Organizational Leadership and Emotional Intelligence

Emotional intelligence (EI) plays a crucial role in effective leadership. Research by J.D. Mayer and P. Salovey (1997) demonstrates that leaders with high EI better manage their own emotions and those of the people around them. A meta-analysis by Van Rooy and Viswesvaran (2004) further confirms a positive correlation between emotional intelligence and leadership effectiveness. In their influential book Resonant Leadership (2002), R. Boyatzis and A. McKee highlight how EI fosters a positive and engaging atmosphere within teams. Additionally, R. Bar-On’s research (2006) links high EI scores with successful leadership outcomes. These findings underscore the importance of developing emotional intelligence for anyone aspiring to lead effectively.

During my dissertation research in 2013, I had the privilege of studying real-world leaders—owners of successful businesses across diverse sectors. We identified significant correlations and influences:
• Certain leadership styles closely relate to specific components of a leader’s emotional intelligence.
• Training and consultations focused on developing EI showed clear changes in leadership models and, consequently, organizational culture, compared to control groups.

For our research, we used a model of leadership and organizational culture based on the metaphors of family, army, and church to gain deeper insight into internal dynamics and management styles. Drawing from G. Morgan’s metaphorical approach to organizational analysis (1986), and L. Aksenovskaya’s adaptation of these metaphors to the Russian context (2003), this model allows us to explore how different cultural images shape the atmosphere and effectiveness within organizations.

The results were striking: each leadership type exhibited a distinct emotional intelligence profile.
• The “Parent” leader shows high empathy and a strong understanding of others’ emotions.
• The “Pastor” scores highest in managing others’ emotions.
• The “Commander”, who generally has lower EI compared to the others, demonstrates strong emotional adaptability and resilience.

Each style brings both strengths and challenges for organizational culture. The “Parent” leader fosters close connections and usually achieves low employee turnover, but may also create excessive familiarity, blurred boundaries, and incomplete task execution. Discipline and subordination tend to be lower in such environments.

The “Pastor” leader inspires deeply and motivates employees intensely, often resulting in high engagement—but also a risk of burnout. This style prioritizes alignment with a grand vision over individual well-being, leading to higher employee turnover despite enthusiasm.

The “Commander” leader emphasizes rules, discipline, and procedures but often struggles with motivating employees. Companies with this culture tend to have lower engagement and loyalty, which negatively affects service quality and customer satisfaction.

However, according to Aksenovskaya’s concept, besides these three cultural types, there are three stages of development—from syncretic (mixed and chaotic) to synthetic (integrated and balanced). Based on my 15 years of consulting experience, I usually observe blends of two leadership types (e.g., “Parent-Pastor” or “Commander-Pastor”), with one prevailing; I have never encountered a purely singular style.

To foster a healthy and effective organizational culture, it is essential to:
• Assess the leader’s emotional intelligence profile.
• Apply leadership psychotherapy to address and develop emotional competencies.
• Integrate systemic organizational elements to build toward a synthetic, balanced leadership and culture.

Thank you for your attention! I hope you found this topic insightful. Please feel free to leave any questions or comments below—I’d be happy to engage in discussion.