarding the analysis of gender in relation to economic activity, Acker examined “the local, ongoing practical activities of organizing work that reproduce complex inequalities” (Acker, 2006, p.442). She analyzed organizations and gender regarding promotional opportunities, employment security, pay and monetary rewards, and pleasures in work and work relations. Not surprisingly, unequal pay was a clear finding. Interestingly, in an earlier study of Swedish banks, she also found that the branch office that was “most successful in distributing tasks and decision making was the one with women employees and a preexisting participatory ethos” (Acker, 2006, p. 443). Additionally, Galinsky et al. (2008) found in a national study of employers that “organizations where women make up over fifty percent of the employees are more likely to have a high level of flexibility (35%) than organizations where women are less than twenty-four percent of the workforce (12%)” (2008, p. 35). In these studies, the workplaces that had the most obvious transformational leadership practices were ones that were run by women.

Examining the concepts of the Ideal Worker and the Work Life Balance requires close examination of role identity and cultural assumptions. Male and female roles are often perpetuated in organizations based on long held beliefs. These concepts require one to really analyze life, family, and work as they truly exist today. Gender is not just an expression of biology but also a social structure but can be considered a “dynamic set of socially constructed relationships” (Emslie & Hunt, 2009, p. 152) that morphs with time and circumstance. The facts demonstrate that attention needs to be paid to both of these ideas. In private industry, women win over fifty percent of entry-level jobs and make it to the middle of managerial status in relatively large numbers (about 53%), but then female presence falls off to 35% at the director level, 24% at the senior vice president level, and 19% at the CEO level (Barton, 2012). According to Gail Rosseau, neurosurgeon and a director of the American Association of Neurological Surgeons, about half of all medical school graduates are women, but only 4.38% of practicing neurosurgeons are (Rosseau, 2012). As Barton (2012) warns, the “middle of the pipeline” where women fall off must be analyzed.

Seeking a work life balance continues to be a lofty goal for many contemporary educational leaders. It continues to be unattainable for many women who are held to both the Ideal Worker and Ideal Mother norms. While the Ideal Worker is always available to the work organization, particularly with today’s technological advances, the Ideal Mother is expected to always be available to her children and their needs. Many organizations give primacy to work obligations over family care obligations. Society and the economy are still “rigged to create imbalance” for many women who are employed (Drago, 2007, p. 3). Being employed, especially if one is a single parent, requires finding adequate child care, incurring additional expenses brought on by child care, and being absent during some critical times in the lives of family members. Socio-economic factors are critical in achieving a Work Life Balance. The ability to “outsource” life aspects is limited to individuals who are high on the socio-economic scale who are able to employ reliable, well-paid child care providers and housecleaners, for example (Halrynjo, 2009, p. 119). Regarding the Work Life Balance, mothers who work tend to compare themselves more intensively to the Ideal Mother ideology than the Ideal Worker norm (Malone, 2011). Drago argues that the “norm of motherhood leads women to expect, and be expected, to serve as caregivers for their families, and, more broadly, to care for anyone in need, and to do so for love rather than money” (Drago, 2007, p. 7). This potentially sets women up for unequal access in the workplace. It also sets them up for unrealistic expectations on the homefront. As Williams notes, “The [I]deal [W]orker standard and norm of work devotion push mothers to the margins of economic life. And a society that marginalizes its mothers impoverishes its children. That is why the paradigmatic poor family in the United States is a single mother and her child” (2012, p. 103). Although perhaps single women who exist in educational leadership positions or who aspire to do so might not be economically impoverished, they might be potentially stretched to the limit both financially, due to unequal pay, career trajectory options, and child care costs, and psychologically due to the normative expectations of work and familial commitments. Blair-Loy (2003) has called these ideals regarding being a good parent and being a good worker devotional schemas, and her research has shown these create mutually exclusive binds for women who want to combine career and family. The omnipresent Ideal Worker and Ideal Mother expectations leave today’s single parents in a difficult situation. The choice between one or the other is just not an option for many working parents today. The harmonious and holistic integration of work and outside interests and responsibilities seems to leave people with fewer and fewer options to achieve their full potential across any domain in which they play active roles.

So what, exactly, does it mean to be a female school leader, or someone who aspires to be such an individual, in contemporary New Jersey school systems? On the surface in New Jersey, women are still underrepresented in educational administration. Most current leadership preparation programs and theories are still based on the research of leaders that were predominately white males (Gardiner et al., 2000). These programs and their theoretical perspectives may not be successfully generalized to the growing number of female administrators seeking school- and district-based administrative certification in New Jersey. The specific critique of gender and related issues provides insight into the study of the production and reproduction of inequalities, dominance, and oppression (Shields, 2008). It recognizes that gender and other work and social identities are just the starting point (Crenshaw, 2005). Further, identities must be defined in relation to one another and must be rationally defined (Anthias & Yuval-Davis, 1983; Collins, 1990). A framework that emphasizes the differences among gender and social influences and impacts can aid in understanding quantitative results. While “difference is a seductive oversimplification” (Eagly, 1998), difference in the total story of a person’s personal and professional path matters.

As more women seek and attain leadership roles in business and academic organizations, the idea that they might carry out their duties differently than men is attracting much interest. Women are working as leaders in most professions, albeit in small numbers (Clare, 1999). For several decades, the literature surrounding leadership styles in relation to gender has uncovered stark contrasts dependent upon forum. Popular periodicals have repeatedly stated that females are superior leaders and lead in very different ways than their male counterparts, yet academic writing has not largely supported this claim. Leadership style has been defined as the “relatively stable patterns of behaviors of leaders” (Eagly et al., 2003, p. 564). The possibility that men and women lead differently is an important area to study because “leaders’ own behavior is a major determinant of their effectiveness and chances for advancement” (Eagly et al. 2003, p. 569). Popular literature regarding distinctive female leadership patterns abound (Book, 2000; Helgesen, 1990; Loden, 1985; Rosener, 1995). Female leaders, these writers maintain, “are less hierarchical, more cooperative and collaborative, and more oriented to enhancing others’ self-worth” (Eagly et al., 2003, p. 569). Magazines written for the business world have also reported differences. For example, Business Week stated in a special report, “As leaders, women rule. New studies find that female managers outshine their male counterparts in almost every measure” (Sharpe, 2000, p. 121), and Fast Company reported after conducting a survey of female CEOs that “the future of business depends on women” (Hefferman, 2002, p. 2). Academic writers, however, largely disagree (Bartol & Martin, 1986; Nieva & Gutek, 1981; van der Leeden & Willemsen, 2001). These writers claim that there is “little evidence of gender differences between men and women in terms of influence, dominance, confidence, capacity to lead, motivate, or deal with problems and conflict within organizations” (Clare, 1999, p. 36). Others also minimize the differences that have been found and attribute these mainly to the lower levels of power held by the women in the majority of studies (Kanter, 1977; Kark, 2001; Powell, 1990). They suggest that women superficially appear to lead differently only because they have not generally risen to the superior levels of power to which the men included in many studies have.

In a study conducted by Russell, Rush, and Herd (1988) that examined women’s behavioral expectations of effective male and female leaders, it was found that many similarities existed among the female participants in their views of effective leadership. While there were age-related differences among the women in their expectations, particularly with regard to effective female leadership, the results suggested that women, irrespective of age, expected that a female leader should exhibit higher levels of consideration, a stereotypic female leader behavior, than a male leader. Eagly and Johnson (1990) conducted a meta-analysis of gender and leadership style that examined studies comparing men and women on task and interpersonal styles as well as democratic and autocratic styles. Evidence was found for both the presence and absence of differences between men and women. While the authors concluded that the overall search for sex differences in leader style was not demonstrated, significant gender differences were reported in the use of democratic or participatory styles of leadership. Their research revealed that women leaders are less directive than men. Eagly, Makhijani, and Klonsky (1992) later demonstrated that women are viewed less favorably when leading in a direct manner; perhaps because of this, women tend to adopt a direct style less frequently than men (Eagly, Johannesen-Schmidt, & van Engen, 2003).

In the realm of emotional intelligence, women performed about 0.5 standard deviations higher than men using previously developed tests of emotional intelligence (Mayer, Caruso, Salovey, 1999). One possible explanation for this is that women must read emotions more carefully because they possess less power in society than do men. [However], research shows that it is women in more powerful positions

who have exhibited greater emotional accuracy… [Alternative explanations of this finding include the idea that] women may be socialized to pay more attention to emotions, and further, that they may be

better biologically prepared to perform such tasks. Research does not address the relative contributions of these factors (Mayer, Caruso, &Salovey, 1999, p.293).

There are significant gendering processes at work in our culture. “When children are born they enter into a gender-tracking system that creates different social realities for the sexes. Parents, teachers, and peers believe that the sexes differ—and explicitly or subtly reward, punish, and ignore behaviors in accordance with prevailing stereotypes. Different physical environments are constructed for the sexes, environments that provide different opportunities for learning physical and cognitive skills” (Russo, 1985, p. 150).

There is a prevailing belief embedded within our society that women are more emotional then men. According to commonly held beliefs, women are more emotionally responsive, experiencing and expressing most emotions more intensely than do men; men, if they are emotional at all, are believed to experience and express more anger. In contrast to these widely held beliefs, the empirical status of sex differences in emotions remains unknown (Barrett et al., 2000, p.1027).

Practical experience in working in schools and comprehensive reviews of literature further understandings regarding educational organizations in several ways. They may also help to explain why some individuals are more likely to succeed in life and work than others. Certainly they help to illuminate the notion that interpersonal relationships and the ability to communicate effectively can be the “Achilles heel of effective school leadership” (Marshall, 2011 p. 1). They can be one’s saving grace in understanding barriers to career mobility. It is evident that emotional and social responses impact behavioral responses to situational cues (Arvey et al., 1998; Mayer et al., 2000). People who lead in a caring manner rather than in limited emotional-social ways have higher goal attainment within organizations (Newman, Guy, & Mastracci, 2009). Emotionally competent group norms are related to greater team performance (Stubbs, 2005). Positive physiological and neurological effects are experienced when positive intrapersonal and interpersonal experiences occur. Leaders with heightened emotional-social intelligence are more likely to engage in transformational leadership behaviors than those who possess lower levels of these intelligences (Barling et al., 2000). Where leaders and subordinates raise one another to high levels of motivation and morality, there is a positive association with effective reform agenda implementation (Sivanathan & Fekken, 2002). Transformational leadership has the potential to increase organizational leadership, articulate shared visions, distribute responsibility, and build a school culture necessary for current reform efforts in public schools (Abu-Tineh et al., 2009).

Many researchers are currently engaged in advancing the theoretical and methodological construct of emotional-social intelligence as a human ability that can be altered or adapted. Emotional-social intelligence has a positive correlation to positive work attitudes, altruistic behaviors, and work outcomes (Carmeli, 2003). High levels of emotional-social intelligence are required to be effective transformational leaders. They also play a role in balancing the multiplicities presented by work and non-work life aspects of individuals who are impacted by varying responsibilities. There are moderate to positive correlations to work/life interfaces that prove increased emotional-social intelligence leads to greater job satisfaction (Carmeli, 2003), although inter-role conflict pressures are mutually incompatible in certain respects. Although participation in the work of the family is affected by the participation in the work of work, empirical evidence shows that people with higher emotional-social intelligence are able to balance work and family effectively. This can lead to greater organizational goal attainment, fewer work days lost, higher work and family commitment, and improved moral.

In 1909, Ella Young, the first female superintendent of the Chicago Public School system stated, “Women are destined to rule the schools. . . .In the near future we will have more women than men in executive charge of the vast educational system. It is woman’s natural field. . .” (Hansot & Tyack, 1982, p.1). In spite of this optimistic destiny predicted by Young, the reality is that women have never dominated public school administration. Shakeshaft reported: "The percentage of women in school administration in the 1980’s

was less than the percentage of women in 1905. Women have seldom attained the most powerful and prestigious administrative positions in schools, and the gender structure of males as managers and females as workers has remained relatively stable for the past 100 years. Historical record, then, tells us that there

never was a golden age for women administrators, only a promise unfulfilled" (1989, p.51). Mertz (2003) believes that female “scarcity in the position of superintendent . . .suggests that the position has been little affected by Title IX and that females continue to have a long, uncertain way to go to reach the top spot” (p. 5).

Males continue to dominate the highest levels of school leadership positions, despite a quantitatively measurable greater number of females who are adequately prepared and actively applying for such positions. Female leaders must have a clear understanding of obstacles they might potentially face so they might overcome these. This knowledge is especially important in the study of school superintendency due to the fact that “the negative effects of gender bias appear to be greater rather than lesser for women who occupy the most powerful administrative office in public schools” (Brunner, 1999, p. 196).

Contemporary educational organizations might be wise to consider the implications of the real lives of leaders and the lives of potential future leaders in New Jersey’s public schools as they craft policies and practices that better reflect the realities of the lives of these individuals. It might also be wise to understand emotional and social intelligence and differing manners of leadership. If not, there will continue to be critical implications. These include: a loss of qualified human resources, increased financial pressures, increased absenteeism, high turnovers that result in lost investments in human resources, and stress “spillovers” that result in increased healthcare costs.

School districts must adapt to new realities. As educational organizations operate currently, they reflect decades old paradigms that might eventually result in an even greater number of human resource shortages and organizational crises. Institutional and cultural support must be provided to permit a healthy balance that is critical to equality. As school districts face long-term impending shortages of educational leaders, it is evident that they have a major stake in gender issues, transformational leadership practices, and emotional-social intelligence research.