This article was written in collaboration with Kristine, an operations leader with over two decades of experience working directly alongside C-suite executives. Her perspective is grounded in how organizations actually run, not how they are designed on paper. Across roles, industries, and leadership teams, she has seen the same patterns emerge, where strategy, systems, and people intersect, and where they break down. This piece builds on those conversations, focusing on a gap that consistently shows up in operations but is rarely addressed in a structured way: how leaders interpret, respond, and make decisions in real human contexts.

In Practice is a special series of articles based on guest interviews.

Where to Begin

There is a common assumption that strong leaders are simply “good with people.”

While this is true, there are other skills that turn a strong leader into a great one.

A capable leader can work across a wide range of personalities, including difficult ones, without allowing those dynamics to degrade performance.

More importantly, they can redirect negative traits into productive outcomes:

• Turning urgency into momentum instead of panic

• Channeling skepticism into better decisions

• Converting strong opinions into structured debate rather than conflict

This is what we like to call applied judgement. This doesn’t mean that every personality needs to fit in every workplace. Sometimes people just are not a culture fit, or sometimes people cannot be redirected into productive outcomes in which place they “need to go”.

That being said, in practice, good leadership shows up in a few consistent ways.

They communicate with intent, not reaction. They adjust tone based on context and avoid escalating situations unnecessarily.

They pause before acting, especially under pressure. Instead of reacting, they consider what response will actually move the situation toward the outcome they want.

And they understand their own patterns.

Because without self-awareness, leaders tend to:

• Become easily inflamed under pressure

• Be influenced by the loudest or most toxic voices in the room

• Default to habitual reactions instead of intentional decisions

With self-awareness, they can:

• Recognize when they are reacting instead of thinking

• Adjust in real time

• Maintain consistency regardless of external pressure

This is control.

This is what emotional intelligence looks like when it is operational.

At the end of this article we will provide special AI prompts and GPT for emotional intelligence to help guide leaders in the right direction.

The Patterns People in Operations Notice

Spend enough time talking to operations leaders, and you will start to pick apart various layers of how a business functions. The technical, then the personal.

These conversations happen in-between the actual work and the systems themselves. Here people are more direct about how things actually work.

You start in familiar territory:

• Execution challenges

• Bottlenecks

• Misalignment across teams

These are surface level issues and if you stick around long enough, eventually, you will start to dig into other layers.

The discussion moves from systems to people. From process to behavior and then it surfaces.

Some of the most persistent operational problems are not technical.

They are human.

In conversations with leaders like Kristine, this shows up repeatedly. Not as a lack of strategy. Not as a lack of tools. But as a gap in how people interpret situations, respond under pressure, and manage each other.

Emotional intelligence sits underneath much of it.

And yet, it is rarely designed into how teams actually operate.

What Emotional Intelligence Actually Means

Emotional intelligence is often simplified, but its foundation is well established.

Mayer and Salovey (1997) define it as the ability to:

• Perceive emotions

• Understand them

• Regulate them

• Use them to guide thinking and behavior

In practice, this translates to:

• Recognizing when tension signals risk

• Adjusting communication based on context

• Managing reactions under pressure

• Interpreting behavior accurately

This is applied judgment.

And it has a measurable impact.

While technically it’s a soft skill, it can also be considered a performance variable.

It Matters More Than Most Systems Acknowledge

In most organizations, the hardest problems are not:

• Lack of information

• Lack of tools

• Lack of process (although this can be a problem)

They are:

• Misinterpretation

• Poor coordination

• Poor timing

• Unmanaged reactions

• Breakdown in trust

Trust in leadership has a measurable impact on performance and engagement (Dirks & Ferrin, 2002). Emotional intelligence drives that trust because it shapes how leaders interpret and respond to situations.

When it is present:

• Conflict is addressed early

• Decisions reflect context

• Teams stay aligned

When it is absent:

• Small issues escalate

• Communication becomes reactive

• Execution slows in ways that are difficult to diagnose

Despite the evidence, emotional intelligence can sometimes be missing in how work is structured.

Share

What gets measured drives behavior

Leaders are evaluated on:

• Output

• Speed

• Efficiency

Emotional intelligence does not map cleanly to these metrics. As Kristine put it.

“Leaders are not paid to optimize emotional intelligence. It gets talked about because it sounds right, but without a way to tie it to what’s measured, it stays in a gray area.”

Without measurement, it becomes optional.
Without accountability, it becomes inconsistent.

Leadership pipelines reinforce the gap

Most leaders are promoted based on performance in their current role, not their ability to lead others. Kristine mentioned:

“People get promoted based on how well they perform their current job, not based on their ability to lead others. Too many leaders take the role without the aptitude for developing people.”

This creates a structural mismatch:

• Strong execution leads to promotion

• Leadership requires different capabilities

• Emotional intelligence is underdeveloped

Two Different Operating Environments

Over time, organizations diverge.

Those that build emotional intelligence into how they operate

• Feedback is integrated into workflows

• Leaders are trained to interpret behavior

• Tension is addressed early

The result:

• Faster decisions

• Higher trust

• More consistent execution

Research shows teams led by emotionally intelligent leaders perform better in complex environments (Côté, 2014).

Those that do not

• Emotional intelligence is treated as optional

• Issues are addressed only after escalation

• Process is used to compensate for behavior

The result:

• Slower execution

• More rework

• Higher disengagement

Problems are often misdiagnosed as process failures when they are actually failures in interpretation.

The Difference Between Healthy and Toxic Dynamics

Certain dynamics become most visible in team behavior.

In high-functioning environments

• Feedback is direct and contextual

• Disagreement is managed constructively

• Behavior adjusts based on new information

Conflict exists, it always will. How it’s managed is a different story.

A high-functioning environment will manage it effectively.

In low-functioning environments

• Feedback is avoided or delayed

• Assumptions replace clarity

• Emotional reactions drive decisions

• The loudest voices become the guiding direction

Over time, this leads to:

• Defensive behavior

• Reduced trust

• Slower execution

Toxicity is not a single event.

It is accumulated mismanagement of interactions.

Where AI Changes the Equation

AI is removing stress from:

• Communication

• Coordination

• Information access

This creates more capacity.

But it also creates a new risk:

The ability to simulate emotional intelligence without developing it.

“AI will make it easier to sound emotionally intelligent. But if actions don’t match the words, it will just be more of the same.”

Kristine was right to point out that AI can improve how something sounds.
But it does not improve the thinking behind it.

If anything, it makes inconsistencies more visible.

What This Means Going Forward

As AI takes on more structured work, what remains is:

• Interpretation

• Judgment

• Human interaction

The organizations that adapt will:

• Treat emotional intelligence as a capability

• Build it into leadership expectations

• Reinforce it through systems

The ones that do not will continue to:

• Talk about it

• Value it in theory

• Miss it in practice

It’s a Concept That You Are Allowed to Practice

Emotional intelligence improves through use, not awareness.

If it is not showing up in decisions and behavior under pressure, it is not operational.

The starting point is not more theory.
It is better inputs in real moments.

Your Closure

AI is creating more space for us.

What matters is how that space is used.

The leaders who improve will be the ones who:

• Control their reactions

• Interpret situations accurately

• Choose responses that lead to better outcomes

We have extra time now and no time like the present to expand on certain skillsets.

It’s up to you.

Practical Prompts to Build Emotional Intelligence in Real Time

1. Before Responding

What am I assuming that I have not verified, and what else could be true?

2. When Emotions Are High

What outcome do I actually want, and is my reaction moving toward or away from it?

3. When Interpreting Behavior

What context or constraints might I be missing?

Using AI as a Reflection Layer (GPT/Project Instructions)

AI can support this process when used correctly.

It can help challenge certain reactions or responses.

Instructions:

I am about to respond to this situation: [context]
My initial reaction is: [reaction]

Analyze:

1. How might the other person see this?

2. What risks exist in my response?

3. What would a high-quality response look like that maintains accountability?

Used this way, AI improves thinking rather than replacing it.

References

• Mayer, J. D., & Salovey, P. (1997). What is emotional intelligence?

• O’Boyle, E. H. et al. (2011). Emotional intelligence and job performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior.

• Joseph, D. L., & Newman, D. A. (2010). Emotional intelligence and leadership effectiveness. Journal of Applied Psychology.

• Dirks, K. T., & Ferrin, D. L. (2002). Trust in leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology.

• Côté, S. (2014). Emotional intelligence in organizations. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology.