0.5 Mills, l., mcdowelle, j., & Roush, w. (july 2009). does research  (Page 14/7)

Introduction

Over the course of the past two decades several new leadership attributes have been introduced to the leadership literature. Among these contemporary leadership properties are emotional intelligence, cultural intelligence and contextual intelligence (Earley&Mosakowski, 2004; Goleman, 1995; Silverthorne, 2004). Although these leadership attributes are frequently listed as highly desirable attributes for leaders to possess they are seldom incorporated into the formal leadership evaluation and development process. The purpose of this paper was to attempt to evaluate one of the new leadership archetypes, emotional intelligence, to determine its suitability for inclusion in the school leadership evaluation process.

The stated purpose of formative evaluation is to help individuals improve their performance (Young&Castetter, 2004). The notion driving the analysis described in this paper is that if emotional intelligence can be linked to effective leadership it should be part of the formative evaluation process and included in leadership development activities.

Major eras

Goffee and Jones (2000) contend that since the 1920s there have been three major eras that represent evolution in thinking about leadership. The three theories that represent these eras are (a) Trait Theory, (b) Style Theory, and (c) Contingency Theory. The first era cited by Goffee and Jones was the era of Trait theory. Trait Theory focused on the traits or characteristics necessary for effective leadership. Trait theory eventually lapsed into disfavor because empirical studies failed to provide a definitive list of leadership traits that could be linked to effective leadership (Northouse, 2004). Trait Theory was eventually supplanted by Style Theory. Yukl (1994) noted that researchers have had difficulty in linking effective leadership to a specific style of leadership because of difficulties in conducting empirical studies that support both trait and style theory as effective conceptual prisms from which to view leadership. The current candidate for an explanation of effective leadership is Contingency Theory. Contingency Theory suggests that specific skills are required in specific leadership situations (Goffee&Jones).