Ocala.com Bloggers
- Broken News
- Bill Thompson
- Digital Editor
- Eric Barnes
- Frame 37
- Ocala.com Multimedia
- Marion Politics
- Newsroom
- Observations
- Naseem S. Miller
- OcalaDay
- Joe Byrnes
- Read My E-Mail
- Allen Parson
- Running Wide Open
- Joe Vanhoose
- Speaking of Business...
- Dr. Philip R. Geist
- The Bowling Blog
- Debbie Whitten
- The Green Zone
- Dave Rhea
- The Sports Blog
- Gregory Broome
- What is that?
- Newsroom
 |
Search Blogs
|
 |
|
|
|
 |
Blog Archives
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
On Intelligence by Henri Benlolo
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
Location: Blogs Webster University Business Experts |
 |
| Posted by: Webster University |
4/5/2007 |
One of the major problems that most employers face is not the ability to find employees that possess or are able to learn the skills needed to perform a job; but rather, the ability to find people who are able to engage in the appropriate behaviors associated with the job. Employers are looking for workers with strong emotional and social intelligence; workers with good work ethics, commitment, pride, dependability, interpersonal skills, respect, just to name a few. If these are the traits and skills that employers are seeking, then why aren’t we teaching them as well instead of just concentrating on developing cognitive intelligence- reading, language, mathematics, quantitative problem solving, and the like. No one would argue that some degree of cognitive intelligence is essential in order to succeed but should it be valued as the most important indicator of success, when in reality there are several other forms of intelligence that are equally as important? Arguably, many would say that emotional intelligence is most important in the workplace because the majority of problems at work are usually not associated with lack of skills but with individuals not getting along, not managing conflict properly, and poor work ethics. Our entire education system’s measuring stick of success, including higher education, is based on cognitive intelligence, with little or no attention given to the other forms of intelligence. Therefore, I ask the question, “Are we really preparing individuals to be successful in the workforce?” What do you think? |
|
| Permalink |
Trackback |
Comments (4)
Add Comment
|
Re: On Intelligence by Henri Benlolo |
By Jo Clifford on
4/4/2007 |
| I am not only very concerned about some workers' lack of ability to resolve conflict, but their seeming inability to work for the good of the "whole." Self-entitlement, self-absorption, self-ishness seem to be the norm, not the exception. Managers are stymied on how to address these attitudes in relationship to demonstrated behaviors, which is the acceptable method for measuring performance. And, no matter how many policies are put into place, blatant favoritism, good ole boy-ism, and failure to take out the rotten apples in the basket continue to rule the day. No, I do not think we are adequately preparing workers with strategies to cope with the emotional challenges they will face in the workplace. |
|
|
Re: On Intelligence by Henri Benlolo |
By Karen Fattorosi on
4/4/2007 |
| Your focus remains on the performance of workers and their apparent self-entitlement, self-absorption, self-ishness which are indicators of emotional intelligence and social responsibility. They cross the threshold of the workplace with those attitudes carefully fashioned by systems dynamics at home, school, and community. I believe that "blatant favoritism, good ole boy-ism, and failure to take out the rotten apples in the basket" have always been in the managerial system--maybe more, maybe less. What has changed over the past few decades is the loyalty of the "company" to the workers, the sense of belonging, the predictability. It's no wonder many workers think of the corporate ladder when they look at their paycheck and the words "self-entitlement, self-absorption, self-ishness" come to mind. None of these changes happened in isolation. The entire system has grown up together. |
|
|
Re: On Intelligence by Henri Benlolo |
By Richard Anguiano on
4/6/2007 |
Seems to me there are at least a couple factors involved here:
1) From everything I've read, the working population is much more transient these days. People who have entered the work force in the last decade or two generally have a tendency to change workplaces more frequently. That wouldn't appear to bode well for a sense of company loyalty but would make workers less likely to work at building productive relations.
2) Also, the perception of the job or career as a stable, reliable force in one's life probably isn't what it once was. Many types of work have become obsolete in the past decade or will in the next. Meanwhile, some who have jobs might be working longer hours with little or no pay increases. If they have benefits, the price they pay for them probably takes a bigger bite out of their checks each year. To say the least that might contribute to fraying the social fabric in an office.
If this is generally the case -- and take issue with me if it's not your impression -- is this the sort of reality you can prepare students for in the classroom, let alone workers once they've reached a workplace? Is there a way to equip students or workers emotionally to cope with these sorts of forces?
Karen's comment leads me to believe this sort of preparation begins many years before the worker-to-be reaches secondary or higher education.
Any thoughts?
|
|
|
Re: On Intelligence by Henri Benlolo |
By Karen Fattorosi on
4/6/2007 |
| Richard: Exactly . . . the preparation to be a "worker" begins very early in the socialization process. Children learn how to work, attitudes toward work, and being a worker from their first, primary teachers--their parents and other working (or non-working) adults who have considerable influence on their social learning. Responsible students often make responsible workers. Even so, young adults can be taught to be responsible workers; however, someone has to teach them. High school? College? The workplace? |
|
|
|
|
|