PREFACE
I never intended this blog to lie dormant for over a month, but that's what happened. Naturally. Organically. Kind of like a volcano.
I guess I just needed to vent about the Air Force and my Voluntary Separation Pay (VSP) before I turned into Mount St. Helens or worse.
Yea, kinda like that.
In hindsight, I wonder if I subconsciously needed to use a blog as a means of exorcising my demons? Maybe, but what's it really matter now? I'm over it.
All I know is that this blog has come to the end of its useful life. There is nothing left to worry about or cling to here.
Thanks VSP.
But before I go, how about one more rant?
Yea, I know, but I couldn't resist.
Enjoy.
TOTO, I'VE GOT A FEELING WE'RE NOT IN ALABAMA ANYMORE.
(1) I drove an hour outside the city (Houston versus Montgomery) to the town of Huntsville (TX not AL) where I found really friendly people and an outdoorsy vibe.
(2) I discovered a local state park with an entire system of dummy-proof running trails. I know they're dummy proof because I (the dummy) didn't get lost!
(3) I ran the first five miles in an utter rage over a stupid Facebook post about someone's interpretation of leadership. This correlates to my anger over Squadron Officer School, which is located in Alabama.
I thought I was getting over the whole Air Force leadership thing, but this individual and his poorly disguised attempts at self-flattery vis-à-vis stating his becoming a commander and taking Air Command and Staff College courses pushed me over the edge.
The nature of the post was a request for assistance with further developing his paper on emotional intelligence (EQ) versus cognitive intelligence (IQ) as the discussion pertains to Air Force leadership.
I nearly had a meltdown.
Video: Seriously.
Why? WHY?! I'll tell you why: This may be one of the most tired, trite, overdeveloped, misunderstood, and pointless topics in the realm of leadership. IMHO, of course.
It just seems like the Air Force can't let this idea go. We talk about it as undergrads, lieutenants, and captains. But now as commanders? Really?! You're a major! If you think there is some magical recipe for EQ versus IQ (not to mention systems intelligence or spiritual intelligence or a whole host of other measures) in a single human, then there is nothing I can say or do to convince you otherwise.
This is why (and I am borrowing here) I can thank the VSP for allowing me to see that there was at least one event per day that confirmed my decision to leave the Air Force. This one just had a 26-day delay on it.
But instead of ragging on this guy anymore than I already have, I am going to offer 10 ways to improve the argument. Take 'em for what they're worth.
(A) You can't change the amount of EQ or IQ that you have. Thus, why not offer an argument about neuroscience or brain chemistry and nature versus nurture? Additionally, why are leaders so bad at realizing their strengths and leveraging those? We try way too hard to improve our weaknesses, when in fact, many of our perceived shortfalls are hardwired and can be used for good if we only stopped trying to change everything else all the time.
(B) Figure out how both EQ and IQ types are necessary in taking the Air Force from a vertical organization to a flat organization. The drawdown is making it more important than ever to operate as teams across different silos. What's that ratio?
(C) The Air Force is leaner than ever. So regardless of your particular EQ and IQ makeup, how do you recommend commanders optimize personnel retention as it relates to the appropriate mix of EQ, IQ, and SQ leaders for the future? One of the charges of commanding is to grow your replacements, right?
(D) Discuss how the EQ-heavy/IQ-lite and EQ-lite/IQ-heavy commanders learn to see 'their' troops as customers. Understanding that the customer isn't always right, couldn't we still argue that no two individuals are the same and therefore require different incentive structures? HINT: Not everyone wants to be you or shares your idea of success or your stance on praise. How do you bridge the EQ-IQ divide? Why not let the technically savvy remain in those jobs versus forcing them into management roles they despise (i.e. simply using EQ folks to fill EQ roles and using IQ folks to fill IQ roles)? Duh, right?
(E) Talk about the unnecessary internal conflict that most leaders feel when trying to shift their particular ratio of EQ and IQ (c.f. A, above). Again, accept who you are and fashion your management style in this way. Consistency is king and much better than vacillating between different people's opinions of you.
(F) There are more than just two categories of people. How do EQ and IQ leaders see the breakdown of their units? HINT: The entire spectrum of commander types would do well to flip the 90-10 convention on its head or create some sort of different breakdown like 10-80-10 (i.e. stop spending 90% of your time on 10% of your bad apples).
(G) Regardless of your brain chemistry and cognitive intelligence, talk about learning to listen to the guys, learning to learn from the guys, and learning to love the guys (c.f. D, above). Always know your why. HINT: The guys.
(H) Talk about how both EQ and IQ leaders need to become Picasso (i.e. steal and implement what works instead of always reinventing the wheel).
(I) Explain how each type should assume the best in their people and stop controlling and monitoring. Both EQ and IQ commanders would do well to set clear expectations, back off, and then be dazzled with how their guys meet or exceed expectations. In other words, how do both types stop managing and start leading.
(J) Be authentic. If you are a cheerleader, then be a cheerleader. If you are a technical nerd, then be a technical nerd. Own it. Otherwise you run the risk of losing your star performers because of your own poor example. In the end you have to recognize and embrace your particular intelligence ratio and simply surround yourself with 'smart' people.
CONCLUSION
