Leadership and Emotional Intelligence

psychological processing and acquisition” (p. 13). Additionally, “workplace learning
always involves the practical, social and cultural context of which it is a part as well as
the learners’ qualifications and relations to both the learning situation and the content of
the learning” (p. 155). These findings directly support dimensions of the Nelson and
Low (2011) EI transformative learning model, i.e., the ability to work well with others
and establishing healthy, productive relationships.
Further, the results suggest that culture influences EI developmental interventions.
“Culture can play a central role in shaping emotional experiences” (Markus & Kitayama,
1991, p. 235). Culture can facilitate or hinder a learning environment in the workplace
(Illeris, 2011; Schein, 2010) and, by extension, whether and to what degree EI attributes
are promoted (Goleman, 1998). “We have to recognize that even the concept of learning
is heavily colored by cultural assumptions and that learning can mean different things in
different cultures and subcultures” (Schein, 2010, p. 373).
Especially in the Federal government, a mature organizational construct, leaders
wishing to develop a culture promoting EI may find resistance. In that regard, some of
the participants cited conflicts between organizational subcultures. As important, culture
changes were events accorded importance by study participants in the context of shaping
their EI. For example, moving into a new position was a significant change for
participant A4, and necessitated her constructing a healthy EI foundation in an unfamiliar
terrain as a coping mechanism. For a few other participants, deliberately moving into a
different culture (e.g., as part of a rotational assignment) shaped their cultural
mindfulness and enacted a greater appreciation for diversity as regards a variety of strong
relationships.