Over the past several years, I have observed organizations using Emotional Intelligence (EI) surveys as a way to assess the EI skills of their people. Recently, one organization I was working with indicated that they had administered such a survey for their people a year or so ago. However, they found they had some very good information, but no specific, proven high leverage steps to take action on the results.

To be cost-effective, I don't often recommend the added expense of an EI assessment instrument. However, when I do perform a skill level assessment, I prefer to use a 360 degree instrument. When you administer a 360 degree instrument, you learn that the results of the self-assessment portion can be quite disparate from the views of co-workers and managers. The bigger picture provides the individual with valuable insight into areas for improvement.

Additionally, since most of us were not taught specific techniques to improve EI skills in grade school, high school or college, my approach as a practitioner is to assume that anyone can enhance his or her EI skills. So my energies and the budgets of my clients have been more focused on enhancing these skills as opposed to assessing them.

However, this does not mean that I don't include measurement as a critical component in my programs. With my Engineering background, I consider measurement a fundamental part of any program. While I include several levels of measurement from how people feel about the training (level 1) to can they perform in the classroom (level 2), my key focus is about application (level 3) and impact on the bottom line and return on investment (level 4). Below are summary reports of both level 3 and 4 impact (i.e. impact of use of techniques on personal and organizational measures) for a few of our programs. For more detail on each program, please visit the results section of my web site.

Oil Industry Supplier - A Case Study Report Productivity Improvements:

Over twelve weeks of training and coaching, the productivity of the trained group increased by an average of approximately 32%. This translates into $264,259 added value to the client based on participants' salaries. The return on investment ratio of the value to the cost of the program was 5.5 : 1 (ROI). In addition, significant improvement occurred in all four of the personal and organizational quality constructs:

- Personal Effectiveness

- Positive Emotional Affect

- Physical Symptoms of Stress

- Negative Emotional Affect

These results suggest that the techniques provided in this program were effective in reducing the most fundamental source of participants' stress by giving them greater ability to manage and transform stress-producing perceptions and negative, emotional reactive patterns. Reducing stress allowed participants to dramatically improve their productivity, performance, interactions with others, and their own health.

Page 1 of 2 :: First | Last :: Prev | 1 2 | Next