Dump your ego, up your EQ as a virtual leader!

I am sure you may all be reading recent surveys about working from home with some alarm. On the one hand, more and more people want to maintain the hybrid or virtual arrangement to have the flexibility of working from their home, office, or even other places. On the other hand, engagement levels have gone down (by 16% per Wall Street Journal, 3/21/2021), 46% of employees feel less connected with their colleagues (Achievers.com survey, 2021), and 34% do not feel valued by their superiors at work. More than one-third of employees are looking for a job change, particularly among millennials. Anxiety management classes have skyrocketed by 4000%, and digital overload shows a 148% increase in meetings and a 45% increase in chats since the pandemic (Microsoft work trends, 2021). Alarming statistics.

Out of the blue, I got an email from an old colleague and friend of mine, Bob McEwan. Bob is of the best leaders I ever worked with, and he wrote to me worried about the leadership issues he saw during the pandemic. He said, "People and teams need encouragement, engagement, personal connection and feel that sense of belonging. I have been worried for a while."

Bob's uniqueness was his high level of EQ. He consistently demonstrated sensitivity and sensibility in any situation, always being acutely aware of any situation and creating an environment of emotional connectedness that people came to love. He inspired me to write on this topic.

As we experience tumultuous changes in our business environment, employees feel vulnerable and even unsafe. The known parameters of work and working are changing rapidly, and employees yearn for a supportive boss-someone who has the empathy, compassion, and sensitivity to understand what they are experiencing and work with it. Emotional intelligence becomes an essential skill that leaders need to display right now. Not being emotionally sensitive is likely to impact employee retention, engagement, productivity, and wellbeing. I will share some anecdotal incidents of how leaders show up without the EQ sensitivity and its implications.

a) In one organization, HR took the initiative of inviting external experts to conduct resilience training during the crisis, inviting everyone to join. In the first week, a few C-Suite members joined, but none did in the second week. In the third week, many of the regular more junior participants also dropped, even though the program received high marks for its effectiveness. When asked, the participants pointed out that their leaders are no longer attending the training. The interpretation from the subordinates was that the leaders felt that attending such training showed 'weakness,' and they (the leaders) do not want to be seen as 'weak’ (on resilience) in front of their teams. Soon many team members also dropped for the same reason. These leaders have attained their positions based on a high level of ego- with a great degree of self-confidence, conviction, and competitiveness. To come through as vulnerable and to need resilience training would be seen as a sign of weakness and affect their credibility as leaders in their minds). By making this assumption, unfortunately, the leaders in the organization missed out big on two EQ dimensions- firstly, to make a profound connection with their team members, and secondly, to show that they just as human as everybody else and appreciate such interventions in times of uncertainty. They also missed an opportunity to cultivate empathy and compassion for what their employees are going through.

2) The second example I would like to share is from one of the surveys (Achievers.com), which talks about 'inaction fatigue.' The survey says that many leaders sought feedback from their teams on improving their virtual experience and feedback on them as virtual leaders; however, only 16% took any action on the input. Employees have had it with such inaction-they are ready to throw up on requests for more feedback that goes nowhere! Some employees mention that they are hounded with deadlines to complete the input, only to see their inputs vanish. Not taking action on feedback are disrespectful. It conveys the leader's ego, "I will choose if I need to respond or ignore," and soon, employees will stop giving meaningful feedback. One leader I spoke to shared with me that his greatest feedback came from making his numbers- if he made them, all was well- if he did not- he needed to figure out why! If only 16% of the leaders are responding to feedback, we have a big EQ problem. This means that leaders are not reading the warning signs in their organization- and this will show up negatively in the long term. Emotionally intelligent leaders will be vigilant to subtle and not-so-subtle signals from the organization regarding what is working and what needs fixing. They would be willing to step outside their mind to see how others are experiencing the situation and factor in those elements that need addressing.

c) One organization regularly holds communication all-hands meetings. While the business has done well during the pandemic, the organization did take cost actions and reduce headcount. In a recent communication call, the CEO shared that the company was outperforming its key indicators. In the open session following the CEO's address, a member on the call asked the CEO why the company was still contemplating further headcount actions if the company was doing so well. There was a moment of quiet on the call. Everyone could see from his body language that the CEO was annoyed by the question. He turned around to his colleague sitting next to him, pressed what he thought was the mute button, and told the colleague, "if he does not like it here, he should go somewhere else!" Everyone on the call heard this! While he later apologized, it was too late. The CEO's credibility plummeted- people called him defensive and not willing to answer tough questions. Leaders with high egos often lose self-control and react defensively. They are offended by the fact someone dares question them. On the other hand, emotionally intelligent leaders would deal with the question with grace- acknowledge that while reducing headcount may seem inappropriate in the short term and maybe share a few facts that justify the action from a long-term point of view. By the way, there were no more questions after this one on the call, and in the next all-hands meeting, there were no questions at all! People got the message- raise issues at your peril!

d) I recently heard from an HR colleague that she was asked to organize a workshop by the head of the department (her boss's boss). Excited to be assigned to the project, she did some groundwork by talking to many colleagues on the topics they would like to be included in the agenda and sent a strawman proposal to the chief (and her boss). Her boss was okay with it, but the leader who assigned this work to her in the first place came back, rejecting her plan completely and coming up with his version of the agenda- asking her to execute the plan, with the note at the end that said that ' this is what I see needs to get done, so get on with it.' My friend was demoralized and frustrated. Her initial excitement of being empowered to structure the agenda went down, and she felt used. She told me that she finally did the department leader's bidding, but without her heart in it. Failure to let go of control and micromanage issues is a huge issue. My colleague also told me that this leader often remarked that he would never ask someone to do a task that he could not do himself! Micromanagers and control freaks believe that they would do it better than anyone else and allow for little space for others to grow, make mistakes and learn. Many of them may have been promoted for their technical skills and may not realize that they need to elevate themselves to be effective in their leadership.

These four vignettes are but a larger piece of the argument. It is to illustrate the importance of EQ during times like this. Author Jen Shirkani in her book Ego vs. EQ (the inspiration for the title of this article), says that "EQ is the demonstration of sensibility. It is a set of skills that includes the ability to recognize one’s own impulses and moods, read situations and others accurately, and respond most appropriately, depending on the situation or person involved."

Bob was extraordinary in his EQ skills. He would spend countless hours with his teams- not just the white-collar team members but also workers on the shop floor. He knew most by their name. He learned about their families. He welcomed all the different ideas and ways to make things happen. People believed and trusted him because he spent so much time with them. He formed a bond, a connection with individuals and teams. He was always available. To him, his people were important, and they knew that. He used to say, "You know when your people stop coming to you, you have lost their trust." And trust is the hallmark of a high EQ leader.

Do you agree?