Hernon.indd Emotional Intelligence: Which Traits Are Most Prized? Peter Hernon and Nancy Rossiter Leadership encompasses self-management and managing relation- ships with others. Such a characterization is best known as emotional intelligence. This article identifies the traits that comprise emotional in- telligence and suggests which ones might be most important for library directors to possess.The article also compares the emerging set of traits to transformational and transactional leadership in an effort to suggest which traits apply to two other leadership styles. eadership focuses on social influence—influencing oth- ers to a ain group, organi- zational, and societal goals. However, it is not a function confined solely to library directors and their senior management team; leadership should be evident at all levels of the organization. “Leadership,” as A. J. Anderson, profes- sor emeritus at Simmons College, com- mented, “needs to be adaptive. Group members and situations all influence a leader’s effectiveness.”1 Leadership is a complex ma er, one that involves mas- tery of a number of traits and an ability to apply different leadership styles. Skill in the practice of leadership is gained “by ‘doing’ and reflecting on what is being learned.”2 Leadership, which has more than a hundred definitions,3 is becoming criti- cally important for senior management as well as, for that ma er, many other librarians to possess. J. Richard Hackman, the Cahners-Rabb Professor of Social and Organizational Psychology at Harvard University, has commented that “lead- ing a team is an emotionally demanding undertaking, especially in dealing with anxieties—both one’s own and those of others.” Leaders at all levels of an organi- zation require emotional maturity to deal with these anxieties.4 Daniel Goleman, who popularized the term emotional intelligence (EI), showed that its possession is directly linked to leadership effectiveness.5 He character- ized EI as managing the mood of the organization and as the “sine qua non of leadership.”6 The five categories of emo- tional intelligence he identified are self- awareness, self-regulation, motivation, empathy, and social skill. The first three categories relate to self-management; the other two address managing relationships with others.7 Problem Statement Previous research has explored the traits that successful academic and public library directors need to have and dem- onstrate.8–13 No study has recast those Peter Hernon is a Professor in the Graduate School of Library and Information Science at Simmons College: e-mail: peter.hernon@simmons.edu. Nancy Rossiter is an Assistant Professor in the Graduate School of Library and Information Science at Simmons College: e-mail: nancy.rossiter@simmons.edu. 260 mailto:nancy.rossiter@simmons.edu mailto:peter.hernon@simmons.edu Emotional Intelligence: Which Traits Are Most Prized? 261 traits in terms of EI. How comprehensive is the list of traits? Which ones do library directors perceive as being most impor- tant? Secondary questions include: Can the traits be learned? Which individuals are perceived as exhibiting them? How important is leadership as reflected in a set of traits in hiring new directors? As Goleman explains, “having a well- developed emotional intelligence, both for the individual and for the organiza- tion, make it worth the effort.”14 Such intelligence is an essential part of the effective performance of leaders, and “a leader’s job is to provide that recognition of roles and functions within the group that will permit each member to satisfy and fulfill some major motive or interest,” thereby contributing to the maturity of the organization.15 Literature Review Sharon Gray Weiner of Vanderbilt Uni- versity provided an excellent synthesis of the research on “what is known about the characteristics and leadership style of university librarians and academic library directors.” She also has discussed studies that address “recruitment, leadership potential identification, career develop- ment, roles and responsibilities, and characteristics and management style.” As she showed, “leadership influences a library’s effectiveness, institutional role, and adaptability.”16 James F. Williams II of the University of Colorado at Boulder and Mark D. Winston of Rutgers University maintained that, for a long time, research conducted in the private sector has probed the competen- cies (traits and abilities) that successful leaders possess. Those competencies can be “used as a basis for strengthening an organization’s leadership team and de- termining the types of educational and leadership development opportunities that are needed for future leaders.”17 An issue of Library Trends (summer 2004), which is devoted to “organizational development and leadership,” contains several articles on the role of leaders and the acquisition of critical leadership traits. In particular, Shelley E. Phipps of the Uni- versity of Arizona library regarded library leaders as those who, in part, facilitate “a shared leadership system” that requires “a significant investment in leadership train- ing.”18 Consultants Florence M. Mason and Louella V. Wetherbee, who analyze various training programs for library leadership, showed that such programs try to develop participants’ leadership skills and “focus on leadership styles, self-discovery, and [an] emphasis on skill-building.”19 They encourage “the development of a clear and broadly accepted set of general library leadership competencies for all types of library se ings” and ”the vigorous promo- tion of these competences in library train- ing and educational venues of all types.”20 The study reported here continues the journey to forming a set of widely accepted traits that can be learned or refined. Outside library and information sci- ence, as suggested above, there is increased focus on EI. For example, one study shows that business leaders rank EI traits as more important than traditional leadership traits for the successful leader to posses.21 Of par- ticular importance are developing a shared vision, relationship building, employee development, adaptability, optimism, empathy, and self-awareness. Procedures This study consists of two parts: (1) an analysis of job advertisements for library directors and (2) a survey of library direc- tors. Job advertisements tend to reflect the perspectives of the search commi ee and those traits on which commi ee members can agree as important for the present and near future. The need for particular traits can shi over time and from situation to situation. The authors performed a content anal- ysis of all job advertisements appearing in College & Research Libraries News from 2000 through 2004 for the position of library director in institutions in either the As- sociation of Research Libraries (ARL) or the Association of College and Research http:posses.21 http:organization.15 262 College & Research Libraries May 2006 Libraries (ACRL), for any mention of leadership. Leadership was defined as covering one or more of the traits identi- fied in the survey portion of the study (and shown in tables 1–5). For the second part, university library directors serving in the ARL became the study population. Omi ing those insti- tutions in which the position was then listed as open (managed by an interim director), the study population totaled 102 individuals, of whom 70 responded to the five-page questionnaire (response rate of 68.6%). Eight respondents were selected for follow-up interviews conducted either in person or by telephone. Those selected for the interviews provided geographical, length of tenure as an ARL director, and gender balance. The purpose of the inter- views was to gain different perspectives on leadership and some of the study’s major findings. Excel was used for data entry and analysis for both the content analysis and survey portions of the study. Content Analysis of Job Advertisements The authors created five lists, each of which corresponded to one of the cat- egories of EI. The items in each list corre- sponded to the tables used to characterize EI in the survey portion of the study. For self-awareness (understanding of one’s self and one’s effect on others), the job advertisements identified only five traits. A “record of proven innovative and effec- tive leadership” was mentioned in 45 (19.9 %) of the 226 advertisements. “Respect for individuality and diversity” appeared in a distant second place (ten times). Round- ing out the list was: • “Respect scholarship, learning, and teaching” (3) • “Articulate” (2) • “Enthusiastic” (2) For self-regulation (think before acting and self-control), only four traits were mentioned. A “broad knowledge of is- sues” appeared most o en, but only in ten instances. Completing the list were “comfortable with change” (6), “think ‘outside the box’ (in new and creative ways applicable to the problem)” (4), and “flexible in adapting to change or overcoming obstacles” (1). The third category, motivation (pur- sue goals with energy and persistence, passion for work, and ge ing others to pursue a shared vision), produced more variety, with the following items listed: • “Visionary—able to build a shared vision and rally others around it” (46) • “Commitment to job, organization, institution, and profession” (18) • “Creative” (17) • “Good oral and wri en presenta- tion skills” (15) • “Create an environment that fosters accountability” (5) • “High energy level” (5) • “Motivate people to develop and adhere to a shared vision” (1) • “Encourage reasonable risk taking” (1) Two items appeared twice in the “other” category: “generate support” and “achieve goals.” For the fourth category, empathy (abil- ity to understand the emotional makeup of others and the skill to treat people according to their emotional reactions), only two items appeared: “good inter- personal/people skills” was mentioned twenty-seven times and “cross-cultural sensitivity and record of achievement” appeared only once. The final category, social skill (ability to manage relationships and build networks, and ability to find common ground and build rapport), had ten traits that ap- peared in the advertisements. “Collab- orative” was listed most frequently (35), followed by “advocate for librarians’ role in higher education” (13), “develop and foster partnerships” (8), “help partici- pants in meetings, consortia, and coop- erative endeavors to be results oriented (6), “lead in a shared decision-making environment” (5), “consensus building in carrying out strategic direction” (4), Emotional Intelligence: Which Traits Are Most Prized? 263 “expertise in building and leading teams” (4), and “enabler and facilitator” (3). Both “good people networking skills” and “resonance (inspiring people to work together to solve problems, inspiring ex- cellence)” appeared only once, as did an item in the “other” category: “serve as a role model of desired behavior.” Survey Findings Characterization of Emotional Intelligence As previously mentioned, EI has been characterized in terms of five categories: self-awareness, self-regulation, motiva- tion, empathy, and social skill. The first five questions took each category and asked respondents if they had any traits to add and then to identify the five most important ones. Because four respon- dents did not confine their rating to only five items, their responses are excluded from the following analysis; therefore, this portion of the survey had sixty-six respondents (64.7 %). For the first category, self-awareness, “cognitive ability to deal with complex TABLE 1 Self-awareness Trait Total Rank Average Able to hone one’s ability 3 3.333 Absence of ego (or ego is not a barrier) 8 2.125 Articulate 18 2.777 Assertive 4 4.25 Challenge assumptions 12 2.416 Cognitive ability to deal with complex scenarios/situations 34 1 3.764 Drive for task completion 5 4.0 Enthusiastic 19 3.315 Intuition 9 2.888 Know where he or she is going—taking the organization 26 3 2.115 Narcissism (an acceptable level) 1 3.0 Realistic understanding of oneself: emotions, strengths, weaknesses, needs, and drives 32 2 2.437 Recognize how one’s feelings affect others and one’s job performance 13 3.153 Resilient 13 3.692 Respect individuality and diversity 23 5 3.652 Respect scholarship, learning, and teaching 1 2.909 Self-confident 20 2.24 Sense of humor 25 4 4.4 Sense of personal identity 4 4.0 Show initiative 12 3.833 Tenacity 8 3.25 Willingness to tolerate frustration and delay 5 3.8 Record of proven leadership 12 2.75 Other 4 264 College & Research Libraries May 2006 TABLE 2 Self-regulation Trait Total Rank Average Ability to figure out what is going on without having to be told 14 2.571 Ability to compromise 12 4.166 Ask the “right”/ “tough” question 6 3.166 Broad knowledge of issues 12 2.416 Comfortable in making judgment calls 22 3 (tie) 2.909 Comfortable with ambiguity 22 3 (tie) 2.909 Comfortable with change 13 3.307 Diplomatic 14 2.865 Endurance 0 0 Evenhanded 4 4.5 Flexible in adapting to change or overcoming obstacles 20 4 2.95 Handle stress well 12 3.583 Honesty 15 2.866 Initiative 4 2.75 Innovative, seeks out, and acts on challenges and new opportunities 15 2.733 Integrity 26 2 2.615 Open-minded 11 2.727 Propensity for reflection 8 3.375 Realistic organizational awareness 13 3.615 Receptivity to change 5 3.6 Sense of perspective 8 3.0 Skill at diagnostic, strategic, and tactical reasoning 17 5 2.823 Stable temperament and ability to maintain an emotional balance under constant tensions 29 1 2.724 Think outside the box (in new and creative ways applicable to the problem) 10 2.9 Trustworthy 10 2.8 Other 2 scenarios/situations” was rated as most important, followed by “realistic under- standing of oneself: emotions, strengths, weaknesses, needs, and drives”; “know where he or she is going—taking the organization”; “sense of humor ”; and “respect for individuality and diversity.” (See “total” and “rank” columns in table 1.) Seven of the twenty-three traits were chosen no more than five times, with two (“narcissism [an acceptable level]” and “respect scholarship, learning, and teach- ing”) mentioned only once. The remain- ing eleven traits were selected between eight and twenty times. Three respondents added four “other” traits, three of which relate to leadership (“drive for continual self-improvement Emotional Intelligence: Which Traits Are Most Prized? 265 at a holistic level,” “spiritual integrity and humility,” and “ability to listen and delegate”). The fourth trait actually deals more with the position of director: “thick skin and a tolerance of loneliness.” Table 2 addresses the second category, self-regulation. Of the twenty-five items listed there, “stable temperament and ability to maintain an emotional balance under constant tensions” was ranked as most important,” followed by “integrity.” “Comfortable in making judgment calls” and “comfortable with ambiguity” tied for third position. “Flexible in adapting to change or overcoming obstacles” was ranked fourth, and “skill at diagnostic, strategic, and tactical reasoning” was ranked fi h. A number of the other rank- ings had tied positions, and seven items were not mentioned more than eight times. In fact, nobody chose “endurance.” However, one respondent added one trait: “courage of convictions.” Another director thought that “good listening skills” related to both “self-regulation” and “empathy.” The third category, motivation, con- sists of nineteen items. (See table 3.) The most important trait is “visionary—able to build a shared vision and rally others around it,” followed by “motivate people to develop and adhere to a shared vi- sion,” “commitment to job, organization, institution, and profession,” “articulate direction for the library,” and “optimism (even in the face of failure).” Three other traits were chosen between twenty-one and twenty-six times, and another seven were mentioned between nine and four- teen times. The final four items were TABLE 3 Motivation Trait Total Rank Average Articulate direction for the library 29 4 2.689 Accessible to others 14 3.571 Change/shape the library’s culture 21 3.190 Commitment to job, organization, institution, and profession 30 3 2.6 Create an environment that fosters accountability 14 3.785 Creative 6 3.0 Driven to achieve beyond expectations 14 3.428 Encourage reasonable risk taking 26 3.769 Figure out what is going on without having to be told 5 2.8 Good oral and written presentation skills 11 4.09 High energy level 24 3.0 Mobilize individual commitment 10 3.5 Motivate people to develop and adhere to a shared vision 31 2 2.87 Nurture staff 9 3.333 Optimism (even in the face of failure) 28 5 3.142 Tolerate some mistakes 4 3.5 Treat others as an equal 9 2.777 Understand small group dynamics 3 3.666 Visionary—able to build a shared vision and rally others around it 36 1 1.583 Other 1 266 College & Research Libraries May 2006 TABLE 4 Empathy Trait Total Rank Average Attract, build, and retain talent 46 2 (tie) 2.543 Comfortable with team culture 24 3.208 Cross-cultural sensitivity and record of achievement 12 3.416 Exercises good judgment 36 4 3.75 Good interpersonal/people skills 46 2 (tie) 2.782 Good listener 33 5 2.5757 Interested in others 18 3.333 Keep organization focused on high-quality service 37 3 3.27 Thoughtfully consider the feelings of others 14 3.571 Treat people with dignity/ respect 54 1 2.648 Other 5 chosen between three and six times. One respondent added one a ribute—“genu- ine belief in the abilities of, and the good faith in, others in the organization.” The rationale for inclusion of this item is the “need to pursue goals and build teams.” The fourth category, empathy, con- tained eleven items, six of which were among those identified as most impor- tant. (See table 4.) There was widespread consensus that “treat people with dignity/ respect” was the first choice, followed by “a ract, build, and retain talent” and “good interpersonal/people skills,” which tied for second position. Rounding out the other most important choices were “keep organization focused on high-quality service,” “exercises good judgment,” and being a “good listener.” Except for “com- fortable with team culture,” which was chosen twenty-four times, the remaining items were selected between twelve and eighteen times. Five respondents identified other traits to add. Their choices included: • “Ability to understand, anticipate, and harness native behaviors or ap- proaches of staff (i.e., typical modes of reading and approaching problems)” • “Wide range of work experiences in different sizes of organizations and different job levels (this exposes a person to variety and promotes empathy and respect)” • “Give praise generously” • “Being open-minded” • “Having integrity” Table 5, which highlights the social skill category, shows that “ability to function in a political environment” was mentioned more o en than any trait in the other cat- egories. The other most important social skills were “effective in leading change,” “develop and foster partnerships,” “col- laborative,” “build rapport with a wide circle of people,” and “resonance (in- spiring people to work together to solve problems, inspiring excellence).” The other thirteen traits were chosen between four and twenty times, with there being four instances of tied ranks. “Friendly (with a purpose)” was the least selected trait. Only one respondent suggested an additional trait—“serve as a role model of desired behavior.” Because respondents were asked to identify the five most important traits for each table on a scale ranging from “1” (most important) to “5” (least important), the “average” column confirms the find- ings presented above. The average (mean) takes into account the respondents’ ratings. In table 1, for instance, “cognitive ability to deal with complex scenarios/situations,” Emotional Intelligence: Which Traits Are Most Prized? 267 which ranked first among the traits, had an average score of 3.764 (for 34 respon- dents). On the other hand, “drive for task completion” had an average of 4.00, but only five respondents selected it. Thus, interpretation of the average must factor in the number of respondents selecting it. Learned Proficiency with the Traits Two o en-asked questions are: 1. To what extent does knowledge about leadership (e.g., leadership theory, styles, and traits) transfer into practice so as to create, develop, or enhance the abilities of an individual? 2. How might those traits be best learned (an acquired skill) or enhanced? Fi y (71.4 %) respondents addressed the questions. Differences of opinion emerged about which traits could be acquired or developed. Some thought that most or all of them could; others disagreed and maintained that individu- als could learn a subset (e.g., listening ability, team-building skills, and effective meeting management), but not traits such as being humorous. More than likely, the subset that could be learned does not relate to someone’s personality char- acteristics that involve unlearning and then relearning particular traits. One re- spondent thought the traits “are difficult to learn” and that most of EI is “nature and cannot be nurtured.” However, she TABLE 5 Social Skill Trait Total Rank Average Ability to function in a political environment 43 1 2.186 Ability to gather outside resources 20 3.1 Advocate for librarians’ role in higher education 11 3.454 Bring issues of broad importance to the academic community, fostering wide discussion and action, when appropriate 19 3.210 Build rapport with a wide circle of people 21 5 (tie) 3.0 Collaborative 23 4 2.956 Consensus building in carrying out strategic direction 12 3.5 Develop and foster partnerships 26 3 3.269 Effective in leading change 27 2 2.518 Enabler and facilitator 11 3.181 Entrepreneurial 10 3.4 Establish credibility with colleagues 17 3.352 Expertise in building and leading teams 10 4.1 Friendly (with a purpose) 4 4.75 Good people networking skills 12 3.333 Help participants in meetings, consortia, and cooperative endeavors to be results oriented 7 3.0 Lead in a shared decision-making environment 20 2.5 Persuasiveness 9 3.0 Resonance (inspiring people to work together to solve prob- lems, inspiring excellence) 21 5 (tie) 2.904 Other 1 268 College & Research Libraries May 2006 recognized that there might be exceptions to this generalization. One director inserted this caution: “It is much like learning [to play] a musical instrument. Some with talent can truly master a trait, others without talent can get be er by working at it but may never truly master a particular capacity. And others are ‘talented’ enough that they nat- urally succeed in some areas.” In effect, individuals must have some natural abil- ity related to leadership. They also need to be observant, be receptive to learning and change, and have opportunities to build the necessary experience. Naturally, not everyone will be a successful leader. Respondents suggested various op- tions for acquiring the traits, including ex- perience (e.g., teaming experience); colle- gial observation; mentoring and coaching; self-education (reading); course work; at- tending leadership institutes, workshops, and seminars; test taking (for the Myers Briggs test for creating self-awareness); and shadowing others. As one director noted, “A person can develop some skills for cultivating partnerships and bringing along results-oriented efforts in meetings, consortia, and cooperative efforts through training and observation of highly effec- tive people. … [M]any of these a ributes are learned through experience.” Course work, however, was viewed as perhaps least effective because it might not enable participants to learn from experience. Recognition as a Leader One question asked whether the re- spondents know any one person within academic librarianship who best exem- plifies the highlighted leadership traits. The intent of the question was to elicit examples and not seek comprehensive- ness. Furthermore, individuals might not be regarded as general leaders in the pro- fession but, rather, as leaders on specific issues and problems such as intellectual property rights, entrepreneurship, access to government information, scholarly communication (e.g., publishers’ pricing policies), collaboration, political skills, and group processes. Within this context, thirty-seven directors (52.9 %) identi- fied one or more leader. The thirty-four individuals mentioned included ARL directors, colleagues at the specific insti- tution, or individuals in other libraries (e.g., a community college or a library in another country); one director even added himself to the list. The names that ap- peared most frequently were James Neal of Columbia University,22 Ann Wolpert of MIT, and Betsy Wilson of the University of Washington. Extent to Which Institutions Seek Leaders To ascertain the directors’ perspective on the leadership traits that institutions seek when they hire new directors, the final question inquired whether those individuals who make the hiring deci- sion want risk takers and leaders. On the five-point scale with “1” being “strongly agree” and “4” being “strongly disagree (“5” equaled “no opinion”), the average was 2.66 and forty-two (60 %) circled ei- ther “strongly agree” or “agree”; sixteen answered either “disagree” or “strongly disagree” (22.9 %). Twelve (17.1 %) ven- tured “no opinion.” As the respondents noted, it is difficult to generalize across institutions and the specific needs of institutions at the time of a hiring. There was agreement that institutions seek leaders, but there was far less concurrence about the need for risk takers; some endorsed risk taking and others rejected it. Two directors inserted a qualification—the search for “calculated risk takers.” One supporter of risk taking remarked: It has been my experience that the provosts who have hired me were definitely looking for a risk taker and leader. That was apparent in the questions they asked my colleagues whom they knew. It was also ap- parent in the dinner conversations I had with each provost before I was hired and then conversations a er I Emotional Intelligence: Which Traits Are Most Prized? 269 was hired. In the ARL positions in which I have served, the provosts wanted someone who could not only come in to deal with and change dys- functional organizations [libraries], but also to bring them back to good health and service. A change agent is always a risk taker; you have no choice because implementing change always involves some kind of risks. (I would also say that ARL colleagues I know very well were probably hired because of their reputations for tak- ing risks and leadership.) “Typically,” one director pointed out, “the successful candidates have been risk takers and leaders in … other se ings, but ‘fit’ rather than ‘trait’ drives the final selec- tion locally.” There is o en a “personal- ity fit”—fits well in the organization’s culture—and “good chemistry with the person to whom he or she reports.” The opposite viewpoint is that “the academy is risk averse and built on con- sensus and tradition.” Furthermore, “if a library has been administered by someone tyrannical, the person making the hiring decision may need to focus on hiring a ‘healer’ rather than a risk taker—the li- brary may need to get through the healing before it is ready to venture into risks.” Thus, those making hiring decisions might seek “safe” candidates, the opposite of what they had or someone who will not “rock the boat.” “They do not want someone who will create controversy, internally or externally, which might land on their desk.” This group of directors also commented: The majority of the time, the people who do the hiring for ARL directors are not themselves directors. They rarely understand the full scope of traits and skills required of direc- tors. Their response to candidates is highly situational, that is, how bad (or good) are things at that li- brary already. If things are bad, the search commi ee will look for a risk taker who will fix messes and bring change. If things are wonderful and the faculty love the library, the search commi ee will be cautious and look for someone conservative who will maintain the status quo. This is true even if one or two working librarians are on the commi ee, since they (1) don’t really understand the director’s job either and (2) have no power on the search commi ee. A search commi ee may sometimes perceive a leader as someone who will focus too much on external activities and not spend enough time on the home front or as someone who will not listen effectively to the individual “needs” of staff or faculty. The chal- lenge when one is a candidate is o en to figure out quickly whether one is dealing with a conservative or a venturesome search commi ee. Most of those who make the final hiring decisions for deans/directors of ARL libraries are seeking people who are knowledgeable, articulate, cooperative, and sometimes even compliant. They want people who report to them to be effective, but not especially demanding of time, a en- tion, and resources. They value good citizenship to the institution and discourage those who strongly advo- cate for their unit or are aggressively independent. Increasingly, they want deans/directors who are experienced fundraisers. Especially in the largest libraries, they rarely hire potential rather than experience. One director disagreed with the proposition that those making the hiring decision consider either leadership or risk taking: Librarians, by their training and ex- perience, do very well in these areas because they alone on the academic side are promoted for these traits. LIS education stresses that most li- 270 College & Research Libraries May 2006 brarians will be managers of people, money, and resources. By the time a librarian becomes a director, he or she has had extensive experience in all areas of management. This is not true of deans and department heads in academic units. Librarians self-se- lect and advance leaders so that the pools for these positions are strong, not because the search process seeks leadership and risk taking. In addition to leadership, institutions o en seek “a good fundraiser, a trust- worthy colleague, and someone who will represent the institution well.” Further- more, they want individuals with good people skills, who are innovative and who will get along well with the faculty and administration, including the person to whom the director will report. One direc- tor noted: “Smart academic leaders want innovative and successful leaders for their libraries. O en they seek out individuals who can change the organization and lead it into the future. On the other hand, I know provosts who intentionally avoid such risk takers and want status quo.” Interviews The purpose of the interviews was to probe the study’s research questions and deter- mine whether a library leadership crisis looms.23 The directors did remark that the position is about “moving an organization forward; it is not about money and power.” Being a director is “political and hard,” and it is “stressful” and requires “know- ing a li le about many areas,” a breadth of knowledge, the ability to “fix problems,” to function without praise, to think on one’s feet, to listen, to synthesize what one hears and reads; and maintain the “big picture—understand how all things come together.” One director believed that the profession has been successful in developing and promoting people of color to managerial positions, “but not at the rate it should to match the nation’s demographics.” The critical traits associ- ated with starting a new directorship, she thought, are respect and trust, gaining the respect of the staff and ge ing the staff to “trust that I want the library to provide the best service and to hold me accountable if I break that trust.” She also emphasized the importance of patience (combined with persistence) as the director seeks to change the organizational culture. Another director pointed out that “You choose which traits to showcase at a particular time” and that changing times and circumstances might require different ones. For the directors interviewed, at- tracting talented individuals to a director- ship is less of a concern that finding good people to become department heads. Many librarians, they commented, have no long-term interest in management, perhaps preferring “to be project heads.” Such positions are short term with clearly defined dates and deliverables, and they want neither the responsibility of a full- time position in management nor their “life consumed by work.” Critical issues confronting the profession, therefore, are to “get more good librarians to take responsibility and assume authority.” There was consensus that the univer- sity community is o en unaware of what directors actually do and how complex the position is. One interviewee com- mented that upper-university adminis- trators think of the library in terms of the time when they used to conduct research and do not associate libraries with many issues with which they now deal. When the questions centered on the selection process for new directors, a com- mon comment was: “A typical search com- mi ee consists of faculty, the director of information technology, and some work- ing librarians. Neither these librarians nor the faculty are likely to be aware of what directors do.” This director characterized two types of search commi ees: 1. Cautious ones that want to maintain the status quo. The mem- bers examine and compare the candidates line by line with the job advertisement. http:looms.23 Emotional Intelligence: Which Traits Are Most Prized? 271 2. Adventitious ones that are more willing to be innovative and flexible. They might even bring in consul- tants to help in the review process. In either instance, a key question is, How well do committee members get along? Another director expanded on the two types by noting that institutions may seek the opposite of the type of director they are replacing. However, upon ar- rival at the institution, the new director might turn to members of the search commi ee, “as you figure they helped to get you hired.” A couple of directors thought they pos- sessed all the traits; the others believed that nobody could master all of them and that the senior management team, as a whole, would have the set. It is impor- tant, they stressed, that senior managers constantly engage in self-examination and seek to improve themselves. The interviewees did not believe there is any leadership crisis and that the pool of talented librarians for directorships is “no be er and no worse than before.” One of them remarked: “In research libraries the 80/20 rule applies; 80 percent of the directors are good leaders and 20 percent are not.” This is all the more reason for the profession, he maintains, to maintain a good pool of candidates and to give such individuals the necessary experiences from which to learn and master different leadership styles. Another reason to maintain a strong pool of candidates for the position of library director, it was noted, is that more than half the current directors are estimat- ed to retire between 2002 and 2010. Given the assorted complex issues relevant to academic libraries, library directors, more than ever, will need to manage their rela- tionships with others—both those internal and external to the profession. As to the path for becoming a leader, the directors emphasized the importance of gaining diverse experiences in libraries and learning from those opportunities. “The best learning situations are those that are long term and give opportuni- ties for personal growth.” One director cautioned: “Growth has to be associated with line authority. Flat organizations want leaders at the senior level who have had line authority.” Those interviewed highlighted mentoring, involvement in professional associations, and a ending leadership institutes. A director added participation in consortia to which the library is a member; such consortia might deal with issues that cut across different campuses as part of a state university system. Involvement in consortia pro- vides contacts and information as well as affords opportunities to engage in problem solving. “Nurturing,” one director commented, “is the role of both the director and AULs [associate or assistant library directors]. Some individuals are more comfortable working with one than the other. Because the director has the final say about salary, and perhaps about tenure, some librarians will prefer mentoring from the AULs.” She also pointed out that one purpose of mentoring is to connect “people to the profession” and that “there is more than one way to do things; there is o en no single answer.” Discussion Three categories (self-awareness, self- regulation, and motivation) relate to “self- management”; the other two (empathy and social skill) cover “managing relationships with others.” For self-management (tables 1–3), “visionary—able to build a shared vision and rally others around it” (table 3) had the lowest average (1.583) among those most frequently identified, which means that more respondents were likely to rate it as most important. “Stable tempera- ment and ability to maintain an emotional balance under constant tensions” (table 2) was second (average: 2.724), followed by “cognitive ability to deal with complex scenarios/situations” (table 1; average: 3.764). Using 3.764 as a general guide, all the highly ranked traits in tables 2 and 3 had a smaller average. Clearly, there is 272 College & Research Libraries May 2006 greater consensus on self-regulation and motivation than on self-awareness. Turning to the other grouping (tables 4 and 5), “managing relationships with others,” the most highly selected traits all had an average of less than 3.764. Among all the frequently mentioned traits (all five tables), the greatest consensus was on the importance of “visionary—able to build a shared vision and rally others around it” (table 3) and “ability to function in a politi- cal environment” (table 5; average: 2.186). Reorganization of Traits Only one director suggested a reorgani- zation of the tables. This person pointed out that “respect for individuality and diversity” should be moved from the self-awareness category to the empathy category. The trait, “broad knowledge of issues,” would fit the self-regulation cat- egory be er if it were reworded as “ability to contextualize a given situation,” which might mean a broad knowledge of issues, but “the real point is the ability to think before acting because one is aware of the larger picture.” Good listening skills,” it was suggested, might relate to both self- regulation and empathy. Job Advertisements A tertiary research question is, Do the traits identified in the job advertisements match the survey rankings? According to study findings, they do not! For the self-awareness category (table 1), the job advertisements were concerned mostly with objective measures of success (e.g., “proven record of innovative and effective leadership” [ranked the highest]). None of the advertisements mentioned individu- als who had a “realistic understanding of oneself” (ranked second by the directors), “knowing where he or she is going—tak- ing the organization” (ranked third), or even individuals who had a “sense of hu- mor” (ranked fourth). This is particularly interesting because laughter and smiling are powerful creators of resonance.24 Likewise, for self-regulation (table 2), none of the advertisements mentioned individuals with a “stable temperament” or the other highly ranked traits. The advertisements listed having a “broad knowledge of issues” as most important; yet, only twelve directors chose this among their top characteristics. In the third category, motivation (table 3), there appears to be more similarity between the advertisements and the di- rector rankings. The directors considered “visionary” as the most important trait, which appeared in fifteen advertise- ments. “Commitment” appeared most frequently in the advertisements and the directors regarded it as third. Interest- ingly, optimism was ranked fi h by the directors, but this trait was not mentioned in the advertisements. In the fourth category, empathy (table 4), “good interpersonal skills” appeared most frequently in the advertisements but, together with “a ract, build, and retain talent,” tied for second position in the director ratings. The directors placed “treat people with dignity and respect” first, “keep the organization focused on high-quality service” third, “exercises good judgment” fourth, and “being a good listener” fi h. Yet, the advertise- ments mentioned none of these traits. With the last category, social skill (table 5), there was a divergence between the advertisements and the director ratings. The directors ranked “ability to function in a political environment” the highest, but the advertisements did not mention this trait. Being “collaborative” appeared most o en in the advertisements, but the directors ranked it fourth. Comparison of Findings to Broader Literature An emotionally intelligent leader appears to have much in common with transforma- tional leadership, another form of leader- ship. One way to look at transformational leadership is to contrast it with the concept of transactional leadership. Transactional leaders are power wielders; they guide or motivate their followers to establish and meet goals and to clarify role and task re- http:resonance.24 Emotional Intelligence: Which Traits Are Most Prized? 273 quirements. In contrast, transformational leaders have an interest in the personal development of followers. This is similar to the EI concept of empathy. Transactional leaders get what they want and followers get something their want; succinctly stated, this is the “carrot-and-stick” approach. The transactional leader pursues a cost-benefit, economic exchange to meet subordinates’ current material and psychic needs in return for “contracted” services provided by the subordinate. Additionally, transac- tional leaders cannot sublimate their own needs to the organization’s, but the trans- formational leader can.25,26 This is similar to the EI trait of “stable temperament and ability to maintain emotional balance.” Transactional leadership works well when maintaining day-to-day operations in stable environments. The problem with transactional leadership is that subordi- nates are not motivated to work toward a group goal unless a personal incentive is involved. Clearly, transactional leaders do not achieve the benefits of outstanding performance and their subordinates do not realize their potential. Transformational leadership builds on transactional leadership. Similar to the EI leader, the transformational leader recognizes existing needs in potential fol- lowers but tends to go further, seeking to satisfy higher needs and to engage the full person or follower.27 The transformational leader can move followers to transcend their own self-interest for the good of the group or organization. Transformational leaders provide indi- vidualized consideration and intellectual stimulation, and they possess charisma. They have special skills that allow them to provide a supportive environment while motivating followers to higher levels of personal action. A transformational leader inspires the members of the organization to achieve more than they thought pos- sible. Consequently, transformational leadership shares many of the EI traits related to motivation. It follows that a transforming leader acts to maximize the needs of followers. Leadership also must stimulate the needs of the entire organization, constantly moving employees to higher-order needs. The term transformational stems from the ability to develop people as resources and to move them to a more satisfactory state of existence. 2 8 By appealing to higher-order needs, the transformational leader generates sub- ordinate commitment to achieving the organizational mission. In reviewing the literature on transfor- mational leadership, the following traits appear consistently: acting creatively, acting interactively (with vision), being empowered, passionate, and ethical. Creativity is revealed through challeng- ing the status quo and seeking new ideas. Creative leaders see problems from dif- ferent perspectives and are able to solve those problems. EI covers creativity and being visionary, and has variations of the other frequently mentioned traits. Transformational leaders act as vision- aries in that they work to achieve a shared vision. They empower their followers due to their ability to translate intention into reality and sustain it for the followers. This empowerment puts duality into motion; empowerment creates more em- powerment, which in turn creates more power and allows followers to achieve their potential. The strength and compel- ling nature of this vision empowers the organization’s members to excel. A surprising element in the listing of traits is that the leader must have passion.29 Transformational leaders are passionate about their roles, tasks, re- sponsibilities, and obligations to their staff. They forget their personal problems, lose a sense of time, and feel competent and in control. Without passion, there is no direction and vision is short-lived. Although the word passion did not appear as an EI trait, several characteristics are similar; for instance, “driven to achieve beyond expectations” involves being passionate. Another defining characteristic that emerges repeatedly in the literature on http:passion.29 http:existence.28 http:follower.27 274 College & Research Libraries May 2006 transformational leadership is that the leader is an agent of change, a catalyst for change, but not a controller of change.30 Change emerges as an EI trait, for exam- ple, “change/shape the library’s culture,” “comfortable with change,” and “flexible in adapting to change or overcoming obstacles.” Research Agenda Instead of continuing to examine lead- ership traits in general, future research might probe different situations and identify any variations in the traits se- lected and used. Such research might take The Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education31 and, through the ap- plication of case studies, investigate those traits over time and determine any shi s in the most frequently occurring ones. In other words, how well do the general traits identified in this article hold over time and in different situations? Further- more, within this context, are there differ- ences in the occurrence of different traits by gender and other general variables? Further research might look at other types of leadership than emotional intel- ligence, comparing the traits and reduc- ing any overlap among them. Case study research might take individuals identified in this study or elsewhere as leaders and probe which traits they have and how they use them effectively.32 Furthermore, do staff and others concur with the characterization of certain individuals as leaders and any claim that directors possess certain traits? Limitations The authors recognize that the importance of specific traits may vary from situation to situation and institution to institution and that many respondents wanted to select more than five traits. Nonetheless, by focusing on a few, the authors had an opportunity to review and refine the emerging list. Conclusion Leadership might be defined in terms of emotional intelligence. Many aspects of this theory are similar to transformational leadership. As Goleman noted, EI “can be learned and improved at any age. In fact, … on average, people’s emotional intelligence tends to increase as they age. But the specific leadership competencies that are based on emotional intelligence don’t necessarily come through life ex- perience.”33 He further observed: “Lead- ers who are motivated to improve their emotional intelligence can do so if they’re given the right information, guidance, and support.”34 Leadership involves leading or in- fluencing people to develop shared values, vision, and expectations based on shared principles and behaviors and to advance organizational effectiveness. In effect, “if a person cannot influence others, they will not follow that person; and if they will not follow, the person is not a leader.”35 Still, few people possess every trait identified in the five tables, but those traits deemed most essential for EI and other leadership styles merit close scrutiny and development. For these reasons, it is important to identify the assorted traits that comprise EI and to see that aspiring leaders in library and other information fields cultivate the ones deemed most critical. Notes 1. A. J. Anderson, course handout for LIS 404, library management (Dec. 11, 2000). Donald E. Riggs distinguishes between management and leadership in “The Crisis and Opportunities in Library Leadership,” Journal of Library Administration™ 32, no. 3/4 (2001): 6–7. Steven R. Covey states that “leadership creates new paradigms. Management works within the paradigm. Leadership works on the system. You manage ‘things’; but you lead people. Fundamental to pu ing first things first in our lives is leadership before management: ‘Am I doing the right things’ before ‘Am I doing things right’?” Steven R. Covey, First Things First (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1994), 27–28. 2. Anderson, Unpublished course handout. http:effectively.32 http:change.30 Emotional Intelligence: Which Traits Are Most Prized? 275 3. Riggs, “The Crisis and Opportunities in Library Leadership,” 5. 4. J. Richard Hackman, Leading Teams: Se ing the Stage for Great Performance (Boston: Harvard Business School Pr., 2002), 226. 5. Daniel Goleman, Emotional Intelligence (New York: Bantam Books, 1995). 6. ———, “What Makes a Leader?” Harvard Business Review 82 (Jan. 2004), 82. 7. Ibid., 88. 8. Peter Hernon, Ronald R. Powell, and Arthur P. Young, “Association of Research Libraries: The Next Generation, Part One,” College & Research Libraries 62 (Mar. 2001): 116–45. 9. ———, “Association of Research Libraries: The Next Generation, Part Two,” College & Research Libraries 63 (Jan. 2002): 73–90. 10. ———, “Academic Library Directors: What Do They Do?” College & Research Libraries 65 (Nov. 2004): 538–63. 11. ———, The Next Library Leadership (Westport, Conn.: Libraries Unlimited, 2003). 12. Mark D. Winston, editor, “Leadership in the Library and Information Science Profession: Theory and Practice,” Journal of Library Administration™ 32, no. 3/4 (2001): 1–186. 13. Terrence F. Mech and Gerard B. McCabe, Leadership and Academic Libraries (Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Pr., 1998). 14. Goleman, “What Makes a Leader?” 91. 15. W. C. H. Prentice, “Understanding Leadership,” Harvard Business Review 82 (Jan. 2004): 109. 16. Sharon Gray Weiner, “Leadership of Academic Libraries: A Literature Review,” Education Libraries 26, no. 2 (Winter 2003): 5. For an additional identification of relevant writing on leadership in academic and public libraries, see Hernon, Powell and Young, The Next Library Leadership. 17. James F. Williams II and Mark D. Winston, “Leadership Competencies and the Importance of Research Methods and Statistical Analysis in Decision Making and Research and Publication: A Study of Citation Pa erns,” Library & Information Science Research 25 (2003): 388. See also Jim Intagliata, David Ulrich, and Norm Smallwood, “Levering Leadership Competencies to Produce Leadership Brand: Creating Distinctiveness by Focusing on Strategy and Results,” Human Resource Planning 23, no. 3 (Sept. 2000). Available online from Expanded Academic ASAP Plus. 18. Shelley E. Phipps, “The System Design Approach to Organizational Development: The University of Arizona Model,” Library Trends 53 (Summer 2004): 75, 77. See also P. Senger, “The Leader’s New Work: Building Learning Organizations,” Sloan Management Review 32 (1990): 7–23. 19. Florence M. Mason and Louella V. Wetherbee, “Learning to Lead: An Analysis of Current Training Programs for Library Leadership,” Library Trends 53 (Summer 2004): 187–217. 20. Ibid., 215. 21. Jennifer J. Salopek, “Social Intelligence,” T + D 58, no. 9 (Sept. 2004): 17. 22. See Gregg Sapp, “James Neal on the Challenges of Leadership: An ‘LA&M’ Exclusive Interview,” Library Administration & Management 19, no. 2 (Spring 2005): 64–67. 23. Riggs, “The Crisis and Opportunities in Library Leadership,” 16. 24. Daniel Goleman, Annie McKee, and Richard E. Boyatzis, Primal Leadership (Boston: Harvard Business School Pr., 2002), 19–32. 25. K. W. Kuhnert, “Transformational Leadership: Developing People through Delegation,” in Improving Organizational Effectiveness through Transformational Leadership, ed. B. M. Bass and B. J. Avilio (Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage, 1994), 10–25. 26. Nancy R. Hoover, “Transformational and Transactional Leadership: An Empirical Test of a Theory.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Associa- tion, Chicago, Apr. 1991. (ED 331 117). 27. James M. Burns, Leadership (New York: Harper & Row, 1978), 9. 28. Ibid., 141. 29. Steven Covey, The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1989). 30. Bruce J. Avolio, “Leadership: Building Vital Forces into Highly Developed Teams,” Human Resource Management Journal (1995): 10–15. 31. The Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education (Menlo Park, Calif.: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, 2001). 32. See, for instance, the identification of leadership in Karin Wi enborg, Chris Ferguson, and Michael A. Keller, Reflecting on Leadership, CRL Publication 123 (Washington, D.C.: Council on Library and Information Resources, 2003). 33. Goleman, “Never Stop Learning,” Harvard Business Review 82 (Jan. 2004): 28–29. 34. Ibid., 29. 35. John C. Maxwell, Leadership 101 (Nashville, Tenn.: Thomas Nelson, Inc, 2002), 69–70.