People & Strategy Winter 2015 Vol. 38 Issue 1 - 40

Our research indicates that when a leader
obtains high health scores, the leader also
scores high on employee engagement ratings.
This pattern was true for all dimensions, and
each high health score is consistently 15 percent above the low health score.

Table 1

% of Leaders Scoring High on Job Performance

Percent High Job Performance vs. Health Score
90
78

60
50
40

Implications and
Conclusions

35
27

20
10
Physical

Emotionall

Social

Intellectual

High Health Score

Vocational

Spiritual

Low Health Score

somewhat controversial. However, it seems
logical that the perceived strength of leadership behaviors is influenced by social or gender expectations (we may be more engaged
by a female leader who is exceptionally smart
and a male leader who has exceptional EQ
because they defy the standard stereotypes).
Tables 3 and 4 (p. 41) provide an illustration
of the collective influence of all dimensions
of leadership health on employee engagement. There is significant research that documents the importance of employee

engagement for employee retention, productivity, and overall organizational success. For
example, Gallup annually reports on the state
of engagement in organizations. In their 2013
report, they stated that only 30 percent of the
U.S. workforce is engaged, and 20 percent are
actively disengaged. According to Gallup, the
latter employees cost corporations $350 billion per year in lost productivity.4 In another
study of 7,939 business units in 36 companies, the researchers found that engagement
was related to customer satisfaction, productivity, employee turnover, and accidents.5

There are three primary implications for these
findings. First, they provide a different perspective on the role of emotional intelligence
in leadership performance. The finding that
emotional health did not predict job performance but spiritual health did suggests that
discussions and research about emotional
intelligence are missing a key construct:
spiritual health. While these two dimensions
are certainly related, our research demonstrates the potency of spiritual health. Future
research regarding emotional intelligence and
leadership must take this finding into account.
The spiritual health area is a new construct
that is important for successful leadership.
Secondly, these findings identify differences
between how respondents experience male and
female leaders relative to employee engagement,
inviting the need for further study and discussion about whether or not there are differences,
however subtle, that may inform optimal leadership development initiatives.

Table 2

Cell entries t-values for Health Areas regression coefficients*
Health
Areas

Execute
Performance
Reliably

Foster
Productive
Relationships

Forge a
Shared
Direction

Tap into a
Higher Purpose

Seize New
Opportunity

Unlesh
Human
Energy
2.59

Emotional
Intellectual
Physical
Social

3.67

6.98

Spiritual

7
.36

4.31

Vocational

4.05
4.40

5.05

3.05

2.66

5.81

3.30

2.66.

*Larger values indicate greater predictive power. Each of the six leadership actions was entered into a regression model with the six healths as predictors; there were six regression models. T-values that indicate the statistical significance of each predictor were odtained for each regression coefficient and for each of the six regression models. For example, the leadership
action Unleash Human Energy, has three significant predictors (Emotional, Social, and Spiritual) of about equal importance. On the other hand, the leadership action, Execute Performance
Reliably, has two significant predictors and Spiritual Health is twice as strong a predictor Social Health.

PEOPLE & STRATEGY

People & Strategy Winter 2015 Vol. 38 Issue 1

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of People & Strategy Winter 2015 Vol. 38 Issue 1