Underscoring this call issued by Yukl, no extant qualitative studies describing the
experiences of effective leaders were found, in terms of how their EI was developed.
This study contributes to that research gap: it is an opening salvo in exploring several of
these tenants in a qualitative manner. As a result, this small yet novel contribution
spotlights the potential value of qualitative research, and phenomenological studies in
particular. Additional qualitative studies would fortify this scholarly discourse.
Recommendations for practice. The workplace learning domain has typically
focused on content (Illeris, 2011). Leader development activities chronicled by Day
(2001), Day and Halpin (2001, 2004), Day and Zaccaro (2004), and Yukl (2010) are
wide-ranging and practitioner focused. Below, this researcher has identified several
recommendations resulting from this study for those involved in developing leaders and
in developing EI.
- Integrate EI into leader development. Given the increasing integration of EI
into adult learning and leader development, it is plausible to recommend that architects of
developmental activities likewise consider fusing these constructs. As noted above,
Illeris (2011) asserted that developmental interventions tend to focus on task performance
and problem solving. This study calls for a workplace learning environment that also
considers EI factors. Leaders need to understand the emotions and their meaning as
assigned by stakeholders (e.g., citizens); to use emotions in rational-based decision
making; and to be attuned to emotional expressions during public activities (Vigoda-
Gadot & Meisler, 2010). While incidental, unplanned learning events should be
accommodated, leader development programs can take a more disciplined approach in
terms of experiences and situations conducive to fostering healthy EI. In this context,