Technological University Dublin
ARROW@TU Dublin

Dissertations Social Sciences

2019-4
Social-Emotional Intelligence (EI), graduates and the workplace – A study of a tailored approach to EI competency development for final year engineering students

Ailish Jameson
Technological University Dublin, [email protected]

Follow this and additional works at: https://arrow.tudublin.ie/aaschssldis
Part of the Communication Commons, and the Social Psychology Commons

Recommended Citation
Jameson, A. (2019). Social-Emotional Intelligence (EI), graduates and the workplace – A study of a tailored approach to EI competency development for final year engineering students. Technological University Dublin. DOI: 10.21427/GWGM-3G82

This Theses, Ph.D is brought to you for free and open access by the Social Sciences at ARROW@TU Dublin. It has
been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ARROW@TU Dublin. For more
information, please contact [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
[email protected].

Social-Emotional Intelligence (EI), graduates
and the workplace – A study of a tailored
approach to EI competency development for
final year engineering students

Alice Jameson

A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirement for the degree of

Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)
Awarded by: QQI

Supervised by:

Dr Aiden Carthy (Lead)
Technological University Dublin (TU Dublin) – Blanchardstown
campus

and
Dr Colm McGuinness (co)
TU Dublin – Blanchardstown campus

and
Dr Fiona McSweeney (co)
TU Dublin – Dublin City Campus Grangegorman
April 2019

Declaration ……………………………………………………………………………………………………
Acknowledgements …………………………………………………………………………………………
Abstract ………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
List of Tables………………………………………………………………………………………………..
List of Figures ……………………………………………………………………………………………..

Chapter One : Introduction and Overview ……………………………………………………

1.1 Introduction ………………………………………………………………………………………
1.2 Overview of higher education ……………………………………………………………..
1.3 Aims and objectives …………………………………………………………………………..
1.4 Research questions …………………………………………………………………………….
1.5 Social-emotional (EI) competency in the workplace – importance and current levels …………………………………………………………………………………….
1.6 Tailored versus general EI coaching …………………………………………………….
1.7 EI coaching and employability …………………………………………………………….
1.8 Structure of the thesis …………………………………………………………………………

Chapter Two : Literature Review ………………………………………………………………..

2.1 Section One: Historical Evolution of EI ………………………………………………

2.1.1 Introduction …………………………………………………………………………

2.1.2 Emotion …………………………………………………………………………

2.1.3 Emotion and the Brain…………………………………………………………………………

2.1.4 Intelligence…………………………………………………………………………

2.1.5 EI …………………………………………………………………………

2.1.6 Model of EI …………………………………………………………………………

2.1.6.1 Trait Theory ……………………………………………………………………….
2.1.6.2 Salovey-Mayer Ability Model ………………………………………………
2.1.6.2.1 MSCEIT …………………………………………………………………………..
2.1.6.3 Goleman and Boyatzis– Emotional and Social Competence Inventory (ESCI)…………………………………………………………………
2.1.6.4 Bar-On Model of Emotional and Social (EI) Functioning ………..
2.1.6.4.1 Emotional Quotient Inventory (EQ-i2.0) ……………………………….

2.2 Section Two: EI and Higher Education ……………………………………………….

2.2.1 Introduction …………………………………………………………………………

2.2.2 The bologna Declaration on the European space for higher Education …………………………………………………………………………

2.2.3 The Nation strategy for higher Education to 2030……………………………………………….

2.2.4 Marketisation of Education …………………………………………………………………………

2.2.5 EI and Graduate attributes …………………………………………………………………………

2.2.6 Graduate Attributes : University of Aberdeen ,Scotland and TU Dublin…………………………………………………………………………

2.2.6.1 University of Aberdeen, Scotland ………………………………………….
2.2.6.2 TU Dublin ………………………………………………………………………….

2.2.7 Graduate attributes and engineering students………………………………………….

2.28 The Journeymen project,Sweden and the professional Entity project, Australia ………………………………………………………………………….
2.3 Section Three: EI, graduates and the workplace …………………………………..

2.3.1 Introduction ………………………………………………………………………….

2.3.2 Employability ………………………………………………………………………….

2.3.3 EI and the Workplace ………………………………………………………………………….

2.3.4 Coaching ………………………………………………………………………….

2.3.5 The Consortium for Research on EI in Organization -Guidelines for emotional competency training ………………………………………………………………………….

2.3.6 EI coaching based on the Bar-On Eq-i2.0 ………………………………………………………………………….

2.3.7 EI coaching in the workplace-case studies ………………………………………………………………………….

2.3.7.1 American Express Financial Advisers (AEFA) ……………………….
2.3.7.2 Fortune 400 ………………………………………………………………………..
2.3.7.3 ‘Search Inside Yourself’ (SIY) EI coaching programme ………….

2.3.7.4 conclusion ………………………………………………………………………….

Chapter Three : Method …………………………………………………………………………….

3.1 Introduction …………………………………………………………………………………..
3.2 Theoretical Framework …………………………………………………………………..
3.3 Research Paradigm …………………………………………………………………………

3.3.1 Positivism ………………………………………………………………………….

3.3.2 Constructivist/ Interpretivism ………………………………………………………………………….

3.3.3 Critical Theory ………………………………………………………………………….

3.3.4 Pragmatism ………………………………………………………………………….

3.5 Ethical considerations ……………………………………………………………………..
3.6 Reflection ……………………………………………………………………………………..
3.7 Timeline ………………………………………………………………………………………..
3.8 Sampling ……………………………………………………………………………………….
3.9 Bar-On Emotional Quotient Inventory (EQ-i2.0) accredited test of emotional intelligence …………………………………………………………………….
3.10 Method: Phase One ………………………………………………………………………..

3.10.1 Overview ………………………………………………………………………….

3.10.2 Pilot ………………………………………………………………………….

3.10.3 Employer Survey ………………………………………………………………………….

3.10.3.1 Survey Questions ………………………………………………………………
3.10.3.2 Survey design issue – Question 5 ………………………………………..

3.10.4 Semi -Structure Interviews ………………………………………..

3.10.4.1 Thematic Analysis …………………………………………………………….
3.11 Method Phase Two …………………………………………………………………………

3.11.1 Pilot …………………………………………………………………………

3.11.2 Recruitment of participants …………………………………………………………………………

3.11.3 Bar -on EQ-i 2.0 testing of research partcipant, one -to -one and group EI coaching …………………………………………………………………………

3.12 Method Phase Three ……………………………………………………………………….

3.12.1 Mock EI competency based interviews ……………………………………………………………………….
3.13 Method – Inferential statistics ………………………………………………………….

3.13.1 Exploratory versus confirm analysis ……………………………………………………………………….

3.13.2 Statistical power ……………………………………………………………………….

3.13.3 Null hypothesis significance testing (NHST) ……………………………………………………………………….

3.13.4 Type I and Type II errors ……………………………………………………………………….

3.13.5 Effect Size ……………………………………………………………………….

3.13.6 Bootstrapping ……………………………………………………………………….

3.13 .7 Phase One tests ……………………………………………………………………….

3.13.7.1 GLM ANOVA ……………………………………………………………………….

3.13.7.2 Levene’s Test for Homogeneity of Variance ……………………………………………………………………….

3.13.7.3 Welch’s Test ……………………………………………………………………….

3.13.7.4 Residuals ……………………………………………………………………….

3.13.7.5 Chi-Squared Test of Independence ……………………………………………………………………….

3.13.7.6 Kruskal – Wallis H-Test ……………………………………………………………………….

3.13.7.7 Eta-squared (η2) ………………………………………………………………..
3.13.7.8 Post Hoc Comparison Tests for GLM ANOVA …………………….
3.13.7.9 Cohen’s d/ds ……………………………………………………………………..

3.13.8 Phase Two Tests ……………………………………………………………………….
3.13.8.1 Repeated-Measures ANOVA ……………………………………………..
3.13.8.2 Box’s Test of Equality of Covariance Matrices……………………..
3.13.8.3 Partial eta-squared ( ) ………………………………………………………
3.13.8.4 Independent samples t-tests ………………………………………………..
3.13.8.5 Glass’s Delta Δ …………………………………………………………………

3.13.8.9 Phase Three Test ……………………………………………………………………….

3.13.9.1 Chi-Squared Test of Independence ………………………………………
3.13.9.2 Cramér’s V (C) …………………………………………………………………
3.13.9.3 Independent samples t-tests ………………………………………………..
3.13.9.4 Glass’s Delta Δ …………………………………………………………………
3.14 Conclusion …………………………………………………………………………………….

Chapter Four : Results Phase One ……………………………………………………………..

4.1 Overview ………………………………………………………………………………………
4.2 Main results: employer survey …………………………………………………………
4.3 Employer responses – EI competency importance ………………………………
4.4 Employer responses – current levels of EI competence………………………..
4.5 Responses by sector ………………………………………………………………………..

4.5.1 Engineering ………………………………………………………………………..

4.5.2 Information Technology/Computing ………………………………………………………………………..

4.5.3 Professional Services ………………………………………………………………………..

(Accounting/Finance/Business/ HR/Law/ Retail)

4.5.4 Science (Including Pharmaceutical/Life) ………………………………………………………………………..

4.5.5 Social Science ………………………………………………………………………..

4.6 GLM univariate analysis – EI competency importance as reported by employers ………………………………………………………………………………………..
4.7 GLM univariate analysis: current levels of EI competency displayed by graduates when entering the workplace, as reported by employers ………….
4.8 Employer Survey: qualitative results…………………………………………………

4.8.1 EI and Professionalism …………………………………………………

4.8.2 Confidence …………………………………………………

4.8.3 Self -Awareness …………………………………………………

4.9 Phase One Results: Semi-structured interviews ………………………………….

4.9.1 Introduction …………………………………………………

4.9.2.1 Theme One: The changing workplace ………………………………….
4.9.2.2 Theme Two: The dynamic nature of the role ………………………..
4.9.2.3 Theme Three: EI and professionalism ………………………………….
4.9.2.3.1 EI, professionalism and peer interactions ……………………………
4.9.2.3.2 EI, professionalism and clients ………………………………………….
4.9.2.3.3 EI and compliance/regulation ……………………………………………
4.9.2.4 Theme Four: Issues with low levels of EI among graduates ……
4.9.2.4.1 Age, experience and upbringing ………………………………………..
4.9.2.4.2 Lack of preparation at third level ……………………………………….

4.9.3 Topic Two : Recruitment ……………………………………….

4.9.3.1 Theme One: CV and Interview Preparation ………………………….
4.9.3.2 Theme Two: Diverse measurements of EI competence by employers …………………………………………………………………………
4.9.3.2.1 Assessment Centres …………………………………………………………
4.9.3.2.2 Online Code Tests ……………………………………………………………
4.9.3.2.3 Competency based interviews …………………………………………..
4.9.3.3 Theme Three: Demonstration of EI as an influencing factor on
graduate hire …………………………………………………………………….
4.9.3.4 Theme Four: Diversity in terms of EI coaching …………………….
4.9.3.4.1 Team based activities ……………………………………………………….
4.9.3.4.2 Role Plays and Scenarios ………………………………………………….
4.9.3.4.3 Video ……………………………………………………………………………..
4.9.3.4.4 Case Studies ……………………………………………………………………

4.9.4 Topic Three: Workplace training in EI ……………………………………………………………………

4.9.4.1 Theme One: Employer investment in graduates …………………….
4.9.4.1.1 Training ………………………………………………………………………….
4.9.4.1.2 Mentors/Coaches …………………………………………………………….
4.9.4.1.3 Presentations …………………………………………………………………..
4.9.4.1.4 Project Teams …………………………………………………………………
4.9.4.1.5 Internships ………………………………………………………………………
4.9.4.1.6 Counselling …………………………………………………………………….
4.10 Conclusion …………………………………………………………………………………….

Chapter Five : Results Phase Two ………………………………………………………………

5.1 Overview ………………………………………………………………………………………
5.2 Main findings: research question three ……………………………………………..
5.3 Descriptive Statistics ………………………………………………………………………
5.4 Repeated-measures ANOVA……………………………………………………………
5.5 Conclusion …………………………………………………………………………………….

Chapter Six : Results Phase Three ……………………………………………………………..

6.1 Overview ………………………………………………………………………………………
6.2 Main Results: Mock EI interview rating sheets ………………………………….

6.2.1 Chi-squared(x2)results ……………………………………………………………..

6.2.2 Post Hoc Independent sample t-test results ……………………………………………………………..
6.3 Phase Three – Qualitative results ………………………………………………………

6.3.1 Theme One: Importance of identifying and articulating Weaknesses ……………………………………………………..

6.3.2 Theme two :Self-Awareness ……………………………………………………..

6.3.3 Theme three: EI and teamwork ……………………………………………………..

6.3.4 Theme four : EI and work experience ……………………………………………………..

6.3.5 Theme five : EI as a critical factor in determining employability ……………………………………………………..

6.3.6 Theme six : Behavioural Dispositions as key to graduate hire ……………………………………………………..

6.3.7 Theme seven : Interview Preparation ……………………………………………………..
6.4 Conclusion …………………………………………………………………………………….

Chapter Seven : Discussion, Strengths, Limitations, Future Research, Conclusions ……………………………………………………………………………………………….

7.1 Overview ………………………………………………………………………………………
7.2 What are the emotional and social (EI) skills that Irish employers deem important for graduates to possess in five sectors of the Irish economy? ….
What are the current levels of EI being displayed by graduates, when entering the workplace, as reported by employers in these sectors?…………

7.2.1 Self -awarencess as key to success in the workplace …………………………………………………………..

7.2.2 Diversity in terms of culture in the workplace …………………………………………………………..

7.2.3 EI Conching as an effective means for promoting social and emotional competency …………………………………………………………..

7.2.4 Importance of EI in the recruitment process …………………………………………………………..
7.2.4.1 Assessment Centres …………………………………………………………..

7.2.5 EI and employability …………………………………………………………..

7.3 Does a tailored, as opposed to a general approach to social-emotional competency coaching for final year engineering students, based on the stated needs of employers, result in different group mean EQ-i2.0 scores
post-intervention? ……………………………………………………………………………..
7.4 Are students who received tailored, as opposed to general EI coaching rated differently by employers with respect to their knowledge of EI, the application of EI to the workplace and employability?……………………..

7.4.1 Behavioural disposition as key to graduate hire ………………………………………………………..

7.4.2 EI development through curricula ………………………………………………………..

7.4.3 Template for TU Dublin X-Cel (Excellence in personal Development) Award ………………………………………………………..

7.4.4 EI development through employability workshops ………………………………………………………..

7.4.5 The Employability Workshop Series Workshop No .1 ………………………………………………………..
7.5 Critical evaluation of the study ………………………………………………………..
7.6 Strengths of the study ……………………………………………………………………..
7.7 Limitations of the study …………………………………………………………………..
7.8 Future Research ……………………………………………………………………………..
7.9 Conclusion …………………………………………………………………………………….

References………………………………….………………………………………….
List of Publications…………………………………………………………………….
Appendices………….…………………………………………………………….……

Declaration

I hereby certify that the thesis entitled “Social-Emotional Intelligence (EI), graduates and the workplace – A study of a tailored approach to EI competency development for final year engineering students” submitted to TU Dublin – Blanchardstown campus for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy has not been submitted as an exercise for a degree at any other third level institution. I also certify that the work described here is entirely my own or has been referred to in the text.

_____________________________ _______________
Ailish Jameson Date

Acknowledgements

I wish to acknowledge the enormous support and guidance given to me by my supervisory team of Dr Aiden Carthy, Dr Colm McGuinness and Dr Fiona McSweeney. Their commitment, input and expertise were invaluable to me throughout the research process. Thanks to the employers and final year engineering students who participated in this research and gave so generously of their time. Thanks to all the staff in both Institutes of Technology (IOTs) for their support. Particular mention to the Head of Mechanical Engineering in Institute 2 and to the student representatives in the two IOTs for all their help in the co-ordination aspects of phases two and three. I also wish to acknowledge funding received from the TU Dublin Programmes for the Future fund.

Special thanks to my friends and family who supported me throughout the PhD journey, in particular, enormous love and gratitude to my inspirational sons Aaron and Ken Heery.

I wish to dedicate this work to my father-in-law Seán Heery, the kindest, most generous and probably the most intelligent man I have ever met. He supported and guided me in my life and throughout my academic career but sadly departed this world in April, 2018. Huge gratitude for everything you did for me.

“I have no special talent; I am just passionately curious”

(Albert Einstein)

Abstract

Previous research has demonstrated that higher social and emotional competence (EI) results in increased life and career success. To date, EI coaching programmes have been delivered in higher education and in the workplace and have demonstrated success in terms of increased EI competence, post intervention. However, to date no attempt has been made in an Irish context to design and deliver a tailored EI coaching programme, based on the stated needs of employers. This study aimed to address this gap in EI research. It was exploratory in nature with a mixed method design being employed. In Phase One, a survey of employers in key vocational sectors of Irish industry was conducted to gather their opinions on (i) the importance of EI competencies and (ii) the current levels being displayed by graduates, on entering the workplace. Phase One concluded with a series of semi-structured interviews with employers (n = 5). Based on these results and due to the iterative nature of the research, a sample of final year engineering students (n = 62) in two institutes of technology (IOTs) in Dublin were recruited to participate in Phase Two. Participants were tested at baseline utilising an accredited test of EI, the Bar-On EQ-i2.0 and one general and one bespoke EI coaching programme were designed and delivered. In Phase Three, each participant met with an employer for a mock EI competency based interview, followed by post-intervention testing. Key results demonstrated that employers rated all competencies as either ‘very important’ or ‘important’, with highest ratings of ‘good’ being attributed to current levels among graduates. Scores on the EQ-i2.0 increased for both groups, post-intervention with statistically significant differences found between the groups for some of the competencies. A template for a TU Dublin X-Cel (Excellence in Personal Development) award has been designed based on results from this study.

List of Tables

Table 1: TEIQue ……………………………………………………………………………………………
Table 2: Four Branch Model of EI …………………………………………………………………..
Table 3: Emotional and Social Competency Inventory (ESCI) ……………………………
Table 4: Principal research phases and objectives ……………………………………………
Table 5: Timeline of Research ……………………………………………………………………..
Table 6: Topic Guide: Semi-structured interviews …………………………………………..
Table 7: Group EI coaching by Group ……………………………………………………………
Table 8 Breakdown of statistical tests used in phases one, two and three …………..
Table 9: Cohen’s d effect size – interpretation …………………………………………………
Table 10: Breakdown of responses by sector …………………………………………………..
Table 11: Employer ratings of EI competencies in terms of importance ……………..
Table 12: Employer ratings of current levels of competence being displayed by graduates, when entering the workplace …………………………………………………………
Table 13: Engineering – ratings in terms of competency importance, as reported by employers ………………………………………………………………………………….
Table 14: Engineering – ratings in terms of current level of competence being displayed by graduates when entering the workplace, as reported by employers …
Table 15: IT/computing – ratings in terms of competency importance, as reported by employers ………………………………………………………………………………….
Table 16: IT/computing – ratings in terms of current level of competence being displayed by graduates when entering the workplace, as reported by employers …
Table 17: Professional Services – ratings in terms of competency importance, as reported by employers ………………………………………………………………………………….
Table 18: Professional Services – ratings in terms of current level of competence being displayed by graduates when entering the workplace, as reported by employers …………………………………………………………………………………………………..
Table 19: Science – ratings in terms of competency importance, as reported by employers …………………………………………………………………………………………………..
Table 20: Science -ratings in terms of current level of competence being displayed by graduates when entering the workplace, as reported by employers …

Table 21: Social Science – ratings in terms of competency importance, as reported by employers ………………………………………………………………………………….
Table 22: Social Science – ratings in terms of current level of competence being displayed by graduates when entering the workplace, as reported by employers …
Table 23: GLM Results – Competency importance as reported by employers …….
Table 24: Summary of statistically significant GLM post hoc comparisons using LSD in terms of competency importance as reported by employers…………..
Table 25: GLM Results – current levels of competence displayed by graduates as reported by employers ……………………………………………………………………………..
Table 26: Summary of statistically significant GLM post hoc comparison using LSD in terms of current levels displayed by graduates as reported by employers ..
Table 27: Semi-structured interviews – employer ratings of EI competencies …….
Table 28: Means, standard deviations, mean differences and standard errors for baseline and follow-up scores for participating students in each EQ-i2.0 domain and sub-category by group ……………………………………………………………………………
Table 29: Repeated-Measures ANOVA results with an asterisk indicating statistical significance ………………………………………………………………………………….
Table 30: Detailed model terms and associated effect sizes, with highest order statistically significant terms highlighted in shades of green……………………………..
Table 31: Post-Hoc Independent Samples t-test results – Group and Institute ……..
Table 32: Mock EI competency based interviews – employer responses …………….
Table 33: Means, standard deviations, confidence intervals, χ², df, significance Cramer’s V (C) for mock EI competency based interviews by group ………………..
Table 34: Means, standard deviations, confidence intervals, χ², df, significance Cramer’s V (C) for mock EI competency based interviews by institute …………….
Table 35: Means, standard deviations, confidence intervals, χ², df, significance Cramer’s V (C) for mock EI competency based interviews split by institute ………

List of Figures

Figure 1: Bar-On EQ-i2.0 model ………………………………………………………………………
Figure 2: Comparison of mean ratings in terms of importance and current levels being displayed, as reported by employers – Adaptability ……………………….
Figure 3: Comparison of mean ratings in terms of importance and current levels being displayed, as reported by employers – Communication ………………….
Figure 4: Comparison of mean ratings in terms of importance and current levels being displayed, as reported by employers – Conflict Management ………….
Figure 5: Comparison of mean ratings in terms of importance and current levels being displayed, as reported by employers – Emotional Self-Awareness …..
Figure 6: Comparison of mean ratings in terms of importance and current levels being displayed, as reported by employers – Emotional Self-Control ……….
Figure 7: Comparison of mean ratings in terms of importance and current levels being displayed, as reported by employers – Empathy ……………………………
Figure 8: Comparison of mean ratings in terms of importance and current levels being displayed, as reported by employers – Initiative ……………………………
Figure 9: Comparison of mean ratings in terms of importance and current levels being displayed, as reported by employers – Motivation …………………………
Figure 10: Comparison of mean ratings in terms of importance and current levels being displayed, as reported by employers – Positive Outlook …………………
Figure 11: Comparison of mean ratings in terms of importance and current levels being displayed, as reported by employers – Teamwork………………………….
Figure 12: Difference scores for repeated-measures ANOVA statistically significant results by group …………………………………………………………………………..
Figure 13: Difference scores for repeated-measures ANOVA statistically significant results by institute ……………………………………………………………………….
Figure 14: Student ability to identify key EI learning ………………………………………
Figure 15: Student knowledge of the application of EI to the workplace …………….
Figure 16: Student knowledge of the links between EI and employability ………….
Figure 17: Student hire based purely on employer perceptions of EI ………………….

Chapter One: Introduction and Overview

1.1 Introduction

This chapter will present a brief overview of higher education, will outline the aims and objectives of the research and present the research questions. It will then discuss social-emotional (EI) competence, examine tailored versus general coaching and the links between EI coaching and employability. Finally, it will present a breakdown of the structure of the thesis.

1.2 Overview of higher education

In Ireland, higher education is provided by a number of universities, institutes of technology and colleges of education (Department of Education and Skills website n.d.). In addition, there are a number of third level institutions which provide specialist education in the fields of art and design, medicine, business studies, rural development, theology, music and law. The Higher Education Authority (HEA) is the statutory planning and development body for higher education and research in Ireland. The Universities Act, (1997) outlined the objectives and functions of a university, setting out the role and structure of governing bodies, staffing, academic councils and other duties. The HEA has an overseeing role in terms of such plans and quality assurance processes, while respecting the autonomy of each university. The Institutes of Technology Act, (2006) provided a similar template as the Universities Act, (1997) with the HEA acting in a comparable capacity. In Ireland, in 1960, 5% of 18 year olds progressed to higher education, by 1980, this had increased to 20% and currently it has risen to 65% (Department of Education of Skills, 2011). Critical to the role of higher education in Ireland is its ability to “add to the understanding of, and hence the flourishing of, an integrated social, institutional, cultural and economic life” (Expert Group on Future Funding for Higher Education, 2015, p. iii). Higher education shifted and changed from a linear process where new knowledge drove innovation in industry to a focus on four overlapping and interlinking “spheres” (Expert Group on Future Funding for Higher Education, 2015, p. iii). These are: university, business, government and civil society that seek to address “the complex economic, technical, social and environmental challenges” prevalent in modern society (p. iii).

The annual funding cost of higher education is approximately €2.7 billion, with the State providing 74% of such funding. According to the Expert Group, in publically funded higher education institutions, State funding has been reducing since 2008 with the introduction of student contributions and reduced student grants. When examining the purpose and value of higher education, the Expert Group argued that higher education should (i) provide a high quality student experience, (ii) support economic, social and cultural innovation, (iii) develop knowledge and capabilities of graduates which meet the expanding needs of the economy, society and public system, and (iv) be equitable in terms of access. This was echoed in the National Strategy for Higher Education to 2030 report which argued that higher education should equip graduates with discipline specific knowledge, together with important skills, such as adaptability, creativity, “rounded” thinking and citizenship (Department of Education of Skills, 2011, p. 11). The National Strategy questioned the “right” skills required for both the graduates of 2015 and of 2030 and, once determined, asked how the correct combination of skills could be included as learning outcomes in higher education (p. 35). One recommendation was the need for higher education to shift from simply focusing on the “over-specialisation” of graduates in discipline specific knowledge to a move towards a more broad perspective to include core skills of quantitative reasoning, critical thinking, communication, teamworking and effective use of information technology (p. 35).

The National Strategy emphasised that higher education must be “excellent, relevant and responsive” to students’ personal development and growth, guiding them to be fully “engaged” citizens in society (Department of Education and Skills, 2011, p. 27). The skills of communication, teamworking, personal development and citizenship emphasised by the National Strategy report are all EI skills, marking an important change in higher education teaching and practices. In recent years, a shift has taken place in many technical disciplines from purely teaching technical knowledge to a focus on social and emotional competency development (Ilyasova, 2015). For example, in engineering the role of emotions in terms of projects, productivity and wellbeing have increasingly become more important. While it is accepted that technical skills are critically important, there is growing recognition of the need for high levels of EI competency in this discipline as, according to Fasano, (2013), EI can be the difference between a good engineer and a great engineer.

1.3 Aims and objectives

The principal aim of this research was to explore whether a tailored approach, as opposed to a general approach to social-emotional (EI) coaching, based on the stated needs of employers, resulted in different mean Bar-On EQ-i2.0 scores post intervention. The Bar-On EQ- i2.0 test of EI will be discussed in greater detail later in the review. To date, no research exploring the opinions of employers on the importance of EI competency when transitioning into the workplace has taken place, in an Irish context. This study was conducted in two IOTs in Dublin. The researcher is a former student of one of the IOTs and had worked there on a part-time basis as an Assistant Lecturer in the School of Humanities. The specific objectives of this study were:

1. To conduct a survey of the opinions of employers in five sectors of the Irish economy: engineering, IT/computing, professional services, science and social science, as to the social and emotional skills that they deemed important for graduates to possess as well as the current levels being displayed by graduates when entering the workplace.
2. To conduct a series of semi-structured interviews with employers to gather detailed data on EI competency in the workplace and to obtain their input on the design and delivery of a bespoke EI coaching programme.

3. To administer the Bar-On EQ-i2.0 pre and post intervention to final year engineering students across the two IOTs.

4. To design and deliver one-to-one individualised EI coaching to final year engineering students using the workplace report generated by the Bar-On EQ-i2.0. The design of the one-to-one coaching for the tailored group incorporated elements of employer feedback from objective 2.

5. To design and deliver (i) a general group EI coaching programme based on established programmes already delivered in the workplace and (ii) a bespoke group EI coaching programme tailored to the specified needs of employers, aimed at increasing specific emotional and social skills associated with employability.
6. To conduct one-to-one mock EI competency based interviews between final year engineering students and employers to determine if a discipline specific approach to EI competency development as opposed
to a general approach resulted in enhanced EI knowledge, employability and graduate hire, from the employer’s viewpoint.

1.4 Research questions

Based on the objectives outlined above, this research addressed the following four principal research questions:

The research questions will now be discussed, with a particular focus on the rationale underpinning each.

1.5 Social-emotional (EI) competency in the workplace – importance and current levels

In recent decades, EI has become increasingly important in the workplace and has been linked with many critical skills such as teamwork, communication, flexibility and adaptability and has been reported to account for 58% of job performance across all sectors of employment (Bradberry & Greaves, 2009). Poor EI has been identified as one of the top five reasons that new hires fail, according to Arcement, (2018). According to Platt, (2015), EI is a key factor in terms of career and life success with low levels of EI being reported to result in challenges in the workplace and, in some cases, careers being jeopardised. Platt, (2015) further argued that poor EI in the workplace is often manifested by an inability to convey ideas, issues with working in teams and gaining trust, and difficulties understanding other people’s emotions. In an educational context, intelligence quotient (IQ) is important in terms of technical knowledge and know-how, however, it is the social and emotional factors which influence success at college (Cherniss, 2000b). According to Hughes and Barrie, (2010), the development of personal transferable skills such as self-responsibility, compassion, capability, self-awareness and cultural awareness are critically important elements of an undergraduate education.

With the shift in the emphasis in higher education to market driven objectives, higher education institutions are now expected to design and deliver an employability agenda (Findlow, 2008). Graduate employability was a key focal point of the Bologna process with a core aim being the examination of skills deficits and measures to address such deficits. To date, many EI coaching interventions have been delivered in the workplace targeting specific EI competencies. However, no research has been undertaken, in an Irish context to survey and interview employers to gather their opinions on (i) the importance of EI in the workplace, (ii) the current levels being displayed by graduates, when entering the workplace and (iii) the design and delivery of a bespoke EI coaching programme. Therefore, this research was the first of its kind in an Irish context to adopt a collaborative process with employers throughout the research process. This research was particularly timely as, in January, 2018 the Institute of Technology, Blanchardstown (ITB) merged with the Institute of Technology, Tallaght (ITT) and Dublin Institute of Technology (DIT) to become Ireland’s first Technological University, TU Dublin. TU Dublin has a particular emphasis on employability and ensuring graduates are career and life-ready (TU Dublin, 2014). Accordingly, this research yielded valuable data in terms of graduate attribute and employability skills required by employers in today’s workplace which could be utilised to inform interventions for students in the newly established TU Dublin.

1.6 Tailored versus general EI coaching

Previously, attempts have been made at designing and delivering tailored EI coaching in higher education and in the workplace. Carthy (2013) examined EI in terms of student engagement and attrition levels and delivered individualised coaching to participants, resulting in a decrease of just under one third in the attrition rate for students who received coaching. American Express delivered a programme to its financial advisers with the focus being on one EI competency; emotion management (Lennick, 2007). The EQ-i (revised to the EQ-i2.0 in 2011) was administered to all its financial advisers and a control and experimental group assigned, with the control group receiving no intervention. Participants in the experimental group reported less stress and an 18% rise in sales was found in this group. In another study conducted by Lopes, Grewal, Kadis, Gall and Salovey, (2006) the focus was on the association between EI and work performance. A sample of 44 analysts and clerical staff aged between 23 and 61 years of age from a finance department of a Fortune 400 insurance company participated. The study adopted a multi-rater feedback design and utilised the Bar-On 360 EI test which will be explained in more detail in Chapter Two. Some of the findings demonstrated that EI was positively linked with percent merit increase and rank but not salary. It was also related to peer rated indicators of interpersonal facilitation, interpersonal sensitivity, sociability and contribution to positive work environment and peer rated mood. The ‘Search Inside Yourself’ EI coaching programme was delivered to engineers within Google and targeted many EI competencies linked with workplace performance and success, in particular, self awareness, motivation and teamwork (Tan, 2012). Some of the results reported by participants were less emotional drain following the programme, reduced stress and general improvements in wellbeing. What was unique in the current study was the inclusion of employers in guiding the design and delivery of the EI coaching process.

1.7 EI coaching and employability

In recent years, graduate employability and pathways to employment following graduation have been the subject of much debate. Employability was included in the four pillars of the European Employment Strategy and was a defining theme of the Extraordinary European Council on Employment which was held in Luxembourg in 1997 (European Union, 2010). The European Employment Strategy was revised in 2003 and employability was broadened to include a focus on (i) employment for all, (ii) high quality and productivity at work and, (iii) an inclusive labour market. Globalisation has led to significant changes in the nature of the workplace with an increasing demand for EI competency in order to successfully transition from higher education into the workplace, according to Emmerling, Shanwal and Mandal, (2008). Employability was a key feature of this study, in particular, in Phase One and Phase
Three. Specifically in Phase Three employers conducted one-to-one mock EI competency based interviews where they rated participants in terms of their key learning from the EI coaching process, their ability to apply the learning into the workplace and make important links between EI and employability. Ultimately, this phase sought to determine who was more successful in terms of hire, the active control or the experimental group.

1.8 Structure of the thesis

This study is contextualised within a multiple intelligence (MI) theoretical framework which adopts a pragmatic approach to how intelligence is defined (Hoerr, 2000). An MI framework contends that intelligence is a multi-faceted, complex capacity which includes both cognitive intelligence (IQ) and social and emotional competency (Hoerr, 2000). Chapter Two begins by presenting a review of the literature. It is divided into three sections. Section One focuses on the historical evolution of EI and examines emotion and intelligence as two separate constructs and charts the evolution of multiple intelligences with a specific focus on personal intelligences. Section Two examines EI and higher education and discusses the changing landscape of higher education from one focused solely on academic achievement to an environment which promotes personal development, social and emotional competency development and citizenship behaviour. The term employability is examined, with a specific focus on how policy documents such as the Bologna Declaration on the European Space for Higher Education and the National Strategy for Higher Education to 2030 have impacted on higher education. Section Three focuses on EI, graduates and the workplace and examines coaching and the theory and principles of EI coaching. It discusses EI coaching interventions in the workplace utilised to develop and enhance work performance.

Chapter Three outlines and justifies the ontological and epistemological approaches that were utilised in this research and presents details of the pilot study conducted prior to the principal intervention taking place. This chapter also presents a detailed outline of the methodology used to address the research objectives, including a discussion of ethical issues relevant to this study and a description of the steps that were taken to ensure that ethical standards were maintained throughout the research process. It also details the inferential statistics that were utilised in phases one, two and three of this study and the analysis process of all data, both quantitative and qualitative.

Chapter Four presents the results from Phase One of the study. Phase One was mixed as both qualitative and quantitative data was gathered. SPSS Version 24 was utilised to analyse quantitative data and thematic analysis was used for analysis of the semi-structured interviews. Chapter Five presents the results from Phase Two of the study. Phase Two was quantitative in nature and utilised SPSS to analyse the baseline and post-intervention Bar-On EQ-i2.0 test scores. Chapter Six presents the results from Phase Three of the study. Phase Three adopted a mixed approach as Likert scale data was gathered and analysed using SPSS and thematic analysis was used to analyse qualitative data.

Chapter Seven presents a synthesis of the findings and discusses them in relation to existing literature on EI and the workplace, the development of graduate attributes and workplace based EI coaching. It re-examines the primary research questions and discusses the research findings with respect to the literature concerning EI and the workplace, graduate attribute development and EI coaching initiatives already delivered in the workplace. Based on the results from this study, a template for a TU Dublin X-Cel (Excellence in Personal Development) award was designed and is outlined. In addition, a sample of an EI employability workshop that was designed as part of an employability series is included. This final chapter also discusses the strengths and limitations of the research and some key recommendations for future research as well as future implications of this research.

Chapter Two: Literature Review

2.1 Section One: Historical Evolution of EI

2.1.1 Introduction

Many theorists claimed that in the 20th century the “driving force of intelligence” was IQ but for the 21st century it will be social and emotional intelligence (EI) (Mann, 2012; Zeidner, Matthews, & Roberts, 2004, p. 379). When focusing on its application in third level education, Cherniss, (2000b) held that IQ was important in terms of knowledge, skills and the ability to complete educational tasks, however, it was social and emotional factors which influenced success at college. When expanding this idea in terms of the workplace, it is accepted that technical skills and education are critically important, however, interpersonal skills, motivation to produce and working collaboratively are important elements in workplace success (Ngonyo Njoroje, & Yazdanifard, 2014). According to Bradberry and Greaves, (2009) EI is the basis for an extensive range of critical skills required in the workplace and accounts for 58% of job performance across all sectors of employment. Cherniss, (2000a) held that while cognitive ability and non-cognitive ability are related, cognitive ability plays a limited role in terms of life success. The question remains as to the relative impact of IQ and EI in determining such success. There have been challenges in defining and conceptualising EI, however, there is agreement that EI covers “an array of emotional functions” (Zeidner et al., 2004, p. 373). Mayer and Salovey, (1997, p. 10) proffered that EI was:

“the ability to perceive accurately, appraise, and express emotion; the ability to access and/or generate feelings when they facilitate thought; the ability to understand emotion and emotional knowledge; and the ability to regulate emotions to promote emotional and intellectual growth”.

A more recent definition by Stein and Book, (2011, p. 14) expands on the concept of EI to include a survival aspect as well as its impact on overall functioning. The authors stated that “EI is a set of skills that enables us to make our way in a complex world – the personal, social and survival aspects of overall intelligence, the elusive common sense and sensitivity that are essential to effective daily functioning”. Prior to developing the discussion on EI, it is important to examine the evolution of intelligence from purely a focus on cognitive intelligence to one which included social intelligence followed by emotional intelligence. Different elements were involved in the expansion of this construct including (i) emotion, (ii) emotion and the brain and (iii) intelligence itself, which will now be discussed.

2.1.2 Emotion

According to Lazarus, (1991, p. 6) emotion is a “psychosocialbiological construct”, a combination of motivation, cognition, adaptation and physical elements which form part of a single state requiring in-depth analysis. Emotions are “complex, patterned, organismic reactions to how we think we are doing in our lifelong efforts to survive and flourish and to achieve what we wish for ourselves” (p. 6). Emotions are often described as a “higher order of intelligence” (Caruso, 2008, p. 4). Shiota and Kalat, (2012) held that there are four elements of emotion, (i) cognition/appraisal, (ii) feelings, (iii) physiological changes, and (iv) behaviour. Although linked, there was no set agreement as to how the elements “hang together” (p. 26). In the late 1800s, the James-Lange Theory of Emotion was developed which argued that emotions were labels attributed to bodily responses in particular situations. It was believed that responses to life events were sequenced, i.e., an event occurred which resulted in a physiological change, leading to a corresponding behaviour, followed by an emotion. In the 1920s and 1930s, Cannon, cited by Shiota & Kalat, (2012) discovered that the sympathetic nervous system was responsible for fight or flight reactions. The Cannon Bard Theory followed which argued that responses of the muscles and organs were too slow to have any role in the feeling element of emotion and that “emotional cognitions and feelings” were independent from “physiological arousal and behaviour” despite all four elements happening at the same time (Shiota and Kalat, 2012, p. 14).

According to Ferguson (2000, p. 83), in 1902, Wundt identified key links between emotion and arousal and held that a dimensional approach to describing emotion was best, describing feelings as being “discrete”. Wundt identified a link between emotion and cognition and argued that for every emotional experience, a new set of cognitive thoughts was created in conjunction with physical changes, leading to action being taken. One significant finding was that many different emotions produced similar physical responses. In addition, Watson – the psychologist who founded the school of behaviourism – held that some basic emotions such as anger, fear and love were innate, according to Ferguson, (2000). Watson argued that such emotions were reserved for a limited number of stimuli, and that the range of emotions displayed in adults were “learned reactions” within the realm of classical conditioning (Ferguson, 2000, p. 83). According to Weiner, (1992, p. 305), arousal theory, proposed by Schachter and Singer argued that emotions involved cognition about an “arousing” event and the level of subsequent arousal. Weiner, (1992) further stated that Schachter refined the theory to state that emotional experience followed a sequence of events. Firstly, arousal occurred in the form of a bodily reaction, leading to awareness in an individual of their response. This led to attempts to explain the reaction with an external stimuli being determined and an internal reaction subsequently labelled. It was the resultant labelling that determined the emotional experience for an individual, according to Weiner, (1992). Individuals who were
attuned to “visceral (gut) sensations” and to their arousal levels tended to feel emotions more strongly and intensely, in particular, negative emotions (Shiota & Kalat, 2012, p. 19). Shiota and Kalat, (2012, p. 42) further expanded the concept of emotion to include two adaptive functions of emotion; “intrapersonal” and “social”. Intrapersonal refers to “within-person” which have direct benefits to the person who is experiencing the emotion, for example, fear which results in a physiological change in the body, a change in cognitive thinking, an appraisal and a behavioural change. The social function facilitates people to work together, develop relationships that enable survival and facilitates the transmission of genes. According to Caruso, (2008, p. 5) emotions “direct our attention” and act as motivators for us to take action and quickly prepare individuals for “critical interactions with other people”. Adler, cited by Ferguson, (2000, p. 98), argued that emotion motivated individuals to achieve goals and if aspects of emotion were “maladaptive”, that it was the goals, not the emotion that were the problem.

The important role of culture with respect to emotion has been highlighted with emotions being influenced and shaped by “social, cultural and linguistic processes” (Gangopadhyay, 2008, p. 122). Ekman, cited by Elfenbein and Ambady, (2003, p. 161) put forward the neuro-cultural theory of emotion which held that there was a universal “facial affect program” that provided a one-to-one map between the emotion felt and the facial expression shown. This facial affect programme was the same for all people in all cultures in non-social settings. However, in social settings individuals used management techniques called “display rules” which varied across cultures and were linked with norms which serve to “intensify, diminish, neutralise or mask” displays of emotions which otherwise would be expressed automatically (p. 161). The authors held that individuals were better at judging emotions when expressed by their own cultural group rather than those of different cultural groups. While it is generally accepted that the communication of emotions has a “strong, universal component”, Elfenbein and Ambady, (2003, p. 160) argued that there were subtle differences across cultures which often cause challenges in terms of communication and mis interpretation of messages. In addition, the “emotional context” expanded on this idea of culture to include upbringing, beliefs, past experiences, cultural norms and socialisation, all elements in an “emotional system” which combine to influence individuals in terms of emotional expression (Weisinger, 1998, p. 29). All of the aforementioned have implications for the workplace as workplace organisations are now sites of diversity and change. For example, it may impact on teamwork and communication, therefore, would require some degree of understanding of cultural differences among employees, in particular, with respect to the management and expression of emotions across cultures. These are important considerations in preparing graduates for the transition from higher education to the workplace and will be discussed in more detail later in the review. The brain has been implicated with respect to perceiving, expressing and managing emotion, according to Goleman, (1995) and its role in relation to emotion will be examined in more detail next.

2.1.3 Emotion and the Brain

The brainstem was the first part of the brain to develop and is the most basic part of the brain. It regulates life functions such as breathing and controls reactions and movements (Goleman, 1995). Over time, the emotional centres of the brain evolved and top layers known as the neo-cortex or thinking areas of the brain were identified. The neo-cortex was implicated in the depth and complexity of emotional life, for example, our ability to have feelings about our feelings. The olfactory lobe was the first site of emotion in the brain, with the sense of smell assisting survival in terms of categorising items, for example, into those that were poisonous or edible (Goleman, 1995). The development of the limbic system expanded the emotional capability of the brain and once refined, two important functions of the brain emerged, learning and memory. This was by way of signals entering the brain at the base close to the spinal cord and travelling to the frontal lobes where signals were converted into rational, logical thought patterns. However, firstly these signals travelled through the limbic system, the site associated with emotions, therefore, individuals experienced things emotionally before rational thinking occurred (Bradberry & Greaves, 2009). LeDoux cited by Goleman, (1995), conducted detailed research on the circuitry of the brain and findings placed the amygdala at the centre of the emotional brain with other areas of the limbic structure in different roles. It was held that the amygdala was implicated in all emotional matters and, when severed, resulted in an inability to understand the emotional significance of events. In the 1970s the condition alexithymia became an area of study and was described as an inability to “recognize, understand and describe emotions” caused by a “disconnection between the limbic system and the neo-cortex, particularly its verbal centers” (Bar-On, 2006, p. 14). Alexithymics are lacking in self-awareness and often attribute distress to medical problems when, in fact, the root of such distress is emotional pain, known as “somaticizing”, i.e., mistaking emotional pain as physical (Goleman, 1995, p. 51).

When specifically focusing on EI, Goleman, (1995) argued that the interplay between the amygdala and the neo-cortex were at its core. In scientific research on the brain utilising functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) conducted by Lieberman et al., (2007), results found that affect labelling, i.e., putting feelings into words was of significant benefit as it produced a reduced response in the amygdala and other areas of the limbic system to emotional images leading to more positive emotional responses. According to Robson, (2011) the structure of the brain is greatly influenced by genetic factors, environmental influences, social relationships, diet and nutrition. Goleman, (2013) also highlighted the impact of neuroplasticity in terms of structural changes in the brain throughout the lifespan. Neuroplasticity led to changes in the brain in response to an individual’s (i) experiences, (ii) actions, (iii) relationships and, (iv) specific training. This was significant as it suggested that the brain had the capacity to change and grow throughout the lifespan and that emotional reasoning can also develop and grow throughout the lifespan. It also showed that with training, the structures within the brain can also change and grow which was relevant to this study as a specific EI coaching intervention was implemented.

In leadership studies, Goleman and Boyatzis, (2008) found that effective leadership was linked to social circuits in the brain. This was as a result of the identification of “mirror neurons” in the brain which “mimic” what other people do (p. 3). This was discovered (accidentally) when scientists monitored a particular cell in a monkey’s brain which only “fired” when the monkey raised its arm (p. 3). On one occasion, a laboratory assistant put an ice cream to his mouth which triggered a reaction in the monkey’s cell. This was significant because it demonstrated that when individuals detect emotions in another person through noticing their actions, the mirror neurons reproduce those particular emotions and the neurons create a “sense of shared experience” (p. 3). This is particularly significant in terms of EI in the workplace. For example, when applied to organisational settings, leaders must understand that their emotions and actions may result in mirroring by their subordinates. Therefore, while leaders need to be demanding, it would be important that such demands are executed in a way that instils positivity and good mood in teams (Goleman & Boyatzis, 2008).

The role of the brain has been important in expanding knowledge on emotion and its implications in day to day life. This review will now turn to examine intelligence and then specifically examine the construct of EI.

2.1.4 Intelligence

At the end of the 19th century, individual differences in intelligence emerged with tests of sensory functioning being developed by Galton in the UK, and cited by Brody, (1992), which Galton argued were linked with intellectual ability. In France, Binet and Henri, cited by Brody, (1992, p. 1) held that intelligence could not be measured by simple laboratory tests but by more complex tests of functions such as “imagination, aesthetic sensibility, memory and comprehension”. According to Brody, (1992, p. 5) Spearman’s Theory of Intelligence 1904 argued that all mental performance intelligence was a “construct” and a “hypothetical entity” and recognised the relationship between intelligence and performance in simple sensory discrimination tasks. Spearman, according to Brody, (1992) measured the ability to discriminate different visual, auditory and tactile stimuli and then compared them to performance in exams in different subjects, together with ratings of intellectual capacity for schoolchildren and adult samples. Findings demonstrated a positive correlation between measures of sensory functioning and measures of intelligence across unrelated school subjects. Spearman held that these correlations reflected the influence of an underlying general mental ability factor, labelled g, which impacted on performance on a range of mental tests. In addition, Spearman identified a second factor, specific (s) intelligence which referred to specific intellectual abilities on particular tasks. Brody, (1992) stated that some theorists in the field argued with this finding and held that intelligence tests should be robust in measures that have high generalised (g) to specific (s) ratios. In 1912, Stern created the term IQ which was calculated by dividing a person’s mental age by their chronological age and multiplying this ratio by 100. In the 1940s, Cattell expanded on Spearman’s Theory and suggested that generalised (g) ability could be divided into two abilities, fluid and crystallised (Brody, 1992). Fluid intelligence referred to the capacity to think logically and solve problems in novel situations while crystallised intelligence was the ability to use skills, knowledge and experience accessed through long-term memory.

In the 1920s, Thorndike developed a test of intelligence known as Completion, Arithmetic, Vocabulary Directions (CAVD) and the logic in designing this test was to be the basis for modern intelligence tests (Plucker & Epsing, 2014). Thorndike classified intellectual functioning into three broad categories; abstract intelligence, mechanical intelligence and social intelligence that marked a move away from intelligence purely focused on IQ. According to Oommen, (2014), IQ tests failed to account for other areas associated with intelligence, for example, creativity and EI. In the 1940s, Wechsler, cited by Plucker and Epsing, (2014) expanded the construct of intelligence further and argued that it was a global construct involving a diverse range of skills which could be measured and considered in terms of an individual’s overall personality. Wechsler viewed intelligence as an effect and argued that non-intellective factors, for example, personality, and not purely IQ were significant in the development of intelligence. He defined intelligence as “the aggregate or global capacity of the individual to act purposefully, to think rationally and to deal effectively with his environment” (Wechsler 1944, p. 3).
This was significant as it broadened the notion of intelligence to include interactions with the environment. Such environmental factors influencing intelligence included socio-economic status, nutrition, education, premature birth, pollution, drug and alcohol abuse and mental illness, according to Oommen, (2014).

The Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children 1949, the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale 1955 and the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS), 3rd edition 1997 remain popular tests of intelligence today. In 1950, Piaget argued that every action has an affective aspect and a cognitive aspect; that feelings were motivators to act but
intelligence was implicated in how individuals act, in any given situation (Piaget, 1950). Piaget argued that our “affective” and “cognitive” lives were interlinked but distinct, for example, individuals cannot reason in maths without feeling something and conversely people will not experience an affect or mood without some basic cognitive understanding (p. 6).

In the 1990s, Gardner expanded the theories on intelligence further and argued that the notion of IQ within standard and accepted intelligence tests predicted a person’s ability to manage and complete academic subjects but had little or no influence on determining a person’s success in life (Gardner, 1993). Gardner, cited by Kezar (2001) held that human intelligences were varied and that MI theory addressed three biases: “westist”, “bestist” and “testist” (p. 143). Westist referred to the value placed in Western society on one quality or characteristic over others. Bestist held that the solution to any problem was in one approach. Testist referred to the tendency to focus on human abilities or intelligences that were most easily testable (Kezar, 2001). Gardner presented his theory of multiple intelligences not as “physically verifiable constructs” but as having the potential to be useful “scientific constructs” (p. 70). Gardner, (1993) suggested nine core intelligences; (i) verbal/linguistic, (ii) musical, (iii) logical-mathematical, (iv) visual-spatial, (v) bodily kinaesthetic, (vi) personal: interpersonal, (vii) personal: intrapersonal, (viii) naturalist and (ix) existential (Northern Illinois University Faculty of Instructional Design website n.d.). At the core of each intelligence was a raw “computational capacity”

which was “unique” to that particular intelligence (Gardner, 1993, p. 280). According to Gardner, (1993), multiple intelligence theory was not a “single inherited trait (or set of traits)” which can be determined through an interview or a written test; rather it was linked with highly developed aspects of cognition and aspects of traditional psychology1 (p. 286). This idea of personal intelligence was a major shift in how intelligence was viewed and is most relevant to this research, therefore, it will be the focus of the following section.

Gardner, (1993) argued that personal intelligences were “information processing capacities”, one focusing inward and the other outward and formed a major part of humans as a species (p. 244). Gardner, (1993) argued that knowledge on personal intelligences was critically important, but typically ignored in all studies of cognition and he proffered an important distinction between intrapersonal and interpersonal intelligence. In its most basic form, intrapersonal intelligence referred to the ability to distinguish between a range of emotions such as pain and pleasure and involved having “access to one’s own feeling life” (p. 240). In contrast, interpersonal intelligence was described as the ability to focus outward towards other people and weigh up interactions, gauge people’s moods, motivations, intentions and temperament. According to Gardner, (1993), individuals skilled in interpersonal intelligence have the ability to read intentions and moods in others when they are not apparent, and the ability to influence individuals and groups who may be in conflict. Gardner expanded on the concept of the self and proffered that a sense of self emerged from a combination of interpersonal and intrapersonal knowledge, and was greatly

1In traditional psychology, the focus is on the problem with the aim of finding ways to treat the problem using various techniques (Teo, 2006). Past, present and future behaviours of an individual are examined, exploring traumatic event(s) that may have occurred during the individual’s life, and how these event(s) have contributed to the overall functioning of the individual.

influenced by cultural background and experiences. While the concept of EI had not been conceptualised at this stage, Gardner made an important contribution to expanding intelligence as a construct and led the way in terms of the development of EI.

This research is contextualised within a multiple intelligence (MI) theoretical framework. A MI theoretical framework adopts a pragmatic approach to how intelligence is defined and accepts that intelligence is a multi-faceted, complex capacity which includes both cognitive intelligence (IQ) and social and emotional competency (Hoerr, 2000). A MI theoretical framework holds that all people are intelligent, but intelligent in different ways. Every person has potential, however, must be given opportunities to learn and develop. This concurs with research on EI which holds that given the opportunity of EI coaching individuals have the potential to develop and grow in terms of their competency. According to Gardner, (1993) cited by Kezar, (2001, p. 143) the notion of intelligence as multiple resulted in all students experiencing a time in their education where they felt “expert” for a period of time.
This was due to the fact that while most individuals demonstrated intelligence some people had more potential in particular intelligences. When adopting a MI framework in higher education, educators incorporate new approaches to learning such as co operative, collaborative and community service learning as these have been found to work better for some students than conventional methods such as lecturing (Kezar, 2001). Collaborative and co-operative learning involves students working in groups to develop knowledge collectively while community service learning provides opportunities to work in the community to examine particular issues already covered in class. Such approaches can result in the development of both interpersonal and intrapersonal skills in learners. In an educational context, MI increases opportunities

for students to learn and provides different ways for adults to grow personally and professionally. It results in a curriculum that is designed to match students’ strengths with assessment procedures being modified in terms of what is assessed and how it is assessed. A diverse range of assessment measurements are utilised, including portfolios, exhibitions and presentations. Educational establishments are viewed as sites of connectivity and foster links with external bodies and stakeholders (Hoerr, 2000). Kezar, (2001) contended that many higher education institutions were not conducive to the development of multiple intelligences. For example, many did not facilitate group work, did not provide space for introspection or experiential learning and equipment, such as audio-visual or computers were not available. Within a MI theoretical framework, EI is included under personal intelligences and this will be the focus of the next section.

2.1.5 EI

EI is an “intangible” concept affecting “how we manage behaviour, navigate social complexities and make personal decisions that achieve positive results” (Bradberry & Greaves 2009, p. 17). EI emerged from psychological research in two areas; cognition and affect and from models of intelligence (Brackett, Rivers & Salovey, 2011). Cognition and affect examined how the interaction between cognitive and emotional processes facilitated and enhanced thinking. It was held that work performance, the ability to complete tasks, decision making and thinking were all affected by emotions such as anger, fear, happiness, and by “mood states”, by “preferences” and by “bodily states” (Brackett et al., 2011, p. 89). With respect to models of intelligence, such models evolved from primarily focusing on competency at analytic tasks such as memory, reasoning and abstract thought to a much broader picture of mental abilities, which included creative and practical knowledge, all of

which were acquired through interactions with the environment. According to Mikolajczak, (2009), some theorists argued that EI was a set of abilities which constituted a new form of intelligence while others held that EI was related to the personality dimensions and was a set of “affect-related traits” (p. 25). While it is accepted that all humans experience emotion and have emotional responses and reactions, there are marked differences in how individuals “experience, attend to, identify, understand, regulate and use their emotions and those of others” (Mikolajczak, 2009, p. 25). This has led to the construct of EI being developed to account for this variability.

Keefer, (2015, p. 3) held that an essential aspect of human development was the ability to “identify, express, empathize with, and regulate emotions” which were linked with “successful adaptation, social integration, goal achievement, and overall health and wellbeing”. An early argument held that EI competency was genetically fixed or developed in early childhood, however, other theorists held that EI can be learned, developed and enhanced over a lifetime (Goleman 1998; Van Rooy, Alonso & Viswesvaran, 2005; Derksen, Kramer & Katzko, 2002). In 1995, Goleman argued that in order to maintain healthy EI, individuals must find the balance between the extremes of over-expression which can lead to anxiety, anger and depression and emotional suppression which can cause individuals to be dull and distant, which relates to the condition alexithymia, as previously discussed. In a Time, 1995 article EI re-defined the meaning of being “smart” and was posited to be the best predictor of success in life (Mayer, Salovey and Caruso, 2000a, p. 396). While EI is not a “cure for all human problems” it has been described as a set of abilities that can be applied to improve wellbeing and enhance life and career success (Salovey & Grewal, 2005, p. 285). With the expansion of the term EI, different models of EI have been proposed which will be discussed next.

2.1.6 Models of EI

This section will examine models of EI, including Petrides Trait Theory, the Salovey-Mayer ability model, the Goleman and Boyatzis Emotional and Social Competency Inventory (ESCI) and the Bar-On Model of Emotional-Social Intelligence (EI), which was the model used in this study. It will present background theory to each model, together with assessment measures. It will then present a critique of EI.

2.1.6.1 Trait Theory

Trait EI or trait emotional self-efficacy is defined as “a constellation of emotional self-perceptions located at the lower levels of personality hierarchies” which recognises the “inherent subjectivity of emotional experience” (Petrides, 2010, p. 137). Many of the genetic factors implicated in the “Big Five personality traits” were implicated in the development of differences in trait EI (p. 137-138). Petrides, (2010) argued that emotional experience was subjective and was part of mainstream theories of differential psychology. According to Petrides, (2010), emotional experience was not constrained by one specific psychological test but was general and allowed for interpretation of data from different questionnaires. In addition, it could be expanded into other models, for example, social intelligence, therefore, it was not restricted to one fixed model. Trait EI is operationalised by the Trait EI Questionnaire (TEIQue) which provides a “gateway” to Trait EI theory (Petrides, 2009, p. 87). The
TEIQue is a self-report measurement which focuses on self-perception and behavioural dispositions which are “compatible” with the subjective nature of emotions (Petrides, 2011). It has four distinct but interrelated dimensions: Emotionality, Self-Control, Sociability and Wellbeing (Petrides, 2009). The test has 153 test items, gives scores on 15 facets, four dimensions and global trait EI (Petrides, 2009). Trait EI scores do not reflect cognitive ability but are scores of “self-perceived abilities” and “behavioural dispositions”, according to Petrides, (2001, p. 663). The TEIQue is a scientific2 measurement tool exclusively based on trait EI theory, however, it is not an alternative to other tests of EI. It affords a “direct route” to the “underlying theory of trait EI”, provides a detailed and comprehensive “average of EI sampling domain” and has increased “predictive validity” (p. 663). See Table 1 for a full breakdown of the TEIQue.

Table 1: TEIQue

Petrides, 2009 in Parker et al.)

2 By being scientific the TEIQue meets criteria in terms of reliability, validity and normative testing.

2.1.6.2 Salovey-Mayer Ability Model

Ability EI is defined as “the ability to perceive emotions, to access and generate emotions so as to assist thought, to understand emotions and emotional knowledge, and to reflectively regulate emotions so as to promote emotional and intellectual growth” (Mayer & Salovey, 1997, p. 5). Ability models hold that EI is an intelligence similar to any other intelligence and meets three empirical criteria; (i) mental problems have right and wrong answers, (ii) the model measures skills that correlate with other measures of mental ability and (iii) the absolute ability level increases with age (Mayer et al., 2000b). Ability models focus on emotions and interactions with thought processes. The Salovey-Mayer ability model evaluates EI through performance tests focusing on solving emotional problems that include a set of correct and incorrect responses (Gutiérrez-Cobo, Cabello & Fernández-Berrocal, 2017). This model argues that EI involves mental skill in terms of own and others’ emotions and at the development stage, importance was placed on both research on intelligence and emotion. According to this model, an emotionally intelligent person can “harness” both positive and negative emotions and manage them in a way to achieve goals (Salovey & Grewal, 2005, p. 282).

The Multifactor Emotional Intelligence Scale (MEIS) was introduced in 2000 and was revised and developed into the Four Branch Model of EI by Mayer, Salovey and Caruso in 2008 (Fiori et al., 2014). The revised model held that emotional abilities lie across a continuum, some of which are at a lower level in terms of executive basic psychological functions while others are more complex in terms of setting goals and self-management. The four abilities form an “emotional blueprint” which together facilitate a better understanding of emotions and helps individuals deal with important situations (Caruso n.d., para. 6). One key aspect of the Four Branch Model of EI is

that these skills operate within a particular social context and individuals must understand the appropriate norms of behaviour with those with whom they interact (Salovey & Grewal, 2005). The test adopts a hierarchal structure with one global underlying factor, EI, four abilities or branches and is scored using consensus and expert based scoring systems (Fiori et al., 2014). In consensus based scoring systems, higher scores indicate higher overlap between individuals’ answers and a worldwide sample of respondents. In expert scoring, the amount of overlap is calculated between individual’s answers and those given by a group of 21 emotion researchers. Table 2 outlines the Four Branch Model of EI.

Table 2: Four Branch Model of EI

(Salovey and Grewal 2005)

The model is operationalised by the Mayer, Salovey, Caruso EI Test (MSCEIT), which is detailed next.

2.1.6.2.1 MSCEIT

The MSCEIT evaluates emotional skills through performance on different tasks and emotional problems (Salguero, Extremera, Cabello & Fernández-Berrocal, 2015). It contains 141 items and is used to assess the four branches of the model with a total EI score determined through totalling scores on the four branches. Critical to the four branch model is the concept of “attunement to social norms” (Salovey & Grewal, 2005, p. 282) and it is scored using two answer keys; General Consensus which is based on consensus of a very large group of people to agree on better or worse responses and Expert Scoring which is based on a panel of emotions experts (Caruso n.d.). According to its developers, the MSCEIT is a flexible tool in that an individual may receive a low score but with hard work and effort can become emotionally intelligent (Multi-Health Systems Inc. 2004). Questions on the MSCEIT are mutliple choice and comprise emotion vocabularly, with a graph being completed summarising results with ratings of ‘Improve’, ‘Consider Developing’, ‘Competent’, ‘Skilled’ and ‘Expert’. The test also includes an intermediate level where the first two branches are merged into an experiential area score and the second two branches are merged into a strategic area score (Fiori et al., 2014). In a study of one Fortune 500 insurance company, employees who scored highest on the MSCEIT were also rated highest by fellow employees and supervisors, and were deemed to be easier to work with and responsible for creating a positive working environment (Salovey & Grewal, 2005). They were rated by supervisors as handling stress well, having good interpersonal skills, and being more sensitive, with higher scores linked with career advancement and higher salary.

2.1.6.3 Goleman and Boyatzis– Emotional and Social Competence Inventory (ESCI)

According to Goleman, (2006) neuroscience discovered that the design of the brain makes it sociable. A newly discovered class of neuron, the spindle cell, was found to act the fastest of all cells in guiding “snap” social decisions (p. 9). Goleman, (2006) stated that the brain’s social centres overlapped with the emotional ones, therefore, it can be challening to determine which human abilities were social and which were emotional. Davidson, cited by Goleman, (2006) held that “all emotions are social” and that “our social interactions drive our emotions” (p. 83). This concurs with theory on the adaptive functions of emotion as proposed by Shiota and Kalat,
(2012) and the interpersonal dimension of emotion as outlined by Caruso, (2008) and previously discussed in Section 2.1.2 above. Goleman, (2006) held that social intelligence included two categories: social awareness and social facility. Social awareness refers to the skills of primal empathy, i.e. the ability to feel with others and sense non-verbal emotional signals, attunement, empathetic accuracy and social cognition. However, it is not sufficient to be simply socially aware. Social facility builds on social awareness to facilitate fluid, positive interactions and involves “synchrony”, i.e. seamless interaction at a non-verbal level, self-presentation, influence and concern about others (p. 84).

The Emotional Competence Framework was developed in the 1990s by Goleman and was divided into two sections, Personal Competence and Social Competence (Goleman, 1998). However, the Framework underwent a major review and the test instruments, the Emotional Competence Inventory (ECI-2) and the ECI U (University Version) were revised to develop the Emotional and Social Competency Inventory (ESCI). The Emotional and Social Competency Inventory (ESCI) was developed by Boyatzis and Goleman and piloted with a total of 116 participants and 1022 raters in the US and in the UK (Boyatzis, 2007). The ESCI model contains 12 competencies organised into four clusters; (1) Self-Awareness, (2) Self-Management, (3) Social Awareness and (4) Relationship Mangement. The ESCI examines the relationships between behaviours that are “observable, recognizable and distinct” and the initial pilot study found that the ESCI measures behaviours that are key to effective performance (Boyatzis, 2007, p. 1). A 360 degree (360o) instrument is utilised where others also assess an individual and their behaviours. Feedback includes ratings from others on their ability to demonstrate key social and emotional competencies. The ESCI can be applied in diverse educational and employment contexts. See Table 3 below for a breakdown of the ESCI.

Table 3: Emotional and Social Competency Inventory (ESCI)

(Hay Group, 2011)

2.1.6.4 Bar-On Model of Emotional and Social (EI) Functioning

Bar-On proposed a model of EI that outlined five broad areas of emotional social functioning that were deemed related to life success; Intrapersonal Skills, Interpersonal Skills, Adaptability Scales, Stress Management Scales and General Mood (Bar-On, 2006). Bar-On was greatly influenced by the work of Charles Darwin on the importance of emotional expression for “survival and adaptation” with links between emotionally and socially intelligent behaviour and “effective adaptation” (Bar-On, 2006, p. 15). Bar-On argued that the construct of EI should be termed emotional-social intelligence and he refers to this wider construct in most of his writings. Emotional-social intelligence includes the ability to recognise, understand and express emotions and feelings, understand how others feel, how to relate to others, and be skilled in emotional management and control (Bar-On, 2006). The focus of this research was on social and emotional comptency development for graduates entering the workplace, accordingly, the Bar-On model was deemed most suitable as its emphasis is on both emotional and social skills which are deemed essential for life and work success.

The term ‘mixed model’ has been attributed to Bar-On’s model (Mayer, Salovey, & Caruso, 2000b) and to EI research which includes traditional social skill measures as well as EI measures (O’Boyle, Humphrey, Pollack, Hawver, & Story, 2010). However, Bar-On does not refer to his model as mixed, rather as a Model of Emotional-Social Intelligence (EI) (Bar-On website). Bar-On, (2006, p. 23) argued that the “mixed” characteristic utilised by some theorists to describe some models existed in “all” models. He further stated that all models of human behaviour were influenced by a “mixed” cross-section of bio-psycho-social predictors and facilitators which included “biomedical predispositions and conditions, cognitive intelligence, personality, motivation and environmental influences” (p. 23). O’Boyle et al., (2010, p. 792) stated that some overlap is “reasonable” and could be a sign of “construct validity” as EI should relate to personality variables, for example, emotional stability. Bar-On presented a counter argument regarding such overlap which will be discussed in the next section.

The Bar-On model emphasises the intrapersonal dimension as a first step to becoming emotionally intelligent. This involves self-awareness, understanding one’s own strengths and weaknesses, and the ability to express thoughts and feelings appropriately and “non-destructively” (Bar-On, 2006, p. 14). At an interpersonal level emotional and social intelligence results in individuals having an awareness of other people’s emotions and feelings, and an ability to develop and maintain relationships which are co-operative, constructive and mutually satisfying. The self-report nature of this model views intelligence as a broad concept which also includes motivations, empathy, personality and wellbeing (Gutiérrez-Cobo et al., 2017). The Bar-On model was operationalised by the EQ-i which was revised in 2011 to the EQ-i2.0 . This is a self-report measurement of EI and has been widely used in occupational, health and educational sectors (Bar-On, 1997a). In addition, the EQ-i2.0 measures an individual’s potential rather than performance, and is process-oriented rather than outcome
oriented. The process is client led and involves a number of steps starting with a detailed workplace report being generated from the results of the test. This report provides clear instructions on analysis and delivery of EI coaching. The EQ-i2.0 will be discussed, in more detail next.

2.1.6.4.1 Emotional Quotient Inventory (EQ-i2.0)

The Emotional Quotient Inventory (EQ-i) was published in 1997 and was reviewed in Buros supplement to the Thirteenth Mental Measurements Yearbook (Frost, 2004). It was the world’s first scientifically validated EI assessment test, meeting the criteria for scientific validation of reliability, validity and normative testing (Frost, 2004). The Bar-On model was operationalised by the EQ-i which adopted a self report means of measuring social and emotional behaviour (Bar-On, 1997b). The EQ-i was the first test to be published by a psychological test publisher and was the most widely used test of EI (Bar-On, 2007). Bar-On argued that the EQ i did not measure personality traits, however, acknowledged a “small degree” of overlap with personality together with a smaller degree of overlap with cognitive intelligence. Bar-On held that the fifteen emotional and social competencies, skills and facilitators increased from childhood until the end of the fourth decade of life and can be signficiantly changed within a period of weeks with appropriate training (Bar On, 2006). Bar-On, (2006, p. 22) stated that personality traits are “simply” not as “malleable” as competencies, skills and facilitators “appear” to be. The EQ-i was revised in 2011 to the EQ-i2.0 .

The EQ-i2.0 model has a 1:5:15 factor structure which measures distinct aspects of emotional and social functioning. It also includes a wellbeing indicator. An overall score of EI is located at the centre of the model. This score is then broken down into five composite scales, which are then further broken down into a total of 15 subscales (MHS Inc. website n.d.). The five composite scales are: (1) self-perception, (2) self expression, (3) interpersonal, (4) decision making and (5) stress management (Multi Health Systems Inc., 2011). There are 15 subscales, three located within each of the composite scales and they are regarded as the building blocks of EI (KinchLyons, 2015a). These are: (1) self-regard, (2) self-actualization, (3) emotional self-awareness, (4) emotional expression, (5) assertiveness, (6) independence, (7) interpersonal relationships, (8) empathy, (9) social responsibility, (10) problem solving, (11) reality testing, (12) impulse control, (13) flexibility, (14) stress tolerance and (15) optimism.

The Well-Being Indicator is an indicator of emotional health and wellbeing rather than a subscale of any one area in particular (KinchLyons, 2015a). This does not directly contribute to the total score, however, the four subscales most often associated with wellbeing are self-regard, optimism, interpersonal relationships and self-actualisation (KinchLyons, 2015a). Figure 1 presents a visual image of the EQ-i2.0 with a detailed description of the EQ-i2.0 attached as Appendix A.

Figure 1: Bar-On EQ-i2.0 model

The EQ-i2.0 demonstrates high reliability in terms of internal consistency and test-re-test reliability. Test-re-test reliability means that the asssessment will give the same results over and over while internal consistency means that items from the same scale are all consistent with each other (KinchLyons, 2015b). In terms of test re-test reliability it is recommended that a period of three to six months has lapsed between testing to avoid respondents remembering their previous responses. The EQ-i2.0 is also a valid assessment meaning it measures what it is supposed to measure and can predict related outcomes. The EQ-i2.0 has been validated for its specified purposes as a measure of EI, as a tool to identify areas for change and development and as a predictor
of success (KinchLyons, 2015b). The general population normative sample for the EQ-i2.0 is extensive (N = 4000) and closely representative of adults residing in the US (90% of the sample) and Canada (10% of the sample) within 4% of census data (Multi Health Systems (MHS) Inc. n.d.). A customer-based professional global normative sample (N=10,000) consisting of 154 countries was updated in 2014. Other normative samples are available for the US & Canada (professional), the UK and Ireland (general population and professional), Australia (general population), Denmark (professional), and Sweden (professional).

The test has been normed against 4000 individual results from the general population, with an equal number of males and females, ranging in age from 18-65+. The EQ-i2.0 is a self-assessment test, completed online, has 133 items on a rating scale of 1-5 with 5 = Always/Almost always, 4 = Often, 3 = Sometimes, 2 = Occasionally and 1 = Never/Rarely (KinchLyons, 2015b). It also provides scores on a Well-Being Indicator. On completion of the EQ-i2.0 workplace reports are generated in two parts; a coach’s report and a client’s report. The coach’s report provides a detailed and comprehensive breakdown of the client’s results, together with the tools required to interpret these results. The client’s report presents an overview of the results, a breakdown of each subscale of the 1:5:15 model in terms of what each score means, its impact at work, strategies for action and guidance for balancing EI. Scores less than 90 are in the low range which corresponds to 25% of the population, scores between 90-110 are considered in the mid range and account for 50% of the population and scores over 110 are in the high range and match 25% of the population (KinchLyons, 2015b). The EQ-i2.0 is a growth model which means that EI is assumed to be continually developing and growing so a low range score, i.e., less than 90 simply means that the particular competence is less developed at that time and clients are given strategies for developing the competence further. It must be noted that EI scores may also decrease as individuals may regress. A sample of an anonymised client workplace report is attached as Appendix B and an anonymised coach workplace report as Appendix C. Please note that due to copyright restrictions a partial coach’s report may only be included, with some pages of the report presenting as blurred.

In one study, the EQ-i scores of 1,171 United States Airforce (USAF) recruiters were compared with annual recruitment quotas (Bar-On, 2007). The recruiters were divided into high performers who met 100% of the annual quota and low performers who met 80% of the annual quota. Findings demonstrated a moderately high relationship between EI and occupational performance. In a study on performance in highly stressful and potentially dangerous professions EQ-i scores were compared with external ratings on performance for a sample of 335 combat soldiers and a sample of 240 elite combat soldiers. It found a significant relationship between EI and performance, with a predictive validity of .55 in the first study and .51 in the second. In a study by Sjolund and Gustafsson, (2007), cited by Bar-On, (2007), 29 managers attended a workshop to improve managerial skills and were tested pre and post workshops. Tests found that EQ scores increased from a mean of 97 to 106, with emotional self-awareness and empathy improving the most. The study also found that managers who commenced the workshop with the lowest EQ-i ratings demonstrated the most progress post-workshop.

2.1.7 EI – a critique

According to Barrett, Miguel, Tan and Hurd, (2004), early arguments regarding EI as a construct held that claims regarding its efficacy were greatly exaggerated. Ability EI tests such as the MSCEIT assessed actual levels of EI performance while self-report measures reflected EI functioning (Salguero et al., 2015). The authors hold that EI assessments must occur in natural settings, for example, nurses on-site on a ward, teachers in the classroom, however, it is accepted that this may be challenging when delivering a course of study at third level. There is agreement among theorists that EI is discriminated from general intelligence through different traits and “underlying systems”, however, there still remains some overlap (Salguero et al., 2015, p. 422). Central to the concept of EI are the three key elements of theory, assessment and application. The question persists as to whether EI is a basic ability linked with fluid intelligence or a competence that is learned and influenced by culture?

As early as 1995, Goleman highlighted the important influence of cultural differences on the expression of emotions and identified three different strategies for displaying emotion. Firstly, “minimizing” occurs when individuals mask any show of emotion which is common in Japanese culture, in particular, in the presence of
authority figures (Goleman, 1995, p. 113). Secondly, “exaggerating” which results in “felt” emotions being magnified which is commonly used by siblings (p. 113). Thirdly, “substituting” occurs when one feeling is expressed instead of another which is typical in Asian cultures where it is perceived as rude to say “no” so individuals agree despite their real feelings (p. 113). Therefore, culture is an important consideration when designing EI training.

Measurement of trait EI was considered easier as it was conducted through self-report questionnaires which involved “self-perceptions” and “behavioural dispositions” which were compatible with the “subjective nature of emotions” (The London Psychometric Laboratory in London website). Knight and Yorke, (2007) argued that self-report mechanisms were at risk of test takers faking their responses.

Therefore, this left them open to “self-distortion” or “self-enhancement”, according to Choi, Kulemper and Sauley, (2011, p. 270). This may be attributed to individuals having limited insight into their mental abilities, therefore, over-estimating their intelligence and positive attributes. This raises an argument with respect to the use of self-report measurements as if individuals’ self-perceptions are inaccurate then it may be more effective to simply focus on actual abilities. What has sometimes been found is that individuals with the lowest level of emotional ability tend to over-estimate their emotional competence much more than those with higher levels, according to Choi et al., (2011). This is believed to be attributed to their lack of skills in a particular domain which can cause them to inaccurately judge their strengths and weaknesses.

Those in favour of ability measures criticised trait EI for utilising self-reports as they argued that such measures “barely” reflected self-perceptions, therefore, were unreliable as assessments of “objective competencies” (Mikolajczak, 2009, p. 26). However, this argument was rejected as studies on the brain focusing on people with lesions in key emotion brain areas demonstrated that these individuals had lower levels of trait EI than “normal” control participants (p. 26). Allport (1942), cited by Keefer, (2015, p. 4) argued that in order to understand individuals’ motives and emotions the best way to do this was to “ask them”, through self-report mechanisms. What was important was a person’s self-beliefs about their competence as such self-beliefs were “powerful motivators” of observable behaviour (p. 5). For example, individuals who believed that intelligence was fixed often viewed challenge and failure as a lack of ability in themselves while those who viewed intelligence as developmental, recognised challenge and failure as opportunities to grow. When comparing students with equal levels of academic ability, it was the ones who were more confident in their ability that tended to succeed more. Furthermore, individuals who perceived that their emotions were outside their control viewed negative emotions with fear and considered them as a weakness, resulting in suppression and avoidance when under stress. However, those who believed that emotions were within their personal control and who were open to negative emotions, viewed them as valuable sources of information and an opportunity to learn, grow and understand. This was termed “emotional regulatory self-efficacy” and those high in emotional regulatory self efficacy tended to be more socially and emotionally competent than those with less emotional self-efficacy (Keefer, 2015, p. 5). Emotional competence self-reports have been found to have “much stronger and more consistent relationships” with outcomes directly linked with emotional well-being (Keefer, 2015, p. 12).

Self-concept is linked with self-report measures and when focusing on EI, it is self-concept “in emotion-related domains” which is important and includes attitudes, motives, values and competence related beliefs (Keefer, 2015, p. 10). Having a positive EI self-concept is a necessary trait for adaptive functioning, however, it is not merely enough to have emotional skills, people must feel competent about putting these skills into action. This positive self-concept and enhanced adaptive coping are termed “emotional intelligence in action” (p. 11). According to Keefer, (2015) significant associations between EI and several mental health outcomes have been found, however, the strength and nature of these associations vary depending on the types of EI measure used. Meta-analysis found that when EI is measured as a trait, it is more strongly associated with mental health than when measured as an ability, and when individuals possess lower levels of perceived EI they exhibit higher depressive symptoms (Salguero et al., 2015). Therefore, it was the beliefs in relation to competency that were an indicator of effective performance. When faced with challenge or difficulty individuals must believe that their actions will produce the desired effects, otherwise they have little incentive to act or persevere in such situations (Salguero et al., 2015).

According to Mikolajczak, (2009), some criticisms have been levelled at ability EI as it may not measure abilities that have been used and put into practice. However, a counter argument emphasises the importance of understanding whether individuals who are less emotionally intelligent lack such abilities or simply are not afforded opportunities to use these abilities. In addition, it is held that there is a lack of association between ability EI scales and emotion information processing and that current measures of EI may only be focusing on crystallized intelligence (Fiori et al., 2014). Another criticism by Fiori et al., (2014, para 7) was that ability EI tests are based on how individuals perform at their best in certain conditions, i.e. “maximal performance” instead of how individuals perform on a daily basis, i.e. “typical performance”. There remains uncertainty as to whether the MSCEIT is unique and a “one-of-a-kind” test or whether future research will demonstrate “convergence” between MSCEIT and other ability tests of EI (Roberts, Zeidner & Matthews 2007, p. 427). The ability test is a direct assessment of an individual’s ability to perceive, use and manage emotions. Similar to IQ tests, it only indicates a person’s potential to act in emotionally intelligent ways, however, does not show how much of that potential the person is actually using (Cherniss, Roche & Barbarasch, 2016). The authors further held that the use of right or wrong scores – which is the mechanism utilised in ability measures – can be challenging in terms of assessing emotion perception or judgement.

Researchers have studied reliability and validity in terms of EI tests and have found that EI was linked with important life outcomes even when researchers have controlled for personality traits and general mental abilities (Choi et al., 2011). It was questioned whether EI measures add incremental validity to other established tests of personality such as the Five Factor Model (FFM) of personality or general mental ability (GMA) tests (O’Boyle et al., 2010). However, studies have found that EI does add incremental predictive validity beyond GMA and FFM for areas such as individual performance and work-family conflict. Joseph and Newman, (2010), in a study on EI and job performance, tested incremental validity of EI over and above the Big Five personality measures and cognitive ability. EI measures were classified into three categories; performance based, self-report ability and self-report mixed models (Joseph and Newman, 2010). Results found that all three EI measures had incremental validity over and above the Big Five and above cognitive ability. In roles that are high in emotional labour demands, the researchers found all three types of EI measures had incremental validity over and above both personality and cognitive ability. It is argued that mixed model measures may have “greater predictability” than other measures and be an excellent way of “predicting performance” in work settings (O’Boyle et al., 2010, p. 792). In addition, self-report measures often “capture” emotions that employees are actually feeling in the workplace (p. 793). This debate is an ongoing one in EI research.

A key aim of this study was to design and deliver an EI coaching intervention to final year students in third level education. This next section of this review will examine the changing landscape of higher education which has led to an emphasis not solely on graduates who are technically expert but also socially and emotionally competent to actively participate in society and in the workplace.

2.2 Section Two: EI and Higher Education

2.2.1 Introduction

According to the Expert Group on Future Funding for Higher Education, (2015) higher education serves multiple roles: (i) to make a contribution to both economic prosperity and development, (ii) to facilitate social development and (iii) to nurture culture and civic engagement. Elias and Arnold, (2006) argued that an innovative and exciting curriculum, coupled with social and emotional learning can lead to graduate success and while all students have the potential to succeed, typically it is the emotionally intelligent ones who do. Elias, (2006) held that social-emotional learning was a combination of character education, service learning, citizenship education and EI and, when combined with academic learning, resulted in an education that was balanced. Elias, (2006) further argued that it was the social emotional aspects of education that have been the missing link in education for many years, yet they represented a set of skills that were key to life, family and workplace success. According to Haigh and Clifford, (2011), the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) Delors Commission identified human dispositions as an important pillar of learning, with an emphasis on social and emotional competency. Such dispositions included the ability to (i) interact constructively with others, (ii) constructively engage with problems, (iii) be innovative, (iv) value others and (v) have a commitment to self-development. The Bologna Declaration on the European Space for Higher Education and the National Strategy for Higher Education to 2030 were two key policy documents which led to a changing landscape in higher education and the next part of the review will discuss these policy documents.

2.2.2The Bologna Declaration on the European Space for Higher Education

The Bologna Declaration on the European Space for Higher Education was an agreement made in 1999 by 29 countries, one of which was Ireland, to reform the structure of the higher education system (Confederation of EU Rectors’ Conference and the Association of European Universities (CRE), n.d.). It comprised Ministers for Education and university leaders from 29 countries with the core aim to develop a European Higher Education Area (EHEA) by 2010 (European University Association website, 2015). A key aim of the Bologna process was to create “convergence” not “standardisation” of higher education with the principles of “diversity” and “autonomy” being central to the process (CRE, n.d., p. 3). Graduate employability was a key focal point of the process with a core aim being the examination of skills deficits and measures to address such deficits. The European Space for Higher Education (ESHE) aimed to increase employability and mobility of citizens with emphasis on “comparable degrees” and a European quality assurance structure (CRE, n.d., p. 4). The Bologna process involved “intergovernmental co-operation” with ministers meeting at interval periods to assess progress (p. 5). When working within the parameters of Bologna it was recognised that third level education should not simply be focused on education and training but must focus on building essential skills of initiative, flexibility, adaptability and communication – all EI competencies – which were deemed essential for engaging successfully in the Labour market (Saraiva & Nogueiro, 2010). Trends, 2010 was a review of the Bologna process and it found that 95% of universities had adopted the new degree structure and that employability was an active element focused on by universities in relation to career progression for graduates (Sursock & Smidt, 2010). However, the authors argued that while the term “employability” was a core aim of the Bologna process and for ministers in all jurisdictions, the meaning of this term and the degree of priority given to it and its particular features differed depending on social and cultural contexts.

Mernagh, (2010) examined the Bologna process in relation to Ireland, focusing on its achievements and milestones. At the time of joining the Bologna process in 1999, Ireland was already reforming the higher education system through national initiatives and policy changes and many of these proposed changes were in line with the objectives of the Bologna process. In terms of the objective of Bologna to introduce a system of “readable” and “comparable” degrees, Ireland responded in 2003 by producing a National Framework of Qualifications (NFQ) (Mernagh, 2010, p. 9). The NFQ is based on standards of knowledge, skills and competence and includes Levels 1-10 which describe the standard of learning and an NFQ Award-Type which outlines the purpose, volume and progression opportunities linked with a specific award (Irish NFQ-Quality Qualifications Ireland (QQI), n.d.). Ireland has collaborated with other countries to ensure that links were made with qualification frameworks internationally. The relationship between the Irish NFQ and the European Qualifications Framework (EFQ) and the Qualifications Framework for the European Higher Education Area (QF – EHEA) has been formally established. Within the grid of level indicators are eight categories; Knowledge Breadth, Knowledge Kind, Know How & Skill Range, Know-How & Skill Selectivity, Competence Context, Competence Role, Competence Learning to Learn and Competence Insight. Under the category ‘Competence Insight’ reference is made to self-awareness, self understanding and responsibility in terms of behaviour and in terms of building the self (NFQ, n.d.). From Levels 7-10 (higher education) solidarity with others, reflection on social norms and the ability to take and lead action for change are included, however, little or no reference is made to social and emotional competency development in the NFQ. A breakdown of the NFQ Framework is attached as Appendix D.

In 2005, the Framework of Qualifications for the European Higher Education Areas (FQEHEA) was adopted and each participating country undertook a “self certification” process to link its national framework to the FQEHEA (Mernagh, 2010, p. 9). Ireland acted as the pilot country in this certification process and consequently was the first country to complete this objective. In 2003, the use of Framework Learning Outcome descriptors was adopted by the Higher Education Training Awards Council (HETAC) (now Quality and Qualifications Ireland (QQI). In 2007, the London Communique set priorities for 2009, one of which was employability and again the Leuven/Louvain-la-Neuve Communique of 2009 set main working areas for the following decade and included employability, however, with no expansion or description of the term (Mernagh, 2010). Quality assurance was a central element of the Bologna process with all higher education providers instructed to make employability and graduate attributes more explicit in teaching and learning (Hughes & Barrie, 2010). It would appear, therefore, that while employability and graduate attributes were central features of the Bologna process, little or no direction was proffered to higher education institutions in terms of how these concepts translated into practice, that interpretation and implementation of these concepts was in the main left to higher education institutions.

In research conducted by Carthy, (2013), EI and academic attainment and attrition levels in higher education were examined and one key recommendation was the revision of the NFQ to include emotional competency as a mandatory element of education at all levels. What the author proposed was to divide the category ‘competence’ into two; procedural competence and emotional competence. Under ‘procedural competence’ three sub-strands were included; ‘context’, ‘role’ and ‘learning to learn’. Under ‘emotional competence’ two sub-strands were proposed; ‘intrapersonal awareness’ and ‘interpersonal awareness’ to replace the ‘competence insight’ category. Under Emotional Competence ‘intrapersonal awareness’ emotional self-awareness, responsibility for self-understanding, behaviour and development of impulse control were included. From Level 6 onwards, reference was made to the development and expression of a personal world view, the ability to recognise and respond to symptoms of mental stress and the display of emotional resilience (Carthy, 2013). Under Emotional Competence ‘interpersonal awareness’, i.e., awareness of the emotions of others, effective communication, development and maintenance of healthy interpersonal relationships and working in a collaborative, considerate and co operative manner in social groups were suggested. From Levels 8-10, the framework was expanded to include the ability to adjust emotional responses to different situations and conditions, to scrutinise and reflect on social norms and relationships and lead action to change them. These proposed revisions aimed to ensure that social and emotional competency development were a mandatory part of education from Levels 1 to 10. The NFQ Framework, as revised by Carthy, (2013) is included as Appendix E.

2.2.3 The National Strategy for Higher Education to 2030

The National Strategy for Higher Education to 2030, published in 2011 examined the future skills requirements of Irish graduates in the 21st century, and highlighted the importance of linking learning outcomes in higher education to skillsets required in the workplace. In 2009, there were 42,831 new entrants into higher education, in 2015 there were 49,549 new entrants and it is predicted that this will increase to 64,918 in 2025 and 64,164 in 2030, with the increase being most significant among late entrants, mature students, postgraduate students and international students. According to the National Strategy for Higher Education to 2030 (2011), higher education must address three key priorities: (1) teaching and learning, (2) research and (3) engagement with wider society and internationally. It was suggested that skills deficits should be addressed in year one with particular emphasis on developing skills of “self-directed learning, time management, information literacy and critical analysis” (p. 55). Emphasis was placed on continuing professional development with skills of “qualitative reasoning”, independent thinking, communication and teamworking being rated as very important when exiting third level education (p. 37). The National Strategy placed the onus on third level institutions to improve the student experience, with the need for programmes to maximise student potential and meet the needs of stakeholders, in particular, employers (National Strategy for Higher Education to 2030 (2011).

It argued that management at third level must work toward enhancing the student learning experience and ensure graduates are more marketable in an Irish, European and international context. Specific attention was given to the amalgamation of Institutes of Technology and the potential benefits of such mergers. According to the Higher Education Authority, Technological Universities would address the social and economic needs of particular regions and engage in industry-focused research (HEA website). One objective suggested by the National Strategy for Higher Education to 2030 was the development of links with workplaces, diversified teaching and tailoring programmes to the needs of enterprise. In addition, it was argued that programmes should be taught by those out in the field and academics, with a focus on workplace learning and teaching that was closely aligned to labour market skills needs. Both the Bologna Process and the National Strategy have led to a debate on the marketisation of education which will be discussed next.

2.2.4 Marketisation of Education

In 2000, the Secretary of State for Education in the UK called for an orientation in higher education towards “employability skills”, “specialist knowledge” and “a broad understanding in the new economy” (Doyle, 2003, p. 278). This expansion of higher education goals was directly linked with meeting the skills required for the UK to compete economically in a global marketplace. This led to the idea of economic competitiveness in terms of higher education and a shift in education policy dominated by a “work preparation theme” (p. 280). Coffield, (1999), cited by Doyle, (2003, p. 280) held that a deficit existed between what the economy needed and what higher education provided and that higher education institutions had the mechanisms to “remedy this deficit”. Discourses in higher education changed with modernisation and led to a “narrative of innovation” resulting in a merging of managerial and political agendas (Doyle, 2003, p. 283). Four key elements in improving employability were put forward: (i) employer involvement, (ii) technical and work related skills, (iii) development of key and generic skills, and (iv) developing an understanding of the world of work (p. 285).

Turculeţ, (2015) stated that modern society has led to educational establishments being responsible for education and training but also having a “new mission” to educate “attitude” (p. 995). According to Beckmann and Cooper, (2004) globalisation resulted in the rise of “new managerialism” in the educational system in the UK (p. 148). Marketisation of education emerged through private sector investment in distance learning, computer based learning systems and educational media products. The term “performativity” emerged in higher education which referred to performance and efficiency and was viewed as a disciplinary measure focused on target achievement and performance evaluation, inspection and monitoring (p. 151). The authors argued that many practices introduced under the banner of quality assurance have had long-term negative consequences for students, educators and society. For example, graduates are now exiting the educational system as uncritical thinkers and are simply trained to meet the demanding needs of the labour market. In addition, educational policy has become inextricably linked with globalisation resulting in a “transnational” educational agenda (p. 149). Efficiency in higher education resulted in “cost savings” rather than “quality service provision” with academics being managed in a manner involving regulation and control (p. 154). This had knock-on effects on the “intellectual” and “creative” potential of students (p. 163). An argument persists that an “ethical dimension” to marketisation needs to be introduced to focus on higher education as a place to build “civil society”, social participation and graduates who work towards the collective good of society (p. 166).

The concept of Knowledge Transfer (KT) policy in higher education came into prominence in the late 1990s and was associated with “successful participation in the new knowledge economy” (Wersun, 2010, p. 665). Prior to this, there was a general acceptance that academic knowledge had practical application outside the university. However, with the emergence of KT the expectation shifted to graduates being able to participate in the knowledge economy (KE) with KT being labelled the “third mission” of universities, on top of teaching and research (p. 665). Prior to KT policy many university policies focused on commercialisation of university knowledge, however, KT extended beyond commercial uses to social, civic and non-commercial purposes. Wersun, (2010) focused on the struggle between managers in charge of policymaking and academics who have the responsibility for putting such policy into action. It examined such a struggle in a university in Scotland between 2002 and 2006. The emphasis was on the “customer” and the “market” and the power held by senior management to effect “corporate change” resulting in changes in organisational culture, structures and processes (Wersun, 2010, p. 667-668). Many managers operated in similar ways to an ordinary business with the onus on them to raise an increasing amount of finance from private sources. The argument persists that this shift to an emphasis on economic competitiveness has led to a decrease in the “social purposes of education” with educational policy being replaced by discourses of economic policy (p. 668).

KT policy coincided with mounting pressure from governments who were seeking to evaluate the impact of publicly funded universities on the economy and on society. Universities sought to “enhance their legitimacy” in response to discourses of “knowledge transfer”, “knowledge society” and “knowledge economy” policy (p. 669). Cullen (2003), cited by Wersun (2010, p. 699) developed the “outreach to outcome” framework that suggested universities at times acted as agents “of local economic development (outreach) and at other times as ventures “to make financial returns and profit (outcome)”. The framework emphasised the importance of “interpretation” and “meaning-making”, however, what was significant was that aspects of academic work such as “teaching” and “continuous professional development (CPD)” were not included in the framework (p. 669). This implied that KT was an activity that was “separate” or “distinct” from such work and suggested that different values drove the pursuit of KT, one “profit oriented” and the other “service oriented” (p. 670). This had implications for the provision of any EI coaching interventions to students as traditionally such initiatives would fit under the CPD banner. The question remains as to where EI competency training might fit within KT frameworks and policies.

According to Jameson, Strudwick, Bond-Taylor and Jones, (2012), the marketisation of education has led to students as consumers in discourses of higher education. The “Tesco” model of education, proposed by Foster, (2002) and cited by Jameson et al., (2012, p. 25) held that learning was “packaged” and “sold” to meet consumer demand and economic need. Previous outcomes of higher education such as learning for personal achievement, fulfilment and promotion of social good remained in the background with the increasing emphasis on “instrumental” education, i.e. the development of “human resources” and “economic prosperity” (p. 25). On the other hand, the increased demand for places at third level and the higher numbers of students graduating with degrees has led to the graduate employment marketplace becoming more competitive and dynamic. In the UK, for example, a significant increase in fees and competitiveness has led to students and parents “shopping around” for courses with employability being a major consideration in terms of choice of higher education institution (Jameson et al., 2012, p. 26). UK universities are required to publish “employability statements” which has led to the need for them to be explicit in terms of their methods for developing workplace skills in students and for the provision of career opportunities for graduates. This has resulted in some confusion and conflict among academic staff in terms of academic teaching aims and employability aims. According to Jameson et al., (2012, p. 27), teaching basic “key skills” in a general way across the curriculum had little impact on graduate employment. What was found to be of more benefit was employer input in course design and in providing work placements. However, employer involvement has proven challenging in terms of cost, in terms of the short-term nature of work placements, and in terms of the drive towards action and doing which are typical of the workplace, according to the authors.

Marketisation has led to conflict between “audit-driven accountability” and “academic innovation” which represent two higher education agendas (Findlow, 2008, p. 313). The author argued that many academics with innovative ideas for projects were required to utilise the “language” and “procedures” of a management-audit culture whose values included “efficiency, transparency and standardisation” (p. 313). Such values were often contradictory to academic values. Findlow, (2008) conducted a study of academic innovators who had received funding for various projects. Findings indicated many barriers to academic innovation, for example, time, external accountability, ownership of projects and lack of financial support. For example, one project focused on designing a programme of cross-disciplinary skills that were transferable to the workplace. There were many constraints to the development of this module by the course committee and while approval on course content was received from senior academics, the academic was forced to “lie” about its content to meet sub committee approval (Findlow, 2008, p. 319). This compromise eventually led to the dissolution of the project and demotivation for the academic who viewed the exercise as gaining “brownie points” for the department (p. 319).

According to Mahon and Bergin, (2018) the decrease in public funding in Ireland has led to economically driven practice on the part of higher education institutes in order to survive. There is a shift from a “university-in-itself” which focused on teaching, scholarship and building personal development to a “university for-itself” which is committed to performance, productivity and competition against others (Mahon & Bergin, 2018, n.p.). Lynch, (2016, n.p.) argued that higher education no longer had students, just customers, which was attributed to national, EU and global policies proclaiming higher education institutions as the “intellectual engine” of a global economy rather than a global society. With this shift in emphasis in higher education to market driven objectives, one must question how involved employers are willing to be in preparing graduates for entering the workplace as it would appear that the onus rests with higher education institutions to fulfil this duty.

he Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI) in Ireland conducted research examining further education in Ireland, focusing on levels of employer engagement (McGuinness et al., 2014). Three different types of employer were identified: (i) employers who understood the value of training and skills and were open to investing in it, (ii) employers who were open to learning about skills development and training but did not know how to engage, and (iii) small companies who had no interest in skills and training. One obstacle to involvement identified by employers was the lack of mechanisms in place for them to have a real contribution to the design and content of training. Such involvement may include employers critiquing course content, leading to them being committed and engaged and, in turn, opening up opportunities for student work placements (McGuinness et al., 2014). Similar to the National Strategy document, the onus was placed on management within third level institutions to build links with industry, to foster engagement at local and regional levels in order to identify skills needs and ensure training content was relevant. Employers reported that they often perceived what was being offered in the further education sector as being “wasteful” and “not for them” as it was unrelated to work (p. 105). One recommendation was that employers be facilitated to engage in training provision and efforts made to demonstrate the value of training for their organisation. Cefai and Cooper, (2009) argued that many graduates exit the higher educational system with an inability to function as “successful and resilient citizens” (p. 16). This resulted in the term emotional education being introduced, which referred to educational practices which focused on building self-esteem through supportive educational relationships resulting in increased confidence and autonomy.

The authors argued that it was important for higher education to meet the academic, social and citizenship aspects of education while also ensuring work readiness. In addition, they stated that there were opportunities for employers to play an important role with respect to graduates being work ready. What is interesting is the voice of students in terms of what they seek from higher education. In a Fishtree, (2017) survey of students, respondents stated that they wanted three changes in higher education: (i) increased use of student data, (ii) bigger focus on career outcomes and (iii) better classroom technology. In terms of a bigger focus on career outcomes, students stated that while they believed that higher education would improve their lives, they argued that its primary purpose must be to improve their “employability in the real world” (Fishtree.com, para 2). Students felt strongly that course content should be designed by both academics and industry experts and that higher education institutions should foster an entrepreneurial environment. According to Billett, (2015, p. 8) challenges have been found with ensuring graduates are “job-ready” which places enormous pressure on educational establishments. Often graduates do not know where they will be employed, upon graduation and even when qualified in a particular discipline, the necessary competencies and skills can differ from organisation to organisation. For example, the role of a nurse in a specialist ward in a major city hospital may be quite different to nurses working in a doctor’s surgery, in a local hospital or in community based settings (Billett, 2015). The argument persists that industry groups and professional bodies are not interested in the demands placed on universities to ensure their graduates are work ready.

One mechanism that has been used to address work readiness is the provision of work experience, work placements and internships. In addition, part-time work was found to be of benefit to students as it enhanced employability, increased confidence in the world of work, promoted greater independence and improved time management and organisational skills, according to Morrison, (2009). On the other hand, part-time work often did not afford students sufficient responsibility, gave little opportunity to work co-operatively and no formal or informal training was provided. When focusing on practice based work experience specifically, Billett, (2015) argued that practice based work experience has shifted from occupations such as medicine, nursing, law and accountancy to a universal demand across all disciplines. Guile and Griffiths, (2001) proposed the “connective” model of work experience which differed from more traditional models as it adopted a reflexive approach and placed importance on how the context and the organisation of work influenced students in terms of their “vertical” and “horizontal” development (p. 113). Vertical development refers to intellectual development that is formal in nature, occurs in school or university, and charts an individual’s progress in terms of their learning through the acquisition of skills and knowledge (Guile and Griffiths, 2001). Horizontal development is linked with socio-cultural theory and refers to the “process of change and development” which occurs within students as they transition from one context into another, for example, school into the workplace (p. 114). This model goes beyond skill development to include students being supported to see connections between formal and informal learning through their work experience.

Le Maistre and Paré, (2004) held that there were significant differences between students engaging in work experience and those qualified and entering a particular profession. During work placement, students were still being identified as “students” and were viewed as developing a “professional identity” and, to a large extent, were shielded from the day-to-day politics and pressures inherent in workplace organisations (Le Maistre and Paré, (2004, p. 47). The authors argued that often students were unable to make or apply the theoretical knowledge acquired in their undergraduate studies due to limited opportunities or exposure to the day to day working within organisations. On the other hand, as “beginning professionals” these individuals have exited a safe and secure environment which facilitated reflection and experimentation (p. 47). They were “thrust” into busy and pressurised settings where “textbook descriptions” became the “actions of daily activities” (p. 47). This left new entrants vulnerable due to age, inexperience and lack of job security, according to the authors. McSweeney and Williams, (2018) also highlighted the differences between students on work placement and those entering the workplace as paid professionals. When contrasting work to placement participants in this study noted that as paid professionals they were immersed in the “busyness of the workplace” and were assigned “additional responsibilities as workers” (p. 9). This highlights a disparity between the opportunities afforded to students on work placement and the ability of work placements to facilitate work readiness. When examining the process of guidance and support in education, Vygotsky proposed the principle of the zone of proximal development (ZPD) that refers to the difference between what a learner can complete without help and what they can do with help (Daniels, 2016). The concept of scaffolding, closely linked to the ZPD refers to a process involving a teacher providing help to a student and withdrawing such support and help as the student becomes more competent. This is similar to how a scaffold is removed as a building under construction progresses. Scaffolding adopts a particular means for providing guidance involving focused questions and positive interactions. It may be the case that work places offering work experience need to adopt such an approach to students on placement, possibly starting with intensive support in weeks one to three, then reducing such supports as the placement progresses.

Billett, (2015, p. 6) stated that students must be active participants in their learning, be “self-initiating” and appreciate the “interdependent” nature of university and workplace learning. In addition, employers must provide work practice experience in “authentic work settings” that provide real opportunities to learning specific occupational skills and capacities (p. 8). This may be achieved through rotations within organisations and different work placements for the duration of their higher education. In terms of moving towards a more global work ready graduate, two key concepts emerged in higher education: graduate attributes and employability which will be discussed in more detail now.

2.2.5 EI and Graduate attributes

Personal transferable skills such as self-responsibility, compassion, capability, self-awareness and cultural awareness have been identified as critically important elements of an undergraduate education (Hughes & Barrie, 2010). This has led to the term graduate attributes which refers to the skills, attitudes and dispositions that go beyond the technical knowledge and expertise in a particular discipline (Barrie, 2006). In the past, graduate attribute development was considered as an additional learning outcome and separate to other learning, but increasingly it is forming part of an outcomes based approach to higher education. This term has become more popular in recent years and while linked with employability and opportunities for graduates, many believe that it is more than simply preparing students for employment. According to Keogh, Maguire and O’Donoghue, (2015, p. 385), a new term “graduateness” has emerged to describe the multiple competencies and attributes required by graduates in order to “match” the demands of the workplace. However, the authors contended that despite graduates being equipped with skills, attributes and competencies they remained unprepared for the transition into the workplace. They argued that this lack of work readiness may be attributed to the context of the workplace being vastly different to the context of the learning environment.

Eraut, (2009) also highlighted the differences between the type of knowledge and skills developed in workplace and educational settings. For example, workplace performance often involved the integration of different forms of knowledge and skill in a pressurised environment whereas in a learning environment a more analytical and “deliberative” approach was used (p. 1). Eraut, (2009) further stated that there were differences in terms of the knowledge acquired between the two settings. In educational settings, learners were equipped with theoretical knowledge specific to particular subjects and methodological knowledge pertaining to evidence collection and analysis. In addition, they developed practical skills through workshops and group projects, generic skills including interpersonal communication, self-management and, general knowledge about the relevant occupation. In contrast, in workplace settings individuals acquired “codified” knowledge which was systematic in nature, for example, through initial professional training and other formal training (Eraut, 2009, p. 1). In addition, competence in work related roles was achieved through practice and feedback, together with knowledge resources, in particular, learning from work colleagues and team leads. Employees developed an understanding of situations, tasks and problems, and became skilled in decision making and making judgements, often demanding a quick response with little time for analysis or consultation. Eraut, (2009) stated that describing the skills acquired in education as transferable was questionable as they often lacked “sufficient affinity” with the workplace to be deemed transferable (p. 4). What may be useful, according to Keogh et al., (2015) was to equip graduates with the relevant resources to facilitate efficient adaptation to the workplace and instil in them an understanding of the complex nature of many organisations. This may be achieved through formative reflection during undergraduate education and an evaluation of work experience, both real and vicarious in a framework that “captures, recognises and reinforces” the depth of a student’s tacit learning (p. 395). This study aimed to bridge this gap between higher education and the workplace through inclusion of employers at each stage of the process.

In Australia, the National Graduate Attributes Project examined the mechanisms by which Australian universities incorporated graduate attributes into teaching and learning (Hughes & Barrie, 2010). It found that assessment was one of the key determinants in terms of successfully implementing any graduate attribute intervention. However, it also found eight key systemic interlinked and interrelated factors which were integral to successful assessment. These were: (1) conceptualisation, (2) stakeholders, (3) implementation strategy, (4) curriculum approach, (5) assessment, (6) staff development, (7) quality assurance and, (8) student centredness. Under ‘conceptualisation’, issues were found with the delivery and assessment of graduate attribute curriculum as many academics conceptualised graduate attributes in different ways (Hughes & Barrie, 2010). In addition, recognition of the different stakeholders involved in graduate attribute development was necessary which included students, academics, marketing departments, employers, professional associations, quality assurance agencies and families. A well-defined implementation strategy was essential which outlined the material to be included in the curricula and procedures for assessment, to include the nature of what was being assessed. In addition, curriculum approach was an important consideration because when assessment was modular graduate attribute delivery needed to occur within a defined timeframe, for example, within a specified semester (Hughes and Barrie, 2010).

One argument proffered was that graduate attribute acquisition was often incremental, that mastery was achieved over a prolonged period of time, and to be effective required a combination of task based and portfolio tools rather than traditional methods of assessment, for example, essays. In terms of developing competence in delivering graduate attribute curricula, staff development and training must include a focus on equipping academics with an understanding of (i) the reasons behind delivering such material and (ii) why they are assessing what they are assessing. It found that many toolkits given to educators for assessing graduate attributes emphasised teaching techniques without being informed by the principles of teaching and learning. What was essential was that graduate attribute assessment be conducted “with” students rather than “for students” with collaboration and active involvement of students in the process critical in terms of charting their progress (p. 7). Hughes & Barrie, 2010 argued that institutions as a whole must invest and commit to graduate attribute interventions and assessment practices must include the eight systemic factors in order to achieve a significant and sustained impact.

2.2.6 Graduate Attributes: University of Aberdeen, Scotland and TU Dublin

2.2.6.1 University of Aberdeen, Scotland

In the University of Aberdeen, graduate attributes form an integral part of student development in terms of preparing students for employment, further study and citizenship (Perkins, 2015 email 4/5). Four key graduate attribute areas are targeted; (i) Academic Excellence, (ii) Critical Thinking and Effective Thinking, (iii) Learning and Personal Development and (iv) Active Citizenship (Baker, Pryor & Perkins, n.d.). Within each of the four skills areas many EI competencies are targeted. For example, “Critical Thinking and Effective Communication” includes initiative, teamwork and the ability to communicate. “Active Citizenship” involves respecting and understanding diversity, enterprise and leadership and a knowledge of ethical issues. Under “Learning and Personal Development”, skills developed include self-reflection and self-discovery, with a focus on strengths and weaknesses. The University has developed an attribute based framework, ACHIEVE, which is a centralised website offering online resources to facilitate personal development planning and reflection on graduate attribute attainment. This is achieved through weekly/monthly logs charting growth and development and assignments which are formally assessed. Graduate attributes are embedded in the programme structures within the University and every course must “explicitly” outline how graduate attributes are supported (Pryor & Perkins, 2011, p. 3).

The University introduced the STAR (Students Taking Active Roles) Award to recognise students taking responsibility and developing their graduate attributes. This Award is open to all undergraduate and taught postgraduate students, however, places are limited, accordingly, the application process is opened twice a year, in August/September and January (University of Aberdeen website – The STAR Award). As part of the STAR Award, students must attend three employability skills workshops and complete the STAR assessment which consists of a written submission and varies by STAR Award Level. The STAR award adopts a particular framework with distinctive elements, including competency based interviews to monitor student attainment of graduate attributes. It includes Position Level Awards which are broken down into three categories; (i) Aberdeen University Students’ Association, (ii) On campus peer/support and (iii) Community-based and volunteering (University of Aberdeen website STAR Position Award Levels n.d). Within each category are Bronze, Silver and Gold levels. Examples of the different levels awards are Nightline Volunteer (Bronze), Student Ambassador Event Team Lead (Silver) and Peer-Assisted Learning Team Leader (Gold). A full breakdown of the University of Aberdeen Position Award Levels is included as Appendix F.

Central to the STAR award is the inclusion and participation of employers throughout the award process and development and maintenance of partnerships internally within universities and with external stakeholders. The STAR award is strongly linked with the concept of “lifewide learning” which was developed and applied in the University of Surrey by Jackson in 2008 (Perkins & Fantom, n.d., p. 5). It examined the “breadth” of learning that occurred within a particular timeframe through different contexts, formal and informal, “real and virtual” and was not curtailed to “learning through formal academic curriculum” (p. 5). One core aim of the STAR Award is to match degree programmes to the needs of graduates and employers which has resulted in the design and delivery of “employer-led” skills elective workshops for students (p. 4). Of interest is the use by students of an e portfolio to chart their achievements and learning throughout the process and the e portfolio serves a dual purpose as a presentation and a reflective tool. Cosshall, (2018) argued that maintaining a portfolio or a word press blog during study and following graduation can be a great asset in terms of employability and gaining work. Such tools can facilitate identity development, encourage reflection and can assist new graduates in becoming more visible and entrepreneurial (Cosshall, 2018). One drawback of word press blogs is their public nature which can raise potential issues with privacy, therefore, students should check university policies in advance of setting up a blog.

Students who actively engage in the STAR Award receive an Enhanced Transcript upon graduation (University of Aberdeen website – Requesting Documentation Section). The Enhanced Transcript is a formal document issued by the University which assists graduates with their employability. The Enhanced Transcript records courses, grades and co-curricular activities, therefore, is more detailed than a degree certificate and is viewed as a supplement to it. Accredited activities such as the STAR Award are eligible for inclusion on the Enhanced Transcript. When asked, employers emphasised the importance of including such co curricular, informal learning within the transcript as it facilitates them in building a complete picture of graduates and also gives students confidence in terms of career options and preparation for interviews, upon graduation. Some of the benefits of participation in the STAR Award, as reported by students, were increased levels of self-confidence, improved communication skills and important links with industry contacts.

2.2.6.2 TU Dublin

In line with a key recommendation of the National Strategy for Higher Education to 2030 and the Hunt Report, 2011 saw the merger of DIT, ITB and ITT to become the Technological University Dublin (TU Dublin) which was established in January, 2019 (TU Dublin website). This research was timely as the TU Dublin has placed emphasis on graduate attribute development. The University has stated that TU Dublin graduates will be: (1) Proficient: Highly Skilled, Practical & Capable, (2) Collaborative and Adaptive, (3) Articulate and Effective Communicators, (4) Critical and Analytical Problem Solvers, (5) Innovative, Creative, Entrepreneurial and Resilient and (6) Ethical and Professionally Responsible (TU Dublin, 2014). By being proficient, TU Dublin graduates will be technically expert and equipped with relevant and applied knowledge, as well as being confident and committed to their personal and professional development. Teamwork, decision making and problem solving will be skills developed across diverse cultures, backgrounds and disciplines in a positive, collaborative environment and through curricular and non-curricular activities (TU Dublin, 2014). Graduates will be skilled in the art of communication, negotiation and conflict resolution, be reflective, listen and lead at local, national and global levels.

By being critical and analytical problem solvers, graduates will be skilled at evidence based analytical thinking and be committed to research to solve real-world problems. Graduates will demonstrate positivity and a ‘can-do’ attitude and find novel ways to drive change and work under pressure and in unpredictable situations. Graduates will be resilient and inventive in overcoming obstacles and demonstrate high ethical standards in personal, professional and civic areas. They will demonstrate honesty, integrity, responsibility and understand their unique contribution and role in society and in active citizenship. What appears to be omitted or clear is how graduate attribute attainment will be achieved in the new TU Dublin. The question remains as to whether TU Dublin will adopt a whole school approach with similar graduate attribute curricula being delivered across all disciplines or will the university adopt a more discipline specific approach. In recent years, the importance of including graduate attributes in technical disciplines has become more prominent and this review will now expand on the evolution of graduate attribute development in the engineering discipline as it was engineering students who participated in the EI coaching in this study.

2.2.7 Graduate attributes and engineering students

in recent years, a shift from purely teaching technical knowledge in engineering degrees to a focus on graduate attributes and competencies has taken place. This has been, in part, due to the need for accreditation of engineering qualifications, post-graduation (Fletcher, Sharif & Haw, 2017). Many international accreditation bodies such as the Institute of Chemical Engineers, the Engineering Accreditation Commission and the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology have clear guidelines on membership and adopt a learning outcomes approach to accreditation, according to Fletcher et al., (2017). In order to gain membership graduates must be skilled and competent across different categories which include knowledge and understanding, intellectual abilities, practical skills and general transferable skills such as communication, teamwork, specifically multi disciplinary team work and interpersonal skills which are all EI competencies. This need for membership of accreditation bodies was also highlighted by Creasey, (2013) with a need for undergraduate engineering programmes to reflect the job market. Creasey, (2013) further held that it was often difficult to define personal attributes needed in the workplace but from surveys of employers and students skills identified were creativity and innovation, team and business skills, enthusiasm, flexibility, adaptability, confidence, motivation and the ability to stand out. What has also arisen across all disciplines of engineering is the recognition of emotions as critical in terms of projects and productivity and with respect to the wellbeing of individuals and organisations (Ilyasova, 2015). It is accepted that for engineers technical skills are critical; the more technically expert, the better the engineer. However, according to Fasano, (2013) EI can be the difference between a good engineer and a great engineer. Engineers must propose ideas and defend them. In addition, they do not work alone, they are part of multi-disciplinary teams resulting in the need for strong communication skills and the ability to be aware of themselves and of others.

According to St. Denis, (n.d.), excellence as an engineer is a function of adequate resources, technical expertise, logical intelligence, linguistic intelligence and emotional intelligence. Currently, there is a set of expected outcomes which engineering graduates, engineering technologists and engineering technicians should have attained upon graduation, which must be aligned with accredited bodies and must be assessed (International Engineering Alliance, 2013). They include discipline specific knowledge, together with emotional competency skills in team and individual work, communication and ethics. It has been challenging to address graduate attributes within engineering disciplines and has met with considerable resistance from academics who find it “intimidating” to teach both the technical aspects of engineering programmes and also focus on a wide range of attributes which are not necessarily within their area of expertise (Nghiem, Goldfinch & Bell 2010, p. 164). What appears to be missing at present is evidence of graduate attribute success and training to equip staff with the necessary skills to be able to teach such skills and abilities to students. Nghiem et al., (2010) conducted research in the engineering department of the University of Wollongong, Australia to examine how and if graduate attributes were being taught. Both academics and students were included in the research. Students completed a survey which explored technical knowledge, communication, teamwork, respect for diversity and responsibility (Nghiem et al., 2010). Interviews were conducted with academics.

Findings demonstrated a need for graduate attribute training to have a pedagogical foundation and to be based on solid research and theoretical models (Nghiem et al., 2010). Class numbers had an effect on graduate attribute development and inconsistency was found among academics in terms of their approaches to teaching graduate attributes. Over 40% of students stated that little opportunity was given for them to develop skills of oral communication in many modules on the syllabus. Students emphasised that skills of professional knowledge development, information literacy, research and problem solving were given most opportunity for development with skills such as teamwork, oral communication, ethics and societal impact scoring in the range of ‘low opportunity’ to ‘a little opportunity’ across all modules surveyed (Nghiem et al., 2010). Feedback from academics emphasised the need for graduate attribute material to be relevant to engineering and not to be included at the expense of technical content of the programme. In addition, they argued that such material must be easily delivered in a typical engineering lecture room and not require advanced technological expertise or instruments in the room. They argued that teaching methods must suit the staff member and their expertise. One barrier identified was the lack of training for technical staff in interpersonal skill development resulting in discomfort in delivering graduate attribute curricula.

De la Harpe and David, (2012, p. 2) argued that in many cases, teaching graduate attribute curricula has been reliant on staff acceptance of its importance and “an ability to translate top-down policy into teaching practice”. The authors surveyed staff in sixteen universities in Australia on their opinions of graduate attributes in terms of (i) their importance, (ii) their inclusion in the curriculum, (iii) staff confidence levels and willingness to deliver graduate attribute curricula, (iv) approaches to developing graduate attributes and, (v) obstacles to integrating graduate attributes into the curriculum and how to overcome such obstacles (De la Harpe and David, 2012). A total of 1,064 staff responded to the survey. Findings demonstrated that 73% of academic staff believed that graduate attributes were important and should be included in the curriculum. Academics reported the need to contextualise teaching and the curriculum, to have clarity of goals and expectations and to equip students with the necessary employability skills. Two factors influencing graduate attribute delivery were a willingness by academics to teach it and confidence levels in terms of such teaching. The issue of confidence levels concurs with findings by Nghiem et al., (2010), as discussed previously. De la Harpe and David, (2012) found that academics with a background in industry were more confident and willing to teach graduate attributes.

According to De la Harpe and David, (2012, p. 14), a “culture of learning” rather than a “culture of teaching” must be fostered with a graduate attribute curriculum being embedded in policy and in professional development practices. Results found that female academics with a teaching qualification and in excess of ten years teaching experience had stronger beliefs regarding graduate attributes, together with knowledge of the attributes that were important for industry. The need for an institutional approach to graduate attributes was highlighted, together with the requirement that recruitment policies focus not solely on academic knowledge but also industry knowledge and skills.
One suggestion was that graduate attribute development should form part of extra-curricular activities and be documented, and that development should be charted through e-portfolios or other tools. Activities could include part-time work, leadership programmes, student union activities and community programmes. What was essential was that they were linked to learning outcomes, teaching and most importantly assessment. These findings concur with practices already in place in the University of Aberdeen, as previously outlined. To conclude this section of EI and higher education, studies of graduate experiences of higher education in preparing them for the transition into the workplace will be examined, one in Sweden and the other in Australia.

2.2.8 The Journeymen Project, Sweden and the Professional Entity Project, Australia

These projects were part of two large international projects involving over 500 students and examined the usefulness of higher education in learning for professional work (Dahlgren, Reid, Dahlgren & Petocz, 2008). The first project, the Journeymen project was based in the EU and the other the Professional Entity project was based Australia. Both projects focused on the interpersonal aspects of human capital from the perspective of the person as learner. They sought to examine the impact of education on the learning person and also to determine learner opinions on education. The Journeymen project was completed between 2001 and 2011 in four universities across Europe, i.e., Sweden, Norway, Poland and Germany. In total, 360 interviews were completed and Dahlgren et al., (2008) focused on the Swedish findings. In this study, students were viewed as journeymen, transitioning and growing throughout their education and becoming aligned with particular academic and professional cultures. The Journeymen project was a comparative analysis of data gathered across universities and addressed how students perceived the relationship between study and work, their understanding of university culture, their own perceptions of themselves as professionals and their views on how university education related to them as professionals. Findings demonstrated that student perceptions of the relationship between education and work were described by the abstract constructs of “rational” and “ritual” (Dahlgren et al., 2008, p. 137). By being rational, education programmes equipped students with knowledge and skills for a particular profession. By being “ritual” educational programmes were more focused on the “exchange value” of knowledge rather than being applied to a specific context (p. 137). This application to specific contexts can be problematic for educators. As previously discussed and highlighted by Billett, (2015) the skills and competencies required in similar professions may often be significantly different. The example proffered by Billett, (2015) was that of nurses working in large hospitals as compared with nurses working in community settings. In the study by Dahlgren et al., (2008), many students reported that educational programmes provided substantive skills which were “content specific” and “contextually situated”, together with generic skills which were acquired in different contexts, developed through exposure to different content and transferable across many contexts (p. 137). Many of the disciplines produced a “discipline-based identity” among students and the links between disciplines and professional roles occurred later in their education, typically at the applied stages.

The Professional Entity project involved 200 students and included a range of studies examining the links between perceptions of professional work and learning. For some parts of the research, teachers also participated. The Professional Entity was a “unifying” way of conceptualising students’ and teachers’ understanding of professional work and found a hierarchy of conceptions consisting of three levels (Dahlgren et al., 2008, p. 139). At the most basic level, the “Extrinsic Technical” level, professional work was viewed as a set of technical components to be used, when required by the demands of the role (p. 139). If students (or teachers) viewed their profession in a limiting way, contained within particular boundaries, then their approach was to focus specifically on the technical components of learning. At the “Extrinsic Meaning” level, professional work was viewed as the development of meaning in relation to discipline objects (Dahlgren et al., 2008, p. 139). Finally, at an “Intrinsic Meaning” level, students viewed professional work as linked with their personal and professional development and as a mechanism to promote identity development (p. 139).

What emerged was the importance of adopting a broad, rather than a limited perspective in terms of learning, with a view that learning extended into other parts of their lives. Similarly, educators, at an intrinsic meaning level, worked hard to integrate teaching with the profession and make learning relevant. One important finding from this research was the need for education and curriculum developers to be explicit in their rationale for including particular components and subjects in a programme of study (Dahlgren et al., 2008). In addition, there was a need for them to question how such components would meet the needs of a particular role in the workplace and how they would be applied in personal and professional contexts. Emphasis was placed on the importance of equipping learners with a transferable skillset, a need to strengthen relationships between professions, university educators, curriculum and students which could potentially lead to a pedagogy which would facilitate the transition from higher education to the workforce. Again the view that higher education and the workplace were inextricably linked was emphasised. A key focus of this current study was on graduates and employability, therefore, this review will now specifically focus on EI, graduates and the workplace.

2.3 Section Three: EI, graduates and the workplace

2.3.1 Introduction

EI has become a prominent feature in the workplace and this review will now examine its relevance and applicability to a work environment. As far back as the 1920s, the Hawthorne studies highlighted that the social and emotional support needs of employees were as important for motivation as monetary rewards or threats (Cherniss, 2000b). These studies found that when managers paid attention to and demonstrated concern for their staff that performance and job satisfaction levels increased. In the 1940s, research conducted on effective leadership found that leaders who had the ability to instil respect, trust and, importantly who themselves demonstrated warmth and respect had more high performing teams (Cherniss, 2000b). In the 1990s, Goleman argued that EI competence had major implications in a work context and defined it as a “learned capability” that resulted in outstanding performance at work (Goleman, 1998, p. 24). Goleman stated that such EI capacities were:

(i) Independent as each one provided a unique contribution to job performance.
(ii) Interdependent as they were linked with each other and drew on others to an extent.
(iii) Hierarchal as they built on one another.
(iv) Necessary but not sufficient, i.e. individuals may possess emotional capacities, however, may never display the associated competence. This may be attributed to a lack of opportunity in the organisation or level of motivation in the actual work.
(v) Generic.

Within organisational settings, the ability to regulate emotions was positively linked with job performance as emotion regulation was viewed as the “tool” through which positive affective states were created and maintained leading to work behaviour benefits (Joseph & Newman, 2010 p. 56). Links have been found between positive moods and work performance where moods predict job performance indirectly through “interpersonal processes” i.e., helping and being helped by co-workers and “motivational processes” i.e., self-efficacy, self-determination and the ability to persist at tasks (Joseph and Newman, 2010, p. 56).

2.3.2 Employability

In recent years, graduate employability and pathways to employment following graduation have been the subject of much discussion and have led to debate about the purposes of higher education. The Bologna Process and The National Strategy for Higher Education to 2030 emphasised a range of outcomes with respect to higher education that were previously discussed in this review. What is clear is that it is no longer sufficient for graduates leaving higher education to simply end up in a job (Haigh & Clifford, 2010). This concurs with Marais and Perkins, (2012) who argued that it has become increasingly more important for graduates to demonstrate their employability skills with key competencies of negotiation, communication and organisational awareness being identified (p. 4356). Links have been found between higher EI competency ratings and improved academic attainment which, in turn, can increase students’ employability (Carthy, McCann, & McGilloway, 2010). Globalisation has led to an expectation among students that national and international policies will result in higher education programme that prepare them for future roles, at a global level (Dahlgren et al., 2008). Students have highlighted the need for curricula which are relevant to professional work and strong links between university education and preparation as a professional.

It has proved challenging to arrive at a conclusive definition of the term employability with many different working definitions of the term emerging in recent decades (McQuaid & Lindsay, 2005). The argument persists that the term may simply be a “buzzword” that is used but not fully understood or a “fuzzy notion” that is poorly defined and in many cases not defined at all (p. 197). One working definition of the term by the Confederation of British Industry (CBI) stated that employability is the “possession by an individual of the qualities and competencies required to meet the changing needs of employers and customers and thereby help to realise his or her aspirations and potential” (McQuaid & Lindsay, 2005, p. 199). Yorke, (2006) argued that employability must focus on a graduate’s achievements and potential to find employment and not on actually securing a job. Yorke, (2006) further held that employability was often viewed as separate to academic study and while career services organise career talks and events students often do not attend unless they believe that they are specifically relevant to their discipline. What has been found to be significant are practitioner led talks and guest lectures with the possibility of including such talks as part of the learning outcomes or subject relevant academic material.

In Ireland, the Association of Higher Education Career Services (AHECS) is the recognised authority on graduate career development, learning and employability (AHECS website). Its mission is to lead, support and facilitate collaboration among higher education careers services. One of its core aims is to promote an employability agenda in higher education. According to Halpenny, (2016), employability is not simply focused on employment or developing skills that employers want. It is a broader concept and involves preparing graduates to be work and life ready. Halpenny, (2016) outlined the CareerEDGE model of employability which proposed a tiered approach to employability. At the base is career development learning which is comprised of four elements: experience (work and life), degree subject knowledge, skills and understanding, generic skills and emotional intelligence. Reflection and evaluation are the next stages followed by self-efficacy, self-esteem and self confidence. All of the aforementioned elements are interlinked and work together to develop employability.

Employability was included in the four pillars of the European Employment Strategy and was a defining theme of the Extraordinary European Council on Employment which was held in Luxembourg in 1997. This strategy was revised in 2003 and employability was broadened to include a focus on employment for all, high quality and productivity at work and, an inclusive labour market. In 2011, the World Bank conducted a study of employers in Peru examining employability and skill development (World Bank, 2011). Employers identified key socio-emotional competencies which were essential, but often lacking, in the workplace. These were: honesty, adaptability, proactivity, motivation to work, teamwork, desire to learn, integrity, flexibility and perseverance. Employers reported that 40% of employees lacked the required skills to perform competently in the workplace. In addition, they stated that employees had very little tolerance to frustration, therefore, skills such as determination, self-regulation, adaptability, initiative, tolerance, co-operation and conflict management were rated highly. According to The World Bank, (2015) employers attributed this lack of social and emotional skills among employees to the over-emphasis on cognitive development and technical knowledge typical of educational establishments.

In a 2016 PayScale survey, 63,924 managers and 14,167 recent graduates were surveyed about money and conditions (Strauss, 2016). Managers (46%) claimed that new graduates did not possess the requisite communication skills, with 36% reporting deficits in interpersonal and teamwork skills. In terms of preparedness for the workplace, 25% of graduates reported being “extremely prepared” for a new job but only 5% of managers agreed, 62% reported being “mostly prepared” with 42% of managers agreeing and 87% of graduates reported being “well prepared” with 50% of managers in agreement (Strauss, 2016, para. 7). These findings highlighted a potential disparity between the views of graduates and employers with respect to work readiness with specific gaps in terms of EI competency being identified.

In Ireland, The Irish Survey of Student Engagement, 2014 surveyed third level students and found that humanities and arts students felt less prepared for the workplace than their peers in other disciplines, with over 25% reporting that there was never any instruction of how to apply their learning in work settings (Humphreys, 2014). While students viewed third level education as valuable and believed it equipped them with new knowledge and skills, students in humanities and arts and a smaller number in computing and science felt they graduated with little or no employability skills (Humphreys, 2014). One interesting finding was that students in the Institute of Technology (IOT) sector believed that they were being better prepared for the workplace than their peers in the university sector. With respect to work placements, 67% of students in the IOT sector had completed a work placement as compared with 61% of university students. In 2015, this survey received in excess of 27,000 responses from students across 30 universities, colleges and institutes of technology (O’Brien, 2015). Findings demonstrated that, in general, there were high levels of satisfaction among students with their places of study, with 79% scoring their overall experience in their chosen college as “good” or “excellent”. One section focused on preparedness for the transition to the workplace and questioned workplace skills and employability. While no specific workplace skills were identified, 63% of students reported that they gained knowledge and skills which would enhance their chances of securing employment, however, 37% of them responded “sometimes” or “never” with respect to gaining workplace skills.

When asked if they spent time in their final academic year maintaining their curriculum vitae and keeping it up-to-date, 25.8% responded ‘never’, 40.5% responded ‘sometimes’, 22.2% often and 11.5% very often (Higher Education Authority (HEA), 2015). When asked if they had considered how they might present themselves to potential employers 12.1% responded ‘never’, 33.8% ‘sometimes’, 36.0% often and 18.2% ‘very often’. When asked if they had explored where to look for jobs which are relevant to their areas of interest, 11.8% responded ‘never’, 33.8% ‘sometimes’, 33.8% ‘often’ and 20.6% ‘very often’. Finally, when asked if they used networking to source information on job opportunities, 23.1% responded ‘never’, 34.0% sometimes’, 27.5% ‘often’ and 15.4% ‘very often’. When asked if they got opportunities to speak with teaching staff or career advisors about their career plans, 12% reported ‘often’ or ‘very often’ and this increased to 17% for final year students in terms of levels of interaction with teaching staff and career advisors (HEA, 2015).

In research conducted by GradIreland3 of graduate recruiters and employers, significant deficits in EI competency were found with respect to entry level employees. For example, 42% of employers reported that graduates lacked effective communication skills, 33% stated that graduates were not able to manage their own learning effectively and 31% reported deficits in the ability to work independently (Mitchell, 2017). Over 25% of employers surveyed reported issues with graduates in terms of flexibility, problem solving and motivation. When examining employer opinions on how students may develop such competencies and skills, 77% stated that internships or work placements supported the development of employability skills, with international work or study experience being highlighted by 41% of employers as effective. In addition, participation in team based activities in college, for example, sports and undertaking skills based workshops provided by careers services were reported as excellent mechanisms for soft skills development. When asked, employers stated that it was no longer sufficient for a graduate to simply have a first class degree, according to O’Brien, (2017). What employers sought were graduates who were skilled problem solvers, innovative, skilled at building relationships, leading teams and, ultimately strengthening their organisation. Increasingly, employers referred to emotional intelligence, adaptability and the ability to access the world as crucial to career success (O’Brien, 2017).

3GradIreland provides information on graduate jobs, recruitment and careers in Ireland

Oliver, (2011) argued that work experience during undergraduate studies was a strong predictor of positive employment outcomes while Grant-Smith and McDonald, (2017) posited that professional work experience was now a critical feature of graduate employability across all disciplines. Such experience was viewed as a mechanism for meeting skills gaps, developing interpersonal skills and building professional networks. However, it may also be exploitative as often such professional work experience was unpaid so employers availed of graduate skills and knowledge, without incurring any cost (Oliver, 2011). What has become a trend, however, is for students to work unpaid for prolonged periods of time during their undergraduate studies in order to improve employment prospects. Many students experience severe economic hardship and stress as they contend with their studies, with unpaid professional work experience and with paid part-time jobs in service and hospitality sectors to finance their education and lives. In one study conducted by Grant-Smith and McDonald, (2017) in Australia, in-depth interviews were conducted with twenty final year urban planning undergraduate students aged between 20-25 years. The researchers were interested in students’ perceptions of how unpaid professional work would enhance their employability as opposed to other non-professional paid work and their studies alone (Grant-Smith and McDonald, 2017).

A minority of participants reported that their non-professional paid work would equip them with transferable skills such as communication, teamwork and interpersonal skills which would be valued in the professional domain. However, all respondents stated that any professional work experience, even unpaid would place them at an advantage and was considered an investment in their employability. A big fear among students was the prospect of unemployment at graduation, therefore, managing studies, part-time jobs in non-discipline related sectors and unpaid work in professional disciplines was necessary. For example, in urban planning programmes, graduates often adopted administrative roles in planning companies in order to build up their skills and be best placed to secure a position, should one arise. These administrative roles would be paid at much lower levels than their qualifications, however, were viewed as a route to future work as a planner, according to Grant-Smith and McDonald, (2017). Respondents argued that often undergraduate studies did not prepare them for the world of work, that it was periods of unpaid professional work that were of more benefit to them. What was surprising was the belief among some respondents that such unpaid professional work would give them the necessary experience to be “worth” a paid professional position (p. 168). For many participants, the fact that they had completed an undergraduate degree programme and worked in a job unrelated to their discipline did not automatically deem them employable. Even in terms of securing unpaid professional work, many respondents stated that such opportunities were linked with who they knew in the profession.

All respondents stated that employability was their personal responsibility and that they needed to be proactive, driven and strategic in selecting a professional mentor, demonstrate initiative by joining professional associations and engaging in unpaid professional work. Many spoke of unpaid professional work as a “favour” by employers with paid work experience viewed as “very lucky” in the current economic climate (Grant-Smith and McDonald, 2017, p. 170). This trend was also found in different disciplines, according to the authors. Fear and anxiety permeated the majority of the interviews, with respondents worried about living up to the expectations of a university degree and a “resignation” about “accepting exploitative practices” in order to gain opportunities for entering their chosen profession (p. 171). The authors questioned whether regulating unpaid work experience would change things but contended that such regulation may lead to students being deprived opportunities, therefore, graduates were active agents in their own exploitation. The authors contended that higher education institutions must adopt a more proactive role in accessing work experience and teaching transferable and generic skills.

2.3.3 EI and the Workplace

Globalisation has seen major changes in the workplace with diverse cultures working together to achieve organisational targets and goals (Emmerling, 2008). In Ireland, the past twenty years has seen significant changes in the business landscape, from a centre of manufacturing to a predominantly knowledge-based economy (GradIreland, 2009). This has led to a more diverse workplace resulting in a need for employees to have an understanding of diverse values, beliefs, attitudes and motivations among different cultures and generations. Diversity focuses on welcoming difference and creating a global culture of inclusion. There are significant gains for organisations in terms of accessing different points of view, “new approaches” and “fresh perspectives” in terms of how a business should operate, according to GradIreland, (2009, para 6). Diversity assists organisations in understanding the global business environment and values the full contribution of all employees. Smith, (2016) examined communication in culturally diverse workplaces and identified three common barriers; language, culture and gender. The challenge for organisations was to find the balance between individuals holding on to “the small things that make them unique” and facilitating individuals to “fit in with the masses” (para 1).

According to Smith, (2016), poor communication results in low morale, lack of teamwork and overall confusion among employees. From a micro perspective employee relations are adversely affected but ultimately poor communication can cost companies financially and in terms of their reputation. What is important is to have
an understanding of the subtle differences between cultures in terms of verbal communication, according to Smith, (2016). For example, different cultures often do not understand the “implied meanings” of many American-English words as, typically English language classes teach the literal meaning of English (Smith, 2016, para 5).
In addition, some everyday language can be offensive in other cultures, with body language and gestures often having different meanings among individuals. In addition, styles of communication among different cultures can prove problematic. Smith, (2016) outlined two styles of communication; high context and low context which were utilised among diverse cultural groups. A high context communicator uses high levels of nonverbal communication skills, lots of hand movements, displays high levels of emotions and are lengthy when writing emails. High context communicators need less personal space and use touch a lot. Their focus is on the relationship and they are process oriented. This type of communication is prevalent in Saudi Arabian culture with a focus on company loyalty and long-term relationships. Low context individuals are very direct and outcome focused. Smith, (2016) reported that 98.7% of organisations were low context and preferred “linear, time-limited and single response replies” to issues and questions. An example of a low context culture is the United Kingdom.

On the other hand, Moncho, (2013) argued that while it was important for individuals to be culturally competent, i.e., being educated about other cultures, there is also a need for cultural humility. Cultural humility refers to the willingness to postpone what individuals believe they know or what they think they know about another person based on generalisations about their culture. By practising cultural humility individuals accept that there are more unknowns than knowns when working n culturally diverse environments requiring an openness to a gradual learning process involving good management, time and flexibility.

According to Ngonyo Njoroje and Yazdanifard, (2014, p. 32) at the core of many organisations is a commitment to building business networks and relationships that will be of benefit in the long-term and an emotionally intelligent workforce who are described as “passionate, motivated and inspired”. There is a need, however, for management to promote a workplace that values EI by positively managing relationships, by leading and confronting staff on work related issues, by building skills in others and by successfully managing conflict (Chopra & Kanji, 2010). In one business school, EI was incorporated into the business communications module following a request by industry that “communication coursework” be integrated into the curricula to make it relevant for the global workforce. It was believed that this would lead to graduates who were equipped with the necessary skills to “negotiate the interpersonal dimension” of the workplace (Myers & Tucker, 2005, p. 44). The coursework involved a series of in-class assignments, self-assessments and journal entries. Students worked on a self-improvement plan and emailed a tutor weekly with a journal entry detailing their progress. Case studies were used in class and students worked in teams to resolve different aspects of the case study. Students were required to meet a businessperson to discuss the relevance and applicability of EI in the workplace, utilising Weisinger’s EI instrument scale developed in the 1990s which focused on both the intrapersonal and interpersonal dimensions of EI. This programme included challenging work situations, for example, between a leader and a subordinate. Students were required to assess the case and formulate suggestions for improving communication and present a logical defence for such suggestions using readings, outside materials and core text by Weisinger, (1998) on EI and work performance.

Evidence has shown clear links between EI and job performance, in particular, when specific emotional and social skills were required for the role (Roberts et al., 2007). For example, social work and the caring professions, in general are two settings where the nature of the work is emotionally charged and requires individuals to work with “emotionally demanding” clients (p. 457). In areas such as sales, marketing and customer service, key aspects of performance rely on positive emotion being expressed. Emotional competencies can be applied to all job settings, however, depending on the job and the organisation the competence demands may differ. For example, psychotherapists must be skilled at active listening and techniques such as mirroring, however, in other professions such as Mathematics interaction can be very limited, accordingly, recognition and manipulation of others’ feelings may not be important though self-management may be important to manage frustration (Zeidner
et al., 2004). Questions remain as to how EI contributes to profits within organisations and whether enhanced well-being in work was as a result of employees being more emotionally intelligent. A key objective of this study was the design of EI coaching programmes, one general and one tailored to the stated needs of employers. This review will now turn to examine coaching and then specifically EI coaching and will present some examples of EI coaching interventions, previously delivered in the workplace.

2.3.4 Coaching

Coaching is a process to assist individuals to become more effective on a personal level and more productive in an organisational setting (Bharwanay, 2007). At its core, coaching is focused on solutions not problems (Starr, 2011). Some of the operating principles of coaching are: (i) a commitment to support the individual, (ii) a relationship based on trust, equality, openness and honesty, (iii) an understanding that responsibility for results rests with the client, and (iv) a belief in the capability of the client to generate better results than their current ones (Starr, 2011). Some of the skills essential to the coaching process are (i) building rapport, (ii) understanding and utilising the different levels of listening, (iii) using intuition, (iv) asking appropriate questions, and (v) giving supportive feedback. In order to be of benefit, the process must be structured with participants willing to be coached. In terms of EI coaching specifically, it is argued that any EI intervention must follow a number of phases from assessment, design, delivery and evaluation, be clear in terms of learning outcomes and adopt learner centred approaches over a period of time, for example, three to six months (Bharwanay 2007). Zeidner et al., (2004, p. 389) concurred and held that any EI intervention in the workplace must be “meticulously constructed”, “standardised” and “validated” for use in specific occupational contexts and for particular purposes, for example, job selection, promotion and job satisfaction. In addition, different occupations demand different levels of social and emotional competency, therefore, the authors stressed the importance of conducting a systematic “emotional task analysis” to match the EI needs to the context and demands of the role (Zeidner et al., 2004, p. 390). Such an analysis would identify particular emotional challenges of a role and examine reactions to different challenging situations, in specific contexts. What was required was a framework to assess multiple elements including “job related abilities”, “occupational issues” and EI (p. 392). This was echoed by Goleman in the 1990s who emphasised that organisations must avoid the “spray and pray” approach to EI training where organisations delivered training to all employees with the view that some of them might utilise and implement it in their day to day roles (Goleman, 1998, p. 246).

When examining how EI intervention programmes have worked in different settings, evidence suggested that trait or competency interventions produced higher success rates than ability ones (Cherniss, Roche & Barbarasch 2016). Some interventions have included lecture, discussions, demonstrations, role plays and experiential activities held in group settings with a reflective element, for example, the use of personal diaries. Others adopted the principles of self-directed learning which included mentoring and diverse resources. For example, one EI intervention designed for physicians to promote high quality health care delivery involved a five week training programme with fifth year paediatric medical students in Israel (Cherniss, 2000b). Training consisted of ten ninety minute meetings twice a week. Each session focused on a particular topic, for example, taking patients initial medical history, crisis intervention or family counselling. Role play was used where students were patients, doctors and family members. In addition, participants observed “live” interviews with patients who discussed their experiences with health care staff and systems within the setting (p. 440). When evaluated, findings demonstrated that participants who underwent the training showed a significant and sustained increase in behaviour which supported patients during interviews, however, students who did not undergo training demonstrated a decrease in supporting behaviour. In another study of New York traffic police reported by Cherniss, (2000b), findings demonstrated that those who remained calm in conflict situations with irate motorists had fewer incidents of violence escalation. Training involved group discussions, role play, real life simulations of challenging conflict situations, and lectures. When the programme was evaluated it was found that officers who had completed the training performed better than those in a control group on a diverse range of performance criteria, for example, “total arrests”, the amount of “misdemeanours” and “total crime” (p. 440). This led to training programmes being developed and designed to assist police officers in managing their reactions and those of others in conflict situations.

In leadership studies, Goleman and Boyatzis, (2008) suggested that EI coaching for leaders could involve rehearsing novel ways of interacting with others and may include being shadowed by a coach and feedback being given on observations. Other research led to the notion of “transformational” leaders who were ones who assisted employees to remain in a positive mood when dealing with customers and when performing “emotional” labour (O’Boyle et al., 2010, p. 793). Emotional labour is typically found in the service industry and can often be stressful. Transformational leaders remain engaged and motivate employees to regulate their emotions in order to cope with the demands and the stress. Elements of the aforementioned studies were used to inform this research, specifically the need to build rapport with participants, the design of individualised one to one coaching in order to avoid a “spray and pray” approach and the use of multiple methods to deliver the group EI coaching intervention to include role plays, case studies and team activities. With the establishment of The Consortium for Research on EI in Organizations the promotion of research in EI within organisations was expanded and developed. The Consortium proposed guidelines for emotional competency training which are discussed next, with a full set of the guidelines included as Appendix G.

2.3.5 The Consortium for Research on EI in Organizations – Guidelines for emotional competency training

The Consortium for Research on EI in Organizations developed guidelines for emotional competence training based on rigorous research in training and development, psychotherapy and behaviour change (Consortium for Research on EI in Organizations Guidelines, n.d.). The Guidelines include four phases of development: (i) preparation, (ii) training, (ii) transfer and (iv) maintenance and evaluation. There are three categories: (1) paving the way, (2) doing the work of change and (3) evaluating change. While the Guidelines provide a detailed roadmap for emotional competence training, the importance of employer engagement in relation to successful outcomes of such training is emphasised. Under ‘Paving the Way’ an assessment of needs is completed to determine the competencies that are most critical for effective job performance in specific roles within the organisation (Consortium for Research on EI in Organizations Guidelines, n.d.). Such competency development must be in line with the organisation’s mission and overall strategy. Next, assessment at an individual level is conducted to identify role specific competencies for coaching which must include multiple sources and multiple methods. Accurate and clear feedback must be given identifying strength areas and areas for further development. Choice around participation is essential as is readiness for such training, therefore, it is important to assess motivation levels in participants and encourage participation by outlining the benefits of such involvement.

Under ‘Doing the Work of Change’ a number of steps must be taken. It is important for the coach to build positive relationships with participants and make change self-directed. Goals must be clear and manageable, with specific behaviours and skills identified. Participants must be given opportunities to practice in their day to day role and feedback must be ongoing from different sources, for example, supervisors, peers, friends and family members. Methods should be experiential and work to enhance insight among individuals with ongoing support provided from peers and supervisors. The organisation must be supported to develop an organisational culture that supports learning as change will be more enduring if the organisation’s culture and tone support the change and offer a safe atmosphere for experimentation. Evaluation should be completed before and after the training, with a follow-up two months later and ideally again one year later. In their book the EQ Edge. Stein and Book, (2011) outlined guidelines for EI coaching programmes based on the Bar-On EQ-i2.0 which will be discussed next.

2.3.6 EI coaching based on the Bar-On EQ-i2.0

Stein and Book, (2011) presented a framework for delivering EI coaching based on the Bar-On EQ-i2.0 to include theory, exercises, activities and reflective pieces. The ABCDE framework, first developed by Robert Ellis and cited by Stein and Book, 2011, is utilised to identify, track and improve thoughts, feelings and behaviours for all of the subscales of the EQ-i2.0. The ABCDE framework is broken down as follows:

A – Activating Event.
B – Beliefs around that event.
C – Consequences of such beliefs on thoughts, feelings and physical sensations.
D – Debate, dispute and discard any maladaptive self-defeating beliefs that lead to negative consequences (C).
E – Effect of completing ‘D’ in terms of shifting your
understanding and beliefs of the activating event (A).

When coaching Self-Regard, Self-Actualisation and Emotional Self Awareness within the Self-Perception realm, individuals are invited to tune into their “internal landscape” and reflect on a set of prescribed emotions such as anger, happiness, fear, anxiety and sadness (Stein and Book, 2011, p. 64). Participants learn about their “ouch” points which are described as the “deep-seated sore spots that others unknowingly prod” (p. 62). Worksheets are completed to examine emotions and their effects and the internal dialogue or self-talk associated with emotions. Strength areas are identified and explored in terms of how they have been of benefit and how they can be developed further. In addition, weaknesses are examined in terms of the impact on their lives and strategies are suggested for improving them. Participants explore goals and areas of interest to determine levels of satisfaction and examine ways to improve the quality of their time spent in different dimensions of their lives (Stein and Book, 2011). When coaching Emotional Expression, Assertiveness and Independence within the Self-Expression realm, individuals explore passive, aggressive and assertive communication through case studies and reflective pieces. Participants are invited to record occasions when they sought help from others in terms of decisions and discriminate between situations where they were seeking input which might be of value in decision making or simply looking for someone else to make the decision for them. Individuals learn the drivers for dependent behaviour and how to work to become more independent.

When coaching Interpersonal Relationships, Empathy and Social Responsibility in the Interpersonal realm, individuals explore their interactions in different social situations. Participants examine their friendship circles and are encouraged to expand their social networks. Individuals engage in role plays to develop skills of listening and repeating back to others what has been shared, describing their version of what they believe the other person’s feelings and thoughts were about a particular subject (Stein and Book, 2011). Participants examine their involvement in community organisations, their participation in charitable activities and situations where they helped out friends, family or colleagues who were in need. When coaching Problem Solving, Reality Testing and Impulse Control in the Decision Making realm, participants become aware of problem solving in their private and working lives and learn steps to problem solve in a structured way. Case studies are utilised to explore how participants are “reading” their environment and strategies for accurately evaluating situations at work, at home and in their lives, in general, are developed (p. 163). Questionnaires are utilised to examine impulsive behaviour and participants are encouraged to use that information to help them develop this competency in different situations (Stein and Book, 2011).

When coaching Flexibility, Stress Tolerance and Optimism in the Stress Management realm, participants examine their routines and ways of behaviour and discuss potential changes they could make in their private and working lives. Individuals examine scenarios where unpleasant or unexpected situations have arisen and explore the feelings, thoughts and sensations associated with such events. Participants are encouraged to make use of the ABCDE framework to really explore stress and stressors in their lives. Questionnaires are utilised to determine how positive an attitude one might have, whether they complain much or not and how they feel on weekdays and at weekends. Finally, with respect to the Wellbeing indicator, participants are encouraged to identify activities that bring happiness to their lives and to set times and days to complete such activities. For all subscales of the EQ-i2.0, self reflective work is completed privately and independently between sessions to build up, improve and enhance each of the fifteen subscales. To conclude this review, three established EI coaching programmes delivered in the workplace will be presented.

2.3.7 EI coaching in the workplace – case studies

2.3.7.1 American Express Financial Advisers (AEFA)

In the 1990s, AEFA conducted research into why one of their products, Life Insurance, was at such a low purchase rate (Lennick, 2007). Interviews were held with both clients and financial advisors about the process and found that although advisers were skilled at selling products, they failed to address the emotional needs of clients when faced with purchasing life insurance. This led to AEFA examining emotion management among its financial advisers. Performance psychologists were consulted and a workshop on self-awareness, self-efficacy and interpersonal efficacy was designed. Advisers were assigned to control and experimental groups and the EQ-i adminstered pre and post workshop. Findings demonstrated an 18% increase in sales for the experimental group. 91% stated they had personally felt a positive effect and 90% stated that it was an important skill in the workplace. Competencies of self regard, assertiveness, empathy, reality testing and self-actualisation showed statistically significant increases post workshop. This pilot programme became a core business practice of American Express and was considered a key element in the company’s long-term success. A follow-up independent evaluation was conducted involving 27 field leaders, 34 veteran advisors and 40 new advisors who had completed EI workshops. All participants reported increased revenue, improvements in terms of client acquisition and increased business with current clients. What was key was the commitment by senior managment and sponsorship for training. The Emotional Competence Training Program (ECTP) was launched by AEFA and based on Goleman’s 1998 Emotional Competence Framework. However, due to limited resources the stand-alone ECTP was integrated into standard training given to new advisers (Lennick, 2007). One recommendation was that an inclusive and collaborative approach be adopted to EI coaching interventions involving senior executives, human resource staff in terms of logistics and expertise and senior leaders who would act as role models to lend support to initiatives. In addition, it was recommended that EI training be part of performance management and aligned with individual and organisational goals.

2.3.7 Fortune 400

In another study conducted by Lopes et al., (2006) the focus was on the association between EI and work performance. A sample of 44 analysts and clerical staff aged between 23 and 61 years from a finance department of a Fortune 400 insurance company participated. Multiple indicators were examined; salary, rank, interpersonal facilitation, affect and attitudes (Lopes et al., (2006). The Bar-On EQ 360 was used to determine interpersonal sensitivity and sociability and peer reports were used for positive and negative interactions. The EQ-360 assesses performance from various perspectives: the employee’s perspective, the leader’s perspective, the direct report’s perspective, the peer’s perspective and where appropriate, the friend’s and family’s perspective (KinchLyons, 2015a). In the study by Lopes et al., (2006), peers and supervisors rated ‘contribution to a positive work environment’ and ‘liking’ was determined by supervisors. Affect and attitudes at work were measured by self report assessment. Peers and supervisors rated stress tolerance using the Bar-On EQ 360. Under ‘interpersonal facilitation’ six determinants were included: “interpersonal sensitivity”, “sociability”, “positive interaction”, “negative interaction”, “contribution to a positive work environment” and “liking” (p. 134). Findings demonstrated that EI was positively linked with percent merit increase and rank but not salary. It was also related to peer rated indicators of interpersonal facilitation, interpersonal sensitivity, sociability and contribution to positive work environment and peer rated mood (Lopes et al., 2006). Further, it was linked with three supervisor rated indicators of interpersonal facilitation, i.e., sociability, liking and contribution to positive work environment and supervisor rated stress tolerance. In addition, it found that percent merit increase was significantly correlated with extraversion and age. This study was limited in terms of sample size with a recommendation being replication of the research using a larger sample and across multiple disciplines. From 2009 onwards, coaching as a mechanism for skill development gained momentum and formed part of professional development initiatives and was viewed as the most “effective talent management activity” within many organisations (Starr, 2011, p. 6).

2.3.7.3 Search Inside Yourself’ (SIY) EI coaching programme

In Google, the SIY EI coaching programme was designed in-house by Chade Meng Tan, an engineer and personal development advocate. It aimed to target social and emotional competencies among engineers, focusing on both intrapersonal and interpersonal intelligence and increasing the “range” and “depth” of people’s emotional abilities (Tan, 2012, p. 17). Tan, (2012) recognised that emotional competencies, rather than simply IQ and expertise were twice as likely to contribute to career success. In particular, the author held that among those working in technical areas, there were significant differences between top and average performers in terms of competencies demonstrated. The author argued that the top six competencies identified in terms of career success were: (i) strong achievement drive and high achievement standards, (ii) ability to influence, (iii) conceptual thinking, (iv) analytical ability, (v) initiative, and (vi) self-confidence. What is interesting is that only two out of the six, conceptual thinking and analytical ability are purely intellectual. Self-awareness and self-regulation were the starting points of the SIY programme (Tan, 2012). Staff were trained to become objective observers of their thoughts and emotions and to self-regulate, which involved developing the skill of “response flexibility”, i.e., the ability to pause before acting (p. 20). Participants identified triggers which led to an emotional response and were taught five steps to managing challenging emotions: (i) stop, (ii) breathe, (iii) notice, (iv) reflect and (v) respond. This approach was used as an emotional self-regulation strategy, bringing focus to controlling attention, leading to cognitive change.

Participants also examined motivation and how aligned they were to their work and to examine whether their work was meaningful, whether tasks created a “state of flow” and whether they were absorbed in the work for the work itself, which was linked with superior performance (Tan, 2012, p. 135). Participants were encouraged to examine intrinsic motivators and set positive life goals. Resilience training formed a core aspect of the SIY training which examined obstacles, how to overcome them and how to maintain perseverance in adverse situations. As part of the self-reflection element of the programme, participants were asked to recall specific events where they experienced success and failure. They were encouraged to view failure as learning, having the ability to stand back, appraise and change, with perseverance being key. Participants learnt how to remain objective and to examine any tendency to “downplay” successful experiences and exaggerate negative ones, while being encouraged to instil a “mental habit” of noting all successes (p. 154). Workplace skills of empathy and teamwork were examined and strategies suggested to develop such skills, resulting in participants being able to make tough decisions in their role while bringing empathy to these decisions, leading to increased trust and understanding with their colleagues. High and low functioning teams were examined. Dysfunctional teams were compared with a “pyramid”, with absence of trust at the base leading to fear of conflict, lack of commitment, avoidance of accountability and inattention to results as individuals moved up the pyramid (p. 175). On the other hand, characteristics of high functioning teams included shared common goals and operating in an environment where deficiencies were not viewed as weaknesses in individual team members. Such teams placed emphasis on building trust, which assumed that individuals do not have any hidden agendas and were given the benefit of the doubt. Relationship building was key and taking care of relationships within the team, with management and key stakeholders viewed as very important. High functioning teams used skilful praise and participants learnt an important distinction between “person praise” and “process praise” (Tan, 2012, p. 185).

Person praise focused on praise due to intelligence and process praise focused on praise due to hard work and
effort. Research found that those praised for their hard work and effort outperformed those who were simply praised due to intelligence. The rationale for this was that when the focus was on the person it strengthened a “fixed mindset” which meant that success was attributed to fixed traits and individuals worried about such traits and how adequate they may be and as a result did not take risks for fear of failure (p. 185). On the other hand, “process praise” strengthened a “growth mind-set” which argued that success and our traits can be developed with effort and perseverance (p. 185). Participants also examined the link between self-awareness and organisational awareness in order to develop an understanding of how organisational awareness facilitated individuals to develop and grow. This was achieved through developing and maintaining networks within the organisation with mentors, allies and individuals who supported and challenged. Conflict management was an important element of the SIY programme and strategies for dealing with challenging situations were examined (Tan, 2012). For example, one exercise completed by participants was to write or engage in dialogue about a difficult real situation from their past or present where there was conflict. Firstly they described it as though they were 100% correct and then were asked to describe it again as if the other person was 100% correct. The aim of this exercise was to practise examining different perspectives and examine both sides of a conflict objectively. Participants learnt to examine all perspectives in an argument and to remain open and objective. Results from participation on the SIY programme demonstrated improvements across different dimensions. For example, participants reported less emotional drain after the programme, with 58% reporting stress pre-programme and 24% post-program (SIY Leadership Institute website). Participants reported a greater ability to focus and be more effective, with 68% reporting improved work performance post-programme as compared to 36% pre programme. 46% of participants reported being better able to maintain calm and poise in challenging situations, as compared to 17% pre-programme.

2.3.8 Conclusion

This chapter has presented a review of the literature and focused on three core sections: historical evolution of EI, EI and higher education and EI, graduates and employability. It has discussed models of EI, the marketisation of education and the links between EI and graduate employability. What has become clear in recent decades is that both IQ and EQ contribute to a person’s intelligence with important links between EI and career and life success being highlighted. National and international policy documents emphasised the need for higher education institutions to include a focus on EI and employability. Employers seek graduates who are work ready and have highlighted multiple issues with graduates in terms of their EI skills. This study is the first in an Irish context to collaborate and include employers in the design and delivery of a tailored EI coaching intervention for final year engineering students. This is the first attempt to survey and interview employers on their opinions of the importance of EI in the workplace and to gather their feedback on the mechanisms for designing a tailored EI coaching programme. This data will be utilised to design a tailored set of EI coaching modules for delivery to final year engineering students.

Through follow up mock EI competency based interviews employers will rate a number of key employability competencies to determine if a discipline specific approach enhances employability more than a general approach. The next chapter will address the ontological and epistemological approaches that were adopted in this research and will discuss the methods utilised to answer the research questions.

Chapter Three: Method

3.1 Introduction

This chapter will discuss the methods used to address the four questions pertaining to this study and will examine the theoretical framework, discuss research paradigms, summarise the research phases, ethical considerations, present the methods utilised in each phase of the research and conclude with a detailed breakdown of the inferential statistics conducted in the three phases of the research for the quantitative data analysis. The four central research questions addressed in this study were:

1. What are the emotional and social (EI) skills that Irish employers deem important for graduates to possess in five sectors of the Irish economy?
2. What are the current levels of EI being displayed by graduates, when entering the workplace, as reported by employers in key sectors of the Irish economy?
3. Does a tailored, as opposed to a general approach to social-emotional competency coaching for final year engineering students, based on the stated needs of employers, result in different group mean EQ-i2.0 scores post intervention?
4. Are students who received tailored, as opposed to general EI coaching rated differently by employers with respect to their knowledge of EI, the application of EI to the workplace and employability? There were two key outputs from this study:
1. A survey of the opinions of employers in key sectors of the Irish economy as to the social and emotional skills that they require graduates to possess.
2. A range of general and discipline specific emotional and social modules aimed at increasing specific emotional and social skills associated with employability.

3.2 Theoretical Framework

A theoretical framework is the foundation layer upon which all knowledge is constructed for a research study and is, according to Grant and Osanloo, (2014) similar to the blueprint for building a house, which sets out all the different aspects involved in order to produce a final product. It acts as the structure and the support for conducting a study and provides a base or an anchor for all its elements. This research was contextualised within a multiple intelligence (MI) theoretical framework which was founded on theories posited by Gardener in the 1990s on multiple intelligences and already discussed in Section 2.1.4 in Chapter Two. In this study, the focus was on the personal intelligences elements of MI theory which focus on intrapersonal and interpersonal competency. It was collaborative in nature in that networks were formed with external stakeholders, i.e., employers who provided input into the design of EI coaching and with final year engineering students who participated in the EI coaching. In addition, Phase Three was collaborative with participants and employers meeting for a mock one-to-one EI competency based interview. Innovative methods were utilised in the coaching process with e-portfolios being used for reflective purposes. A key feature within a theoretical framework is a research paradigm which will be discussed next.

3.3 Research Paradigm

According to Patton, (1990), a research paradigm is a world view, a general perspective, or a way of breaking down the complexity of the real world. When embarking on any research study, researchers must carefully design a “road map” which involves clear identification of the research question (s), selection of one or multiple research paradigms and the use of logic to rationalise why such a paradigm was selected (Blaikie and Priest, 2017, p. 24). According to Patel, (2015a, para 3), a research paradigm includes an ontology, an epistemology and a methodology. An ontology focuses on the “views of the nature of reality” (Patton, 1990, p. 8) and involves the study of “being” and “what is” in terms of the nature of existence and the structure of reality (Crotty, 1998, p. 10). Epistemological assumptions are the appropriate “concepts, theories and techniques” of investigation (Patton, 1990, p. 8) and a way of understanding “what it means to know” (Crotty, 1998, p. 10). Ontological assumptions question whether social reality is external to individuals and imposed on their consciousness from the outside or whether it is a product of individual consciousness and internal to a person (Cohen, Manion and Morrison, 2011). Biesta, (2010) referred to a mechanistic ontology and a social ontology; the former viewed the world in deterministic terms, a system of causes, effects and connections and the latter as a world full of meaning and interpretation. A social ontology did not dismiss a mechanistic one, however, it posited that to attribute meaning to individual and social action a different set of ontological assumptions must be included (Biesta, 2010).

In the Middle Ages, one of the great ontological debates was the nominalist realist debate which posited two distinct approaches to understanding the social world, according to Nelson, (1998). Nominalism held that individuals decided what was true and what was not, and whatever was deemed correct by the majority of people in terms of living in the world was a social construct and must be accepted as correct and adhered to (Nelson, 1998). Nominalists tested laws to determine whether they were actually laws or simply hypotheses. Realism held that truth was independent of human will and that individuals cannot shape their world only discover it. According to realism, the universe was governed by laws, the nature of which can only be discovered through the use of reason. Realism contended that the world can be understood through research, that knowledge was to be discovered through appropriate research techniques and was the baseline for most quantitative research (Braun and Clarke, 2013). Egon Guba was a key figure in the development of research paradigms and he expanded the concepts of ontology, epistemology and methodology to include axiology which examined the role of values, rhetoric, language and communication in research (Johnson and Christensen, 2012). Four of the most commonly used research paradigms are positivism, interpretivism, critical theory and pragmatism (which was the paradigm used for this research) and these will be discussed next.

3.3.1 Positivism

Positivism is a research paradigm linked with the scientific tradition, is deductive in nature, with ideas and hypotheses being based on logic and reason with experiments and empirical data typically being used (Curwin and Slater, 2002). According to Patel, (2015b) a positivist ontology holds that there is a single reality or truth. The epistemological assumptions underpinning positivism are that reality can be measured, therefore, the focus is on reliable and valid tools to obtain that knowledge (Patel, 2015b). Positivism emerged from the teachings of positive science where knowledge and teachings resulted from scientific observation and the scientific method (Crotty, 1998). In positivism, the world is assumed to be external to the individual, scientific knowledge is objective and it is solely this knowledge that is valid and accurate. This approach is known as nomothetic, i.e., methods are designed to determine general laws, concepts and measurements with a goal of identifying underlying themes in search for general laws that explain what is being observed (Cohen et al., 2011). In positivism, methodologies typically utilised are surveys and experiments.

The idea of scientific knowledge as objective, accurate and valid has been challenged by many scientists who argued that claims of science as “absolute” were greatly exaggerated (Crotty, 1998, p. 29). It was suggested that individuals should speak of “probability” rather than “certainty” when it came to scientific discourses (p. 29). Popper’s Principle of Falsification held that there is no absolute scientific truth, that in any research study if there was as much as one finding at variance then the general principle or law was false. Accordingly, the focus in scientific research must be on disproving a theory, not proving it (Crotty, 1998). Within the positivist paradigm, the theoretical perspectives are positivism and post-positivism. Post positivism challenged positivism as it held that “absolute truth of knowledge” does not exist when studying human action and behaviour and argued that causes determine outcomes, therefore, post positivist research investigates the causes that effect outcomes (Creswell, 2014, p. 7). Quantitative methods are typically adopted in positivism, for example, questionnaire, sample measurement and scaling and statistical analysis, according to (Patel, 2015a).

3.3.2 Constructivist/Interpretivism

The constructivist/interpretive paradigm examines how individuals seek to gain understanding of the world they live in through meaning attributed to their experiences (Creswell, 2003). The ontology underpinning this paradigm holds that there is no single reality or truth, that reality is created by individuals in groups (Patel, 2015a). The epistemological assumptions of a constructivist/interpretive paradigm hold that reality must be interpreted, with a focus on discovering the underlying meaning of events and activities (Patel, 2015b). The world and its objects are not clearly known or defined and meaning emerges only when the conscious part of the mind engages with them (Crotty, 1998). Meaning is seen as being constructed ratherthan created and the concept of “intentionality” is key (Crotty, 1998, p. 44). In this context, intentionality implies “reaching out to” meaning that once the mind becomes conscious of something, it reaches out to it and subsequently directly relates to it (p. 44). Social constructionism focuses on the generation of meaning and can refer to objects in the natural world, people with whom we interact and emphasises the important role of culture and how it shapes the way we see the world. “Sedimentation” may occur within cultures where meanings attributed to social reality build up over time, are transmitted down the generations and can become “screens” or “masks” for the truth (p. 59). This paradigm holds that reality is socially embedded, is changing and dynamic and the acquisition of knowledge is achieved through interactions between the researcher and the researched (Grbich, 2007). There are some criticisms of this approach as it has an over emphasis on individual action without looking at structures which are at play (Grbich 2007). The theoretical perspectives within this paradigm are interpretivism, phenomenology, symbolic interactionism, hermeneutics, critical inquiry and feminism (Patel, 2015a). Methodologies include ethnography, grounded theory, phenomenological research, heuristic inquiry, action research, discourse analysis and feminist standpoint research. Typically methods are qualitative in nature and include interviews, observation, case studies, life history, narrative and theme identification.

3.3.3 Critical Theory

Karl Mark laid the foundations for critical inquiry. The Frankfurt School was set up in the 1920s and had its origins in the Institute for Social Research established in 1924 under the patronage of Weil (Crotty 1998). Its primary aim was the discussion of Marxist ideas. Marx was a person of action, examining real-life situations of men and women and society as it was experienced. Marx referred to class struggles in society as being caused by conflict originating in ancient times between those who were free and those who were enslaved, according to the author. Marx held that there were many forces at work shaping society, for example, legal and political but at the very base, economic forces were the ones that mattered most. Critical theory does not solely aim to understand research but to also challenge it. It does not merely examine situations in terms of interaction and community, rather it aims to examine situations in terms of conflict and oppression. In terms of research it seeks to bring about change, according to Crotty, (1998).

At the core of critical theory is the voice of the oppressed with inquiry being a means of exposing areas for change and activism (Denzin, 2017). Inquiry and activism are viewed as ways of helping people. It focuses on ethically responsible research and is committed to social justice which seeks to make a difference in the lives of individuals who are socially oppressed. Critical theory impacts social policy by ensuring criticisms are heard and action taken by policy makers. Therefore, it is a model of change for others. The ontological assumptions underpinning critical theory hold that reality is created and shaped by social, political, cultural, economic, ethnic and gender-based forces that are embedded in social structures over time (Cohen and Crabtree, 2006). The epistemological beliefs hold that what individuals know is linked with interactions between the investigator and a particular object or group, therefore, is viewed as transactional. Critical theory utilises dialogic methods, observation, interviewing which facilitate conversation and reflection. Participants are invited to question the “natural state” and challenge mechanisms in place to maintain order (Cohen and Crabtree, 2006, para 9).

3.3.4 Pragmatism

Pragmatism was the paradigm deemed most suitable for this research as according to Patton, (2002, pragmatism lends itself to methodological appropriateness as a primary ontological concern. It is deeply rooted in the work of John Dewey who held that all experiences have an emotional component where feelings play an important role in determining beliefs and actions (Morgan, 2014). The ontological assumptions underpinning pragmatism are that reality is constantly re-negotiated, debated and interpreted in light of its usefulness in new, unpredictable situations (Patel, 2015a). The epistemology within this paradigm holds that the best method should be the one that solves problems with the “means” being “finding out” and the underlying aim being “change” (Patel, 2015a n.p.). Pragmatism adopts the view that knowledge is constructed and results from “transactions” between the “organism” and the “environment” (Greene and Hall, 2010, p. 131). It recognises that knowledge may be fallible and that current knowledge may lose its relevance when future problems are being examined. Pragmatism is linked with action and use, involves a staged approach to inquiry and values the inclusion of other viewpoints (Ormerod, 2006). In addition, “meaning” and “application” to the real world are central to pragmatic belief with individuals being actively involved in the construction of meaning rather than passive recipients of knowledge (p. 892). It is this dual process of “meaningfulness” and “organism-environment relationship” which is central to pragmatic thinking (p. 901). This active involvement in the social world results in the “reshaping” of both individual experiences and of the environment in which individuals live (p. 902).

Pragmatism expands the fundamental belief of other research paradigms which solely focus on “what is” to also include what “might be” in terms of action and change (Goldkuhl, 2012, p. 8). It is particularly suited to mixed methods, design-based research and action research (Patel, 2015a) and includes a combination of quantitative
and qualitative methods, as previously discussed under the earlier paradigms. This study adopted a mixed method approach as it concurred with Mason, (2006) who argued that social experiences and reality are multi-dimensional, therefore, cannot be fully understood by adopting a singular approach. In addition, Denscombe, (2008) held that changes in social research in the 21st century have resulted in a need for a paradigm that is “sufficiently flexible, permeable and multi-layered (p. 271). Creswell, (2014) argued that the use of quantitative and qualitative methods should not be viewed as distinct categories but representing “different ends on a continuum”, and when a mixed methods approach is utilised, research is deemed to be in the middle of the continuum (p. 3).

One guiding principle of pragmatism is that knowledge can only be gained through intervention and importantly that the overall purposes of the research must frame the research questions (Biesta, 2010). By judging knowledge pragmatically, one considers the “processes and procedures” through which knowledge has been generated with research only providing an insight into what has been possible, not establishing “what is” or “what will be” (Biesta, 2010, p. 113). Walker, (2010) further held that a pragmatic approach focuses on the notion of “transferability” in terms of inferences from data (p. 270). This research adopted a mixed method approach with a quantitative piece, an employer survey, being conducted in Phase One which was then followed up with semi-structured interviews with a sample of employers to triangulate the survey data and provide more in-depth information to inform this phase of the study. Triangulation in research involves the use of more than one approach to researching a question with the objective of providing a more comprehensive picture of the results through the use of different methods (Heale and Forbes, 2013). In Phase Two, an intervention, i.e., emotional and social competency coaching for final year engineering students was designed and delivered. In order to measure this intervention, the Bar-On EQ-i2.0 was administered pre and post intervention with quantitative analysis of these scores being conducted. In Phase Three, these results were triangulated by means of mock EI competency based interviews between employers and participants to determine if a tailored approach enhanced EI learning and employability. Although not a key aim of the study, this EI coaching intervention equipped participants with an awareness of EI competencies and their relevance and application in the workplace, together with a set of transferable EI skills for the workplace. In addition, they gained valuable exposure to employers in their discipline of engineering which afforded them networking opportunities and direct contacts with industry.

3.4 Summary of research phases

As previously mentioned, there were three distinct phases to this research, in addition to two pilot phases, one in Phase One and one in Phase Two. Two Institutes of Technology (IOTs) in Dublin participated in this research. Both institutes had similar mission statements and were committed to providing education to student groups under-represented in higher education (Institute 1 website – mission statement) (Institute 2 website – access policies). The student body in both institutes was diverse, ranging from school leavers, students from disadvantaged socio-economic backgrounds, mature students, students with disabilities and members of ethnic minority groups. Both institutes offered full-time honours degree programmes in engineering at NFQ Level 8 which followed a similar format and structure. In Institute 1, two engineering degree programmes were offered: mechatronics and computer engineering. In Institute 2, three engineering degree programmes were offered: electronics engineering, energy systems engineering and mechanical engineering. In Institute 1, a module entitled ‘Skills for Success in Higher Education’ was offered, on a mandatory basis across a range of undergraduate programmes in year one, however, was not offered in the engineering discipline (Institute 1 Skills for Success in Higher Education module descriptor). A module entitled ‘Professional Development for Engineers’ was a mandatory module in year one across all the engineering programmes in Institute 1. This module introduces the student to the soft skills required to be a successful engineering student and includes communication skills, teamwork, ethics, self-directed learning and proficiency in using industry standard productivity software (Institute 1 ‘professional development for engineers’ module descriptor). In Institute 2, a module entitled ‘Critical Skills Development’ was a mandatory module in year one across all disciplines of engineering. This module focuses on the development of critical skills such as research skills, learning skills, the skills of academic writing and referencing, critical thinking, communication, interpersonal skills and teamwork (Institute 2 ‘critical skills development’ module descriptor).

In Phase Two, the focus was on final year engineering students only. This decision was made due to the fact that the research was iterative in nature and because there is a growing interest in EI and its importance in the engineering sector. In addition, time and budgetary restrictions were a consideration. It was believed that an intervention such as EI coaching would help to broaden these participants’ understanding of essential social and emotional skills required in industry and equip them with the necessary EI competencies in order to successfully transition into the workplace.

In this study, an active control and an experimental group were selected. An active control group was chosen due to the fact that there are ethical implications in terms of non-intervention control groups when “effective and established treatments exist” (Kinser and Robins, 2013, p. 2). It has already been established that EI interventions have positive results (Bradberry and Greaves, 2009) and research has already been conducted on EI using a classical control group (Carthy, 2013). A breakdown of the principal research phases and objectives is presented in Table 4 below.

Table 4: Principal research phases and objectives

3.5 Ethical considerations

Ethics was an ongoing process of review, reflection and consideration throughout the study. The research reflected the principles of honesty, trust and a duty to care, with responsibility and accountability to all participants being of paramount importance. At the research design stage ethics and governance issues were addressed. A formal application for ethical clearance was submitted to Institute 1 which included a declaration in terms of impact on the human subject and/or the researcher. See Appendix H for ‘application for ethical clearance of a project’ and Appendix I for ‘impact on human subject and/or researcher’ form. Access to personal contact details of participants followed clear ethical guidelines with permission being sought to source same and data protection issues taken into account, which was in line with best practice as proposed by Watson and Coombes, (2009). This involved getting permission from lecturing staff to attend their classes to inform students of the research. Initial expression of interest forms were handed out and were completed by students who expressed an interest in participating in the research. Students were advised that these forms would be retained in a locked cabinet in the postgraduate research room and shredded following the study, in line with data protection legislation. Informed consent was of critical importance throughout the process which requires that potential participants in a study are given enough information about the study and how the data collected will be used (Bradburn, Sudman and Wansink, 2004). A process of “rolling informed consent”, as proposed by Piper and Simons, (2005, p. 56) was adopted where consent to participate in the survey, semi-structured interviews, EI testing and coaching was under continual review and re-negotiated throughout the research. See Appendix J for the formal institute consent form.
Accordingly, the principles of confidentiality and anonymity were strictly adhered to with no identifying information on surveys, interview notes and transcripts. Each student was assigned a confidential code which was recorded by the researcher. In addition, they were informed that anonymity would be guaranteed and no names or other identifying material would be on any final report. As this research involved three distinct phases there were some differences in terms of ethical issues and considerations during each phase which will be discussed next.

In Phase One, the survey was sent to employers with a personalised cover email detailing the research and addressing ethical issues such as confidentiality and anonymity. A link to the survey was included on the cover email and it was distributed using the Blind Carbon Copy (BCC) facility with the researcher being the recipient in the ‘To’ area on the email. This ensured confidentiality was maintained for employers and also that a record of employer organisations was retained. All coded results were independently cross-checked and counts per sector verified. In Phase One, the online tool SurveyMonkey was used as it was a quick and efficient means of gathering survey data.
An ethical issue in relation to ‘limited license to content’ arose which necessitated clarification. This ‘limited to license content’ meant that Survey Monkey was granted a “worldwide, royalty free license to use, reproduce, distribute, modify, adapt, create derivative works, make publicly available, and otherwise exploit your Content, but only for the limited purposes of providing the services to you” (Survey Monkey website). A meeting was held with the manager of the Learning and Innovation Centre in Institute 1 who was responsible for maintaining the Survey Monkey account who advised that this online resource was used extensively by them for research purposes and no issues had ever arisen. It was solely in cases where there were intellectual property issues, disclosure of personal information or sensitive data was being gathered that Survey Monkey would not be utilised. On the basis that none of the aforementioned were being gathered a decision was made to proceed and use this online resource, with anonymity being guaranteed and no sensitive data being gathered. The onsite account was used for distributing and collecting the survey data.

In Phase Two, transparency was again very important and students were recruited for the pilot and the final study through in-class presentations. Full details of the research were presented and students were given opportunities to ask questions. An information sheet was circulated to each student detailing the research which is attached as Appendix K. Preliminary expressions of interest were gathered and students were informed that they could withdraw from the research at any stage in the process. Details of counselling services in both institutes were given to participants and contact was made with the counselling services in both institutes to inform them of the research and make them aware of its possible implications. This is in line with Institute 1 ethical policy on causing harm to research participants. At the start of the one-to-one coaching, consent was obtained, in writing, once again and care was given to explain the nature of the test to each student, that it was a snapshot of their emotional and social functioning at a particular time in their life and that it was a growth model with opportunities to learn and develop in the process. It was stressed that the one-to one coaching session was private and that the workplace report was their property. It was explained that copies of the reports were being held on computer for data analysis purposes but would be destroyed in line with data protection legislation. In the group coaching sessions, students were known to each other, however, were not informed whether they were part of the active control or the experimental group. At the start of each of the three group EI coaching sessions, participants were advised about confidentiality and that details of the sessions were to be kept private.

In Phase Three, one-to-one mock EI interviews were held between employers and students. Anonymity and confidentiality were maintained with employers interviewing blind, i.e., membership of the active control or the experimental group was not disclosed. An information sheet was circulated to both employers and students at the start of each interview. A topic guide was designed for employers asking questions on the coaching process that participants had undertaken, their knowledge of EI and its application and relevance in the workplace. Students were informed that employers would be completing a rating sheet at the end of each interview which included Likert scale questions and qualitative based questions to explain each of their ratings. Employers and students were informed that rating sheets were confidential and for the researcher’s attention only. Completed rating sheets were scanned onto a computer for future analysis and hard copies filed away in a locked cabinet to be destroyed in line with data protection legislation. Students were informed that EQ-i2.0 testing post intervention was for data analysis purposes only, however, in the interests of openness and transparency in research individual results post intervention in the form of a workplace report were sent to each participant.

3.6 Reflection

At all stages in the research a journal was maintained as a self-reflective tool. This enabled the researcher to chart growth and learning throughout the process. It also provided an insight into the potential impact personal values, beliefs and opinions may have on the research process. The researcher also maintained an online private Livebinder account which charted the EI learning journey. The written journal provided valuable insight into the challenges and strengths of the research design and prompted the researcher to critically evaluate the methods being employed at all stages of the research process. Reflection was twofold, both in action and on action. Schon 1977, cited by Helyer, (2017) emphasised the importance of both reflection in action and reflection on action. By reflecting in action, reflection takes place in the present moment, for example, while undertaking a particular task or in a particular situation. By reflecting on action, individuals reflect back on experiences, critically appraise them and implement any changes. Both reflection in action and reflection on action facilitate growth, insight and personal and professional development.

“Through the mirror writing” was adopted which, according to Bolton, (2010) enables people to discover who they are in practice and why they act as they do (p. 72). It is “intuitive” and “spontaneous” and individuals write for “self-illumination” and “exploration” not to create a final product (p. 72). It involves critical reflection and analysis which can often be challenging but can yield enormous benefits in terms of self-awareness and self-growth. For example, “through the mirror writing” facilitated the researcher to take time out to devise best strategies for recruiting employers as this was the most challenging aspect of the research process. By giving time and space to the reflective process it assisted the researcher in developing awareness around the fears and anxieties associated with the possibility that employers would not engage. This prompted the researcher to devise more creative ways to recruit employers such as attendance at career fairs and open days in different universities. It also ensured that the researcher developed strategies for personal wellbeing throughout the research process to avoid burnout which included fitness and mindfulness meditation.

Such reflective practices were important in this study as, for example, in the individualised one-to-one coaching sessions, care and sensitivity was needed when presenting results to participants, in particular, those whose scores may have been at the lower end of the EQ-i2.0 scale. Such results highlight personal information for participants in terms of their social and emotional competency and at times, some participants became quite emotional when discussing both strength areas and areas for learning. Accordingly, at all times, care was taken to ensure the language being used was supportive and constructive and attention was paid to building rapport and to body language. In the one-to-one coaching some participants became emotional during the session and care was taken to stop the session and give time to check that the student was feeling ok and were happy to continue with the session. In addition, the researcher followed up the session with a call or an email and outlined details of on-campus counselling services once again, should the need arise. Time was taken at the end of both the one-to-one and the group coaching to reflect on the sessions and to critically evaluate what worked and areas for learning. Through reflection, the researcher continually checked to ensure that they remained professional but sincere and sensitive.

3.7 Timeline

Table 5: Timeline of Research

3.8 Sampling

For research to be robust and valid, it must be purposeful, use appropriate methods and be critically analysed. Sampling is a very important consideration in social research and sampling theory facilitates researchers to take a sample of the population and from data gathered make generalisations about the population as a whole (Bloch, 2004). In probability sampling, each person has an equal chance of being selected to participate in the research and it includes simple random sampling, stratified random sampling, cluster random sampling, systematic random sampling and multi-stage sampling (Curwin and Slater, 2002). In non-probability sampling, selection methods may result in elements of the population being excluded, therefore, an element of judgement is used. Some non-probability sampling techniques used are purposive sampling, quota sampling, judgemental sampling, snowball sampling, volunteer sampling and, convenience sampling. At the design stage, consideration was given to the issue of non-response which was addressed by selecting a larger sample group. When determining sample size, consideration was given to availability, time and resources which, according to Curwin and Slater, (2002) influence the sample size.
What was key was that the sample was big enough to yield statistically significant and reliable results and that the results were able to detect some minimum effect size in order to accept or reject the null hypothesis. In part one of Phase One, the employer survey, non-probability sampling was utilised with a purposive sampling technique being used. Contact was made with the careers officers in both institutes to obtain guidance on sourcing employers to participate in the research. Meetings took place with careers officers in both institutes where details of the research were outlined. Contact was also made with GradIreland which maintains a database of employers. It was suggested that the careers officers would contact these organisations, in the first instance to introduce the research and the researcher, thereby enabling direct contact with key personnel in these organisations. Surveys were sent to employers from the Irish Times Top 100 companies under each of the five sectors of industry, from contacts sourced from the GradIreland handbook and website, from meetings with the careers officers, from networks of contacts in industry, from online advertisements and from attendance at careers fairs. In part two of Phase One, the semi-structured interviews, five employers were randomly selected from each of the five sectors of industry.

In Phase Two, a non-probability sampling technique was utilised in respect of the pilot study and the final research. A volunteer sample was used for the pilot study and for recruiting the final sample. A volunteer sample is one of the main types of non-probability sampling methods and is comprised of people who self-select into the study (McBride, 2010). In the pilot study students in the final year Information Technology degree programme who were in class on the day the research was being presented had an equal chance of being selected. The lottery method or the fishbowl draw was adopted to select the students to participate in the pilot which, according to Kumar, (2011) involves putting numbered pieces of paper into a bowl with a number assigned for each element of the population. In this study, each numbered piece of paper corresponded to a student’s name, thereby enabling a random sample to be selected. A final sample of 5 (n = 5) participated in the pilot study. The pilot study will be discussed in greater detail in Section 3.11.1.

A non-probability sampling technique was utilised with all final year engineering students who were in attendance on the day of the presentations having an equal opportunity to participate in the research. The final volunteer sample was 62 (n = 62) with participants randomly assigned to either the active control or the experimental group. Random assignment of students was done within each institute but not across institutes due to practical considerations. This meant there was one active control and one experimental group in both institutes, however, both active control groups and both experimental groups were amalgamated into one active control and one experimental group, for data analysis purposes.

In Phase Three, non-probability sampling was utilised with a purposive sampling technique being used. This involved employers in specific disciplines of engineering being recruited to conduct the mock EI interviews with participants. These employers were sourced from databases of employers in the schools of engineering in both institutes. Eligibility criteria was that employers were from the disciplines of engineering represented in the student sample and that their organisations recruited graduates. A total of ten employers responded to the invitation to participate in the mock EI competency based interviews.

3.9 Bar-On Emotional Quotient Inventory (EQ-i2.0) accredited test of emotional intelligence

As previously discussed in Chapter Two, the Bar-On EQ-i2.0 was considered the most appropriate test for this research based on the fact that it has been used extensively in the occupational, health and educational sectors and is psychometrically robust in a number of settings (Bar-On 1997b; Austin, Saklofske & Egan, 2005; Bar On 2005; Bar-On, Handley & Fund 2005; Morehouse 2007). The test is a self-report measure of social and emotional functioning with 133 items. It consists of short sentences to which respondents indicate the level to which they believe each sentence describes them. It uses a five point Likert scale, ranging from “very seldom or not true of me” (1), to “very often true of me or true of me’ (5). Each response is assigned a value based on a five-point rating system whereby for positively phrased items (e.g., I like helping people), a rating of 5 is given for “very often true of me’ or ‘true of me’ whilst a rating of 1 is given for ‘very seldom or not true of me’. For negatively phrased items, for example, ‘I don’t get enjoyment from what I do’ the scoring is reversed, with a rating of 5 given for ‘very seldom or not true of me’. Once the test has been completed, a total EI score is generated by adding the scores for all 133 items as well as composite scores in five principal domains (Intrapersonal, Interpersonal, Stress Management, Adaptability and General Mood) (Bar-On, 1997a and Bar-On 1997b). Each of the principal domains is further comprised of scores in a range of sub categories, as previously outlined in Section 2.1.6.4.1 in Chapter Two. This chapter will now turn to examine methodological considerations specific to each phase of the study.

3.10 Method: Phase One

3.10.1 Overview

A key output of the research was the design of domain specific social and emotional competency modules for final year engineering students, tailored to the specified needs of employers. The emphasis on taking action to facilitate change was key with constructive knowledge being gathered through multiple methods: an employer survey and semi-structured interviews, student participation in social and emotional coaching and through mock EI interviews with employers, post intervention. Phase One focused on gathering data from employers in five sectors of industry: engineering, IT/computing, professional services (including accounting, business, finance, law, human resources and retail), science (including pharmaceutical and life) and social science. The rationale for selecting these five sectors was twofold; they were some of the identified growth industries in Ireland (Kilmartin 2010) and honours degree programmes in each discipline were delivered across both institutes, facilitating access to students for participation in the research. A diverse range of tools were utilised to analyse data in each of the three phases. These will be discussed later in this chapter. Part one of Phase One was an employer survey which will be discussed next.

3.10.2 Pilot

In line with best practice in research, a pilot study was conducted which, according to Abu Hassan, Schattner and Mazza, (2006, p. 70) may identify “any potential problem areas and deficiencies in the research instruments and protocol prior to implementation during the full study”. In Phase One, the survey was piloted with a sample of employers who were based in Institute 1. Feedback was positive and minor changes to wording on the survey were implemented. Due to the small sample in the pilot, no data analysis was conducted.

3.10.3 Employer survey

Solid research must be purposeful and requires mechanisms such as well designed questionnaires which result in creative and innovative analysis (Curwin and Slater, 2002). In line with the ontological underpinnings of pragmatism where the methods chosen are those deemed most suited to answer the question (s), Phase One commenced with a quantitative element, i.e., a survey of employers in five vocational sectors of industry: engineering, IT/computing, professional services, science and social science. The survey sought to gather:

(i) The opinions of employers as to the importance of social and emotional competency in the workplace.
(ii) The opinions of employers on the current levels of EI competency being displayed by graduates.
(iii) Any additional social and emotional competencies they deemed important which were not included on the survey.

The ten competencies surveyed were adapted from Goleman’s 1998 Emotional Competence Framework and the Bar-on EQ-i2.0 model of emotional intelligence (MHS 2011) with a focus on both the intrapersonal and the interpersonal dimensions of EI. The ten competencies surveyed were:

1. Adaptability (flexibility in handling change).
2. Communication (listening openly and sending convincing messages).
3. Conflict Management (negotiating and resolving disagreements).
4. Emotional Self-Awareness (recognising one’s emotions and their effects).
5. Emotional Self-Control (keeping disruptive emotions and impulses in check).
6. Empathy (sensing others’ feelings and perspectives and taking an active interest in their concerns.
7. Initiative (readiness to act on opportunities).
8. Motivation (focused and committed to the goals of the team and the organisation).
9. Positive Outlook (persistence in pursuing goals despite obstacles and setbacks).
10. Teamwork (working with others toward shared goals).

3.10.3.1 Survey Questions

When designing the survey, consideration was given to a number of factors prior to including questions, in line with good practice in terms of questionnaire design (Fowler, 2009). Only questions which were necessary or useful to this study were included and careful attention was given to ensure that enough context was given to questions to promote ease of understanding. Question placement and sequence of questions were considered, Likert scales and structured questions were utilised as these were deemed the most appropriate means of gathering the data required. A cover email with a link to the survey was included and respondents were thanked initially in the email for their participation and at the end of the survey. The survey adhered to some general principles of online survey construction, i.e., the software used was kept as simple as possible, resulting in less time for respondents to download, with cost, convenience and time in distribution being noted. The online survey tool, Survey Monkey was used as the data collection instrument for this phase of the research. Initial questions focused on gender, age, sector and size of organisation. Employers were then asked to rate ten social and emotional competencies on a scale of importance, from ‘Very Important’ to ‘Not Important at all’ and then to rate the current level of each competency graduates demonstrate when entering their organisations, on a scale of ‘Excellent’ to ‘Poor’. An explanation was given for each competency listed on the survey in order to avoid any possible lack of understanding of emotional intelligence competencies. Finally, an open question was utilised to gather additional feedback from employers and to give them an opportunity to include any social and emotional competencies not listed on the survey that they felt were of importance in the workplace. The survey remained ‘live’ from August to November 2015. The word version of the employer survey is attached as Appendix L.

The issue of non-response arose in relation to the survey. Initially, 250 surveys were distributed, 50 in each sector and one month later 55 responses were received. Therefore, a non-probability sampling technique, convenience sampling, was then employed which involves sourcing respondents that are easy to reach and available (Lavrakas, 2008). A decision was made to source companies once again from the online national Golden Pages4 directory and not to email the survey but to call each company first briefing them on the research and requesting them to participate and give a contact name and email in the organisation.

4Golden Pages is Ireland’s comprehensive online directory of business and residential telephone listings.

A non-probability sampling technique, i.e., snowballing was also used where industry contacts were asked to complete the survey and then pass it onto their relevant contacts in the field. Companies were also sourced through online advertisements on Indeed.com5 and Irishjobs.ie6 and surveys sent to them. Contact was made with heads of departments in both institutes requesting them to forward the email and survey link to their networks of contacts in these areas. This proved very beneficial and yielded a high response, in particular, in the social science area. Careers fairs were attended in Dublin City University (DCU)7 and in the RDS8. In DCU the focus was on accounting, finance, business and law. This event was very busy and a number of exhibitors were approached. Some shared their contact details while others stated that they would pass the details onto a colleague working in the area of training and development. It was felt that seeking survey responses was intruding on a day with a different focus, therefore, exhibitor details were noted and followed up with an email. A careers fair in the RDS was a ticketed event and registration was completed prior to attendance at this event. Face to face contact was made with seventy employers at this event and all expressed an interest in the research. They asked that the survey be forwarded to them and some indicated an interest in being involved in part two of Phase One, the semi structured interviews. Business cards were collected from all of these employers and subsequent contact was made with seventy employers by means of a personalised email detailing the research and attaching the survey for completion. This yielded valuable additional responses and many forwarded the link to their networks of colleagues in the field. In total, 500 (n = 500) surveys were sent with a response rate of 238.

5 Indeed.com is a worldwide job site for job seekers giving them free access to search for jobs, posts CVs and research
companies.
6Irishjobs.ie is an online recruitment website in Ireland.
7DCU is a university in Dublin, Ireland with a distinctive mission to transform lives and societies through education, research
and innovation.
8The Royal Dublin Society (RDS) is in Dublin 4 and used for exhibitions, concerts and sporting events.

An email outlining the research, together with the survey link was sent to Science Foundation Ireland (SFI)9, Engineers Ireland10, Irish Management Institute (IMI)11 and Social Care Ireland (SCI)12 requesting them to include the email and survey on their website. A response was received from SCI who agreed to place it on their website, Facebook and twitter pages.

3.10.3.2 Survey design issue – Question 5

One subsequent potential design issue was discovered when the survey was closed with one Likert scale used being unbalanced. Participants were asked the following question (question 5) for each of the ten competencies:

‘The following is a list of ten social emotional competencies which have been deemed important for the workplace. For each competence listed, please tick one box indicating how important it is for you as an employer that graduates possess this competence’

The Likert scale used was:

‘very important’, ‘important’, ‘neutral’, ‘somewhat important’ and ‘not important at all’

This was potentially unbalanced as ‘somewhat important’ was later felt to denote some level of importance in terms of the competence, therefore, can be deemed as a positive category, however, it is placed on the negative side of the scale. A preferred Likert scale for this question, as proposed by Cohen et al., (2011) would have been:

9Science Foundation Ireland (SFI) is the national foundation for investment in scientific and engineering research.
10 Engineers Ireland is the professional body for engineers and engineering in Ireland
11 Irish Management Institute (IMI) is a membership organisation that reflects a spectrum of Irish industry, from the smallest
micro-organisations to the world’s largest multinationals
12 Social Care Ireland (SCI) represents social care workers, managers, educators and students in Ireland

‘very important’, ‘important’ ‘neither important nor important’, ‘unimportant’, ‘not at all important’

However, less than 2.6% of survey responses were under the ‘somewhat important’ point on the Likert scale, therefore, a decision was made to proceed with the analysis of the survey in its original form. Survey data was analysed utilising SPSS and the qualitative results were analysed using thematic analysis, which will be discussed later in this chapter.

3.10.4 Semi-structured interviews

Phase One concluded with a set of semi-structured interviews with employers. Due to time and limited resources the semi-structured interviews were restricted to one representative from each of the five sectors. The interviews expanded on the variables explored in the survey while also gathering employer input on the design and delivery of tailored EI coaching. A non-probability sampling technique was used where one employer from each sector was selected using the lottery method. This is in line with the principles of MMR, as outlined by Denscombe, (2007) where both quantitative and qualitative methods are utilised at different stages of the research. The interviews were 45 minutes in length and facilitated in-depth and detailed information to be gathered. According to Denscombe, (2007) interviews are a primary source of data collection utilised when research involves gathering more complex and detailed material such as personal experiences, beliefs and opinions. Some of the strengths of in-depth interviewing are that it provides detailed data, the focus is on the research participant and it facilitates exploration of and reflection on beliefs, opinions and issues (Coombes, Allen, Humphrey and Neale, 2009).

Some of the key features of in-depth interviews are structure and flexibility with a topic guide utilised to explore key areas of relevance (Coombes et al. 2009). In this study, the topic guide included the following areas for exploration: (i) social and emotional competencies, (ii) recruitment practices and (iii) workplace training in emotional intelligence. At the start of the interviews, employers were asked to complete two sections of the survey again, i.e., rating the EI competencies in terms of importance and in terms of the current levels being displayed by graduates when entering the workplace. Table 6 sets out a detailed breakdown of each area explored. A copy of the topic guide for the semi-structured interviews is included as Appendix M.

Table 6: Topic Guide: Semi-structured interviews

While there was a clear set of issues to be explored and questions to be asked; there was flexibility during the interview process and respondents were allowed to elaborate and give more information on topics being explored which is an important element of qualitative research, according to Denscombe, (2007). Prior to conducting interviews with employers, a detailed information sheet was compiled and distributed to each employer and checked for understanding – see Appendix N. In addition, Institute 1 consent form was completed by each employer prior to the commencement of the interview. Each interview commenced with an introduction, an explanation of the aims of the research and the researcher’s interest in the topic. In addition, informed consent and confidentiality were explained again and written permission gained.

Permission was sought verbally to record the interviews and each employer agreed. In addition, attempts were made to set the tone, build trust and rapport. Recording equipment was tested prior to the commencement of the interviews and a clock was in the room, for time management purposes. At all stages, the main points and issues being stated by participants were examined and probed in order to determine deeper meaning and explore what was being stated and possibly omitted. Interviews were concluded by asking participants if they had anything to add to the process which, in many cases yielded valuable, detailed, unexpected and detailed data. All participants were informed that they were free to withdraw from the research at any time, free to refuse to answer any question and free to have their data destroyed at any stage in the process. None of the participants withdrew from the research and all questions were answered. The semi-structured interviews were analysed using thematic analysis, which will be discussed next.

3.10.4.1 Thematic Analysis

In line with best practice on interview analysis as posited by Coombes et al., (2009), all recorded material was transcribed verbatim and a coding frame developed. This process of indexing or coding facilitates a process of “sorting, ordering and structuring” data in preparation for analysis (Coombes et al., 2009, p. 205). Thematic analysis was utilised which has been defined by Braun and Clarke, (2006, p. 86) as involving “the searching across a data set – be that a number of interviews or focus groups, or a range of texts – to find repeated patterns of meaning”. However, thematic analysis is not a “linear” process but rather a “recursive” process where researchers move back and forth throughout the process (Braun and Clarke, 2006 p. 86). It is a method used for “identifying, analysing and reporting themes” within data with decisions being made as to whether themes will be analysed at a semantic or latent level (Braun and Clarke, 2006, p. 6). At a semantic level themes are identified within explicit meanings in the data set and a process of description to interpretation is undertaken, while also referring to prior research and literature. At a latent level, analysis examines “underlying ideas, assumptions and conceptualisations” that shape the semantic content of the data (p. 12). At a latent level, themes are linked with a constructionist approach and involve searching across the data set to find repeated patterns of meaning which are clustered together. The authors identified six phases of thematic analysis which were used as a guide for analysing the semi-structured interviews in this research. The six phases are:

(1) Familiarising yourself with your data.
(2) Generating initial codes.
(3) Searching for themes.
(4) Reviewing themes.
(5) Defining and naming themes.
(6) Producing the report.

In Phase One, the above guidelines were applied to the data. Semi-structured interviews were transcribed directly by the researcher, read multiple times in an active way with notes being taken, data was collated and coded using Excel, relationships between codes determined and data scrutinised for themes. It involved a constant process of reading, review and detail. Interview data was analysed at a semantic level with themes identified through explicit meanings in the data and theorised in relation to best practice and current literature in the field. In order to ensure reliability, dual coding and generation of themes was conducted independently by Dr Fiona Mc Sweeney, co-supervisor and findings were cross-checked and validated by means of workshop style meetings. The next section will examine the methods used in Phase Two.

3.11 Method Phase Two

3.11.1 Pilot

In Phase Two, the pilot study was conducted with a sample of final year NFQ Level 8 honours degree IT/computing students (n = 5). This group met eligibility criteria for the pilot study as they were in their final year of undergraduate studies at NFQ Level 8 and the programme of study had a predominantly technical focus, similar to engineering. The research was outlined to the student group during one of their lectures and a detailed information sheet outlining the purposes of the research, level of involvement expected and ethical considerations was circulated to all students. The student presentation on the Bar-On EQ-i2.0 is attached as Appendix O. The Bar-On EQ-i2.0 was administered and a workplace report generated which included ratings on total EI, the five composite scales, the 15 subscales and the wellbeing indicator. A coach’s report was also generated. The report included detailed explanations of ratings, their impact on life and work and strategies for action. On completion of the EQ-i2.0 each student was invited to a one and a half hour one-to-one coaching session where the workplace report was presented, scores explained and confirmed for accuracy and understanding, coaching on highly, well and less developed competencies was conducted and a personal development plan designed. This individualised approach to coaching was beneficial for students as the report was very detailed and required specialised knowledge to interpret the scoring rubric that is employed 13. The pilot group then attended a one hour general group EI coaching

13 In order to register an account with Multi Health Systems, the company that supplies the EQ-i2.0 to
the Irish market, one must complete a rigorous training programme to become a qualified emotional
competency assessor. I have completed this programme and a copy of my certificate of competency
is included as Appendix P.

session aimed at promoting competence in one domain within the EQ-i2.0. The group coaching design adopted the theory and practices as set out by Stein and Book, (2011) previously discussed in Chapter Two. The domains chosen were Interpersonal and Decision making, examining the theory behind interpersonal skills and decision making and the practical application of such skills in the workplace. The group coaching session was designed using materials already utilised in the workplace drawing on coaching theory and general EI coaching interventions already delivered in the workplace. The tailored EI coaching was designed based on the expressed needs of employers and these materials were piloted with an employer in the engineering sector. Feedback received was very positive and small changes with respect to wording were implemented. Due to the small sample involved in the pilot study for Phase Two, no statistical analysis of the data collected was conducted.

3.11.2 Recruitment of participants

In Phase Two contact was made with heads of engineering departments, academic engineering staff and careers officers in both institutes in order to access students for participation in the research. Meetings were held across both institutes and presentations were delivered to final year engineering groups. The final volunteer sample was 62. Information sheets were distributed and ethical implications of the research outlined. Participants were randomly assigned to four groups, two active control (one in each institute) and two experimental (one in each institute).

3.11.3 Bar-On EQ-i2.0 testing of research participants, one-to-one and group EI coaching

The EQ-i2.0 was administered online, and once completed results were compiled and workplace reports generated. A one-to-one coaching session of one and a half hours duration was organised with each student across both institutes. The workplace report was presented to students commencing with the overview of their results. An individualised coaching session was designed for each student based on the results but it was open to students to guide the session in whatever way they felt was of most use to them. A dis-identified copy of an actual one-to-one EI coaching session is attached as Appendix Q. The session was designed in line with coaching principles as posited by Starr, (2011) and within the prescribed format outlined by MHS. The session commenced with an overview of the test results and results were checked with each participant for accuracy and understanding. Skills which were highly, well and less developed were discussed, their meaning and impact on the student in terms of work and life success and the student’s understanding of their relevance and application to the workplace were addressed. Strategies for action were explained and a personal development plan was designed with each student which included short and long-term goals. In line with good coaching principles students were given the opportunity to discuss and ask questions and were actively involved in the process. On completion of the one-to-one coaching sessions, group coaching was delivered to both groups which was designed in line with best practice on the delivery of EI group coaching interventions, as outlined by MHS, (2011) and Starr, (2011).
The active control group received three by one and a half hour group coaching sessions based on general coaching theory and principles. The experimental group received three by one and a half hour group coaching sessions based on coaching theory but specifically tailored to the expressed needs of employers. Each session addressed core competencies within the EQ-i2.0 and involved lecture style slides, team work and reflective pieces. The group EI coaching sessions for the active control group are attached as Appendix R and the group EI coaching sessions for the experimental group are attached as Appendix S.

For both groups, reflection was included as an important element of the EI coaching process. According to Keith and Jenness, (2017, p. 1) reflection is a powerful tool for professional development and can be instrumental in providing a “framework for transferring and applying learning into different practical scenarios”. The authors hold that reflection must be at the core of any professional development programme in the workplace in order for employees to develop and grow. This concurs with the guideline for EI coaching utilising the Bar-On EQ-i2.0 previously discussed in Section 2.3.6 of Chapter Two. Reflection was completed in-class throughout each of the three group EI coaching workshops, with open discussion forums and reflection on specific aspects of task completion being addressed. In addition, strategies for improvement were explored in the group EI coaching sessions. In addition, each participant was given a folder containing reflective sheets to be completed independently and in private. This was in line with theory on the importance of reflection in terms of embedding any continuing professional development programme, as previously discussed in Sections 2.3.4 and 2.3.5 of Chapter Two. All participants were given guidance on setting up an e-portfolio account utilising Livebinders which is an online resource for tracking personal, academic and career achievements (Livebinders.com website). This resource is a private one with an account name and is password protected. Each participant was given instructions on creating a personalised folder on EI which facilitated reflection on the EI coaching process and a tool to chart their progress. These accounts were not accessed by the researcher. The core EI competencies addressed in the EI group coaching sessions are outlined in Table 7: This is followed by a discussion on the methods utilised in Phase Three.

Table 7: Group EI coaching by Group

3.12 Method Phase Three

3.12.1 Mock EI competency based interviews

14 Balloon Tower activity was taken from Fresh Tracks Innovative Team Building Activities and involves teams building a
balloon tower using balloons and masking tape only. Teams must work within a particular timeframe and demonstrate strategy used and costings. The highest and cheapest balloon tower wins (Fresh Tracks.co.uk website).
15 Dragon’s Den activity involves small teams working together to design a product within a fifteen minute period and
presenting the product for five minutes to the larger audience. It is based on the worldwide reality TV series where
entrepreneurs pitch their ideas to a team of business experts in order to secure investment (British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) Two website).

Phase Three involved mock EI competency based interviews between employers and participants. Each research participant met with an employer in their discipline of engineering for one thirty minute mock EI competency based interview. As previously stated, there were ten employers involved in Phase Three, two from each discipline of engineering represented in the study. Four employers met with the participants in Institute 1 which had two engineering disciplines represented and six employers met with participants in Institute 2 where three disciplines of engineering were represented. All of these employers were actively involved in graduate hire within the respective Institute. It was noted that the use of different employers may have confounded the findings, however, due to practical considerations such as time, travel and availability of employers a decision was made to proceed with the mock interviews. It was assumed that each participant had met the technical requirements of a particular role, therefore, the focus of the mock interview was on EI competency only. An information sheet was designed and given to both employers and students prior to the interview date and checked for understanding. The information sheet is attached Appendix T. A prescribed list of questions was used which focused on student motivation to participate in research, discussion on the EQ-i2.0 test results focusing on high, well and less developed competencies, learning from the one-to-one coaching process, the group coaching process, the relevance and applicability of EI competencies to the workplace and the benefits and challenges of participating in the research. See Appendix U for the topic guide for the mock EI competency based interviews.

At the end of each interview, employers were requested to complete a rating sheet which contained four questions with both quantitative and qualitative data sought. All ratings sheets were duly completed by employers with respect to each participant. A Likert rating scale was utilised to rate each participant with an
explanation sought for each rating. The first three questions which employers were asked to rate were (1) the student’s ability to identify key learning from the EI coaching process, (2) the student’s knowledge of the application of EI competencies to the workplace and (3) the student’s understanding of the link between emotional intelligence competencies and employability. Employers were asked to rate each of these questions on a scale from ‘Very Poor, Poor, Neutral, Good, Very Good’ and were asked to provide an explanation for each rating. Question four asked employers to confirm if they would hire the student and asked ‘all things being equal on the technical and qualifications front, would you hire this student based purely on your perception of their emotional intelligence (EI)?’ Employers were given four possible responses, ‘Yes’, ‘Maybe’, ‘Undecided’ and ‘No’ and again were requested to explain their responses. In order to eliminate bias, employers interviewed ‘blind’, i.e., they were not informed whether participants were in the active control or the experimental groups. A copy of the mock EI competency based interview rating sheet is attached as Appendix V. Thematic analysis, at a semantic level was utilised in Phase Three for qualitative analysis with key themes being found in the data and linked back with theory in the literature.

In all three phases of the research, a range of statistical tests were utilised to infer results from the data. This chapter will conclude with a detailed breakdown of the methods utilised for inferential statistics.

3.13 Method – Inferential statistics

This section outlines the methods used for the inferential statistics conducted in the research. Firstly, it discusses exploratory versus confirmatory analysis, statistical power, null hypothesis significance testing, Type I and Type II errors, effect size and bootstrapping. It then outlines the statistical tests conducted within each phase. The IBM statistical package SPSS Version 24 was utilised for data analysis purposes on a Windows 10 operating system.

3.13.1 Exploratory versus confirmatory analysis

Studies often include both exploratory and confirmatory components at different stages of the research (Koestler Parapsychology Unit Study Registry (KPUSR), 2015). One argument posited is that initial testing of a theoretical hypothesis may be exploratory in nature while confirmatory analysis may often be used to confirm the results of a previous empirical study. Exploratory analyses may be a starting point for some research where specific statistical tests are utilised as the data is analysed or it may involve pre-specified statistical tests with sample size set to test the hypothesis (KPUSR, 2015). Confirmatory analysis often provides evidence that an experimental hypothesis is either true or false, sample size is based on power analysis and many analysis decisions are made prior to data collection (p. 1). Therefore, each analysis within a study may be categorised as either exploratory or confirmatory rather than categorising the entire study from the outset. In this study, the process was exploratory rather than confirmatory and specific statistical tests were utilised and will be discussed in the subsequent sections.

3.13.2 Statistical Power

Statistical power is the “ability of a test to find an effect” and is the “probability that a given test will find an effect assuming that one exists in the population” (Field, 2013, p: 69). The β (beta) level of a test, i.e., Type II error rate is the probability than a given test will not find an effect assuming one exists in the population (Field, 2013, p 69). The power of a test is expressed as 1 – β. Cohen (1988, 1992) cited by Field (2013) recommended a “.2 probability of failing to detect a genuine effect, therefore, the corresponding level of power would be 1 – .2 or .8”. Typically, one should aim to at least “achieve a power of .8 which, in other words, is an 80% chance to detecting an effect if one genuinely exists” (Field, 2013, p. 69). The power of a statistical test depends on (i) effect size (discussed below), (ii) the α (alpha) level and (iii) the sample size. G*Power is a tool to compute statistical power analyses for many different tests (Faul, Erdfelder, Buchner and Lang, 2009). In Phase One, the employer survey, G*Power analysis for an Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was conducted with α = 0.05, power = 0.80 and a medium (0.25) eta-squared effect size. A copy of the G*Power analysis for Phase One is attached as Appendix W. The computed required sample size suggested was 200, 40 per group. It should be noted that G*Power analysis was conducted after the data was collected due to limited knowledge on statistical power in earlier stages of the research. One limitation of the survey data was that not all employer groups had a sample size of 40 which may, according to Louis, (2009), play a role in limiting the significance of some of the statistical comparisons conducted. Since a wide range of measures were employed to gather survey responses and due to time constraints a decision was made to accept the sample size that had resulted after a period of twelve weeks. In Phase Two, an a priori G*power analysis was conducted to determine sample size pre-intervention. A copy of the G*Power output for Phase Two is included as Appendix X. It found that in order for the sample to be sufficient to detect a large16 difference in EQ-i2.0 means, i.e., 0.8 effect size, on a 2 tailed t-test, at a significance, i.e., alpha level of 0.05, and 80% power, a sample of 52 was required. Allowing for attrition of 10% (approx. 5) this gave a suggested sample size of 57.

16 The numbers required for anything other than a large effect size were beyond the scope of the resources available, therefore, a large effect size was selected.

3.13.3 Null hypothesis significance testing (NHST)

Null hypothesis significance testing (NHST) is a method for assessing scientific theories (Field, 2013, p. 74). The null hypothesis argues that an effect does not exist while the alternative hypothesis holds that an effect does exist. A test statistic is computed under the assumption that the null hypothesis is true and the “probability of getting a value as big as the one we have if the null hypothesis were true” is calculated (p. 74). Typically, if this probability is less than .05 the null hypothesis is rejected and one can report a “statistically significant” finding (p. 74). If the probability is greater than .05 a “non-significant finding” is reported (p. 74). Other cut-off values are possible, but .05 is commonly used and was used for data analysis in this research. By using test statistics to inform about the true state of the world, attempts are being made to determine whether there is an effect in the population. According to Field, (2013) there are two possibilities; there is, in reality, an effect in the population or there is, in reality, no effect in the population. While there is no way of knowing which of the two is true, the test statistic and associated probability can be used to determine which of the two is more likely. There are two commonly referred to errors, Type I error and Type II error which will be discussed next.

3.13.4 Type I and Type II errors

A Type I error occurs when the belief is that there is an actual effect in the population when, in fact, there is not (Field, 2013). If a test utilises a significance level of .05 the chance of making a Type I error is 5%, therefore, the probability of not making a Type I error for each test is .95, i.e. 95%. A Type II error occurs when there is a belief that there is no effect in the population when in reality there is. The rate of the Type II error is denoted by the Greek letter β (beta) and related to the power of a test (which equals 1−β) = .8 or 80% (Field, 2013). In research, inflated error rates must also be addressed one of which is the familywise error rate which is the “error
rate across statistical tests conducted on the same data” (p. 68). To address a build up of errors the level of significance can be adjusted for individual tests to ensure that the “cumulative Type I error remains below .05” (p. 69). One such adjustment method is known as the Bonferroni correction. This is a conservative correction which controls the Type I error very well, however, reduces statistical power (p. 459). As this study was exploratory in nature, controlling for Type I error was not considered important and a decision was made to ignore the familywise error rate though it was noted that findings may produce a false positive. The conventional significance level of .05 was used.

3.13. 5 Effect Size

When conducting tests researchers are attempting to determine whether there is an effect in the population (Field, 2013). Effect size refers to the “magnitude of the result as it occurs, or would be found, in the population” (Ellis, 2010a, p. 4-5). Effect size is “any of several measures of association or of the strength of a relation” and is considered a “measure of practical significance” (p. 4-5). According to Lakens, (2013), it is important to report effect sizes as they facilitate communication of the practical significance of a result, i.e., the practical consequences of the results in terms of daily life instead of simply reporting statistical significance. Effect sizes can be raw/unstandardized, for example, Mean2 – Mean1, or standardised. Standardised effect sizes fall into two families, according to Ellis, 2010b:

-The d family measure the difference between groups, for example, Cohen’s
d.
-The r family is a measure of association or the strength of relationship, for example, the correlation coefficient. (Ellis 2010b).

Both the r and the d family measures were utilised in the research. Eta-squared (η2), partial eta-squared ( ), Glass’s Delta (Δ), Cramer’s V (C) and Cohen’s d were calculated in different phases of the research, each of which are discussed later in this chapter. In order to contextualise and interpret effect sizes, Coe, (2002) outlined a table of effect sizes and their meanings with respect to Cohen’s d. For example, an effect size of 0.2 means that 58% of the control group would be below the average person in the experimental group. An effect size of 0.6 means that 73% of the control group being below the average person in the experimental group and an effect size of 1.0 results in 84% of the control group being below the average person in the experimental group.

3.13.6 Bootstrapping

Bootstrapping can address the problem of lack of normality by “estimating the properties of the sampling distribution from the sample data” and involves the sample data being “treated as a population from which smaller samples, known as bootstrap samples, are taken” (Field, 2013, p. 199). For each bootstrap sample the target statistic is calculated and this process is repeated many times. The probability of the actual statistic from the original sample is then assessed in the context of the bootstrap sampling distribution and an appropriate p-value calculated. One point of note is that as bootstrapping is “based on taking random samples from the data collected”, therefore, the results will be slightly different each time (p. 199). In phases one and two of this research, bootstrapping on the GLM ANOVA results, repeated-measures ANOVA results and post-hoc comparison tests was conducted independently by Dr Colm McGuinness, CStat, co-supervisor and Lecturer in Maths and Statistics in TU Dublin – Blanchardstown campus. In addition, in Phase Three, the chi squared tests were checked by Dr McGuinness against results from Fisher’s exact test and found to be equivalent from a statistical point of view. Table 8 below outlines a breakdown of the statistical tests used in each phase of the study.

Table 8 Breakdown of statistical tests used in phases one, two and three

3.13.7 Phase One tests

3.13.7.1 GLM ANOVA

In Phase One, a series of parametric and non-parametric tests were conducted on the survey data. Parametric tests depend on “assumptions about the shape and form of the distribution”, i.e., some tests assume a normal distribution in the population and use the sample means and standard deviations to represent the population distribution (Hoskins, n.d., p. 2). On the other hand, non-parametric statistical procedures do not rely on or have few assumptions about the “shape or parameters of the population distribution” from which the sample was taken (p. 2). For example, an ANOVA is a parametric test and is used to “test the fit of a regression model” and SPSS utilises the general linear model to deal with ANOVA and regression (Field, 2013, p. 430).
Analysis of variance (ANOVA) can determine whether the means of two or more groups are likely to be different, but is typically only applied to three or more groups. ANOVA uses F-tests to statistically test the equality of means (Frost, 2016a). In Phase One, a General Linear Model (GLM) analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted to test for (i) differences in means among the five sectors in terms of EI competency importance and (ii) differences in means among the five sectors in terms of current levels of EI competence being displayed by graduates when entering the workplace, as reported by employers. There are four assumptions of linear models, as stated by Grace-Martin (n.d.):

1. The residuals are independent.
2. The residuals are normally distributed.
3. The residuals have a mean of 0.
4. The residuals have constant variance.

There are arguments that various parametric methods are “faulted” as (i) the sample may be too small, (ii) the data may not be normally distributed or (iii) the data are from Likert scales (Norman, 2010 p. 625). The data from Phase One was from a 5 point Likert scale, so the data were certainly not normally distributed. However, a
counter argument is that parametric statistics are robust to the aforementioned violations of assumptions. Norman, (2010, p. 628) stated that for ANOVAs it is the “assumption of normality of the distribution of means, not of the data” which is relevant and held that ANOVA was robust for highly skewed non-normal distributions. Norman, (2010) further argued that with respect to the assumptions of parametric statistics that there are no restrictions on sample size, therefore, ANOVA is robust irrespective of sample size. In this study, where departures from normality were deemed to be significant this was dealt with via a separate additional test, Levene’s test of Homogeneity of Variance which is outlined in Section 3.13.6.2 below. Results were independently checked via a bootstrap procedure, previously discussed in Section 3.13.5 and found to agree with the GLM results, which supports the view of Norman, (2010).

3.13.7.2 Levene’s Test for Homogeneity of Variance

Levene’s test for homogeneity of variance was used which tests the null hypothesis that the “variances in different groups are equal” (Field, 2013, p. 193). It conducts a “one-way ANOVA on the deviation scores” which is the “absolute difference between each score and the mean of the group from which it came” (p. 193). Levene’s test is generally taken to be non-significant at the p > .05 level. This suggests that the variances are more or less equal and the assumption of homogeneity of variance is maintained (Field, 2013). In Phase One, where homogeneity of variance was violated, i.e. p < .05, a Welch test was used to confirm results.

3.13.7.3 Welch’s Test

Welch’s F adjusts F-ratios and the residual degrees of freedom to address issues arising from violations of the homogeneity of variance assumption (Field, 2013). It compares two or more means to determine if they are equal and is generally taken to be significant at the usual p < .05.

3.13 .7.4 Residuals

When utilising the GLM model, residuals were plotted to check the pre-requisite of this model that residuals are normal. Residuals are “the differences between the values of the outcome predicted by the model and the values of the outcome observed in the sample” (Field, 2013, p. 305). Standardised residuals are the residuals converted to z-scores, i.e., converted into standard deviation units and are distributed around a mean of 0 with a standard deviation of 1. There should be no patterns which indicates that the residuals are a random sample. Quantile-Quantile or QQ Plots were used which is a graphic procedure that “plots the observed values on the X-axis and the expected values (assuming a normal distribution) on the Y-axis” (University of Washington Education Courses website, 2017). If the distribution of the sample corresponds to a normal distribution, the points should fall on a straight line. In addition, SPSS produces a “detrended” Q-Q plot where the “Y-axis is the deviation (difference) between what was observed and what was expected” (University of Washington Education Courses website, 2017, n.p.). The assessment of normality from a QQ plot is somewhat arbitrary and detrended Q-Q plots were included in the analysis as such plots can make it easier to decipher any pattern (University of Washington Education Courses website, 2017).

3.13.7.5 Chi-Squared Test of Independence

This is a non-parametric test to determine an association between categorical variables with cross-tabulation being used as a means of classifying data (Field, 2013). In Phase One, this test was performed to determine whether there was a significant association between sectors and employer ratings of competencies by testing if the distribution of responses differed across sectors.

3.13.7.6 Kruskal-Wallis H-Test

It is clear that data from a five point Likert scale is not normally distributed, but Norman (2010) argued that results of ANOVA should nonetheless be valid. For instances when the GLM ANOVA residuals were substantially not normal, as determined from a detrended QQ plot, the Kruskal-Wallis H-test was used. This test is a rank-based non-parametric test that can be used to determine if there are statistically significant differences between two or more groups of an independent variable on a continuous or ordinal dependent variable and is considered the non parametric alternative to the one-way ANOVA (Laerd Statistics website). It ranks all of the data from all groups and then conducts an ANOVA on the ranks by group to compare mean ranks across groups. When using the Kruskal-Wallis test, four assumptions must be met, according to Glen, (2016):

(i) The dependent variable should be measured at the ordinal or continuous level.
(ii) The independent variable must consist of two or more categorical groups.
(iii) There is no relationship between the groups.
(iv) In order to understand how to interpret the results from a Kruskal-Wallis H test, you have to determine whether the distributions in each group (i.e., the distribution of scores for each group of the independent variable) have the same shape (which also means the same variability).

The Kruskal-Wallis H test is generally taken to be significant at the p < .05 level. In Phase One, the employer survey data fulfilled the conditions of Kruskal-Wallis as might be expected of Likert data. This test compared the differences in the mean rank for each competence in terms of employer ratings of EI competency importance and separately the differences in the mean rank for each competence in terms of employer ratings of current levels of EI competence being reported as displayed by graduates entering the workplace.

3.13.7.7 Eta-squared (η2)

η2 effect size is an effect size measure that is “the ratio of the model sum of squares to the total sum of squares” and measures the “overall effect of an ANOVA” (Field, 2013, p. 875). η2 measures the proportion of the variation in the dependent variable that can be associated with values of the independent variable (Lakens 2013). An η2 effect size of .01 is considered small, .06 medium and .14 large (Watson, Lenz, Schmit and Schmit, 2017). Specifically, in Phase One η2 measured the proportion of variation in each competency that was associated with membership of the five different sectors. So, for example, if η2 was equal to .663 that meant that 66.3% of the variation in a particular competency was explained by sector membership.

3.13.7.8 Post Hoc Comparison Tests for GLM ANOVA

In Phase One, post hoc procedures were conducted on the data which consisted of “pairwise comparisons” which are utilised to compare different combinations of the treatment groups (Field, 2013 p. 458). The least significant difference (LSD) pairwise comparison – which was used in data analysis for the employer survey – does not try to control the Type I error and is similar to performing multiple t-tests on the data (p. 459). As the study was exploratory in nature the GLM LSD pairwise comparison was deemed to be appropriate in Phase One as this phase did not require absolute control over the Type I error. If such control over the Type I error was required, a Bonferroni adjusted alpha would be the better test to use as discussed earlier. The LSD method computes the least significant difference between two means as if these means were the only means to be compared and reports as significant any difference larger than the LSD (Williams and Abdi, 2010). The LSD method has more power than other post hoc tests because the alpha (α) level for each comparison is not corrected for multiple comparisons, however, it “severely inflates” the Type I error (Williams and Abdi, 2010, p. 3).

3.13.7.9 Cohen’s d/ds

Cohen’s d is described as a standardised measure of the “magnitude of an observed effect” and expresses the difference between two means in standard deviation units (Field, 2013, p. 874). It ranges from 0 to infinity. According to Lakens, (2013), Cohen 1988 used subscripts to distinguish between different versions of Cohen’s d, as without the subscript, Cohen’s d denotes the entire family of effect sizes. Cohen refers to the standardised mean difference between two groups of independent observations for the sample as ds.(Field, 2013). In Phase One, effect sizes were calculated by dividing the difference in means by the square root of the estimated within standard deviation error. The standard interpretation of Cohen’s d is outlined

in Table 9 below.

Table 9: Cohen’s d effect size – interpretation

This means that if two groups’ means do not differ by 0.2 standard deviations or more, the difference is trivial, even if it is statistically significant (Field, 2013). The formula for Cohen’s ds is as follows:

(Lakens, 2013)

3.13.8 Phase Two tests

3.13.8.1 Repeated-Measures ANOVA

In Phase Two, a repeated-measures ANOVA was run which, according to Smolkowski, (2018) may be conducted for a study with only two assessments per individual, such as pre-test and post-test design. According to Field, (2013, p. 544), a repeated-measures ANOVA is conducted when the same “entities participate in all conditions of an experiment or provide data at multiple time points”. It is the equivalent of the one-way ANOVA but for related not independent groups, and is referred to as a within-subjects ANOVA. The within-participant variance is comprised of two things: (i) the effect of the manipulation and (ii) individual differences in performance. As with the independent ANOVA, an F-ratio is utilised which compares the size of the variation due to the experimental manipulation against the size of the variation due to random factors (Field, 2013). The only difference is in the way the variations are calculated. If the variance due to the manipulations is big relative to the variation due to random factors, the value of F will be large, which concludes that observed results are unlikely to have occurred if there was no effect in the population. In a repeated-measures ANOVA the types of variances are the same as in independent ANOVA; there is a total sum of squares (SST), a model sum of squares (SSM) and a residual sum of squares (SSR). In Phase Two, the Pillai trace (V) was the test statistic used, as recommended by Field, (2013) and is described as “the sum of the proportion of explained variance on the discriminant function variates of the data” and is “similar to the ratio of SSM/SST”. It is considered significant at the p < .05. A significant result means that group means differ significantly in some way with respect to some or all of the dependent variables.

According to Smolkowski, (2018), there has been debate about the reliability of gain scores and equivalently repeated-measures for the pre/post design. Following the review by Smolkowski, (2018,) where he states that the analysis of gain scores provides for appropriate, unbiased tests for most research designs and the fact that gain scores address the desired research question, it was decided that repeated-measures would be the appropriate technique to use for Phase Two, along with difference scores for post-hoc testing. In conducting the repeated-measures ANOVA, consideration was given to regression to the mean effect. This can be of concern in pre-post intervention studies as it can make any change in repeated measures seem like a meaningful change due to a treatment, according to Schnell, (n.d.). One solution to this is to have a designated control group which was the case in this study and which has been discussed under Section 3.8. In addition, in this study participants were randomly assigned to groups which is another way of addressing regression to the mean effect. The repeated-measures ANOVA for Phase Two was conducted using a full factorial model on the Group*Institute and timing variables. As a check on any assumption violations, bootstrapping of the repeated-measures ANOVA was conducted independently and p-value significance results agreed with repeated-measures ANOVA p-value results.

For the univariate tests, it is assumed that the covariance matrix of the dependent variables is „circular/spherical“ in form; that is, the covariance between any two elements is equal to the average of their variances minus a constant. This assumption is only required for 3 or more groups so was not relevant for Phase Two. The GLM repeated-measures procedure also considers the dependent variables as responses to the levels of within-subjects factors. The measurements on a subject should be a sample from a multivariate normal distribution, and the variance-covariance matrices are the same across the cells formed by the between-subjects effects (IBM Corporation, 2013). In order to check this assumption, Box’s test of Equality of Covariance Matrices was checked which will be outlined next.

3.13.8.2 Box’s Test of Equality of Covariance Matrices

According to IBM Knowledge Center website, Box’s M tests the null hypothesis that the observed covariance matrices of the dependent variables are equal across groups. In Phase Two, where Box’s Test was violated an additional check of the diagonals of the covariance matrices was conducted by examining Levene’s test which is in line with the IBM Knowledge Center website guidelines on repeated-measures ANOVA assumptions. Levene’s test was discussed in Section 3.13.6.2.

3.13.8.3 Partial eta-squared ( )

n2p is a version of η2 and, according to Field, (2013) (p. 881) is “the proportion of variance that a variable explains when excluding other variables in the analysis”. An effect size of .01 is considered small, .06 medium and .14 large, according to Cohen and cited by Richardson, (2011). These are effectively the same threshold values as
specified for η2 above, i.e. .01, .06 and .14. Specifically, in Phase Two measured the proportion of variation in the intervention scores that was associated with timing or group membership or institute membership or group*institute membership, where the value for a given model term excludes variability in the denominator accounted for by all other terms. The strength of the effect can be interpreted in the same way as eta-squared.

3.13.8.4 Independent samples t-tests

When comparing means in statistics, hypothesis tests, such as t-tests may be utilised (Frost 2016b). There are three distinct types of t-test that are possible, according to Frost, (2016b):

(i) a one-sample t-test.
(ii) an independent samples t-test which is a test using the t-statistic that establishes whether two means collected from independent samples differ significantly.
(iii) a dependent samples, or paired, t-test.

In Phase Two, post-hoc comparison tests were conducted by means of independent samples t-tests on statistically significant repeated-measures ANOVA results.

3.13.8.5 Glass’s Delta Δ

In Phase Two, Glass’s Δ was used to calculate effect size:

where s1 refers to the standard deviation of the control group. According to Huber, (2013) Glass’s Δ was originally developed in the context of experiments and uses the “control group” standard deviation in the denominator of a “d family” effect size calculation. It has subsequently been generalised to non-experimental studies. Its interpretation is as for Cohen’s d. In Phase Two, in analysing pre/post EQ-i2.0 scores, Δ was calculated on post-hoc independent samples t-tests by dividing the mean difference scores by the standard deviation of the control group difference.

3.13.9 Phase Three tests

3.13.9 .1 Chi-Squared Test of Independence

In Phase Three, the Chi-Squared Test of Independence was run to check if there was a significant association between groups and employer ratings of mock social-emotional competency based interviews by testing if the distribution of responses differed across groups.

3.13.9.2 Cramér’s V (C)

Cramér’s V (C) was also calculated in Phase Three which is described by Field, (2013) as a way of calculating correlation in tables which have more than 2×2 rows and columns. It is a measure of association and an effect size. Cramér’s V is a number between 0 and 1 that indicates how strongly two categorical variables are associated. Cramér’s V varies from 0 (corresponding to no association between the variables) to 1 (complete association) and can reach 1 only when the two variables are equal to each other (SPSS Tutorials.com, Cramer’s V). It is based on Pearson’s chi-squared statistic and was published by Harald Cramér in 1946. In Phase Three, Cramér’s V was used as a measure to calculate the strength of the association between statistically significant chi-squared results. An effect size of 0.1 is considered small, 0.3 moderate and 0.5 large.

3.13.9.3 Independent samples t-tests

In Phase Three, post-hoc comparison tests were conducted by means of independent samples t-tests to establish whether two means collected from independent samples, i.e., the active control and the experimental groups in the mock EI competency based interviews differed significantly.

3.13.9.4 Glass’s Delta Δ

In Phase Three, Glass’s Δ was used to calculate effect size on independent samples t-test results.

3.14 Conclusion

This chapter has outlined the methods utilised to answer the four research questions linked with this study. It has justified the use of the MI theoretical framework and the rationale for selecting pragmatism as the research paradigm for conducting this study. It has presented a detailed description of the diverse methods and tests utilised during each phase of the research. It has outlined, in detail, the inferential statistics utilised as part of the quantitative aspects of this research. The next chapter will present the results of Phase One.

Chapter Four: Results Phase One

4.1 Overview

This chapter presents the results from Phase One of the research, the employer survey and follow up semi-structured interviews. The first and second research questions were addressed in full in this phase of the research and the third in part. By question three being addressed in part, employers were asked for their input on the design and delivery of the tailored EI coaching intervention. These questions were:

In order to address questions one and two, a survey and follow up semi structured interviews were conducted with employers across five sectors of industry; engineering, IT/computing, professional services, science and social science. With respect to question three, data gathered in the semi-structured interviews directly impacted the design and delivery of the tailored one-to-one and group EI coaching in Phase Two. This section will now present the main results.

4.2 Main results: employer survey

A total of 500 surveys were issued with a total of 238 responses, 37.0% of respondents were male and 62.18% were female, with 0.82% non-response to this question. In four of the sectors, engineering, professional services, IT/computing and social science the majority of respondents were in the 35-44 years of age bracket, with the exception of science where the majority were aged between 25-34 years. In engineering, 47% of respondents were female and 53% male, IT/computing 59% female and 41% male, professional services 67% female and 33% male, Science 50% female and 50% male and social science 68% female and 32% male. The majority of responses from three of the sectors: engineering (47%), IT/computing (59%) and professional services (69%) were based in large organisations with the majority of responses in science (45%) and social science (43%) being from small companies. In relation to sector, there were four skipped responses and one indicated they belonged to the sports development sector, therefore, these five were excluded from the final sample. The final sample to be analysed was 233. Table 10 presents a breakdown of responses by sector.

Table 10: Breakdown of responses by sector

4.3 Employer responses – EI competency importance

Employers were asked to rate ten EI competencies17 in terms of importance on a scale of 5 to 1, 5 = Very Important, 4 = Important, 3 = Neutral, 2 = Somewhat Important and 1 = Not Important at all. Findings indicated that for eight of the ten competencies, over 45.9% (n=106) of employers rated all ten competencies as ‘Very Important’, with 74.6% (n = 173) of employers rating ‘Motivation’ and 71.0% (n = 164) rating ‘Teamwork’ as ‘Very Important’. Findings also showed that over 86.2% (n = 199) of employers rated all of the ten competencies as either ‘Very Important’ or

17 See Section 3.10.3 for a breakdown of the ten EI competencies surveyed.

‘Important’. Only 0.4% of employers (n = 3) rated three of the ten competencies, Emotional Self-Awareness (n = 1), Emotional Self-Control (n = 1) and Initiative (n = 1) as ‘not important at all’. Table 11 provides a breakdown of employer responses in terms of EI competency importance, with highest ratings highlighted in green.

Table 11: Employer ratings of EI competencies in terms of importance18

4.4 Employer responses – current levels of EI competence

Employers were asked to rate each of the ten competencies in terms of the current levels being demonstrated by graduates when entering the workplace on a scale of 5 to 1, 5 = Excellent, 4 = Very Good, 3 = Good, 2 = Fair and 1 = Poor. Less than 14.1% (n = 32) of employers rated the current level of competence among graduates

18 The green shading in Tables 11 to 22 highlights where the majority of responses lie.

as ‘excellent’ across all ten competencies, with 14.1% (n = 32) rating ‘Teamwork’ and 13.3% (n = 30) rating ‘Motivation’ as ‘excellent’. Highest ratings of ‘good’ were found for seven of the competencies, with the exception of ‘Motivation’, ‘Adaptability’ and ‘Teamwork’ where highest ratings were found under ‘very good’. Conflict management was rated by 35.7% (n = 81) as ‘fair’ among graduates. Between 0.9% (n = 2) and 8.8% (n = 20) of employers rated current levels of competence across all ten competencies as ‘poor’ among current graduates. Table 12 presents a detailed breakdown of these findings

Table 12: Employer ratings of current levels of competence being displayed by graduates, when entering the workplace

4.5 Responses by sector

This section now presents findings from each of the five sectors.

4.5.1 Engineering

There were 30 responses in the engineering sector. Highest ratings of ‘very important’ were found for Adaptability (48%), Initiative (46%), Motivation (70%), Positive Outlook (60%) and Teamwork (73%). The majority of the competencies were rated as ‘good’, however, highest ratings of ‘fair’ were found for Conflict management (46%), Empathy (41%) and Initiative (31%) and highest ratings of ‘Very Good’ for Motivation (55%) and Teamwork (55%). Table 13 presents employers’ ratings of competencies in terms of importance and Table 14 presents employer ratings in terms of current levels being displayed by graduates, when entering the workplace.

Table 13: Engineering – ratings in terms of competency importance, as reported by employers

Table 14: Engineering – ratings in terms of current level of competence being displayed by graduates when entering the workplace, as reported by employers

4.5.2 Information Technology/Computing

There were 39 survey responses in the information technology/computing sector. Highest ratings of ‘Very Important’ were found for Adaptability (53%), Communication (53%), Emotional Self-Control (61%), Initiative (64%), Motivation (69%), Positive Outlook (51%) and Teamwork (59%). The majority of the competencies were rated as ‘Good’, however, highest ratings of ‘Very Good’ were found for Adaptability (44%) and Positive Outlook (42%). Table 15 presents employers’ ratings of competencies in terms of importance and Table 16 presents employer ratings in terms of current levels being displayed by graduates, when entering the workplace.

Table 15: IT/computing – ratings in terms of competency importance, as reported by employers

Table 16: IT/computing – ratings in terms of current level of competence being displayed by graduates when entering the workplace, as reported by employers

4.5.3 Professional Services (Accounting/Finance/Business/HR/Law/Retail)

There were 45 survey responses in the professional services sector. Highest ratings of ‘Very Important’ were found for all competencies, with the exception of Empathy which was rated as ‘Important’ by the majority (59%) of employers. Highest ratings of ‘Very Good’ were found for six of the competencies, with highest ratings of ‘Very Good’ being given for Adaptability (55%), Initiative (40%), Positive Outlook (51%) and Teamwork (48%). Table 17 presents employers’ ratings of competencies in terms of importance and Table 18 presents employer ratings in terms of current levels being displayed by graduates, when entering the workplace.

Table 17: Professional Services – ratings in terms of competency importance, as reported by employers

Table 18: Professional Services – ratings in terms of current level of competence being displayed by graduates when entering the workplace, as reported by employers

4.5.4 Science (including Pharmaceutical/Life)

There were 22 survey responses in the science sector. Highest ratings of ‘Very Important’ were found for all competencies, with the exception of Empathy which was rated as ‘Important’ by the majority (50%) of employers. Highest ratings of ‘Very Good’ (38%) and ‘Good’ (38%) were found for Adaptability. Similarly, highest ratings of ‘Very Good’ (42%) and ‘Good’ (42%) were found for Teamwork. Highest ratings of ‘Fair’ were found for Emotional Self-Awareness (42%) and Emotional Self Control (42%), with highest ratings of ‘Good’ found for the remainder of the competencies. Table 19 presents employers’ ratings of competencies in terms of importance and Table 20 presents employer ratings in terms of current levels being displayed by graduates, when entering the workplace.

Table 19: Science – ratings in terms of competency importance, as reported by employers

Table 20: Science -ratings in terms of current level of competence being displayed by graduates when entering the workplace, as reported by employers

4.5.5 Social Science

There were 97 survey responses in the social science sector. Highest ratings of ‘Very Important’ were found for all ten EI competencies. The majority of the competencies were rated as ‘Good’, however, highest ratings of ‘Very Good’ were found for Communication (37%), Empathy (34%), Motivation (38%) and Teamwork (42%). Table 21 presents employers’ ratings of competencies in terms of importance and Table 22 presents employer ratings in terms of current levels being displayed by graduates, when entering the workplace.

Table 21: Social Science – ratings in terms of competency importance, as reported by employers

Table 22: Social Science – ratings in terms of current level of competence being displayed by graduates when entering the workplace, as reported by employers

A one way between sectors General Linear Model (GLM) univariate analysis was conducted to compare the mean scores for all ten competencies, in terms of (i) their importance and (ii) the current levels displayed by graduates when entering the workplace, as reported by employers. Results of this test are presented next.

4.6 GLM univariate analysis – EI competency importance as reported by employers

Results of the GLM univariate analysis suggested a statistically significant difference in mean scores between sectors for seven of the ten competencies, with the exception of Motivation, Positive Outlook and Teamwork. Levene’s test for equality of variances was met for three of the competencies, Conflict Management (p = .235), Emotional Self-Awareness (p = .991) and Emotional Self-Control (p = .999). Welch’s test was conducted for the seven competencies which violated Levene’s test. Welch’s test confirmed the initial GLM statistically significant effect for Adaptability, Communication and Empathy, indicating again that not all sectors had the same mean scores. Detrended QQ plots for GLM residuals19 highlight possible non-normality of data, with some of the data at a distance of more than two standard deviations from the trend line. However most points were within one standard deviation of the mean.

The detrended QQ plots with respect to EI competency importance are attached as Appendix Y. Since there was the possibility of non-normal data, and/or data that violated the homogeneity of variances GLM assumption, a chi-squared test of independence was conducted for each of the ten competencies and also suggested statistically significant differences in ratings between the five sectors, for seven of the competencies, with the exception of Initiative, Motivation and Teamwork. Results for Initiative conflicted with GLM results and suggested no statistically significant differences in mean competency across the five sectors. Results for Motivation and Teamwork concurred with the original GLM test which suggested there may be no statistically significant difference in mean competency across the five sectors.

To confirm that the non-normality of the data was not unduly influencing results, a further non-parametric independent samples Kruskal-Wallis test was conducted to confirm these findings. Results for nine of the competencies concurred with the GLM results, with the exception of Adaptability (p = .071) which conflicted with GLM and Welch test results, and suggested that there was no statistically significant difference in the mean rank scores across the five sectors for Adaptability. It may be the case for this competency that the non-normality of residuals is influencing the GLM and Welch results. GLM post hoc LSD comparison tests were conducted which suggested statistically significant differences between sectors for seven of the ten competencies. Bootstrapping was also conducted independently and

19 Pearson (1931) cited by Norman 2010 found that ANOVA was robust for Likert data and highly skewed non-normal distributions.

significance agreed with results presented here. Table 23 presents a breakdown of these results with statistically significant results highlighted. The LSD t-test for Adaptability comparing engineering to professional services had p =.001 and a large effect size, therefore, we can be fairly certain that the means are indeed likely to be different, and that the GLM and Welch tests are giving the correct inferential information for the current circumstances. Table 24 presents a summary of statistically significant GLM post hoc comparisons using LSD in terms of competency importance as reported by employers.

Table 23: GLM Results – Competency importance as reported by employers20

20 The red shading on this table highlights statistically significant p values while the green shading shows the effect size with light to dark shading being used to indicate small, medium and large effect sizes. 21 n/a – Welch’s test was not applicable as Levene’s test for homogeneity of variances was met.

Table 24: Summary of statistically significant GLM post hoc comparisons using LSD in terms of competency importance as reported by employers

4.7 GLM univariate analysis: current levels of EI competency displayed by graduates when entering the workplace, as reported by employers

Results of the GLM univariate analysis suggested no statistically significant differences in mean ratings between sectors for seven of the ten competencies, with the exception of Emotional Self-Awareness, Emotional Self-Control and Empathy. Levene’s test for equality of variances was met for seven of the competencies (p > .05), with the exception of Communication, Empathy and Initiative. Welch’s test confirmed the initial GLM results for Communication and Initiative, however, conflicted with GLM results for Empathy, indicating that not all sectors had the same mean scores. Detrended QQ Plots for GLM residuals highlight the non-normality of data, with some of the data at a distance of more than two standard deviations from the x-axis. However, most points were within one standard deviation of the mean. The detrended QQ Plots with respect to current levels of EI competence are attached as Appendix Z. A chi-squared test of independence was conducted for each competency which concurred with the initial GLM results for each of the ten competencies. GLM post hoc LSD comparison tests were conducted for the GLM results which suggested statistically significant differences between the professional services sector and the other four sectors for the competencies Emotional Self Awareness and Emotional Self-Control. These post hoc test results further suggested statistically significant differences for the competency Empathy between the social science and the engineering, IT/computing and science sectors. Table 25 presents these results with statistically significant results highlighted. To confirm that the non normality of the data was not unduly influencing results, a further non-parametric independent samples Kruskal-Wallis test was conducted to confirm these findings. Results for nine of the competencies concurred with the GLM results, with the exception of Positive Outlook (p = .033) which conflicted with GLM results, and suggested that there was a statistically significant difference in the mean rank scores across the five sectors for Positive Outlook. It may be the case for this competency that the non-normality of residuals is influencing the GLM results. Bootstrapping was conducted independently and significance agreed with results presented here. Table 26 presents a summary of statistically significant GLM post hoc comparison using LSD in terms of current levels displayed by graduates as reported by employers

Table 25: GLM Results – current levels of competence displayed by graduates as reported by employers

Table 26: Summary of statistically significant GLM post hoc comparison using LSD in terms of current levels displayed by graduates as reported by employers

Figures 2-11 below present the comparison of mean ratings in terms of the ratings by employers of the importance of EI competencies and their views of the current levels of EI competence being displayed by graduates, when entering the workplace. It is acknowledged that different Likert scales were utilised for these questions, therefore, these figures purely act as a visual representation of the ratings

Figure 2: Comparison of mean ratings in terms of importance and current levels being displayed, as reported by employers – Adaptability

Figure 3: Comparison of mean ratings in terms of importance and current levels being displayed, as reported by employers – Communication

Figure 4: Comparison of mean ratings in terms of importance and current levels being displayed, as reported by employers – Conflict Management

Figure 5: Comparison of mean ratings in terms of importance and current levels being displayed, as reported by employers – Emotional Self-Awareness

Figure 6: Comparison of mean ratings in terms of importance and current levels being displayed, as reported by employers – Emotional Self-Control

Figure 7: Comparison of mean ratings in terms of importance and current levels being displayed, as reported by employers – Empathy

Figure 8: Comparison of mean ratings in terms of importance and current levels being displayed, as reported by employers – Initiative

Figure 9: Comparison of mean ratings in terms of importance and current levels being displayed, as reported by employers – Motivation — Figure 9: Comparison of mean ratings in terms of importance and current levels being
displayed, as reported by employers – Motivation

Figure 10: Comparison of mean ratings in terms of importance and current levels being displayed, as reported by employers – Positive Outlook

Figure 11: Comparison of mean ratings in terms of importance and current levels being displayed, as reported by employers – Teamwork

This Section has outlined the results from the GLM univariate analysis with respect to the current levels of competence being displayed by graduates, when entering the workplace, as reported by employers. These results suggested no statistically significant differences in mean ratings between sectors for seven of the ten competencies, with the exception of Emotional Self-Awareness, Emotional Self Control and Empathy. Follow up post hoc comparison tests suggested statistically significant differences between the professional services sector and the other four sectors for the competencies Emotional Self-Awareness and Emotional Self-Control. These post hoc test results further suggested statistically significant differences for the competency Empathy between the social science and the engineering, IT/computing and science sectors. A visual representation of employer ratings of EI competency in terms of importance and in terms of current levels being displayed by graduates, when entering the workplace was also presented.

4.8 Employer Survey: qualitative results

The final survey question afforded employers an opportunity to provide additional comments which are detailed next. A total of 62 employers provided qualitative results (engineering n = 9), (IT/computing n = 11), (professional services n = 14), (science n = 5) and (social science n = 23). Thematic analysis was used to analyse results with themes of (1) EI and professionalism, (2) confidence and (3) self awareness being highlighted.

4.8.1 EI and professionalism

Employers emphasised the need for graduates to understand that the workplace was a professional environment and demanded high levels of EI competency. For example, communication was highlighted across all five sectors as a critical skill for graduates to possess in the workplace. Specifically, communication across cultures and the appropriate use of communication in a professional environment, including the use of social media were emphasised. Communication and its link with receiving feedback was highlighted in the social science and the IT/computing sectors. The professional environment necessitated the need for empathy and respect, in particular, using empathy to maintain professional boundaries and for connecting with clients “without getting too close” (social science). Motivation, specifically “self-driven motivation” was deemed crucial for success with the need for graduates to “come out of college with the bit between their teeth” and grasp any opportunities being afforded to them (professional services). The nature of the professional environment demanded high levels of initiative and this was raised by employers in all five sectors with one employer stating that graduates need to be “proactive not reactive” (IT/computing) with another stating that initiative does not mean graduates were “to change things
within an organisation without asking a superior” (professional services) which often resulted in a lot of work by staff to undo the damage caused. It was believed that graduates should not expect to “run the company within three months”, however, they should expect to be doing more than “making the tea” (professional services).

4.8.2 Confidence

Confidence was raised by employers in four of the sectors, with the exception of the science sector. One employer (engineering sector) stated that graduates will not be “battle-hardened” at the start of their career, however, must be “confident in themselves, recognise their own emotions and know how to deal with them to help them come through the early stages and take as many lessons from them as possible”.

4.8.3 Self-Awareness

Self-awareness was raised across the five sectors with the need for graduates to engage in “self-learning” and “self-development” (IT/computing) and being aware of “their limitations and lack of experience and knowledge and know-how when leaving college and entering the workplace” (Science). Self-awareness was linked with reflective practice and viewed as an important “tool to learn and grow”, to “encourage self-care” and deal with stressful situations (social science). Self awareness was linked with social awareness by employers across all five sectors. By being socially aware, graduates demonstrated awareness around colleagues and work pressure which may impact on their availability for support. Social awareness extended to the “appreciation of the role of others” and “loyalty” which one employer (Science) highlighted as an issue and often a “one way street from management to employees” which potentially may result in” graduates being treated differently” in the future.

4.9 Phase One Results: Semi-structured interviews

4.9.1 Introduction

Phase One concluded with a series of semi-structured interviews with an employer in each of the five sectors (n = 5) which aimed to gather more in-depth data from employers regarding EI competency among graduates. In addition, the interviews sought to gather feedback from employers on the design and delivery of tailored EI coaching to final year students in Phase Two. Their input on the design and delivery of EI coaching addresses, in part, the third of the research questions ‘Does a tailored, as opposed to a general approach to social-emotional competency coaching for final year engineering students, based on the stated needs of employers, result in different group mean EQ-i2.0 scores post-intervention? A topic guide was utilised and included three topics for exploration: (1) social and emotional competencies, ratings, relevance and opportunities to use, (2) ESI and recruitment, and (3) workplace training in ESI. Employers were asked to complete two questions on the survey, i.e., to rate the ten EI competencies again in terms of their importance and in terms of the current levels being displayed by graduates, when entering the workplace. Findings indicated that employers rated all ten competencies as either ‘very important’ or ‘important’ with current levels of competence being rated as either ‘very good’, ‘good’ or ‘fair’. See full list of employer ratings for the ten competencies in Table 27. When analysing
interview data, the six phases of thematic analysis, as proposed by Braun and Clarke 2006 and discussed in Chapter Three were utilised and cross-checked by Dr McSweeney. These findings will be presented in three sections and within each section key themes identified within the data will be discussed.

Table 27: Semi-structured interviews – employer ratings of EI competencies

4.9.2 Topic One: EI competencies, ratings, relevance and opportunities

Topic one focused on EI competencies, ratings, relevance and opportunities. Four themes were identified of: (1) the changing workplace, (2) the dynamic nature of the role, (3) EI and professionalism which was divided into three subthemes of peer interactions, clients and compliance/regulation and, (4) issues with low levels of EI among graduates which was divided into two subthemes of age, experience and upbringing, and lack of preparation at third level.

4.9.2.1 Theme One: The changing workplace

The changing nature of the work environment has resulted in the need for graduates to be socially and emotionally competent. All employers stated that the workplace had changed significantly in recent years in many ways, for example, diversity in terms of culture, in terms of the changing age profile among employees and in terms of globalisation which resulted in the need for graduates to work across different time zones.
In the science sector, high levels of EI were essential as graduates were expected to work “with other people, different nationalities, different time zones em you know online all that stuff, that ability is important, the ability to work across disciplines”. Employers stressed the importance of self-awareness (not solely emotional self-awareness) and argued that poor self-awareness resulted in an inability among graduates to understand the impact of their behaviour on a team and others within the organisation. Communication was a competency highly valued in the changing workplace in terms of the team, the organisation and clients. In professional services graduates have “a lot of presentations externally, we have corporate clients, we have private clients, internal clients”. Employers stressed that graduates must be skilled in all forms of communication, verbal, written and in terms of their use of social media in professional settings. In social science, poor communication potentially led to health and safety issues and staff getting “seriously hurt”, as the nature of the role was “caring for people you know with challenging behaviour or with high needs”, therefore, staff must be “on the same wavelength”.

The changing workplace resulted in the need for high levels of initiative among graduates and this was reported by all employers. In social science, the “busy, busy” nature of the work environment resulted in staff not having “time to be spoon feeding anybody”. Graduates were expected to use their initiative on multiple projects and
offer “to take on” (engineering) tasks rather than waiting to be told that ‘this is what you need to do today” (science). Initiative was linked with an “energy or hunger” (professional services) for work. In IT/computing, motivation was described as “super important” due to the “variety of projects, variety of customers” and that at graduate level they are “expected to pick up quite a lot very fast and work through it”. This was echoed in professional services with motivation being described as “hugely important” due to the changing structures within the organisation which included “performance reviews now on a monthly basis”. In IT/computing, the changing workplace resulted in the need for competency in adaptability, teamwork, emotional self-awareness and communication in order to work in an “agile environment” meeting “sprints and deadlines”. Employers in all sectors emphasised the importance of teamwork and “collegiality and I suppose it’s not, you know your job is all that matters, you know a team effort everybody is expected to pitch in” (IT/computing). In professional services, high levels of teamwork were essential to meet the overall organisational strategy and the need for graduates to understand that they are “always going to be working together”, therefore, it was “incredibly important that you can work within a team”. Teamwork was “hugely important” in the science sector and linked with motivation and superior performance.

4.9.2.2 Theme Two: The dynamic nature of the role

Aligned with the changing workplace was the changing nature of roles within the workplace which again demanded high levels of EI among graduates. In social science, issues with adaptability were found among graduates who did not fully understand the dynamic nature of the social care role. For example, this employer stated “we don’t get to bed at 11 o’clock” and stated that many graduates argued that they were “due to be finished at 11 o’clock” and wanted to go home. Adaptability was also stressed in engineering due to the dynamic nature of the work with graduates starting “a project and they might be on that project for six weeks. They could end up being moved to another project in a different sector completely so you know you absolutely have to have that sense of adaptability or you won’t survive”. In professional services graduates were required to “be adaptable in any role I suppose but particularly in financial services it’s constantly changing”. One ongoing and common issue reported by this employer was in terms of graduates and their lack of flexibility. For example, in professional services, graduates were required to complete a number of “rotations” within different departments to gain a broad range of skills and experience. This employer stressed the time and commitment necessary to organise these rotations and to get team leads to agree to take a graduate. Issues had arisen with graduates who were “not 100% satisfied with the rotations” and some were “insistent that they don’t do a particular rotation”.

The dynamic nature of the role demanded graduates with a positive outlook. For example, in social science the nature of the work was with vulnerable populations and this employer argued that graduates who have negative outlooks do not last in the sector. For example, graduates are “coming into a challenging behaviour unit and the people suffering with depression, borderline personality disorder, schizophrenia who are quite negative em if you want to sit down and be negative with them you’re not going to be of any help to them”. In professional services, this employer reported noticing “a lot of negativity” among graduates which graduates themselves were unaware of but it was obvious “not just to me but to the person that they’re working with, the department head and everyone else”. This negativity had implications in terms of the team, in terms of career progression and recognition among peers and managers. In IT/computing, flexibility was required in terms of the role as, according to this employer “no-one just hires a developer anymore, it’s a developer and all of these competencies”. In science, the diverse nature of the role often resulted in conflict for graduates as they had very specific ideas about what the role would entail with many believing that the role would be desk-based with little or no interaction with others. This employer reported that graduates were “just disillusioned about what role they got into” that it was not the role they “thought at all”.

4.9.2.3 Theme Three: EI and professionalism

When discussing EI competencies with employers, a number of employers linked such competencies with professionalism. When analysing the data further, three sub-themes associated with professionalism were found: EI, professionalism and peer interactions, EI, professionalism and clients and EI and compliance/regulation which will be discussed next.

4.9.2.3.1 EI, professionalism and peer interactions

The importance of EI competency in terms of peer interactions was raised by all employers. In the engineering sector, the nature of the workplace demanded a high degree of teamwork as employees were required to work efficiently and effectively in multi-disciplinary teams. This employer stated that “there’d be project managers,
there’d be IT, architects, business analysts all have a little bit of a role but yet they are all working together for the common goal you know, to get that change request over the line for the client”. In engineering, responsibility was placed on established teams within the organisation to demonstrate positivity to new graduates as it was linked with motivating graduates “even when things get a bit hairy”. This was echoed in IT/computing where the onus was placed on more experienced employees “to make everybody you know feel included”. Again positivity was raised in terms of peer interactions with negativity being described in the IT/computer sector as “infecting the rest of the team”. Within professional services, peer interactions and the need for a positive outlook was viewed as critical, not only for the graduate themselves but also for the team and the wider organisation with this employer arguing that “no one likes I suppose a negative nelly…, you know being negative has a very negative effect not just on yourself but on the team members and the wider I suppose group of people that you interact with”.

The link between empathy and peer interactions was also raised by employers. One example in the engineering sector was the case where a graduate experienced some personal problems outside the workplace and how the rest of the new recruits “rallied around” to offer support and help find a solution. However, in professional services issues arose due to a lack of empathy among graduates which greatly impacted peer interactions and had become a significant challenge in the workplace. While this employer accepted that “you have to focus on yourself obviously but there’s definitely less empathy out there than I think there used to be but I think it is important em you know in a working environment. You’re working with so many different people em people have lots of issues going on”. Empathy in terms of connecting with others was emphasised as very important in the science sector but in contrast with other employers, this employer questioned whether every employee within an organisation “needs to be absolutely brilliant at it cos we could get to the other extreme”. This employer made a link between empathy, listening and non-verbal communication and argued that “it’s listening in terms of body language, it’s listening in terms of what else is going on with the person. It’s trying to understand where they are coming from”. In social science, “cliques” within teams were raised as an issue and the importance of empathy among graduates when working in teams. Two examples given were “people going through marriage breakdowns. There’s no empathy for that” or individuals with no consideration for “how is that person feeling when they walk into the room and yous (sic) are all sitting there and you stop talking when they enter”.

Conflict and peer interactions was raised in the science sector and the need for graduates to understand that they may not always like working with some individuals but must manage these situations. This employer stated “it doesn’t necessarily mean you’re going to get on with the person but you can agree roles and responsibilities” and argued that graduates had this “perception that well if I don’t want to work with somebody I can just highlight it to somebody and they’ll take them away or they’ll resolve the problem for me”. In social science, the employer argued that graduates were “getting conflict every way really” in terms of settling into work with “an established team”, in terms of management who were often critical of graduates and with service users who often responded negatively to new members of staff.

4.9.2.3.2 EI, professionalism and clients

The importance of EI was also stressed due to the client facing nature of each of the organisations. In the engineering sector, graduates worked on a “client site”, therefore, they needed to be “aware of how to conduct themselves with clients”. This was echoed in IT/computing as the role was “also a client facing role so they’re dealing with customers, they’re dealing with a lot of different teams internally in the company. So emm it’s not just them working by themselves coding, you know in a quiet environment it’s very interactive and you know every day they are talking to new people”. In the science sector, the employer argued that students often had a “perception that if you work in a science based industry you can work on your own and you don’t necessarily have to work with other people. But that’s I don’t think that’s ever really the case em so it’s important in the sense that they have to be able to interact with other people”. In IT/computing, the client facing nature of the organisation demanded high levels of empathy among graduates in order to be able to see the customer’s perspective if, for example, it was a new client and the graduate was tasked with managing their portfolio and, in effect, “taking over for a while”. Empathy was also raised in social science in terms of the client facing nature of the role and in terms of teams. This employer stressed that “you need to be able to pick up that there’s something going on for fellow colleagues, for a service user whoever, empathy is just part of social care, in general, I think”.

In professional services, the employer highlighted the lack of understanding among graduates of appropriate behaviour in terms of dealing with clients and, in general. This employer stated that “that’s one thing that I would have noticed quite a lot with graduates these days is that there’s this very casual sort of aspect to their personality. And they come into a professional environment, they don’t necessarily change their behaviour to suit the environment”. In IT/computing, high levels of communication were required as “customers are so remote, you’re constantly dealing with them over email, over phone we just need someone who is very clear at communicating”. Employers associated communication with building rapport and trust with customers and “if you don’t have strong communication skills that’s going to be really difficult you know, they’re not going to have that kind of bond” (IT/computing). In engineering, this employer stressed the importance of strong communication between graduates and clients and cited an example of “a situation there a couple of months back where a grad went in, thought he was handling something very well and he wasn’t. Again some of it was direct face to face with the client, things were said so again he, it was a big learning curve for him. Because he realised that he should have called things out a little bit earlier, flagged them to the project manager that he was engaging with”.

4.9.2.3.3 EI and compliance/regulation

In science, issues with motivation among graduates were often found due to their lack of understanding of compliance and regulation. This employer argued that “here maybe things aren’t as exciting as they thought it was going to be”. The employer held that the sector was “heavily driven by compliance as well and around conformity” which resulted in issues with the work not being as “interesting” as graduates perceived it would be. In social science, regulation and legislation played a major role in the workplace on a daily basis. This employer highlighted issues with graduates in terms of their lack of awareness around such legislation. One example
given was a situation where a graduate did not disclose important information regarding an incident with a service user, not fully appreciating that poor decisions and non-disclosure have legal implications. In professional services, this employer stated that the organisation was “at the mercy of the regulator and you know various other third parties so you know no-one can really say where we’ll be in a year or two years” which often caused issues with graduates in terms of adaptability and flexibility when faced with change.

4.9.2.4 Theme Four: Issues with low levels of EI among graduates

Employers highlighted issues with low levels of EI among graduates and outlined multiple factors which they believed contributed to such shortcomings. These were: (i) age, experience and upbringing and, (ii) lack of preparation at third level which will be discussed next.

4.9.2.4.1 Age, experience and upbringing

In IT/computing, the ability to take feedback in terms of performance reviews or promotion was highlighted as an issue with some graduates. This employer elaborated by stating that many recruits have reacted badly to feedback and “effectively hand in their notice and you know not kind of understand the thoughts behind it”. This employer attributed this to a “lack of maturity” and an attitude of “‘well I didn’t get what I wanted so I’m leaving’ so throwing all of their toys out of the cot kind of thing”. This employer stressed the importance of graduates “being able to break down their (the manager’s) feedback and everything like that and understand their point of view would be very important to see you grow in the environment”. The link between EI competency and experience was also raised in engineering. An example given was in terms of communication and the importance of graduates seeking help from their manager if they are unsure of how to proceed with a situation. This employer stressed “if something isn’t going how it’s supposed to go again call it out, speak to someone” as “at their level you know again that’s down to experience some of them wouldn’t necessarily have that know-how”. In engineering, for example, the employer reported no issues with conflict management among graduates which was attributed to a lack of experience or a “lack of exposure” to conflict due to their age or something that ” develops as you grow in your career” (professional services). When elaborating on the rating of ‘fair’ for the competency emotional self-awareness, the employer in science argued that motivation and coaching might work but they held that “a lot of this stuff still comes just from experience”. With respect to their rating of ‘good’ for the competency initiative in the engineering sector, this employer stated “again it’s down to experience” and argued that some people need “a bit of coaching” or guidance to develop. In social science, issues with emotional self-awareness and emotional self-control was highlighted which this employer attributed to “age” resulting in a lack of awareness of themselves and “not enough work done on themselves”. This employer argued that younger graduates enter the workplace with “their emotions all over the place”.

Closely aligned to age and experience was the impact of upbringing on EI among graduates. In professional services, specific issues with empathy among graduates were of concern and this was something that was “under review” as it had emerged as “something that’s kind of lacking with the younger generation”. This employer attributed this lack to “things like being raised by childminders and you know in the crèches” and believed graduates had less interaction with “the immediate family and grandparents and all of that sort of stuff”. In social science the impact of the Celtic Tiger22 on EI competence among graduates was raised with this employer stating “again I’m finding that they don’t have the competencies when they are coming in, you kind of have to really push them”. This employer labelled new graduates as “the Celtic Tiger generation” and held that they have been “quite spoilt over a number of years” resulting in graduates being “quite demanding” but did not want to “give a little bit”.

4.9.2.4.2 Lack of preparation at third level

Four employers, with the exception of engineering, argued that there was a lack of preparation by higher education institutions, with the main emphasis at third level being on the academic aspects of education. In professional services, this employer explained the rating of ‘fair’ for the competency emotional self-awareness by stating that “I think there is so much focus on the academic side and we rate the academics very highly don’t get me wrong but I suppose what makes a difference so obviously I suppose it’s the emotional intelligence piece that is kind of lacking”.

22 The Celtic Tiger refers to the unprecedented growth in Ireland’s economy which was given an
unofficial commencement date of 1994 (McAleese 2000)

When discussing issues with teamwork among graduates, the employer held that college was more focused on individuals rather than teams stating “you could say that college educates individuals or it gives them skills and competencies as individuals”. This employer argued that “the more academically qualified the person is and this is a big generalisation sometimes the more difficult it is for them to work with other people. Em because they’re they have got so tunnel vision in terms of what they are doing”. In IT/computing, issues with empathy were attributed to the college environment and that it was a case of “breaking them out of the environment that they’ve been in” and providing training to upskill graduates. In science, the transition from a third level environment to a workplace setting often raised issues for graduates due to the fact that “there isn’t necessarily that same support structure around them and that can be a problem”. This employer believed that there was a lot of “hand-holding” in college environments which was not necessarily available in the workplace.

4.9.3 Topic Two: Recruitment

This area explored how EI competencies were linked with recruitment practices within the organisations. Employers identified issues with graduates and their ability to demonstrate EI starting with the job seeking process, to the recruitment stage and on entering the organisation. Themes identified were (i) curriculum vitae
(CV) and interview preparation, (ii) diverse measurements of EI competence by employers, (iii) demonstration of EI as an influencing factor on graduate hire and, (iv) diversity in terms of EI coaching design and delivery.

4.9.3.1 Theme One: CV and Interview Preparation

The need for graduates to demonstrate EI competency throughout the recruitment process was highlighted by all five employers. In three of the sectors, issues were highlighted in terms of poor CV and interview preparation. For example, in IT/computing this employer stated that there was a lack of understanding among graduates of the importance of demonstrating EI competence on their CV for “even getting into the interview process”. They further argued that at the interview stage, the CV was all they had to refer to, therefore, it was critical that graduates can “explain their experience in their projects” with the necessity for concrete examples of areas such as “how you dealt with change” or an example of “a time where a project didn’t go your way and you had to make a decision”. This employer held that such questions often put graduates “out of their comfort zone away from the technical questions”. Employers emphasised preparation and the need to provide examples from a part-time job or sports involvement where issues may have arisen. One employer described examples as “a bit wishy washy”. In science, the lack of preparation extended to the failure of graduates to tailor their CV to the job role advertised. This employer stated that “when you look at the CV it is just about my ability to do something here, nothing to do with the job description”. This view was echoed in professional services with this employer stating that the CV must match the job specification. Employers expected graduates to demonstrate EI competency on their CV but what was key was that it matched the job specification. In the science sector, the starting point with any CV was the personal interests section because “if there’s something different about it, if somebody is going beyond the normal stuff well I think that is always useful”.

4.9.3.2 Theme 2: Diverse measurements of EI competence by employers

When discussing how employers measure EI competence in the recruitment process, different measurements were reported by employers which will be discussed next.

4.9.3.2.1 Assessment Centres

In the engineering sector, a formal protocol was in place for recruiting graduates. This included, as a first step an online coding test where applicants were required to score 60%+ in order to be considered for the next stage, namely, attendance at an assessment centre. This employer stated that “from the outset we would be looking at stuff like that (pointing at competencies on survey) before they’d even be offered a role here”. Graduates go through “a series of exercises” and “little tests that are done before they’d even get in the door”. Firstly, graduates must complete an online technical coding test and score 60% or over in order to be considered for the next stage. At the second stage, graduates attended an assessment centre for a full day and underwent a series of group and individual tasks, with a team of observers watching the interactions between candidates and taking notes throughout the day. Team tasks included the design of a product for the marketplace, followed by a presentation of their work to the larger group, all completed within a particular timeframe, usually 30 minutes, 20 minutes to prepare the task and 10 minutes to present.

According to this employer, candidates must consider “how are you going to sell this in the marketplace? How are you going to make a profit?” Further tasks were completed in groups, followed by attendance at an interview with a panel. Interview panels comprised of project managers and senior managers and “they would throw scenarios at the graduates to see ‘what would you do in this situation, or how would you handle that’?” At the end of the day, the observers and team leads met for a “wash-up” where “everybody comes together who has been involved and they give feedback. So the person observing the individuals may not necessarily be the same people who interview them. And it’s very interesting at the end of the day where people would have seen them very strong say in a group exercise would have been very weak in an interview”. Results from all of the tests throughout the day were entered onto a template with a grading of 1-4 and an average score awarded to each applicant. This employer stated that teamwork and adaptability were “huge” and stressed that the assessment centre model was “a formula that has worked and we have certainly got a great calibre of candidates after going through an assessment centre and obviously then a small panel will get called back for the final interview and really at that stage it’s up to the partners to decide”.

4.9.3.2.2 Online Code Tests

The IT/computing sector utilised an online “code test” as a first step in the recruitment process which was technical in nature but also examined the “communication side as it looks at how clearly they are explaining their ideas”. The code test was very lengthy and required “a commitment of five to six hours”, therefore, demanded high levels of motivation and perseverance. This employer stated that if applicants were not “hungry for the role you know they tend not to be interested in completing it so if it doesn’t go right like they don’t have the perseverance to get through it em because sometimes after five hours it is still not working but you know you have to keep working and it could be seven, eight hours and then you’ll get it right kind of thing”.

4.9.3.2.3 Competency based interviews

In IT/computing, graduates who were successful at the online coding test were invited to a competency based interview where different methods were used to assess such competency. For example, different scenarios were presented to candidates, sometimes with the use of video and graduates were asked “’if you were on a project how you might work with someone else who is coming from a different background’?” Skills of initiative, motivation, adaptability, empathy and communication were assessed in a phone interview and again at the face to face interview. In this organisation, the face to face interview was three hours long and involved three individuals with specific functions, some technical and some competency based. These interviews presented graduates with “heavy weighted examples” and “scenarios” and questions around motivation and ambition. In this organisation, a competency framework was designed to match each role within the organisation comprised of different levels of technical expertise and competency required for a particular role. The panel then “individualise” the framework in order to “put their own spin on the interview” but “essentially to make the interviews consistent”.

In professional services, a competency based interview was utilised with specific EI competencies of initiative, motivation, positivity and adaptability being examined. This employer stated that while the aforementioned competencies were particularly sought after it was the other competencies listed on the survey that “at the back of your mind you are still looking for all of those things”. This employer stated that the majority of applicants were “at a very high level academically” and the deciding factor between one candidate and the next was “all of these skills” (pointing at competencies on survey). Interview preparation was essential but more importantly was the ability to know what the “recruiter is looking for” and “to get that across in interviews”. In this sector, a score card was utilised and each competency was rated from ‘1’ to ‘5’ and “anything below 3 you wouldn’t consider”.
Similar to IT/computing, interviews were tailored to the needs of the role in the science sector. This employer argued that the ability of graduates to demonstrate, with examples, their knowledge of competencies in the interview process was “arguably probably more important than ‘did you work in the industry before’?” Interviews included case studies where candidates were placed into groups and asked to consider a particular case study with a specific task and problem, then return and present to the panel on how they would address the issues in the case study. In social science, a competency based interview was completed which would have “10 questions em and then they get a scoring on each, on the way they answer it em so the CV doesn’t really come into it”. This employer further stated that there are no specific questions on social and emotional competencies and that the onus would be on the student to highlight examples of their competence at the interview.

4.9.3.3 Theme 3: Demonstration of EI as an influencing factor on graduate hire

A recurrent finding in the data was a lack of ability among graduates to demonstrate their EI competence throughout the recruitment process from the job application process through to the interview process. This then led to the interview exploring ways that this may be addressed, specifically focusing on employer perceptions on the value of a tailored EI coaching intervention as a means of preparing graduates for the transition into the workplace. What was emphasised by each employer was the importance of demonstrating EI competence throughout the entire recruitment process and how such demonstration may be an influencing factor on graduate hire. In engineering, the employer stated that the organisation would not place major importance on EI coaching due to the nature of their own recruitment process and would not “see it as a big plus to have it”, however, they acknowledged that it could potentially be “an added bonus” but not “something that you would focus on”. This was mirrored in IT/computing, with the employer stating that EI coaching would be viewed as a “bonus”, however, what would be most important would be that graduates demonstrated the learning at the interview stage. In this sector, the employer linked the provision of EI coaching by higher education institutions with potential success at interview stage. This employer stated that “in the interview process I think a lot of people that we met within the last couple of weeks. If someone had sat down and done this with them em they could have done a lot stronger interview and could have been successful”.

In IT/computing, the employer stated that graduates often demonstrated a lack of adaptability at interview and were often very vocal about wanting “to be a developer, ‘that’s all I want to do’ with this employer arguing that the organisation was not seeking “one trick ponies”. This employer then stated that they should have rated adaptability as ‘very important’ and not ‘important’ on the survey completed at the start of the interview. Another finding was that employers were often indirectly evaluating EI competencies at the interview stage without explicitly questioning them. For example, in IT/computing, emotional self-control would not have specific questions assigned to it in the interview. However, scenarios which were presented to graduates would require a response that would demonstrate such a competency. At the interview, they would need to confirm that they were “confident that they have that maturity that they are able to step back from a situation like that rather than you know blow out for no reason kind of thing if something isn’t going their way”. In IT/computing, this employer held that an intervention such as EI coaching prior to entering the workplace might help graduates to “hit the ground quicker if they came into the role”. In addition, this employer believed that such coaching may alleviate some of the “unknowns” and “kind of nerves in the first couple of months when we do hire graduates”.

This employer discussed links between their organisation and the Association of Higher Education Careers Services23 (AHECS) and referred to a seminar which they had attended regarding graduate employability. At the seminar, issues were highlighted in terms of graduates being work ready and the gaps in skillsets among graduates. The seminar examined “what they’re missing, like when they leave college why aren’t they getting jobs?” This employer argued that “it definitely does fall a lot on the emotional side, the communications side where you know people coming out with the same degree aren’t necessarily all at the same level”. This employer felt that

23 The Association of Higher Education Careers Services works to bring employers and careers services together to discuss issues of mutual interest and concern (AHECS website).

if this emotional side was prepared in college it would really “set up” graduates in terms of transitioning into the workplace.

In professional services, the employer stated that the fact an individual had completed EI coaching may not influence them in terms of interviewing them, however, “if they come in for interview then you would expect that they are able to display I suppose the emotional intelligence training that they have learned”. This employer stated that their “standards would be academic initially”, that they received a large amount of applications from graduates, therefore, this employer stated “you’re looking at a job specification em and you’re looking at the CV and we probably don’t necessarily highlight the emotional intelligence, I suppose characteristics that we
would be looking for in the job spec”, with the exception of teamwork and communication. This employer acknowledged that universities were doing a lot more to develop skillsets in graduates but stated “I suppose the piece that is missing with a lot of the students these days is kind of the workplace experience. You know the internships and so on, that is so invaluable. And you know this working alongside that (pointing at survey list) it just makes such a huge difference”. In science, EI coaching would influence the employer in terms of asking graduates “what did they learn” and if the answer was “I’m more aware” or “I can read my environment a bit more” then the employer “would say there’d be a positive side to it”. What was most important for employers was the ability to demonstrate the learning and knowledge with examples. In social science, the employer stated that EI coaching would influence them in terms of hiring graduates because “I have an interest in it but others mightn’t”. This employer further stated that “I do think that if I seen (sic) somebody coming in with this little cert saying ‘I’ve completed this’ I’d be going ‘good’ because we have something to work with”. In the science sector, the employer raised the issue of the workplace environment in terms of EI and argued that the organisational culture and workplace environment must promote EI, stating that “you can put people who are very very competent in there but if nobody communicates with them, nobody listens to them, if nobody tells them where they are going, if they don’t allow them the opportunity to make improvements then they’ll wither after a while”. For this employer, importance was not placed on EI coaching as an intervention and when probed, this employer stressed the importance of the context for EI coaching and the need for any EI coaching intervention to be “pulled in as opposed to pushed in”.

4.9.3.4 Theme Four: Diversity in terms of EI coaching

The third research question focused on whether the provision of discipline specific social and emotional competency coaching tailored to the needs of Irish employers would result in different group mean EQ-i2.0 scores, post intervention than a general approach. Employers were asked their opinions on the design process of such coaching with diverse strategies for tailoring EI coaching to the workplace being suggested, which will be discussed next.

4.9.3.4.1 Team based activities

In engineering, emphasis was placed on “something tangible, to see them in action, to see them you know even doing a presentation, to see them coming together kind of as a team”. This employer stated that candidates were placed in a very pressurised environment working within time pressures and strict deadlines. This employer suggested utilising the assessment centre framework for any EI intervention. They stated that through observation of the group exercises at the assessment centre days “you see people’s strengths and weaknesses there and it’s quite evident”. This format was one that this employer believed could be utilised in the coaching process as it was a “huge gauge for us em for calling the ones, the good ones back I suppose for final interview because you’re going to see how they are going to perform in our environment.” This employer argued that everything focused on teamwork but that the other EI competencies link in with it such as how graduates conduct themselves, how they communicate with clients. The assessment centre framework meant that observers “can physically, you know you are in the room and you’re watching them so I think that works really well”.

4.9.3.4.2 Role Plays and Scenarios

In IT/computing, this employer suggested the use of role plays and relevant scenarios, which could be applied to the specific role. One example of a scenario was “student A you got a job with a graduate programme, this happened on day one and you know kind of just breaking it down to them and saying what would you do, you know discussing and giving them an input”. This employer stressed that it would have to be “very interactive cos coming from IT as well they only know IT”. For this employer, any EI coaching programme should “push back on them as well so say any other ideas, I don’t think that’s great, what else could you do?” This employer raised constructive feedback as important for any intervention to see “how they react”. In social science, the employer stated that EI coaching would be very challenging to implement and gave an example of empathy stating “it’s something that’s going to be really hard because somebody either has it or they don’t”. This employer suggested role plays as a means of teaching EI but felt in the social care sector that observation and learning from co-workers was the best means to develop these skills.

An example proffered by this employer was “a situation where you have somebody who’s trying to harm themselves and what that social care worker or whoever goes in and the way they talk that person down” can result in huge learning on the job for graduates. In science, role plays were highlighted as one method of delivering EI coaching but role plays “where there is a bit more kind of skin in the game in the sense that it’s, you know, you genuinely there has to be some sort of em kind of a serious motivator to do it right”.

4.9.3.4.3 Video

In professional services, the use of video was suggested as it would demonstrate “types of situations where you know maybe you can see the impact of what you have said or what you have done on someone else in a team and maybe look at the empathy piece as well”. It was felt that video would be “a really good way of interacting with younger people these days. They watch an awful lot of video and Facebook and stuff”. This employer stated that video, followed by a role play or case study may work but what was key was finding a way to “help them (the graduates) to switch on a little bit”.

4.9.3.4.4 Case Studies

In science, the employer suggested case studies as a means of developing EI competency. This employer held that there was a “need to immerse people in bad before they can recognise what good is”. One example given by this employer was that in order for individuals to understand conflict they must first be immersed in
conflict. A team task was suggested where team members are working together to produce an output which may be a “complete disaster” first time round but “the second time you agree roles and responsibilities and then you are starting to get better”. This employer held that assessment practices must be aligned with the competencies that are being coached, so for example, if developing teamwork then assessment must be based on some teamwork exercise. This employer held that “if we talk about teamwork and if we only ever assess people as individuals then it won’t work” and “if you talk about conflict but if you don’t actually put them in a conflict situation em you know it’s not as effective em you know so you almost need to put people in the negative state and allow them to move over to the other state”. This employer believed that the provision of individual coaching should be an important element in any EI coaching process. In science the employer argued that when one is looking at EI competency or lack of among graduates that “attitude is everything”, that “you can teach skills, you can teach competence, attitude is something that is very hard to teach”.

4.9.4 Topic Three: Workplace training in EI

Another area explored in the semi-structured interviews was the extent to which employers implemented measures to assist graduates with the transition into the workplace or whether they believed the onus was on third level institutions to provide such preparation. It also sought to determine whether any specific EI coaching was provided for new recruits. While there was no provision of training specifically focused on EI, employers invested in graduates by means of various supports and training programmes which will be presented next.

4.9.4.1 Theme One: Employer investment in graduates

4.9.4.1.1 Training

All employers stated that there were no training programmes in place within their organisation which focused exclusively on the development of social and emotional competencies for graduates entering the workplace. However, many of the organisations provided formal, structured training programmes. For example, in engineering, the employer stated that all graduates entered into the organisation under a programme for two years, “a consulting by degrees programme and there’s a very em structured training programme for them em over the two year period”. Participation in the structured training programme afforded them the learning required to apply a wide range of competencies in the workplace. In IT/computing, workplace training was technically focused, however, training materials for new graduates have been “re-jigged” because the organisation felt that “sometimes there is that gap between a graduate coming in and being ready to be put on a project just from the
communication and softer skills side”. All new recruits participated in a six week training programme and following successful completion were “placed straight on a project, so you are joining a team, you are interacting with a customer”. Within this organisation graduates were actively encouraged to become involved in “extra initiatives”, for example, graduate recruitment involving site visits to different third level campuses. In professional services, graduates completed “communications training” and a lot of “presentation training”, however, in terms of other competencies this employer stated “we probably don’t provide a huge amount of training under these headings (pointing at survey) but we do provide an awful lot of training so it’s probably something we should look at”.

4.9.4.1.2 Mentors/Coaches

In IT/computing, career coaches and mentors were in place to build teams and their success. In the event where “a new hire” may be “a bit more introverted than normal, you know lacking a bit in confidence” the career coach would take responsibility for working with that recruit and setting a goal of “‘ok look let’s build up your confidence, let’s get you on a project, let’s get you doing a presentation’ you know it’s kind of a joint effort then between both of them”. This would be on a case by case basis with the primary responsibility of the career coach being “to reach his goals as well in getting his team successful and building their confidence”.

4.9.4.1.3 Presentations

In IT/computing, the organisation ran “text slams” which were “an opportunity for the guys to build on their communication so they have to do a presentation in front of the office and they have to come up with an idea of their choice”. However, this employer argued that graduates must be motivated and demonstrate initiative and “put their hand up” to participate in such initiatives. This organisation also implemented a policy of three month reviews rather than yearly reviews to assess goals, target achievement, barriers to goal attainment and setting new objectives for the next quarter. This employer emphasised that there were multiple opportunities for graduates to develop their EI, for example, volunteering to do a In IT/computing, the organisation ran “text slams” which were “an opportunity for the guys to build on their communication so they have to do a presentation in front of the office and they have to come up with an idea of their choice”. However, this employer argued that graduates must be motivated and demonstrate initiative and “put their hand up” to participate in such initiatives. This organisation also implemented a policy of three month reviews rather than yearly reviews to assess goals, target achievement, barriers to goal attainment and setting new objectives for the next quarter. This employer emphasised that there were multiple opportunities for graduates to develop their EI, for example, volunteering to do a presentation in order to develop their communication skills. In professional services, graduates were afforded many opportunities to develop and enhance their social and emotional competencies.

One example proffered by this employer was the opportunity for graduates to “do knowledge sharing sessions once a quarter. This involved “putting together a presentation that they deliver to all their peers and then various members of heads of department. So very senior people em will sit around the table and the graduate will present to them on their role, and maybe just a specific topic within their role or a project that they have been working on. But it’s really an opportunity for them to kind of sell themselves”. According to this employer graduates were required to utilise many of the competencies listed on the survey for this presentation as there would be multiple disciplines represented in the audience who may not be familiar with terminology or complex details of the role. The onus was on the graduate to effectively communicate and “it’s a very very nerve wracking situation to be in”.

4.9.4.1.4 Project Teams

In professional services, project teams with a specific remit were used as opportunities for graduates to become more involved and to develop within the organisation. Issues such as recycling, for example, were addressed by means of “green teams” and gave graduates opportunities to become involved in areas which are outside the day to day work and this employer linked this with motivation and initiative. The employer stressed the importance of these initiatives in terms of “career development and being recognised” which were viewed as “so important” in their organisation.

4.9.4.1.5 Internships

In science, there was no formal workplace training in EI offered in the organisation. This employer stated that one mechanism used in the organisation was to afford graduates the opportunity to work there and “try it out for a while and see how you get on for a month or two and let’s see what works”. In addition, this organisation had a network of contacts with other organisations and often asked if they were in a position to “take somebody on for two months and see how it goes”. This afforded graduates an opportunity to be in a role and see how things worked out, however, this process was a “little bit more awkward in a science based industry” due to time taken to train people. This employer stated that there needed to be a willingness on the part of graduates to “try different things, different routes, for example, recognising sometimes that the best way to go forward is to go backwards and then go forward again”.

4.9.4.1.6 Counselling

In IT/computing, counselling supports were in place for staff who were experiencing difficulty or reduced wellbeing and these were provided by a private healthcare provider. In this organisation, the employer stated that “I suppose we do have a very open, transparent environment here that, you know I’ve been here nearly two years now and I’ve never seen an issue that was escalated. You know there isn’t really that kind of em office kind of politics side of things here it’s a lot different than you know if you’ve a problem you can go straight up to your manager and talk about it, and you know air it out”.

In social science, no training in EI was provided to graduates entering the workplace and this employer argued that it would pose enormous challenges for organisations to provide such training as some EI competencies were either innate in graduates or not. However, the employer stated that graduates often have valuable experience to bring into the organisation through work placements or research they have completed and this employer was very open to this and encouraged graduates to apply their skill and knowledge base within the organisation. This employer stated “a graduate might have done a very good work placement somewhere else or they might have done a thesis on something or they might have done a portfolio on something that might be totally beneficial.”

It may be the case that interventions in the workplace may not necessarily have to focus solely on social and emotional competencies but can be designed to include social and emotional competency training as part of a broader package of training.

4.10 Conclusion

This chapter has presented the findings from Phase One of the study, the employer survey and the follow-up semi-structured interviews. These results demonstrated high levels of importance placed by employers on EI competency among graduates. However, the majority of employers rated such competence as ‘good’ in terms of current levels. EI competency was emphasised as a critical skill for transitioning into a dynamic and diverse work environment, with motivation and teamwork being particularly prized among employers. Chapter Five will detail the findings from Phase Two.

Chapter Five: Results Phase Two

5.1 Overview

This chapter will present the findings from Phase Two of the research, the baseline and post Bar-On EQ-i2.0 testing of final year engineering students and EI coaching.

5.2 Main findings: research question three

Phase Two focused on the third research question ‘Does a tailored, as opposed to a general approach to social-emotional competency coaching for final year engineering students, based on the stated needs of employers, result in different group mean EQ-i2.0 scores post-intervention? In order to answer this question, the EQ-i2.0 was administered to each participant at baseline and again post-intervention, following a period of six months, which is in line with best practice in terms of administration of the test (KinchLyons, 2015). As previously stated in Section 3.9 of Chapter Three, the EQ-i2.0 is a 1:5:15 model comprising total EI, five composite scales, fifteen subscales and a Wellbeing indicator. The initial sample was sixty-two (n = 62) with an attrition rate of 5. These five participants completed the EQ-i2.0 test at baseline, four subsequently withdrew from the study after the initial EQ-i2.0 testing due to pressures of academic work and one withdrew after the one-to-one and group coaching. Therefore, the final valid sample was fifty-seven (n = 57). Repeated measures ANOVA and post hoc independent sample t-tests were conducted to analyse the data, results of which are presented below.

5.3 Descriptive Statistics

Results for the active control (n = 28) and the experimental (n = 29) groups demonstrated that all mean EQ-i2.0 scores across both groups increased post intervention. Table 28 presents a detailed breakdown of baseline and post test scores for both groups. The EQ-i2.0 is broken down into three categories of ratings; scores below 90 are less developed social-emotional competencies, scores between 90-110 are mid-range meaning that the competencies are well developed and scores above 110 are highly developed competencies. With regard to the active control group, mean scores at baseline were in the mid-range of the scale, i.e., between 90 and 110. Results indicated that all mean scores increased post-intervention for this group but remained in the mid-range of the scale. With regard to the experimental group, mean scores at baseline were in the mid-range of the scale. Post-intervention scores for Total EI, Self-Perception, Self-Regard, Self-Actualisation, Emotional Self-Awareness, Assertiveness, Interpersonal, Interpersonal Relationships, Social Responsibility, Reality Testing, Stress Management, Stress Tolerance, Optimism and Wellbeing increased from the mid-range (90-110) at baseline to highly developed skills (110+) post-intervention. The remaining eight competencies for the experimental group increased post-intervention but remained in the mid-range category.

Table 28: Means, standard deviations, mean differences and standard errors for baseline and follow-up scores for participating students in each EQ-i2.0 domain and sub-category by group24

5.4 Repeated-measures ANOVA

24 The green shading on this table indicates mean EQ-i2.0 scores which increased from the mid-range
to the upper range of the EQ-i2.0 post-intervention.

A repeated-measures ANOVA was run with one within and two between factors to examine the baseline-post intervention test scores – an explanation of the repeated-measures ANOVA was outlined in Section 3.13.7.1 of Chapter Three. A repeated-measures ANOVA was run to compare baseline and post EI scores on a full factorial basis for the time25, group and institute variables. Assumptions for the repeated-measures ANOVA were checked and Box’s Test of Equality of Covariance Matrices was deemed to be met for all competencies with the exception of Self-Regard (p = .012), Assertiveness (p = .002), Interpersonal (p = .038) and Interpersonal Relationships (p = .005). Levene’s test for equality of variances was then checked, as suggested by the IBM Knowledge Center website and met for all measures, with the exception of Self-Perception (F = 4.63, p = .005) and Self-Actualisation (F = 5.12, p = .006) at post-intervention and Interpersonal (F = 3.79, p = .015), Empathy (F = 4.38, p = .008) and Impulse Control (F = 3.85, p = .015) at baseline. As there were 22 EI variables to test, despite this possible failure of a repeated-measures ANOVA assumption, it was decided to move forward with this test as it was deemed
unnecessary to change the analysis at this point in order to accommodate these seven measures. Additionally, this is an exploratory analysis so any significance can be of interest. Bootstrapping was also conducted independently and significance agreed with results presented here. Graphs displaying residuals for competencies which violated Box’s Test are attached as Appendix AA and for those that violated Levene’s test are attached as Appendix BB. Results of the repeated-measures ANOVA showed the highest order statistically significant differences were between groups for eight of the subscales and between institutes for two of the subscales and the wellbeing indicator. Table 29 gives an overview of repeated-measures ANOVA results with an

25 Time indicates before/after.

asterisk indicating statistical significance and Table 30 presents a full set of results with statistically significant effects and associated effect sizes being highlighted in green.

Table 29: Repeated-Measures ANOVA results with an asterisk indicating statistical significance

Table 30: Detailed model terms and associated effect sizes, with highest order statistically significant terms highlighted in shades of green2627

26 For ease of reading border lines have been included in Table 30 as there are 22 competencies to report. 27 The V statistic shown is Pillai’s V

Post hoc tests were conducted on statistically significant repeated-measures ANOVA findings. Difference scores were computed and independent sample t-tests were conducted to compare tailored coaching and general coaching. Results of post hoc tests showed statistically significant differences in difference scores between the active control and the experimental groups for Total EI, Self-Expression, Assertiveness, Independence and Decision Making, suggesting that tailored coaching, as opposed to general coaching resulted in larger mean differences for these competencies. There was a large effect size for Self-Expression and Assertiveness with a moderate effect size for Total EI, Independence and Decision Making. Post hoc independent samples t-tests also showed statistically significant difference scores between institutes for Interpersonal, Interpersonal Relationships and the Wellbeing Indicator in agreement with repeated-measures results, suggesting that institute was an influencing factor in terms of these difference score results. There was a moderate effect size between Institute 1 and Institute 2 for Interpersonal and the Wellbeing Indicator, with a large effect size found for Interpersonal Relationships. Table 31 presents detailed post-hoc independent samples t-test results by group and institute.

Table 31: Post-Hoc Independent Samples t-test results – Group and Institute

Figures 12 and 13 show the 95% confidence intervals for the difference scores for the repeated-measures ANOVA statistically significant results, by group and by institute. These give a graphical view of dependent samples t-tests. All of the confidence intervals for the experimental group are statistically significantly different from zero, therefore, this is evidence that the population means for these differences are positive. For the active control group, five of the EI competencies are statistically significant from zero therefore, this is evidence that the population means for these differences are also positive. With respect to Assertiveness, Independence and Stress Tolerance for the active control group, confidence intervals cross zero, therefore, evidence does not suggest that the population means for these competencies are different from zero.

Figure 12: Difference scores for repeated-measures ANOVA statistically significant results by group — Figure 12: Difference scores for repeated measures ANOVA statistically significant results by group

Figure 13: Difference scores for repeated-measures ANOVA statistically significant results by institute

5.5 Conclusion

This chapter presented the results from Phase Two of the study focusing on the baseline and post test results following one-to-one and group EI coaching interventions for an active control and an experimental group of final year engineering students across two IOTs in Dublin. Sample statistics found that all scores on the Bar On EQ-i2.0 increased for both the active control and the experimental groups post intervention. For the active control group all EQ-i2.0 scores increased but remained in the mid-range category while for the experimental group fourteen of the EI competencies increased from the mid-range category to the upper range category, with the remaining eight EI competencies increasing but staying in the mid-range category. Repeated-measures ANOVA results showed statistically significant differences between groups for eight of the EQ-i2.0 competencies with a moderate effect size and between institutes for three of the EQ-i2.0 competencies. The next chapter will present results from Phase Three, the final phase of this study which focused on the mock EI competency based interviews between employers and participants.

Chapter Six: Results Phase Three

6.1 Overview

Phase Three focused on the final research question ‘Are students who received tailored, as opposed to general EI coaching rated differently by employers with respect to their knowledge of EI, the application of EI to the workplace and employability? In order to answer this question, participants in the active control and
the experimental groups attended a one-to-one mock EI interview with an employer in their discipline of engineering. There were ten employers involved in this phase of the research who spanned the five disciplines of engineering represented in the study. The final student sample was 51, 27 in the active control group and 24 in the experimental group. Six students who had participated in the coaching process did not attend for interview for various reasons; pressure of final year academic work and part-time work commitments. Each employer interviewed a sample of students from their discipline of engineering. A topic guide was utilised during the interview with a prescribed set of questions to be asked. Employers were asked to complete a rating sheet at the end of each interview, rating the participant on four areas using a Likert rating scale. In addition, employers were asked to explain their ratings for each question. The four questions were:

1. How would you rate the student’s ability to identify key learning from the EI coaching process? Explain.
2. How would you rate the student’s knowledge of the application of EI competencies to the workplace? Explain.
3. How would you rate the student’s understanding of the link between emotional intelligence competencies and employability? Explain.

4. As an employer, all things being equal on the technical and qualifications front, would you hire this student based purely on your perception of their emotional intelligence (EI)? Explain.

For questions 1-3, a Likert scale of 1 (Very Poor), 2 (Poor), 3 (Neutral), 4 (Good) and 5 (Very Good) was used. For question four, the scale consisted of 1 (Yes), 2 (Maybe), 3 (Undecided) and 4 (No). Statistical analysis of Likert ratings was completed using IBM SPSS Version 24 on a Windows 10 operating system.

6.2 Main Results: Mock EI interview rating sheets

With regard to the active control group and question one, the student’s ability to identify key learning from the EI coaching process, 33.3% were rated as ‘very good’, 48.1% as ‘good’, 11.1% as neutral and 7.4% as ‘poor’. With regard to the tailored group, 62.5% of students were rated as ‘very good’, 29.2% rated as ‘good’ and 8.3% were rated as ‘poor’. When examining responses to question two, student’s knowledge of the application of EI competencies to the workplace, for the active control group 14.8% of students were rated ‘very good’ by employers, as compared to 41.7% in the experimental group. In relation to question three, the student’s understanding of the link between EI competencies and employability, 33.3% of participants in the active control group were rated as ‘very good’ as opposed to 58.3% in the tailored group. When examining question four rating whether employers would hire students based purely on their perception of the student’s EI, 40.7% of students in the active control group would be hired as compared to 58.3% in the experimental group. See Table 32 for a full breakdown of these results and Figures 14-17 for a visual representation of the results.

Table 32: Mock EI competency based interviews – employer responses

Figure 14: Student ability to identify key EI learning

Figure 15: Student knowledge of the application of EI to the workplace

Figure 16: Student knowledge of the links between EI and employability

Figure 17: Student hire based purely on employer perceptions of EI

6.2.1 Chi-squared (χ²) results

A chi-squared (χ²) test of independence was run to check if there was a significant association between employer ratings of mock EI competency based interviews by group*institute, by group, by institute and, in addition, by group separately within each institute. The rationale for testing the data by group within each institute in Phase Three was because a significant effect was found in Phase Two for institute for three of the EQ-i2.0 competencies. This raised the question as to whether results might, in fact, differ within institutes, if assessed separately. This separate assessment is important here as this stops non-significant results from one institute swamping out significant results from another. Findings from the chi-squared test of independence suggested no statistically significant difference in the interaction effect group*institute. With respect to main effects, no statistically significant differences were found in employer ratings between the groups for three of the four questions. The exception was question two. In addition, findings suggested no statistically significant differences in employer ratings across the institutes for all four questions. When examining results for the data split by institute, statistically significant results were found between groups within Institute 1 for questions one and three suggesting differences in employer response distributions between the active control group and the experimental group responses. No statistically significant findings between groups were found for Institute 2.

When examining question one, the student’s ability to identify key learning from the EI coaching process, results showed no statistically significant difference between the active control (M = 4.07, SD = .874) and the experimental groups (M = 4.46, SD = .884), χ² (3, n = 51) = 6.145, p = .105, Cramer’s V = .347 (moderate effect size). In terms of institute, no statistically significant results were found χ² (3, n = 51) = 2.568, p = .463, V = .224 (small effect size). With respect to question two, the student’s knowledge of the application of EI competencies to the workplace, results demonstrated a statistically significant difference between the active control (M = 3.89, SD = .641) and the experimental groups (M = 4.04, SD = .999), χ² (3, n = 51) = 8.279, p = .041, V = .403 (moderate effect size). No statistically significant results were found between institutes for question two, χ² (3, n = 51) = 2.959, p = .398, V = .241 (small effect size). When examining question three, ratings of student’s understanding of the link between EI competencies and employability, results showed no statistically significant difference between the active control (M = 4.22, SD = .641) and the experimental group (M = 4.42, SD = .929), χ² (3, n = 51) = 5.058, p = .168, V = .315 (moderate effect size). No statistically significant results were found between institutes for question three, χ² (3, n = 51) = 1.656, p = .647, V = .180 (small effect size).

With regard to the final question, whether employers would hire students based purely on their perception of their EI, findings demonstrated no statistically significant difference between the active control (M = 2.07, SD = .1.14) and the experimental group (M = 1.79, SD = 1.10), χ² (3, n = 51) = 2.024, p = .567, V = .199 (small effect size). Again no statistically significant findings were found between the institutes for question four, χ² (3, n = 51) = 3.079, p = .380, V = .246 (small effect size). When examining results split by institute statistically significant results were found for Institute 1 for questions one χ² (3, n = 23) = 8.532, p = .036, V = .609 (large effect size) and question three, χ² (3, n = 23) = 8.203, p = .042, V = .597 (large effect size). Both these results demonstrated a moderate effect size. Results showed no statistically significant results for Institute 1 for Questions Two χ² (3, n = 23) = 7.214, p = .065, V = .560 (large effect size) and question four, χ² (3, n = 23) = 2.843, p = .497, V = .322 (moderate effect size). No statistically significant results were found in means scores within Institute 2 for all four questions; (1) χ² (3, n = 28) = 1.676, p = .642, V = .245, (2) χ² (2, n = 28) = 3.743, p = .154, V = .366, (3) χ² (2, n = 28) = .200, p = .905, V = .084 and, (4) χ² (3, n = 28) = 3.435, p = .329, V = .350, respectively.

6.2.2 Post Hoc Independent samples t-test results

A post hoc between groups independent samples t-test was conducted, following the χ² statistically significant findings for question two, student’s knowledge of the application of EI to the workplace. Results of this test suggested no statistically significant differences in mean response between the active control and the experimental groups (M = 3.89, SD = .641) and (M= 4.04, SD = .999), t (38.348) = .641, p = .525, Glass’s Δ = 0.234 (small effect size). Overall, and taking Type I error into account, these results suggested that there was no evidence for a difference between students who received tailored EI coaching as opposed to general EI coaching in terms of all four questions. Post hoc between groups independent samples t-tests were also conducted on statistically significant results split by institute for questions one and three. Results suggested no statistically significant differences in mean responses in Institute 1 between the active control and the experimental groups for question one (M = 3.70, SD = .823) and (M = 4.31, 1.109), t (21) = 1.45, p = .162, Glass’s Δ = 0.74 (moderate effect size) and question three (M = 4.00, SD = .667) and (M = 4.46, 1.127), t (21) = 1.15, p = .264, Glass’s Δ = 0.689 (moderate effect size).

All of the chi-squared tests involved cells with 0 or low counts (and SPSS gave warning messages for the tests) which can be a problem with chi-squared testing. However, the chi- squared tests were checked by Dr McGuinness against results from Fisher’s exact test and found to be equivalent from a significance point of view. See Tables 33 and 34 for a breakdown of results by group and institute and Table 35 for a breakdown of results split by institute.

Table 33: Means, standard deviations, confidence intervals, χ², df, significance Cramer’s V (C) for mock EI competency based interviews by group

Table 34: Means, standard deviations, confidence intervals, χ², df, significance Cramer’s V (C) for mock EI competency based interviews by institute

Table 35: Means, standard deviations, confidence intervals, χ², df, significance Cramer’s V (C) for mock EI competency based interviews split by institute

6.3 Phase Three – Qualitative results

Employers were also requested to explain each of their ratings for the four questions on a pre-designed rating sheet. Thematic analysis was conducted at a semantic level on responses to the above questions. Seven key themes were found in the data which employers linked with knowledge of EI, the ability of students to apply EI to the workplace and overall employability. These themes were: (i) the importance of identifying and articulating weaknesses, (ii) self-awareness, (iii) EI and teamwork, (iv) EI and work experience, (v) EI as a critical factor in determining employability, (vi) behavioural dispositions as key to graduate hire, and (vii) lack of preparation being
found. There was some relationship between themes (i) and (ii) as employers highlighted the importance of identifying weaknesses (theme one) but also discussed self-awareness in terms of weaknesses (theme two). Each of the themes will now be presented.

6.3.1 Theme One: Importance of identifying and articulating weaknesses

When examining ratings of ‘very good’ for both the active control and the experimental groups in respect of question one, employers raised the area of weaknesses and specifically the student’s ability to identify and address their weaknesses. This focus on weaknesses was similar across both the active control and
the experimental groups particularly in relation to the ratings of ‘very good’ and ‘good’. For the active control group, ratings of ‘neutral’ also included comments on weaknesses and an inability of students in this group to articulate their weaknesses. For example, one employer stated that the student “had to be teased out quite a bit and had misplaced his report and had forgotten his strengths and weaknesses”. Another employer reported being “unconvinced” that the student “really tried to change his weak categories”. Employers attributed lower ratings to students who did not make the effort to change their weak areas with one employer stating that the student simply “accepted the EI test ratings” rather than “encouraging and pushing himself to be better or applying his learnings”. Participants were rated highly for being able to clearly identify their weaknesses but most importantly, explain the steps they had taken to address these weaknesses. For example, one employer stated that the student “mentioned picking up a book to further improve her weaknesses” and that the student “had a plan for her weaknesses”. Employers valued the fact that the student was “very comfortable discussing his weaknesses and how to improve them”. What was important for employers was that students used the learning from the EI coaching process to make changes in their EI and demonstrate how they have made improvements with one employer stating that the student “did very well here, really demonstrated how he has developed his weaknesses in particular”. Another employer rated highly the fact that the student questioned their lower scores on the EQ.i2.0, named their weaknesses and talked through them with the employer, following which the student “realised he was much better than he thought”.

Employers also attributed ratings of ‘good’ to some students who, while being aware of their weaknesses had not implemented any changes. Others recognised what they had to learn but “could analyse it a little further” while another student “lacked application to improve weaknesses”. In terms of question four, employers again referred to weaknesses with one employer giving a rating of ‘yes’ in terms of hire as the student had “worked on main weaknesses identified through the coaching session and applied fix – making decisions, judgements too quickly”. What is important here in terms of higher ratings is the value placed by employers on the fact that students were open about their weaknesses but demonstrated the steps they had taken to address them.

6.3.2 Theme Two: Self-Awareness

Participants who could demonstrate high levels of self-awareness were rated highly by employers. Ratings of ‘very good’ across questions one to three were given by employers to students who demonstrated high levels of self-awareness. Employers referred to self-awarenesss and reflection on the EI coaching process twice as much for the active control group as compared with the experimental group for these questions. It may be the case that these students in the active control group discussed self-awareness more than the students in the experimental group. One employer stated that the student “understood the process very well”, that the student was a “very thoughtful, reflective individual”. Employers stated that by being self-aware students were able to give a “good and honest appraisal” of scores and through a process of self-reflection one student clearly demonstrated that they had “great social responsibility skills”. Self-awareness enabled students to identify strengths and weaknesses but also to understand that the EI coaching process was just the starting point that they have “more to draw from this involvement and participation”. Self awareness was linked with students being “perceptive”, “thoughtful” and “anxious to learn and improve” which were rated highly by employers. Even for students who employers stated had much room for improvement, it was their willingness to engage in self-reflective activities which resulted in ratings of very good for this question. One employer stated that the student “understood the topics well and related them to the importance for self-improvement” while another also commented on how self awareness had helped the student to take steps to self-improvement

Self-awareness was also highlighted for students who received ratings of ‘good’ in terms of question one. This lower rating was attributed to the student’s inability to provide explanations or examples of how the learning had changed them or been of benefit. For example, one student was described as “very aware”, however, “over-analysed every aspect of the coaching process”. Another student was very aware of how the EI coaching process could assist him with his “interpersonal skills”, however, “struggled to give specific examples”. Another again had strong awareness of strengths and weaknesses but “lacked application to improve weaknesses”. Self awareness was also given as the reason for giving a rating of ‘very good’ for question two, i.e., the student’s knowledge of the application of EI competencies to the workplace. One employer argued that the student was very aware of the importance of “stress management and empathetic skills” in the workplace. Another argued that the student’s “awareness will sharpen with experience in the workplace on a full time basis”, while another was described as a “thoughtful individual but perhaps not as reflective as he might be in terms of both things that go well and those that don’t go as well”. What was interesting was that one student who “struggled to show the passion he had” was rated as ‘very good’ for question one because he had demonstrated an awareness around this weakness and was taking steps to address it. Another who “had an initial confidence issue” was rated as very good as he had the awareness to bring “all supporting materials”, i.e., the workplace report from the EQ i2.0 test, with him and was able to take the initiative and “drive the interview where he wanted it to go”. Again this need for examples was apparent when analysing higher ratings and the need to demonstrate the self-reflective process and take employers on a journey of the process of self-awareness and learning.

6.3.3 Theme Three: EI and teamwork

In terms of question one, employers also gave ratings of ‘very good’ to students who could demonstrate the value of participating in the EI coaching process, in particular, in relation to teamwork. This reference to teamwork was similar across both groups with respect to all four questions. One student demonstrated their learning from the EI coaching with an example of how their approach to group projects has changed, stating that previously they would have “jumped into” the task but now they “paused and thought about group dynamics” which resulted in the student allowing “others to demonstrate their skills for the benefit of the group”. Again the benefits of the EI coaching in terms of group work was rated highly with one student giving an example of “where the group spun out of control and how it was brought back carefully” and another student describing how when a team has high EI it has benefits as “everyone’s drive lines up”. The EI coaching process had also taught one student “the value of accepting criticism” and how particular EI competencies can be used for “split decisions”. For another student EI could be used for “more social team based parameters” that are used “on a daily basis to get the job done”.

This theme of teamwork and team dynamics was found with respect to question two also, i.e., the student’s knowledge of the application of EI competencies to the workplace. In terms of rating students as ‘very good’ for this question, employers argued that one student “grasped the EI capabilities in the make-up of a team” while another viewed “team achievement as more valuable than personal achievement”. This ability to demonstrate with examples how EI could be applied in the workplace was rated highly by employers. One student was described as giving a “great example of being less dominant” in a team situation while another outlined how they “came to the table with ideas, encouraged others to participate and leveraged their EI to get the project across the line”. Students who received a rating of ‘neutral’ for this question “couldn’t expand beyond developing relationships with team” or focused on “individual productivity rather than wider work/team fit”. Another had a “good understanding of team dynamics but did not give outright examples where identified skills would relate” and focused exclusively on teamwork in terms of conflict rather than “the benefits of working with others”. It would appear that differences in ratings are due to the fact that students did not have a thorough knowledge of teamwork and were unable to articulate this knowledge with strong examples.

Teamwork was highlighted in terms of question three with employers rating as ‘very good’ students who “gave examples of how they (EI competencies) enabled working with team players – and even difficult or challenging non team players to enable getting the job done”. On the other hand, one student who received a rating of poor in respect of question three was described as speaking “at a high level” about EI but his attitude would “put him as typical of someone who works best alone”. The importance of the team arose in terms of ratings of ‘maybe’ for question four. One employer questioned a student’s confidence and stated that they would “like to understand the role he takes in a team effort”. Another employer stated that the student was “a bit battered but a team fit” with another student being described as a “very good team member” but possibly not so confident in a “drop in the deep end situation”. Another employer sought to “explore more on teamwork and delivering solutions” prior to making a decision regarding hire. Students who received ratings of ‘no’ in terms of hire were described as “extremely forgetful on group project issues encountered”, another employer believed that the student was “best suited to an aggressive SME where one person can own a project life cycle” and believed that the “team aspect would distract and frustrate” the student.

6.3.4 Theme Four – EI and work experience

The theme of work experience was highlighted by employers when giving ratings of ‘very good’ for question two. Work experience was referred to across all four questions for the active control group and twice as much as the experimental group, with references to work experience confined to question two for the experimental group. Employers placed value on the knowledge acquired by students in both groups through work placements in terms of their ability to apply EI competencies to the workplace. The work experience did not necessarily have to be directly related to their discipline of engineering. For example, one student was described as having “good work experience” which enhanced their “application of the competencies”. Another employer believed that “past work experience helped him hugely” in terms of the mock EI interview as the student “completely understood the
importance of soft skills in the workplace”. Employers also referred to work placements undertaken during college as providing opportunities to enhance EI with one student being able to demonstrate “with examples how each area related to the challenges faced during his placement”. The EI coaching process also helped to address any “difficulties encountered” on their work experience while another was able to understand and define “what modern employers are looking for”. Previous work experience provided a “wealth of scenarios” where the student could relate EI competency to “understanding previous mistakes or correct actions”. What was important was that these insights provided the means for making improvements in the future. On the other hand, one employer stated that the student “suffered from lack of personal experience”, however, the student was honest and optimistic in recognising their own abilities. One student who received a rating of ‘neutral’ for question two “talked back to college after being asked for a hypothetical work scenario”. Work experience was described as enhancing the student’s “application of the competencies” and that the student “reads people well as demonstrated by her reading of my body language in the interview”. Through previous work experience another student recognised that EI was a “key driver in interpersonal communication”. Employers also referred to work placements as valuable learning environments for developing EI with one student rated as ‘very good’ as he had “worked on a demanding placement and he well demonstrated with examples how each area related to the challenges faced during his placement”. With respect to question three, the student’s understanding of links between EI competencies and employability ratings of ‘very good’ once again referred back to work experience completed by students, in particular, interpersonal skills with one employer stating “I think his experiences

B&B, Summer internships have helped X (name of student) appreciate the necessity to work with and through others”. This value placed by employers on work experience, not necessarily directly related to their discipline is an important finding but only if students can identify the EI skills acquired and how they might be transferable to the workplace.

6.3.5 Theme Five: EI as a critical factor in determining employability

Participants who articulated the importance of EI in determining employability were highly rated among employers. Participants in the experimental group articulated this factor eight times more than the active control group. References to EI as a critical factor were made by participants in the experimental group across questions one to three, with such references being confined to question three for the active control group. Students in the experimental group articulated how EI can often be the “deciding factor” in terms of hire. One employer stated that the student “understood the importance of EI and interpersonal skills and how it will benefit him from an employability perspective”. Another student understood that soft skills were very important, that in most interview scenarios candidates have the same degree, therefore, “the only clear deciding factor was his soft skills in the interview”. Another student “was working on improving himself after being given these results from the testing so he had a better chance when it came to interview time” and another “knew what he needed to work on and knew what would make him more employable”.

Employers rated highly the fact that students understood the link between EI and industry. One rating of good for the active control group was attributed to the fact that the student understood that “technical skills alone will not suffice”, but did not demonstrate how their strengths could enhance their “potential employability”. One employer acknowledged that once students were “working as an engineer in a larger organisation may/will heighten his awareness of the relevance between EI and employability”. Another student built “rapport naturally but may not recognise his ability to do this is a positive to the workplace”. Ratings of ‘neutral’ for this question were explained by students not demonstrating a “strong understanding of where the new knowledge would relate to industry/employability”, that answers were “overly structured” which did not match the “reality of social situations or workplace scenarios”. One student did not attribute their success at problem solving to EI and did not relate EI skills to success in the workplace. This need to link EI to the workplace with examples is, therefore, extremely important for students to understand, in particular, as employers agreed that it can often be what separates two candidates with similar technical skills and qualifications.

6.3.6 Theme Six: Behavioural Dispositions as key to graduate hire

Employers identified behavioural dispositions as key to graduate hire equally across both groups for questions one, three and four. When examining findings in terms of question four, graduate hire based purely on employers’ perceptions of student EI, all ratings of ‘yes’ for this question referred to specific personal qualities and behavioural dispositions of participants. One student was described as “extremely warm and engaging, passionate when talking on the subject”. Another employer rated as very good the fact that the student described the EI coaching process as a “mirror of myself”. Employers valued students who were willing to improve “whilst confident enough in current abilities”. Confidence was highlighted by a number of employers as apparent with some students while another needed to “build on her self-confidence but would make an excellent employee”. One student was rated ‘yes’ in terms of hire as they were the “only student who mentioned social responsibility and importance of work/life balance”. Employers referred to the “incredibly strong behavioural skills” of a number of participants, one of whom was described as having “great interpersonal skills – optimism, problem solving, teamwork, positivity”. Students who were hired were described as having “very strong soft skills”, as a “strong team player, empathetic, flexible”, with “strong communication skills”, both verbal and non-verbal and were able to express themselves very well. Another student had “strong EI”, was “able to smile, animate, express himself in a way you want to hear what he has to say and to bring people on a journey”. Others were “very likeable” with the ability to be “genuine” identified by many employers as a particularly important quality.

Many employers in giving ratings of ‘maybe’ in terms of student hire expressed the wish to see the student a second time. For students who received ratings of ‘undecided’ employers again referred to behavioural dispositions and personal qualities in making their decision. For example, one student was described as lacking the “spark” required, another was not as “decisive as he could be”, another lacked “passion” and another needed further personal development. When exploring ratings of ‘no’ in terms of graduate hire, behavioural dispositions featured among many of the explanations. Students were described as “over-confident” or “uncaring for the topic” with interest and enthusiasm being described as being “non-existent”. Others did not fit the profile of the organisation, one was described as “very hard work” in the interview with the employer describing the interview as similar to “pulling teeth”.
Another student was described as “headstrong” when it came to discussing group projects and “appeared unchanging in his ways towards criticism”. Another was described as “arrogant” and “in need of working on genuine answers”. This need to be genuine was emphasised by all employers with highest ratings being attributed to students who were honest and genuine with their responses. Poor eye contact was also highlighted as an issue with some students.

6.3.7 Theme Seven: Interview Preparation

The theme of interview preparation was referred to by employers across both groups equally, with respect to all four questions. Participants who had prepared were rated highly by employers with employers arguing that such preparation was very evident in the course of the interview. On the other hand, employers were very vocal regarding students who did not prepare which again was very evident in the interviews.

For example, in relation to question one, employers stated that they were unclear on what exactly students had taken from the process with one student’s explanations of learning being described as “a little woolly”. Employers referred to self-confidence as being an issue with some students who were rated ‘good’, with the employer “not fully convinced” that the student “took as much as he might from the EI coaching process”. Some students were unsure how to answer the questions and did not focus on how “positive EI competencies can affect also”. Employers attributed these issues to a lack of preparation by students for the interview. Employers stated that some students needed “time, space and support” to “learn but also apply” learning and “grow further as a result”. In giving a rating of ‘neutral’ for this question one employer stated that the student “had to be teased out quite a bit and had misplaced his report and had forgotten his strengths and weaknesses” so again highlighting the need for improvement in terms of preparation. In terms of ratings of ‘poor’ for this question, employers again highlighted lack of preparation. Many students could not give any examples of where they had used EI in a project, one student “talked in circles around EI”, another employer reported that a student “really had no interest scoffed at my first question”. Another employer described the interview as “hard work” in terms of getting the student “to talk, express himself”. Another student “forgot the topics, did not improve, didn’t mention the benefits of strengths”.

This lack of preparation was also reported with respect to question two. For example, in giving a rating of ‘good’, many employers highlighted the lack of examples given by students of how EI can be applied to the workplace. Some students did not link EI competency to the workplace, did not provide “an applied example” for the workplace and needed to be “probed” in order to share examples. Some students had a narrow focus and needed to expand on their learning further. Ratings of ‘neutral’ for question two were attributed to a lack of preparation of specific examples to reinforce their responses. One student was described as having a “utopian view of the workplace” and not having an understanding of the “grey” areas of working with people. Others were not prepared enough for the interview, could not articulate the link between EI and the workplace and would have benefited from “more prep time”. Some students were “complacent”, used language in the interview that the employer would not recommend such as “self-isolate”. One student who received a rating of ‘poor’ for question two “did not know his own results. Did not understand what soft skills were. Had to be told”. Another student “did not factor EI into a task or work challenge” and another student stated that “people may have their own issues” in a work setting but “danced around this as if it was a weakness”. When examining ratings of ‘maybe’ in terms of question four, all employers referred to the need for students to improve on certain behavioural and EI skills. For example, one student was described as having “good interpersonal skills didn’t sell himself overly well today”, another demonstrated “great understanding” but the employer “wasn’t convinced of his passion”. Another student was described as “arrogant” and “in need of working on genuine answers”. This lack of preparation is extremely important and has arisen in Phase One of this research and will be expanded and discussed further in the discussion chapter.

6.4 Conclusion

This chapter has presented results from Phase Three of this study which focused on the mock EI competency based interviews between employers and participants. While statistically significant findings were not found between the active control and experimental groups, important findings were determined with respect to interview success, including the ability to articulate weaknesses, the need to demonstrate, with examples, teamwork and learning from previous work experience. Employers valued students who prepared for the interview and those who demonstrated self-awareness and particular behavioural dispositions. Chapter Seven will present a discussion of the overall study and present a synthesis of information, drawing on current literature in the field and on findings from this study.

Chapter Seven: Discussion, Strengths, Limitations, Future Research, Conclusions

7.1 Overview

This study was designed to address four key research questions, as follows:
1. What are the emotional and social (EI) skills that Irish employers deem important for graduates to possess in five sectors of the Irish economy?
2. What are the current levels of EI being displayed by graduates, when entering the workplace, as reported by employers in key sectors of the Irish economy?
3. Does a tailored, as opposed to a general approach to social-emotional competency coaching for final year engineering students, based on the stated needs of employers, result in different group mean EQ-i2.0 scores post-intervention?
4. Are students who received tailored, as opposed to general EI coaching rated differently by employers with respect to their knowledge of EI, the application of EI to the workplace and employability?

The study was conducted in three phases to address the above questions. Phase One, using both quantitative and qualitative analysis, addressed questions one and two, in full. It addressed question three, in part through gathering opinions and expressed needs of employers on the design and delivery of a tailored EI coaching intervention for final year engineering students. A key strength of this research was employer involvement as it provided a valuable insight into the ‘what’ and ‘how’ in terms of the design and delivery of EI coaching as an intervention. In addition, the collaborative nature of this study gave final year students valuable exposure to employers in their discipline of engineering. Findings revealed that all employers rated the EI competencies as either very important or important, with motivation and teamwork being rated as very important by all employers. Highest ratings of ‘good’ were found for the current levels of competence being displayed by graduates, when entering the workplace. In terms of designing tailored EI coaching, employers stated that coaching must be something tangible, must involve teamwork and working within time pressures and deadlines. Reflection was also emphasised as important in terms of learning from the process.

Phase Two involved the design and delivery of tailored and general EI competency based coaching programmes for final year engineering students. Students were tested using the Bar-On EQ-i2.0 at baseline and post-intervention, all students received one-to one coaching and both groups received three by one and a half hour group coaching sessions. The active control group received general EI group coaching and the experimental group received tailored EI group coaching, as informed by employers. Results were analysed using quantitative analysis. Results showed that EI ratings increased post intervention for both groups. As previously stated, the EQ-i2.0 is broken down into three categories of ratings; scores below 90 are less developed social-emotional competencies, scores between 90 and 110 are mid-range meaning that the competencies are well developed and scores above 110 are highly developed competencies. With regard to the active control group, mean scores at baseline were in the mid-range of the scale, i.e., between 90 and 110. Results showed that scores for Total EI, the five composite scales, fifteen subscales and the Wellbeing indicator increased post-intervention for this group but remained in the mid-range of the scale. With regard to the experimental group, all mean scores at baseline were in the mid-range of the scale. The impact of the intervention was greater for the experimental group for some of the EI competencies with post-intervention scores for Total EI, Self-Perception, Self-Regard, Self-Actualisation, Emotional Self-Awareness, Assertiveness, Interpersonal, Interpersonal Relationships, Social Responsibility, Reality Testing, Stress Management, Stress Tolerance, Optimism and the Wellbeing indicator increasing from the mid-range (90-110) to the high range (110+) on the EQ-i2.0. The remaining eight competencies for this group increased post intervention but remained in the mid-range category. For both groups, mean scores increased over time from baseline to post intervention. The impact of the intervention was greater for the experimental group as compared with the active control group for some of the EI competencies, with statistically significant differences found post-intervention for Total EI, Self-Expression, Assertiveness, Independence, Interpersonal, Decision Making, Reality Testing and Stress Tolerance and for Interpersonal, Interpersonal Relationships and Wellbeing between institutes. All of these statistically significant results across groups and institutes will merit discussion at a later stage in this chapter.

Phase Three consisted of a mixed design, with one-to-one mock EI competency based interviews being completed by employers with each participant. Employers completed a Likert scale rating sheet following each interview and provided qualitative explanations for each of their ratings. In terms of the mock EI interview and student recruitment, over 58% of the experimental group were recruited as opposed to 40% of the active control group. However, findings demonstrated no statistically significant difference in mean ratings between groups in terms of three of the four questions on the rating sheet. The exception was question two which focused on student’s ability to apply the EI coaching to the workplace. Both the one-to-one and the group coaching delivered in this study followed the guidelines set down by Multi-Health Systems (MHS). However, the guidelines state that coaching interventions should take place within a nine to twelve month period, with regular meet-ups. In this study time, resources and availability of students and employers resulted in the coaching taking place over a six28 month period which may have impacted on results.

This study was contextualised within a multiple intelligence theoretical framework with the core focus being the personal intelligences within the framework. Personal intelligences, as described by Gardner, (1993, p. 244) and discussed in chapter two are “information-processing capacities”, one focusing inward (intrapersonal) and the other outward (interpersonal) which form a major part of humans as a species. This study adopted the principles of the MI theoretical framework, when designing the one-to-one and the group EI coaching interventions. As a starting point, the focus was on the intrapersonal intelligence examining self-perception, emotional self-awareness, self regard and self-actualisation. In agreement with Gardner, (1993) by initially addressing the aspects of intrapersonal intelligence facilitated participants to explore and to distinguish between a range of emotions such as pain and pleasure and involved having “access to one’s own feeling life” (Gardner, 1993, p. 240). In addition, when adopting the interpersonal intelligence elements of the MI theoretical framework into the EI coaching intervention, participants were facilitated to focus outward towards other people and weigh up interactions, gauge people’s moods, motivations, intentions and temperament. Results of this study demonstrated that all EQ-i2.0 scores across both the active control and the experimental groups which again concurs with the MI theoretical framework which holds that every person has potential, however, must be given opportunities to learn and develop. It also agrees with research on EI which holds that

28 The EI coaching intervention took place over a six-month period from recruitment of participants to post-intervention EQ-i2.0 testing. However, the actual one to one EI coaching and group EI coaching interventions took place over a four-month period at the request of final year students.

given the opportunity of EI coaching individuals have the potential to develop and grow in terms of their competency. Arising from this, it is held that this study aligned itself cohesively and effectively with the MI theoretical framework.

This chapter will provide a critical analysis of the results from the three phases of the research and will consider each research question, in turn. However, in terms of discussing each of the questions, some crossover and overlap has occurred between Phase One (question one and question two) and Phase Three (question four) as similar themes were found. Therefore, where appropriate and for ease of reading some of the discussion has been integrated. In terms of the quantitative aspects of this study, it is important to point out that the sample sizes for the phases of this study were generally small. Small sample sizes can more easily be non-representative of their associated populations, and additionally may result in statistical tests that have low power. Where there is not statistical significance there may have been issues with the statistical power of the associated test. The findings are discussed in the context of previous research as well as with reference to how they might be used to inform future EI coaching interventions.

7.2 What are the emotional and social (EI) skills that Irish employers deem important for graduates to possess in five sectors of the Irish economy? What are the current levels of EI being displayed by graduates, when entering the workplace, as reported by employers in these sectors?

As previously stated, Phase One of the research addressed these questions which involved a survey of employers in five sectors of industry and was followed up by semi structured interviews with a sample of employers. This phase also focused on part of question three and gathered employer opinions on the design and delivery of the tailored EI coaching intervention. In the survey, over 80% of employers rated all ten competencies as either important or very important with competencies of Motivation, Communication and Teamwork being highlighted as very important and often lacking among graduates. Employers offered different explanations as to why these competencies were important and why ratings of current levels were ‘good’ as opposed to ‘very good’ or ‘excellent’. When discussing issues with current levels of EI competence among graduates, employers also highlighted the diverse nature of the role within different organisations. Often graduates did not understand that particular roles were multi-dimensional and required a wide range of competencies, for example, adaptability, flexibility, problem solving and teamwork. They argued that graduates often had a very narrow focus with one example given in the IT/computing sector of a graduate who wanted to be a developer but what was required by the organisation was a developer who also possessed a range of other technical and social-emotional skills in order to achieve maximum performance. This narrow focus was extended to working within multi-disciplinary teams. Again graduates did not appreciate that they would not solely be working with individuals within their own profession, and that teams were often comprised of varying professionals which necessitated high levels of communication.

In Phase One and Phase Three of this study, employers stressed the need for graduates to be confident, arguing that graduates did not sell themselves, own their skills or apply their knowledge and skills in the workplace. This concurs with Keefer, (2015) who argued that when comparing students with equal levels of ability, it was the ones who were more confident in their ability that tended to succeed more in the workplace, in their educational career and in life, generally. Confidence is included in the EQ-i2.0 under the subscale self-regard which scores individuals on their confidence and knowledge of their strengths and weaknesses. However, with respect to this research employers repeatedly stated that often graduates displayed an inability to demonstrate such strengths or discuss weaknesses which will be addressed further on in this chapter. When examining the importance of EI competencies and the issues with current levels being displayed by graduates, one thing that became obvious was the contention by employers that the college environment and, in particular, the extent of the support structures available in college were simply not available in the workplace and, consequently, graduates struggled with that transition. This concurs with Le Maistre and Paré, (2004) and with McSweeney and Williams, (2018) who highlighted the significant differences between tasks and responsibilities assigned to students on work experience as compared with tasks and responsibilities when fully qualified and employed as a full member of staff. They argued that the transition into the workplace can be challenging due to the manner in which students on work placement are treated. For example, students are protected from the day-to-day politics and the busy nature of the work environment. But, as professionals there is an expectation that they can adapt to a very busy, dynamic and pressurised setting which can leave them quite exposed, tired and stressed but gaining confidence as they learn to cope.

However, this finding also contradicts other findings in the semi-structured interviews where employers stated that multiple supports were available to graduates when entering the workplace from mentors to counselling and to involvement in different project teams. One employer argued that, in college, a broad range of supports were offered to students which simply were not available in the workplace due to time constraints and resource availability. Such supports included guidance on academic tasks, projects and team based issues. Another argued that the nature of higher education was very prescribed and structured. So for example, lecturers had pre-designed continuous assessment and examinations that students completed within particular timeframes.
However, the workplace was dynamic and diverse, with tasks changing constantly and project teams working on different projects within particular timeframes. The expectation was that graduates could be adaptable and flexible to move onto another project team to work on a completely different project.

Arising from this study, there is an opportunity to re-examine the level of supports being provided in third level education and in the workplace and incorporate some of the principles put forward by Vygotsky, cited by Daniels, (2016) in terms of support and scaffolding. This would result in supports being more intensive in year one of higher education but gradually reducing as students progressed in their academic careers. In addition and as already mentioned in Chapter Two, workplaces could also adopt a scaffolding approach to students on work placement, with intensive support being given at the start of a work placement and gradually reducing over time. This may merit further research to examine the nature of support structures in place in higher education to determine if they are providing opportunities for students to become independent and critical thinkers and to grow and develop as individuals. This may highlight a need to expand on the supports currently in place to explore if they are facilitating the transition into the workplace. On the other hand, employers need to assume more responsibility in terms of assisting students with the transition into the workplace, perhaps adopting a scaffolding approach to graduates as they embark on their professional careers. When examining EI competency and its importance in terms of successful transition into the workplace, employers raised self-awareness as a critical starting point for graduates. This will be discussed next.

7.2.1 Self-awareness as key to success in the workplace

What emerged was the importance employers placed on self-awareness, not solely emotional self-awareness as crucial to workplace success. This agrees with Weisinger, (1998) who argued that self-awareness was at the core of EI and must be the starting point for any EI coaching programme. In addition, the starting points for the Search Inside Yourself (SIY) EI coaching programme delivered by Google to engineering staff were self-awareness and self-regulation (Tan, 2012). Peter Guber, CEO, Leader and Entrepreneur argued that self-awareness was the number one most important factor in terms of career success and was the foundation block for developing “exceptional interpersonal skills” which concurs with findings from this study (Guber, 2015, n.p.). Employers argued that in order for graduates to successfully make the transition from third level into the workplace and to grow and develop in their career, they must be self aware. They emphasised that emotional self-awareness was too narrow, that there was a need to focus more on self-awareness as a broader concept and most importantly as the starting point in any intervention. This is of interest and merits further discussion to determine if there are differences between emotional self-awareness and self-awareness.
The Bar-On EQ-i2.0 described emotional self-awareness as “understanding own emotions” (MHS, 2011, n.p.) and Stein and Book, (2011, p. 57) provided a detailed definition of emotional self-awareness as “the ability to recognize your feelings, to differentiate between them to know why you are feeling these feelings, and to recognize the impact your feelings have on others around you”. Baumeister, (2005, p. 7) defined self-awareness as “anticipating how others perceive you, evaluating yourself and your actions according to collective beliefs and values, and caring about how others evaluate you”. Prince and Alexander, (n.d.) argued that self-awareness was a dual process of understanding one’s own strengths and weaknesses but also understanding how others perceive them. This inward focused notion of self and outward focused concept of others’ perceptions are very prominent when examining self-awareness. Prince and Alexander, (n.d., p. 2) coined the term “other” awareness which was attributed to understanding how other people perceive us and understanding how our behaviours and actions impact others, both of which can inform our own self-awareness. This focus on the ‘other’ in terms of self-awareness concurs with findings from phases one and three of this study where employers repeatedly referred to the need for graduates who were self-aware due to the impact of poor self-awareness on colleagues, among teams and with clients which, in some cases resulted in litigation. While 43% of employers in the survey rated ‘emotional self-awareness’ as good among graduates, three employers in the semi-structured interviews rated it as fair, with the remaining two employers rating it as very good and good, respectively. In elaborating on these ratings, employers held that it is one thing for graduates to possess social and emotional competencies but if they are not aware of them then they are of no real use in the workplace. This finding is similar to Keefer, (2015) who argued that it was a person’s self-beliefs about their competence which was key as such self-beliefs were powerful motivators of observable behaviour. This need for self awareness, which was reported by employers as often lacking in graduates manifested in the workplace by graduates’ inability to conduct themselves and change their behaviour to meet the needs of a professional environment and to understand the negative impact of their behaviour on a team.

Employers linked self-awareness with a commitment to self-learning and self development but also required an appreciation of the broader nature of an organisation, with employers arguing that students often have a very narrow focus. This agrees with Prince and Alexander, (n.d.) who argued that self-awareness was a process, with no destination point; that individuals were continually learning and growing and becoming aware of strengths, beliefs and values. Employers extended the concept of self-awareness to include social awareness which for employers meant graduates being aware of the demands and pressures experienced by colleagues and the need for graduates to demonstrate an appreciation of the time and effort it takes to train them. This concurs with Goleman, (2006) who held that social awareness included the skill of primal empathy, i.e., the ability to sense other people’s experiences and be attuned to non-verbal emotional signals. The Emotional and Social Competency Inventory developed by Boyatzis and Goleman has a specific cluster focused on social awareness which includes empathy and organisational awareness. Once again, the importance of demonstrating social awareness and self-awareness must be emphasised as by not doing so, graduates may be impeding their progress within the workplace and ultimately their career success. One challenge raised by employers was in terms of the measurement of self awareness arguing that it would be very difficult to assess. Prince and Alexander, (n.d.) stated that in many organisations, multi-rater feedback assessments were utilised to measure personal development and self-awareness. Such an assessment format enabled learning through self-ratings and ratings by line managers and team members. In this study, the use of multi-rater feedback systems was evident among employers through mechanisms such as monthly and quarterly reviews utilised for learning and development among graduates, not specifically focusing on self-awareness but on a broad range of social-emotional competencies. Through these systems, employers found that reviews resulted in the graduate and the team lead being congruent in relation to areas of strength and areas in need of further development. This concurs with Prince and Alexander, (n.d.) who held that individuals with high self-awareness who have congruence between their and others’ ratings are more successful in the workplace, have strong working relationships and higher levels of performance. However, employers in Phase One of this study reported issues in terms of graduates and feedback with many graduates reacting very badly to constructive criticism. One employer stated that often graduates resigned from positions due to feedback received by team leads or at performance reviews when the feedback did not meet their expectations in terms of their perceived performance or in terms of monetary rewards. This issue with feedback arose repeatedly in the survey and semi-structured interviews, with a variety of reasons being given for these challenges from age and experience to being from the Celtic Tiger generation.

One possible future research area could be to examine the coaching capacities of managers and overall perceptions of employees with respect to feedback. There is a need to examine team leaders and managers in terms of their delivery of feedback and whether it is constructive. In addition, it is important that team leaders and managers are facilitated to engage in EI competency testing to determine their levels of EI. This may be difficult due to lack of time, resources and engagement by employers and by the employability driven agenda adopted by many organisations, as argued by McGuinness et al., (2014) and Jameson et al., (2012). Leadership studies, as proposed by Goleman and Boyatzis, (2008) have clearly demonstrated that effective leaders must have an understanding of how their emotions and actions impact in the workplace and lead to mirroring by subordinates.
In addition, the Emotional and Social Competency Intelligence framework includes a category on relationship management that specifically focuses on coaches, mentors and inspirational leadership (Boyatzis, 2007).

Employers believed that some of the issues with graduates and EI could be addressed through reflection and they emphasised the important link between reflection and self-awareness, in both Phase One and Phase Three of the study. This is similar to Morin, (2011) who emphasised both reflection and introspection as critical elements in developing self-awareness. In addition, the STAR Award in the University of Aberdeen, the Search Inside Yourself programme offered in Google and Stein and Book’s EQ Edge framework for EI competency development utilising the Bar-On EQ-i2.0 include reflection as essential elements in building not only self-awareness but also a wide range of social and emotional competencies.

However, Guber, (2015) argued that reflection must be objective in order to build self-awareness. This necessitates an honest appraisal of one’s (i) strengths, (ii) weaknesses, (iii) triggers in terms of stress and coping mechanisms, (iv) methods for managing conflict, (v) inspirations, (vi) things that derail (vii) responses to authority, (viii) strategies to deal with criticism and (ix) communication styles. Guber, (2015), similar to employers in this study, stressed the need for multi-rater feedback involving colleagues, managers and team members in terms of such appraisal. This would involve different people responding to the nine questions above with respect to their colleague and then comparing responses to determine if their responses matched. According to Guber, (2015) this is the route to growth and development and ultimately career success, and it is never too late to start the process, which agrees with Prince and Alexander and with theory on EI which argues that EI can be developed throughout the lifespan.

In line with findings from Phase One and the literature on EI coaching a reflective element was included after each coaching session both in-class and for participants to complete independently at home. This is similar to the University of Aberdeen who provide a centralised website, ACHIEVE, for students to track their graduate attribute development through reflection with weekly/monthly logs being completed and assessed independently. It also concurs with Keith and Jenness, (2017) who argued that reflection was a powerful tool for professional development and must be at the core of any professional development programme in the workplace in order for employees to develop and grow. What was key in this coaching was that participants understood the process. In tailoring the group coaching, employers stated that group coaching should be tangible, involve teamwork, product development with an emphasis on the process and steps undertaken in any assignment from start to finish. So, for example, the reflective element of the balloon tower exercise for the experimental group involved in-class group discussion, reflection on what worked, the challenges and the areas of learning. Successful teams shared their strategy, i.e., the steps taken to complete the task and the process that involved identifying core EI competencies that they believed contributed to their success, such as teamwork and communication. Just as importantly, teams that did not perform well critiqued their performance and were given an opportunity to reflect on what could have worked better and what they would do differently if given the same task again. The aim here was for everyone to benefit from the process of reflection in order to learn and grow which is similar to the Guidelines of The Consortium for Research on EI in Organizations which held that EI coaching methods must be experiential and work to enhance insight among individuals.

Participants were also afforded an opportunity to reflect privately through the use of an online e-portfolio platform, Livebinder, previously discussed in Chapters Two and Three. Worksheets with reflective questions guided participants on concrete measures to reflect and learn from the process. The use of an e-portfolio afforded each participant an opportunity to expand on their skills and knowledge and develop their employability which concurs with Cosshall (n.d.) on the importance of blogs and e-portfolios for enhancing employability and developing digital literacy among students. These elements of reflection were not monitored or checked in this study but could form part of a future project on EI interventions where students are tracked and interviewed to determine the role of reflection in terms of personal growth and development.

Interestingly, Eurich, (2018) posited that introspection and/or reflection does not always improve self-awareness, that in some cases individuals who reflected were less self-aware and reported poor job satisfaction and well being. On further examination, Eurich, (2018) stated that it was the ‘how’ in terms of reflection that was the issue. Often, individuals focused on ‘why’ questions rather than focusing on ‘what’ questions, when reflecting. Eurich, (2018) argued that ‘why’ questions resulted in narrow introspection and can cause people to, in the first instance reflect on how they went wrong but then attempt to prove that they were right. In addition, ‘why’ questions can lead to “unproductive negative thoughts” and rumination (p. 7). For example, when using ‘why’ questions to reflect on a poor performance review employees often focus on their shortcomings and failings rather than an objective, rational assessment of their strengths and weaknesses. In order to build self-awareness through reflection, individuals need to use ‘what’ questions as this facilitates individuals to remain “objective, future-focused and empowered” and to learn and grow from new insights (Eurich, 2018, p. 8). In terms of a poor performance review, individuals may ask ‘what are the steps that I need to take to improve’ which is more solution focused.

According to Eurich, (2018) by being self-aware individuals are more knowledgeable about themselves resulting in increased confidence and creativity. In research conducted by Eurich, Woznyj, Van Wagoner, Heggestad, Brodersen cited by Eurich, (2018) (in press), 800 existing scientific studies on self-awareness were analysed, including surveys of people across countries and industry to examine the relationship between self-awareness and attitudes and behaviours of job satisfaction, empathy, happiness and stress. In addition, in-depth interviews were conducted with 50 people who considered themselves highly self-aware in order to examine the strategies utilised. When examining existing studies on self-awareness the authors repeatedly found two broad categories which they labelled internal self-awareness and external self-awareness. Internal self-awareness focused on how “clearly” individuals saw their values, aspirations, passions, thoughts, feelings, strengths and weaknesses and importantly how they impacted on others (p. 3). The research found that internal self-awareness was linked with higher job and relationship satisfaction, personal and social control and happiness but negatively related with anxiety, stress and depression. External self-awareness focused on an individual’s understanding of how other people perceived them. This understanding led to highly developed empathy skills and the ability to see things from other people’s perspectives. The research found no relationship between high internal self-awareness versus high external self-awareness which suggests that both categories must be addressed in order to grow and develop. While the literature on EI emphasises that EI improves with experience, Eurich, (2018) held that, in terms of self-awareness, experience and power may often hinder self-awareness, that often as individuals grow in their careers they are less open to feedback from peers, subordinates and those senior to them. This would be important for organisations when designing or developing an intervention such as EI to ensure that management are invested and a top-down approach is adopted. When addressing questions one and two in this study, and building on the need for self-awareness among graduates, the importance of cultural awareness was stressed by employers which will be discussed next.

7.2.2 Diversity in terms of culture in the workplace

Cultural awareness emerged as a critically important aspect of the global workplace which resulted in the need for graduates with high EI competency. Weisinger, (1998, p. 29) referred to culture as a person’s “upbringing, beliefs, past experiences, cultural norms and socialisation” which impact on how individuals manage and display emotion. Employers reported that the workplace was now a site of cultural diversity with people of different nationalities and backgrounds working alongside each other. Such diversity had a knock-on effect in terms of EI among graduates and employers stressed the importance of graduates having an understanding of culture and how it may impact them in the workplace. This idea of cultural awareness in terms of work readiness links in with Haigh and Clifford, (2011) who argued the need for graduates as citizens with cosmopolitan citizens having the ability to effectively function in diverse cultural environments. In addition, Hughes and Barrie, (2010) linked cultural awareness with graduate attribute development and as an important transferable skill. Emmerling, (2008) highlighted the need for EI among graduates due to globalisation which has seen major changes taking place in the workplace with diverse cultures working together to achieve organisational targets and goals. Ngonyo Njoroje and Yazdanifard, (2014) discussed an emotionally intelligent workforce which has become much more important with the changing nature of the workplace, both culturally and generationally.

What was stated by many employers was that the development of cultural awareness among graduates was a dual responsibility between higher education institutions and workplaces. Employers stressed the importance of a firm commitment by senior management in promoting a workplace culture and ethos that respected and valued difference. Interestingly, Baumeister, (2005, p. 12) argued that the emphasis was often on the differences, rather than the similarities, between particular cultures as these were more “spectacular” and obvious, however, it was the similarities which revealed the “essence” and “purpose” of culture. What is important for graduates to learn and be taught are the similarities and differences between different cultural groups as this could facilitate the transition into the workplace and promote cross cultural communication and teamwork. To some degree, this concurs with Moncho, (2013) who argued the need for cultural competence among individuals in the workplace but also stressed the importance of cultural humility which involves a willingness to postpone established beliefs and opinions about a person based on their culture. By suspending pre-existing beliefs individuals allow themselves to remain open to a gradual process of cultural awareness learning. This might merit future research to explore the degree to which cultural awareness is being addressed in higher education.

Employers stressed the importance of communication as an EI competence but, in particular, when working in a culturally diverse workplace. Employers reported that often graduates were not aware of the appropriate language to use in a professional setting, with poor communication impacting on both colleagues and clients. This concurs with the PayScale, 2016 survey cited by Strauss, (2016) where 46% of managers claimed that new graduates did not possess the requisite communication skills and with GradIreland research in which 42% of employers reported a lack of effective communication skills among graduates (Mitchell, 2017). Employers reported that good communication skills were essential for breaking down barriers and promoting good professional relations. There is a responsibility here for employers to promote a culture of openness and inclusion in the workplace and embrace diversity. Importantly, employers must be aware of the subtle differences in terms of communication between different cultures. This was emphasised by Smith, (2016) who reported the impact of poor communication on organisations in terms of low morale, lack of teamwork and overall confusion among employees. In addition, employee relations were adversely affected but ultimately poor communication cost companies financially and in terms of their reputation. This would tie in with the GradIreland article on diversity in the workplace which highlighted the need for time and flexibility in order to make cultural diversity work but also the benefits inherent in working in a diverse workplace, in terms of teams and productivity.

Gangopadhyay, (2008, p. 122) stated that emotions were influenced and shaped by “social, cultural and linguistic processes”. Accordingly, customs and ideologies of different cultures must be made apparent but this raises the issue again in terms of responsibility for preparing graduates to work in a culturally diverse workplace. In terms of organisational responsibility, what would be key is organisational policies and procedures that reflect diversity and that graduates are provided with an induction, upon entering the workplace. Thereafter, training must be provided on an ongoing basis to upskill staff and build morale in the team. As a starting point, training could include a focus on styles of communication among different cultures, with characteristics of high context and low context communication, as posited by Smith, (2016) being included. In addition, strategies for displaying emotions could be examined which was referred to by Goleman (1995, p. 113) who outlined three strategies for displaying emotion; “minimizing”, “exaggerating” and “substituting”, as previously discussed in Chapter Two. This emphasis on communication was included in the Bologna Declaration which recognised that higher education must build essential skills, one of which is communication.

The National Strategy for Higher Education to 2030 (2011) emphasised communication and teamworking to meet the needs of stakeholders. Therefore, it is one thing having an understanding of cultural diversity but what is important is that graduates are knowledgeable prior to entering the workplace and competent at applying such knowledge in the workplace. For example, being aware that people are typically better at judging emotions when expressed by their own cultural group is important. In addition, an understanding that communication of emotions has a strong universal component but there are subtle differences across cultures which can cause challenges in terms of communication and mis-interpretation of messages, as posited by Elfenbein and Ambady (2003). Both cultural awareness and communication are included in the employability and graduate attribute agendas of higher education institutions and in both the Bologna process and the National Strategy for Higher Education to 2030. In fact, cultural awareness training was emphasised in the National Strategy document due to the significant rise in new entrants into higher education, with international students making up a significant amount of such entrants (Mernagh, 2010). Yet employers highlighted issues with cultural awareness and communication among graduates. This is surprising as third level policies and national and international policies include the requirement that cultural awareness be targeted with students. This raises the need for further research to evaluate how higher education institutions are embedding cultural awareness knowledge and training into the curricula.

The semi-structured interviews in Phase One included a focus on the opinions of employers on EI coaching as an effective intervention for promoting social and emotional competency which will be discussed next.

7.2.3 EI Coaching as an effective means for promoting social and emotional competency

Opinions were mixed in terms of EI coaching interventions being an effective way of promoting social and emotional competency in graduates. However, what was important for all employers was the need for workplace organisations to promote a culture of openness to any EI coaching interventions and senior management to support such interventions. They held that without buy-in by senior management EI coaching as an intervention simply would not work. This concurs with The Consortium for Research on EI in Organizations that argued that any EI competency intervention must be in line with the organisation’s mission and overall strategy. In addition, employers emphasised that any EI coaching intervention must be role specific with one employer arguing that in some roles not everybody had to be expert at, for example, empathy. Again this agrees with The Consortium for Research on EI in Organizations that stated that EI coaching interventions must identify role specific competencies to be coached, to include multiple sources and multiple methods. This supports the view of Bar-On, (2007) who held that an assessment of needs must be conducted prior to implementing any workplace coaching intervention. This idea of matching EI competencies to be coached to the specific role concurs with Roberts et al., (2007) who used the example of social work and the caring professions which are typically emotionally charged and would demand very different competencies than competencies required in professions such as Mathematics. This notion of matching EI competencies to the role supports a tailored approach to EI competency development such as the one conducted in this study. In tailoring such interventions, role specific work related EI competencies can be developed and enhanced leading to increased work performance and career success.

Billett, (2015) also proffered that there were challenges inherent in making graduates work ready as often competencies in similar roles differed from organisation to organisation. An example given was of a nurse in a specialist ward in a major city hospital as compared to a nurse working in a doctor’s surgery in a community setting; both have the same job title but vastly different competencies required. This highlights the importance and the value of employer input and engagement in any EI coaching intervention being developed for students. This was a strength of the current study as employers were involved and engaged in the process, at all stages. This direct link with employers provided a valuable insight into their opinions and viewpoints on EI competency and its application in the workplace and their input and guidance on the tailored EI competency based intervention resulted in role specific competencies being addressed. However, this also raises the question of responsibility in terms of work readiness and highlights the need for a dual approach and shared responsibility between universities and employers to ensure that the skills being developed were relevant and fit for purpose. Through a collaborative process, the “spray and pray” approach outlined by Goleman, (1998, p. 246) would be avoided and all EI interventions would be “meticulously constructed” for use in specific occupational contexts and for particular purposes, as suggested by Zeidner et al., (2004, p. 389). Of significance was the low value placed by employers on EI coaching as an intervention to upskill students in third level education and prepare them for the workplace, yet they reported a range of issues with EI competence among graduates. This would appear contradictory in nature. What was of particular interest was that during the interview process, employers reflected on the training they provided to graduates and recognised a possible gap in induction processes for new recruits, in terms of EI competency. For example, in IT/computing the employer had initially rated the EI competency of ‘Adaptability’ as important but when given time to reflect on it and discuss it in the interview this employer stated that they should have rated it as very important. This employer further stated that a review of the induction
process currently in place within the organisation was underway to include a greater focus on EI. This was due, in part to issues encountered with new recruits in terms of their social-emotional skills.

In the professional services sector, the interview format had been changed to include more emphasis on EI. The reasons for such changes were as a direct result of issues with social and emotional competency among entry level graduates. This again highlights an important need for training among managers within organisations on EI and its importance and relevance to organisational success and staff wellbeing. Such training would equip managers and team leads with the necessary skills and expertise to support and train new recruits and indeed more experienced staff within organisations. This research has highlighted the value placed by employers on reflection among graduates in terms of learning, however, the need for reflection is also required among managers and team leads within organisations. With reflection and training, organisations could design and implement induction processes which would address both the technical aspects of a role and EI competency development.

Employers contended that EI coaching might prompt them to ask students about their learning from the process but it would not influence them in terms of graduate hire unless graduates could clearly demonstrate the learning. Evidence, however, suggests the significant impact of EI coaching in terms of occupational performance and success, for example, with fifth year paediatric students in Israel, with New York traffic police and among United States Air force recruiters in terms of annual recruitment quotas. In fact, the results from this study demonstrated that for both groups all mean EQ-i2.0 ratings increased. With respect to the experimental group, all mean EQ-i2.0 competency ratings increased from the mid-range category to the highly developed category, with the exception of self-expression, emotional expression, independence, empathy, decision making, problem solving, impulse control and flexibility. So the participants in this study who received the tailored EI coaching were exiting the third level system with highly developed skills in a range of EI competencies which were emphasised as critical by employers in this study. These ratings will be discussed further under question two below. It may be the case that EI interventions could form part of a broader package of employability workshops delivered in higher education, which will be discussed later in this section. To employers, it was more important that graduates could demonstrate, with examples, their learning and knowledge and how such an intervention was of benefit and facilitated personal development and change.

What was of more importance to employers in terms of work readiness were the provision of work placements and internships, which they believed would build both technical knowledge and EI competency, thus facilitating a smooth transition into the workplace. Employers also valued skills and learning from part-time work and hobbies. Work placements and internships were emphasised in both Phase One and Phase Three of this study, although in Phase One employers referred more to work experience such as part-time work. This is similar to Oliver, (2011) who argued that work experience during undergraduate studies was a strong predictor of positive employment outcomes and with Grant-Smith and McDonald, (2017) who held that professional work experience was a critical feature of graduate employability across all disciplines. Work experience was viewed by employers as a mechanism for meeting skills gaps, developing interpersonal skills and building professional networks. What was significant was the importance placed by employers on skills obtained through non-discipline related work experience such as part-time work or hobbies and interests. This is interesting as findings from the study conducted by Grant-Smith and McDonald, (2017) with urban planning students demonstrated the poor value placed by these students on non-discipline related work experience.
It may be the case that, in Australia more value is placed on discipline specific work experience, however, in this study, this was not the case. The focus, therefore, should be on helping students to understand that the skills acquired through part-time work are transferable to a more discipline specific workplace, but what is key is their ability to demonstrate and articulate how these skills are transferable. This arose in the mock EI interviews in Phase Three with many employers rating students highly who could apply their learning from extra-curricular activities and part-time work to the workplace.

One emergent finding was issues with graduates and EI throughout the recruitment process. Employers highlighted a range of issues with graduates from (i) responding to the advertisement, to (ii) the cover letter, (iii) in terms of Curriculum Vitae (CV) design and (iv) during the interview. Such issues were having a significant negative impact on graduate opportunities and ability to progress in the recruitment process. These emergent findings will be discussed next.

7.2.4 Importance of EI in the recruitment process

One emergent finding in this study was the argument by employers that graduates did not tailor their cover letter or CV to the job and person specification, as advertised. Employers stated that particular jobs may seek competencies of flexibility, problem solving and communication, for example, however graduates failed to include any reference to these competencies in their cover letter or CV. This often resulted in them being excluded from the interview process from the outset. This once again raises the debate about responsibility in terms of teaching employability skills and whether the onus rests fully with higher education institutions or with students themselves. The Bologna Process and the National Strategy for Higher Education to 2030 emphasised the need for higher education policies and practices to instil key employability skills in students. This is similar to Marais and Perkins, (2012) who held that graduates must be able to demonstrate their employability skills, upon completion of higher education. In fact, students themselves have been very clear about the need for curricula to reflect the professional work environment, with an expectation among students that a degree would lead to a professional career. Yet many employability initiatives are voluntary, for example, the STAR Award in the University of Aberdeen is optional and students go through an application process in order to secure a place. It may be time for higher education institutions to include a compulsory element in terms of the development of employability skills in students.

The importance of tailoring the job application to the advertisement was of critical importance to employers in this study. According to Irishjobs.ie many applicants focus on the layout of the CV, the content and the language and believe that such a CV, together with a “robust” cover letter will result in them being shortlisted for the job (IrishJobs.ie, 2012, para 1). However, this is not the case. Currently, most job advertisements include both a job specification which focuses on the technical expertise required and a person specification which outlines particular qualities, attributes and experience being sought. There is a need for job applicants to tailor their cover letter and CV to “illustrate” (para 3) all of the elements in both the job and person specifications, and, ultimately “stand out from the crowd” (para 6). This is similar to findings from this research where employers stressed the time taken to design a job advertisement and that often graduates ignored the specifications on the advertisement and submitted an application that had nothing of relevance to the position advertised. Employers stressed that for many advertised positions, all they had to judge graduates on was the CV.

What graduates need to be aware of is that a standard selection criterion includes (i) competencies, (ii) qualifiers, i.e., level of performance required for the role, (iii) behaviours and (iv) importance, i.e., whether it is essential or desirable (Santos, n.d.). According to Santos, (n.d.) graduates must be aware of the importance of providing concrete examples of previous experience as issues with demonstration of competence with clear examples was of particular concern in the technical disciplines. This was echoed in findings from this study where employers in Phase One and Phase Three repeatedly stressed the importance of examples and demonstration of skills. Many students were rated lower as their examples were weak and appeared to take them out of their comfort zones. For employers, this highlighted a lack of preparation on the part of the students. Graduates must be helped to understand that examples may be from time spent on projects in college, their sporting activities, prior training or part-time jobs, a view echoed by Santos, (n.d). Recruitment personnel spend, on average, six seconds reading a CV, therefore, it is imperative that applicants get their attention quickly.

Typically, a CV is viewed like a “heat map”; recruiters start at the top, accordingly, the most relevant information must be there and must be in chronological order (para 3). It is key for graduates to appreciate that the starting point for the recruitment process is their response to the job advertisement, not the interview and that demonstrating their employability starts with addressing all of the selection criterion outlined on the job advertisement. When specifically examining EI competence, i.e., the person specification, what was interesting in this study was that many employers held that if graduates included some demonstrated examples of their EI competence on their CVs, that they may have had increased success in the interview selection process. Of particular significance was the important role of leisure interests in the recruitment process with some employers stating that it was often the starting point for them when reading a CV. They held that hobbies and interests often provided valuable insight into a person’s character, for example, an applicant who played soccer may be skilled in teamwork or someone who enjoyed long distance running may be more solitary. Graduates need to be aware of this and prepare their CV carefully and meticulously.

Significant changes have taken place in terms of the recruitment process in some sectors which no longer follows the traditional route from advertisement to CV to interview to job. For example, in the IT/computing and engineering sectors graduates were required to complete online coding tests, lasting five to six hours, as the next step after submitting a cover letter and CV. Such tests were, in the first instance, testing technical ability, however, also addressed competencies such as motivation, determination, perseverance and problem solving as, according to employers if applicants were not motivated and very interested in the role, the tendency was for them to give up halfway through. In the engineering sector interview, unlike the other interviews, no issues with EI competence among new recruits were found. What emerged in this interview was a very specific method of recruiting graduates, i.e., the use of assessment centres which, according to this employer were being utilised increasingly in the engineering sector for graduate hire. The assessment centre model afforded an opportunity to rate both technical expertise and social-emotional competency. Many of the competencies surveyed in Phase One were included in the assessment framework. The assessment centre model will be discussed in greater detail next.

7.2.4.1 Assessment Centres

Assessment centres are used to measure performance and competence and include different components and emerged in this research as the primary method of graduate selection in the engineering sector. Therefore, the multiple components utilised in the assessment centre model may be of interest to newly qualified graduates and particularly engineering graduates who are seeking employment. For example, components such as “in-basket tasks” predict some outcomes such as performance while leaderless group discussions often highlight potential leaders in groups (Kaplan, Cortina and Ruark, 2010, p. 172). In-basket exercises are typically used prior to the actual interview and involve each candidate being assigned a number of tasks to complete in a given time. What recruiters are seeking are skills of prioritising and completion of the most important tasks (Roberts, 2018). According to The British Psychological Society, (2015) assessment centres are often used as part of a graduate recruitment process and are a means of assessing individuals or groups for recruitment and selection purposes. Assessment centres involve multiple assessments where applicants undertake a range of activities while being observed by a team of trained assessors who evaluate performance against a set of “pre-determined, job-related assessment criteria” (p. 8). An assessment centre has a particular structure consisting of (i) multiple assessors, (ii) multiple participants, (iii) multiple exercises, (iv) at least one exercise that requires participants to display key skills or behaviours which are closely related to successful job performance, (v) an exercise in which participants interact with each other and (vi) a template with assessment criteria and scoring mechanisms. Traditionally, assessment centres involved bringing people together in a physical space, however, they can also operate as virtual centres using video conferencing and web based tools. Some of the key roles present at an assessment centre are assessors/observers, centre managers/facilitators, centre administrators, role players, fact-find administrators, centre designers and a chairperson (The British Psychological Society, 2015). According to GradIreland, (n.d.) assessment centres give candidates an opportunity to showcase their skills and talents and, typically tasks undertaken mirror those required for the role. Tasks are both individual and completed in groups.

For example, a group of six to eight people may be assigned a task to complete under observation by selectors. Core skills being examined are communication, collaboration and team work in order to achieve a goal. Reflection is included in terms of examining the process adopted by the team in order to work together to solve the problem. Group case studies and discussion groups are also utilised. Leaderless tasks are assigned where all group members are given an individual briefing document but must arrive at a solution acceptable to everyone within a time limit. Individual tasks include case studies, in-tray exercises and presentations (GradIreland, n.d.). In this study, engineering graduates who had successfully scored 60%+ on an initial online coding test were invited to attend an assessment centre as the next step in the recruitment process. This consisted of a day long battery of individual and group tasks which targeted specific EI competencies, for example, problem solving, stress management and teamwork. Due to the intensive nature of the assessment centre day, the employer in the engineering sector reported no issues with EI among its graduate intake. This was due to the fact that graduates with poorer EI skills did not progress from the assessment centre to the next stage in the recruitment process.

Accordingly, if more graduates had higher EI skills the pool of potential candidates ‘passing’ the assessments at assessment centres would probably be higher. It would be important for higher education institutions and for graduates to understand the nature of assessment centres in terms of facilitating graduate hire. As this study focused on EI coaching for final year engineering students core elements of the assessment centre template as outlined by this employer were used in the design of the tailored EI coaching for the experimental group because this is a template that is being used increasingly in technical disciplines. What was interesting is that all employers discussed the importance of the ‘how’ in terms of delivering EI workshops, i.e., the methods were the most important aspect and required a space to see people in action with something tangible being a necessary output. Therefore, when tailoring the EI coaching activities, the exercises were tangible and involved tasks within particular timeframes with observation being of particular importance. This study will propose a template for an employability workshop series to be offered to final year students, which could be applied across all disciplines and will be outlined later in the chapter.

In the qualitative findings in Phase One and Phase Three employers highlighted significant issues with employability and work readiness among graduates. They made clear links between high levels of EI and employability which will be addressed, next.

7.2.5 EI and employability

What is clear is that graduates seek a pathway into a career following their academic study, therefore, employability skill development is important. This was one of the main findings of the Fishtree, (2017) survey with students emphasising the need for a higher focus on career outcomes in third level education. However, Jameson et al., (2012) argued that integrating basic key skills into the curriculum had little effect on graduate employment and what would be of more benefit was employer involvement in course design and the provision of work placements. In this study, employer involvement was a critical element and their input was invaluable in terms of EI coaching design and student participation in the process. However, as discussed in Chapter Two challenges have been found with employer involvement in terms of cost and in terms of the short term nature of work placements, according to Jameson et al., (2012). This was echoed by McGuinness et al., (2014), who found differences among employers in terms of engagement from those who understood the value of skills training and were happy to invest in it, to those who were interested but did not know how to engage and to those who had no interest in skills and training. This focus on employability again raises the debate on the purposes of higher education and responsibility in terms of developing such employability skills in graduates. Students have clearly stated that they view higher education as a pathway to a career and employers emphasised the need for work ready graduates with the expectation that higher education should fulfil this requirement. Yet in this study employers highlighted issues in terms of EI and work readiness, in general, among graduates, which raises the need for their input and involvement in employability initiatives in higher education to address such shortcomings.

Similar to Jameson et al., (2012), employers in Phase One and Phase Three of this study emphasised the benefits of work experience and work placements in terms of enhancing employability. This concurs with Guile and Griffiths, (2001) who argued thatwork experience was a critical element in bridging the gap between school or university and the workplace, once appropriate assessment measures were in place. One might question how issues with employability exist when there appears to be such a focus on employability in higher education. For example, the Bologna Process emphasised the need for higher education institutions to embed graduate employability into their teaching. Trends, (2010), in a review of the Bologna process reported that over 97% of universities had included employability as an active element in career progression for graduates (Sursock and Smidt, 2010). It may be the case that gaps in employability skills among graduates are caused by how the term ‘employability’ is interpreted by higher education institutions and the degree of priority afforded to it, as suggested by Sursock and Smidt, (2010). Perhaps the concept of employability needs to be more explicit in teaching and learning, as proposed by Mernagh, (2010) and Hughes and Barrie, (2010). It may be that the differences between the higher education environment and the workplace result in these issues with employability among graduates, highlighting once again the need for increased input and involvement of employers in the process.

However, such an employability agenda is certainly a contributory factor in the debate on the marketisation of education. The emphasis by employers on employability links in with this debate as raised by Beckmann and Cooper, (2004) and Doyle, (2003), and previously discussed in Chapter Two, on the economic goals of higher education with education policy now dominated by economic competitiveness and a work preparation theme. The importance of education for developing students as citizens and for social good must not be overlooked, however, and the need to avoid the Tesco model of education, as proposed by Foster, (2002) and cited by Jameson et al., (2012) where learning is packaged and sold to meet consumer demand and economic need.

However, this research has highlighted the importance of graduates meeting the needs of a growing
economy. One must consider the argument posited by Beckmann and Cooper, (2004, p. 166) that an “ethical dimension” to the marketisation of education must be included with an onus on higher education institutions to build “civil society”, social participation and graduates who worked towards the collective good of society. One possible reason for this increased focus on employability may be the rise in demand for places at third level and the higher numbers of students graduating with degrees, resulting in the graduate employment marketplace becoming more competitive and dynamic. In the Fishtree, (2017) survey, students argued that course content must be designed by both academics and industry experts. This again highlights the important role employers have in higher education and the necessity for a dual responsibility between higher education institutions and employers in terms of graduate attribute development and employability. This need for employer engagement and participation is at the crux of the employability debate.

However, higher education institutions must facilitate employers to have a real contribution to the design of content of any training which was identified by McGuinness et al., (2014) as a barrier to employer involvement. There is scope for employer involvement to include the provision of training and in-class presentations on the value of learning for their organisations, as suggested by McGuinness, (2014). Employability must be viewed as an integral part of the curriculum not as an additional learning outcome, as is the case with graduate attribute development, as held by Hughes and Barrie, (2010). This concept of employability merits further research to investigate how it is being interpreted in higher education and the mechanisms in place to equip students with the necessary employability skills.

As previously discussed in Chapter Two, the TU Dublin was formally established in January 2019. There is a particular emphasis on employability and ensuring graduates are ‘career and life-ready’. Consequently, there may be new opportunities to develop and design innovative programmes to embed EI in the curricula and tailor such programmes to meet the graduate attribute areas as set down by TU Dublin. This could result in graduates being rated excellent by employers in terms of EI competency as opposed to Phase One where the majority of employers rated current levels of EI competency among graduates as good for seven of the ten competencies, with the exception of adaptability, motivation and teamwork which received highest ratings of very good. As already outlined in Chapter Two, the graduate attribute areas to be targeted are: proficiency, collaboration and adaptability, articulate and effective communication, critical and analytical problem solving, innovation, creativity, entrepreneurship, resilience, ethics and professional responsibility (TU Dublin, 2014). What is not clear is ‘how’ TU Dublin aims to meet these graduate attribute areas. The issue of ‘how’ was very important in this study as employers repeatedly referred to the methods that should be used in delivering any EI intervention emphasising the need for experiential activities and tangible exercises.

It may be the case that the STAR Award template developed by the University of Aberdeen, previously discussed in Chapter Two could be utilised by TU Dublin to develop and design graduate attribute curricula. A key strength of the STAR Award was the consultative nature of the process which involved the university and employers, with
the curriculum being developed and modernised to meet the needs of graduates andemployers (Perkins and Fantom, n.d., p. 4). This curriculum, combined with a series of “employer-led” skills elective workshops for students have led to very successful outcomes for students in the University. There may be opportunities for the TU Dublin to adopt a similar template for its students in order to facilitate graduate attribute development and embed employability into its teaching a learning. This will be discussed further later in this chapter.

7.3 Does a tailored, as opposed to a general approach to social-emotional competency coaching for final year engineering students, based on the stated needs of employers, result in different group mean EQ-i2.0 scores post intervention?

One of the principal aims of this study was to determine if there was merit in tailoring EI coaching to meet the expressed needs of employers. Previous studies by Carthy, (2013), Tan, (2012) and Lennick, (2007) demonstrated that general EI coaching programmes are an effective intervention for the development of social and emotional competency. In these studies, attempts had been made to target specific EI competencies which had been identified as problematic. For example, the American Express Financial Advisers (AEFA) coaching workshops focused on emotion management among its financial advisers and used the Emotional Competency Framework as proposed by Goleman, (1998) as the basis for workshop design. In the Search Inside Yourself (SIY) programme conducted in Google for engineers, specific competencies of self-awareness, self-regulation, empathy, motivation and teamwork were targeted for coaching. Boyatzis et al., (1995) delivered an individualised coaching programme to students where they chose the competencies to work on based on their EI test results. Carthy, (2013) delivered individualised coaching to third level students to develop emotional competencies and explored its link with grade point averages and attrition levels. What has not been conducted in an Irish context is to include employers in the design of a tailored EI coaching programme to determine if it would result in different EI scores post intervention as opposed to a general approach and whether it would increase EI learning and knowledge and enhance employability.

Both the one-to-one and the group coaching delivered in this study followed the guidelines set down by Multi-Health Systems (MHS), however, as already stated, time, resources and availability of students and employers resulted in the actual one-to-one and group EI coaching interventions taking place over a four month period which may have impacted on results. The individualised session plan for the experimental group was further tailored to include an emphasis on employability and how to utilise the results from the EQ-i2.0 for interview preparation as this was an area highlighted by employers as problematic with graduates. The group EI coaching workshops, while addressing similar EI competencies, in the main differed in terms of content and methods of delivery.

An examination of the results demonstrated that the EI coaching intervention worked, i.e., mean scores on Total EI, the five Composite Scales, the fifteen subscales and the Wellbeing Indicator of the EQ-i2.0 increased post-intervention for both groups. This concurs with the findings of previously mentioned studies by Carthy, (2013), Tan, (2012) and Lennick, (2007). For the active control group, who received the general EI group coaching mean ratings showed that at baseline all EQ-i.2.0 scores were in the mid range of the scale, meaning that they were between 90-110, which corresponds with well developed EI competencies. For this group all scores in the EQ-i2.0 increased post intervention, however, remained in the mid-range category. For the experimental group, who received the tailored EI group coaching, all mean ratings on the EQ-i.2.0 at baseline were in the mid-range of the scale, however, when examining mean ratings post intervention, all EQ-i.2.0 scores moved from the mid-range to the upper-range category, with the exception of Self-Expression, Emotional Expression, Independence, Empathy,
Decision Making, Problem Solving, Impulse Control and Flexibility which remained in the mid-range of the scale.

These results contradict some of the findings from Phase One where employers, both in the qualitative survey data and the semi-structured interviews stated that there were significant issues with new recruits in terms of EI. In addition, Mitchell, (2017) and Strauss, (2016) stated that graduates lacked key social and emotional competencies when entering the workplace. However, what was clear in this study was the importance of demonstrating EI, both in the recruitment process and in the workplace and this was raised repeatedly by employers in Phases One and Three. In fact, in Phase Three lower ratings by employers were largely attributed to the students’ inability to demonstrate their learning and knowledge from the EI coaching process. This might be at the crux of the issue, that students have well-developed or highly developed EI competency but are unable to, or simply do not demonostrate them. Overall, these results are encouraging for employers in that these students who were preparing to make that transition into the workplace were now aware and equipped with well developed and, for the tailored group, highly developed EI competency in a broad range of social and emotional skills.

Results of the repeated-measures ANOVA showed statistically significant differences between the active control group and the experimental group for Total EI, Self-Expression, Assertiveness, Independence, Interpersonal, Decision Making, Reality Testing and Stress Tolerance. What is interesting here is that all of these eight statistically significant competencies were specifically targeted during both the general and tailored group coaching sessions. So for these eight statistically significant competencies, a tailored approach in terms of content and methods worked better. For the eight statistically significant competencies results of the repeated-measures ANOVA showed moderate effect size for each of the competencies. If true, this is very positive for both students, higher education institutions and employers. Firstly, the fact that an intervention, whether general or tailored, results in higher EI post intervention is positive. Secondly, these results suggest there may well be merit in tailoring coaching as eight of the competencies in the experimental group were statistically signficantly higher than the active control group. At this point, it may be useful to further examine how such highly developed EI competencies, if applied, would be evident in the workplace. Three of the statistically significant EI competencies in the experimental group which increased from the mid-range to the upper range of the Bar-On EQ-i2.0 were Assertiveness, Independence and Stress Tolerance. These three competencies have been selected as they link in with communication, initiative, decision making and stress management which formed part of the EI group coaching sessions.

Assertive individuals are firm and direct where necessary, achieving goals through articulation of needs and protection of resources and place importance on their and other people’s righs, defending those rights whenever required (MHS, 2011). This highly developed skill has emotional, social and behavioural implications in the workplace. It is linked with communication and assertive individuals are confident, respectful of others and themselves, can articulate their case clearly and concisely and are skilled at managing conflict. This ability to articulate skills clearly and concisely was highlighted by employers in this study, in particular, in relation to the interview and was linked with interview preparation. Employers were very vocal about the need for graduates who were confident and one key element of assertiveness is the ability to be confident.

Another statistically signficant competency was Independence with mean ratings for the experimental group being in the highly developed category, post intervention. Employers in this study linked independence and initiative and placed enormous value on graduates who entered the workplace enthusiastically and who were willing to step up and volunteer to take on tasks. They were emphatic that independence and initiative did not mean graduates taking on tasks without consulting the team, however, independent graduates displayed confidence in their work and adopted an active role in team based projects and were trusted to meet the requirements of a particular task. According to Epson Blog Team, (2017), the dynamic and changing nature of the workplace will require employees who excel at working both independently and as part of collaborative teams. Epson conducted research that involved interviews with 17 leading experts and a survey of over 7,000 European workers. One of the main findings was that connectivity was changing the way individuals lived and worked. Accordingly, the workplace is now evolving to require employees who can be expert at working “in isolation” but also be proficient at collaboration through mainly “virtual means” (para 1). Accordingly, independent working will be one of the most valued skills on a CV.

In terms of highly developed Stress Tolerance, such individuals would have the
capacity to cope with challenges and stressful situations and be skilled at devising coping
strategies to effectively manage stress in the workplace. They are realistic in how they
assess work situations and can often be turned to and relied on by colleagues in potentialstressful situations. Stress Tolerance is an extremely important competence in the Irish workplace today. Currently, in Ireland workplace stress has doubled between 2010 and 2015, according to Miley, (2018). Between 2010 and 2015, the number of Irish workers experiencing one or more stress reactions increased from 21% to 38%, with 20% working as professionals. The most common triggers for stress among Irish employees were emotional demands, dealing with conflict and angry customers or clients or being forced to hide their feelings (Miley, 2018).

Those dealing with emotional demands were 21 times more likely to experience work related stress than those who were not experiencing such demands. Accordingly, this statistically significant result in terms of Stress Tolerance is very important. If participants in this study are exiting the third level system with highly developed skills in Stress Tolerance they will have a toolkit to draw on to help them cope effectively with the demands of a busy and dynamic workplace. They will have awareness around stress within themselves and in terms of colleagues and should be in a position to devise strategies for action which boost their wellbeing and prevent workplace stress. Once again, what is key is that individuals are aware of these skills as such awareness will lead to strategies being put in place to capitalise and utilise such strengths in the workplace.

Post hoc independent samples t-tests agreed with the repeated-measures results with the exception of Interpersonal, Reality Testing and Stress Tolerance. It may be the case that the independent samples t-test did not capture all that is possibly occurring with the data which may be attributed to sample size or the associated power of the test. In the semi-structured interviews in Phase One, employers stressed interpersonal skills such as teamwork and communication as well as competencies of motivation, positivity and initiative. When examining the mean difference scores it is clear that all mean scores for the experimental group were above the mean scores for the Active Control group for the eight statistically significant competencies as illustrated by Figure 12 in Chapter Five.

Statistically significant repeated-measures ANOVA results were also found between institutes for Interpersonal, Interpersonal Relationships and the Wellbeing Indicator, with Institute 2 showing higher mean scores, post-intervention. All mean difference scores for Institute 2 were above the mean difference scores for Institute 1 for the three statistically significant competencies, as shown in Figure 13 in Chapter Five. This is interesting as both institutes offer similar degree structures and have similarities in terms of a diverse student body. It may be the case that the curriculum, teaching and assessment practices and students differ between the institutes or that the wellbeing initiatives offered in Institute 2 work better, however, as this was not a focus of this research any explanations proffered are merely inferred. This may merit future research to determine the influence of curricula, teaching practices, methods of assessment and wellbeing initiatives on student EI.

Results overall are positive with mean scores across both groups increasing post intervention and ultimately resulting in key skills linked with employability being developed and improved. This concurs with the National Strategy for Higher Education to 2030 (2011) which emphasised the importance of graduates exiting the third level education system with key skills, including independence, communication and teamworking. In addition, the Bologna process, cited by Saraiva and Nogueiro, (2010) held that higher education should not simply focus on education and training but must focus on building essential skills of initiative, flexibility, adaptability and communication which were deemed essential for engaging successfully in the Labour market. The fact that mean EI scores increased across both groups across all subscales will result in graduates who took part in this study exiting third level with, for example, an awareness of their strength areas and areas for further development. More importantly and relevant to this study is the fact that a tailored approach to EI coaching worked better than a general approach for eight EI competencies, with statistically significant results being found. In addition, for the experimental group who received tailored EI coaching, fourteen of the EQ-i2.0 competencies moved from the mid-range category to the upper-range category, suggesting that a tailored approach should be used. However, it is accepted that further research would need to be conducted to monitor students transitioning into the workplace to determine the long-term impact of such an intervention.

7.4 Are students who received tailored, as opposed to general EI coaching rated differently by employers with respect to their knowledge of EI, the application of EI to the workplace and employability?

Phase Three sought to determine if a discipline specific approach to EI coaching resulted in increased knowledge of EI, its application in the workplace and whether it enhanced students’ employability. Initial results from the mock EI interviews were positive and suggested that the tailored coaching led to more enhanced EI and employability than a general approach. In fact, results indicated that the experimental group received higher ratings than the active control group for questions one, two and three. In addition, an increased number of participants in the experimental group were hired as compared with the active control group. However, statistical significance was found for question two only, the student’s ability to apply EI learning to the workplace, suggesting a difference between the groups but follow up post-hoc tests did not find any statistically significant differences. Overall, this is positive as it showed that EI coaching worked.

Many explanations were given by employers with respect to these ratings which will be discussed later in this chapter. Similarly, when split by institute, initial results showed statistically significant differences were found for questions one and three for Institute 1, suggesting a difference between the active control and the experimental groups in Institute 1 but follow up independent samples t-tests showed no statistical significance for these questions. This lack of statistical significance in Phase Three could again be attributed to there being no actual effect or power issues with the associated tests. It could also be due to the fact that while employers were from similar disciplines of engineering as the participants they interviewed, both employers and participants brought their own unique style and approach to the process. Although the statistics showed that a tailored approach was no better than a general approach to EI coaching, 58% of students in the experimental group were recruited as compared with 40% of the active control group, therefore, the tailored intervention is recommended. It may again be the case that sample size and issues with power influenced these results.

There were many similarities between the groups in terms of employers’ explanations of their ratings. Employers linked EI with an ability to articulate weaknesses. What is crucial for graduates to understand is the value placed by employers on students who can clearly articulate their weaknesses, discuss them and importantly highlight the steps they have taken to address them. Highest ratings of ‘very good’ in terms of Questions 1-3 on the mock EI interview rating sheet were explained by participants in both groups addressing their weak areas. On the other hand lower ratings were attributed to an inability of participants in identifying and discussing weaker areas.
Similar to Phase One, the ability to identify and articulate weaknesses was linked with self-awareness and with interview preparation. This concurs with Slingo, (2017b) who held that in an interview situation when faced with a question about weaknesses, what employers are seeking are candidates who have high self-awareness in terms of weaknesses, are honest and can demonstrate their ability to self-improve. Employers valued students who critiqued low scores and who questioned and reflected on them which often led, according to one employer, to the student realising they were more competent than they thought. Employers, in attributing higher ratings repeatedly referred to these participants as reflective and thoughtful when they discussed the coaching process.

This, according to employers was very evident in how they articulated the benefits of coaching and linked it with employability. This re-affirms the importance of reflection and evaluation in terms of any EI intervention. In this study, reflection occurred both in-class through discussion and critical analysis of tasks and privately through worksheets and by means of an e-portfolio. However, these elements of private reflection and e-portfolios were not evaluated. Employers explained that self-awareness facilitated students to identify both their strengths and weaknesses, which was linked with interview preparation. This need for reflection and evaluation are major elements of the Search Inside Yourself programme (Tan, 2012) in Google, the CareerEdge model (Halpenny, 2016) and the STAR Award in the University of Aberdeen (Marais and Perkins, 2012) where different online tools, reflective worksheets and activities were completed and discussed in-class. Future research could explore the use of online and written tools for reflection in terms of personal development and growth.

Employers could clearly identify students who had taken the time to prepare for interview as they could articulate, with examples their positives and their areas for learning. This concurs with results from Phase One where employers repeatedly highlighted the importance of interview preparation. According to Slingo, (2017b) interview preparation is important as it ensures that a response to a question on weaknesses does not directly impact on the role applied for. For example, if a perceived weakness was giving presentations what would be important would be the ability of the candidate to highlight the steps taken to address this weakness such as engaging in mentoring (Slingo, 2017b). Just as importantly, interview preparation must also focus on strengths. For example, Slingo, (2017a) stated that four key elements must be addressed when responding to a question on strengths; (i) what the candidate is good at, (ii) how that skill can be applied to the role, (iii) whether this strength sets the person apart from the competition and (iv) how it is articulated in the interview, i.e., the delivery.

Similar to results from the mock EI interviews in Phase Three, Slingo, (2017b) argued that interview preparation demands high self-awareness and the ability to be confident not arrogant or too humble. This is interesting as this element of delivery was raised by employers in the mock interviews with respect to students who received lower ratings or were unsuccessful in getting the job. This was similar across both the experimental and the active control groups. Employers linked self-awareness, self-reflection, interview preparation and confidence with interview success as these participants were more realistic in their summation of their strengths and weaknesses and confident in discussing them, which again concurs with Slingo, (2017a). One might question why there was no difference statistically between the two groups in the mock EI interviews. Results from Phase Two demonstrated that a tailored approach worked better for many of the competencies. It may be the case that a good candidate is a good candidate with employers unable to discern between a good candidate who has received tailored EI coaching, as opposed to general EI coaching. However, crucially as demonstrated in results from Phase Two of this study, candidates are more likely to be good if they receive tailored coaching. In addition, this lack of statistical significance between the groups in Phase Three may also be simply an effect of having a small sample – a larger sample may have yielded statistically significant results.

Interview preparation was stressed as critically important by employers in Phase One and Phase Three. In Phase Three, employers referred to interview preparation when explaining both higher and lower ratings across both the active control and experimental groups. Due to its significance in terms of employability, it may be prudent to discuss its importance and relevance, in more detail. According to Ryan, (2018) interview preparation is key to success on the day and argued that candidates should invest approximately two hours in such preparation. Firstly, candidates should research the company and be able to speak naturally about the organisation, its mission, aims and objectives. This can also assist candidates in formulating their own questions about the role and the company, which can demonstrate their interest. Candidates must prepare answers to particular questions involving scenarios. The use of scenarios or situation based tasks was identified in Phase One as a tool for interview and, in Phase Three students who could demonstrate their learning with the use of scenarios were rated higher. For example, scenarios that could be prepared may be how the candidate “saved the day” in a particular task or a time when they worked with a difficult person, or worked alone to achieve a goal (Ryan, 2018, para 16).

Alternatively, candidates may be given a scenario, which may focus on conflict, teamwork or communication skills, for example. This view was shared by Lyons, (2016, para 8) who argued that candidates must address the basics, prepare, perform, and “be the star”. The basics include appropriate dress and punctuality. Through preparation, candidates research the role, know the job specification and prepare examples. In performing, candidates listen to the questions being asked and are able to clearly articulate their responses. Candidates familiarise themselves with the STAR technique which is utilised by employers when conducting competency based interviews. This involves asking a candidate to describe a particular situation, elaborating on the task, the action taken and the results. For each of the four questions in the mock EI interview, employers attributed higher ratings to students who were prepared, who could clearly articulate their responses, describe scenarios where they worked as part of teams or in conflict situations and, most importantly back each response up with concrete examples. What was very obvious to employers were students who did not prepare as these students showed a lack of interest in the coaching process, an inability to give examples, a lack of understanding of the grey areas when working with others and the necessity by employers to probe or tease out answers. Students must understand that they must lead the interview which employers, in line with Ryan, (2018) argued can only be achieved through meticulous preparation. For example, poor preparation impacted on communication flow and poor use of language in the interview process, for example, one candidate utilising the term “self-isolate” to describe themselves. In addition, students who received lower ratings focused on how EI could help with conflict resolution but excluded its impact in terms of benefits to the individual and to teams.

Similar to Phase One, the importance of work experience or work placements was reported by employers. For the active control group work experience or work placement was highlighted by employers across all four questions but with the experimental group it was confined to question two. It may be the case that students in the active control group discussed their work experience more or saw opportunities to discuss their work experience more across all four questions but this is merely inferred as it did not form part of this study. Employers explained higher ratings and success in the interview as students being able to discuss their work experience but more importantly, demonstrate their learning with concrete examples. For example, students who identified how past work experience, Summer work and internships directly impacted on interpersonal and communication skill development and who were able in the interview to state how such learning could be applied in the workplace were rated very highly in terms of employability. For both Phase One and Phase Three what was significant was the assertion by employers that work experience did not necessarily have to be discipline specific.

Employers argued that interpersonal skills such as communication and teamwork may be developed through Summer work or through engagement in sporting activities. This concurs with Mitchell, (2017) who argued that, in a GradIreland survey 77% of employers who were surveyed stated that internships or work placements were essential in terms of building competencies, skills and overall employability in graduates. Similar to this study, employers emphasised participation in team-based activities in college, for example, sports and undertaking skills based workshops provided by careers services as excellent mechanisms for social-emotional skill development.

All of the above raises the issue with the non-compulsory nature of skills based workshops offered by careers services and the fact that they are not integrated into the curriculum in higher education. Yorke, (2006), cited by Jameson et al., (2012) held that employability is often viewed as separate to academic study and while career services organise career talks and events, students often do not attend unless they believe that they are specifically relevant to their discipline. This needs to be addressed on foot of this research with the potential to include a mandatory module on employability in the final year of study. Equally as important is the need to embed employability throughout the course of a student’s academic career but to include employers and practitioners in the design and delivery. This is similar to Yorke, (2006), cited by Jameson et al. (2012) who held that employer involvement is a huge factor in terms of student buy-in to any employability initiatives.

This study also highlights the need for work placements to be a compulsory element of all undergraduate degree programmes offered at third level which concurs with Billett, (2015) who stated that there is now a universal demand for work placements across all disciplines in order to ensure social and emotional competency and enhanced employability. What is key and was emphasised by Billett, (2015) was the need for work placements to be authentic, afford students real opportunities to learn and instil in them an appreciation of lifelong learning and a commitment to their ongoing personal and professional development. Perhaps there is a need for work placement to facilitate students to engage more fully in the day-to-day pressures and politics typical of a workplace environment. Opportunities to engage in training during the work placement may also afford valuable professional development skills and learning although this may prove difficult with respect to time and resources. This commitment to personal and professional development was emphasised by employers in Phase Three as crucial to career and life success.

Throughout the mock EI interview process, employers stressed the need for concrete examples, which again was linked with interview preparation. In addition, students who received highest ratings across both groups could clearly apply their learning from the coaching process to team dynamics and teamwork, in particular. In addition,
participants who demonstrated how they would use EI to address potential conflict situations in the workplace but also in terms of building relationships with colleagues were rated highly by employers. This focus on relationship building was of major importance to employers. Similar to results from Phase One the majority, i.e., 73% of employers in the engineering sector deemed teamwork as ‘very important’, with highest ratings of ‘very good’ being attributed in terms of current levels being displayed by graduates. This concurs with results from the mock EI interviews where higher rated students demonstrated competence in teamwork and could easily illustrate this competency with examples. In the Search Inside Yourself (SIY) EI programme a particular focus was on teamwork. Participants examined the nature of teams and identified key strengths of high performing teams and the importance of teamwork in achieving organisational aims and objectives (Tan, 2012). Of particular importance to employers when attributing higher ratings to students was the ability of students in the interview process to link how EI competency may assist them when working with challenging non-team players. This is interesting as one particular focus of the SIY programme was on challenges with non-team players with specific emphasis on the characteristics of dysfunctional teams.

Teamwork is an important element of graduate attribute initiatives such as the one delivered in the University of Aberdeen (Perkins, 2015) and will be a particular focus in the newly established TU Dublin. This is an important step forward as previous research by Nghiem, Goldfinch and Bell (2010) found that students in technical disciplines reported more emphasis on professional knowledge development, information literacy, research and problem solving with little or no opportunity to develop social and emotional competency, for example, communication and teamwork. What was interesting in the research conducted by Nghiem et al., (2010) was the level of discomfort experienced by academics in technical disciplines in terms of delivering graduate attribute curriculum to students. They reported feeling unqualified and out of their depth in terms of equipping students with graduate attributes. There is an opportunity here for cross-disciplinary work. One possibility is that students from technical disciplines attend social and emotional competency modules that form part of other non-technical degree programmes. In addition, there is scope here for a multi-disciplinary approach to graduate attribute attainment. Alternatively, training for academic staff must be provided across all disciplines in order to equip them with the requisite skills and knowledge to embed graduate attribute development into their teaching.

Previous discussion and results from Phase Two have demonstrated that tailored coaching worked better than general coaching. In Phase Three, more of the students in the experimental group who received the tailored coaching were employed. In addition, Phase Two demonstrated that fourteen of the EI competencies on the EQ-i2.0 increased from the mid-range category to the upper-range category with respect to the experimental group while all of the scores remained in the mid-range category for the active control group. Despite this, Phase Three did not find any statistically significant differences in employer ratings of students in terms of employability and graduate hire. This is most interesting and raises the question of why this might have been the case. Perhaps it may be that a good candidate is sufficient for employers. It does not matter whether they received tailored or general coaching, what is more important is that they can be confident and articulate in an interview situation. Once again and as already stated, it may be that the timeframe, resources and availability of students and employers impacted on the results.

7.4.1 Behavioural dispositions as key to graduate hire

Central to this phase was whether students who received tailored EI coaching were hired more than the group who received general coaching. As already stated, over half (58.7%) of the experimental group and 40% of the active control group were successful in terms of hire. What was clear in terms of explanations on successful graduate hire was the repeated references by employers to behavioural dispositions of students. These ratings reflected equally across both groups for questions one, three and four with the highest number of references to behavioural dispositions being given for question four, namely, graduate hire. Qualities of enthusiasm, positivity, honesty and drive were some of the qualities attributed to students in the experimental group which directly link with EI competencies coached. For example, optimism and positivity were addressed with both groups but specifically with the experimental group in the final group coaching workshop. Employers commented on non-verbal communication in relation to hire for both groups, specifically good eye contact and the ability to smile. It is, therefore, important for graduates to understand the important role non-verbal communication plays in the interview process. This agrees with Miles, (2015) who argued that in an interview situation, non-verbal communication was just as important as verbal communication. The five elements of good non-verbal communication are, according to Miles, (2015), the ability to smile, good eye contact, clear speech, good posture and good wardrobe choices with all five elements significantly impacting on hire.

Many students who were successful in terms of hire were described as friendly, likeable, well presented and genuine in terms of themselves as a person and in terms of their responses to questions. This trait of genuineness was referred to by employers when explaining both higher and lower ratings among participants in both groups. According to Salemi, (n.d., para 4), being genuine is linked with being authentic in an interview situation with the need by employers to get to know the “real” you and learn more about you. The author further stated that there are different ways to project your individuality and your genuine self. For example, a candidate may highlight something personable and memorable such as an unusual hobby or interest. While it is important to remain professional throughout the interview it is essential that employers are presented with some of the personal traits and aspects of a candidate. This concurs with findings from Phase Three, as many employers in describing participants as genuine stated that their examples were very concrete, that the student had demonstrated respect and really engaged the employer. Successful students also demonstrated a positive attitude which agrees with Phase One findings where employers emphasised the importance of positivity in terms of life and career success. Students in both groups who received highest ratings demonstrated evidence of an interest in the topic, were motivated to participate, were open to new learning and growth and had put clearly defined and measurable strategies in place to improve and develop their employability. This is similar to Starr, (2011) and The Consortium for Research on EI in Organizations who argued that for any coaching intervention to be effective, participants must be willing and motivated to participate. Interestingly, all of the ‘maybe’ ratings for the active control group were explained by employers wanting participants to progress to the next stage of the interview process.

Employers wished to have a further conversation to explore their knowledge of EI. For the experimental group, some of the ‘maybe’ ratings were attributed to the behavioural dispositions of students, for example, they lacked passion, confidence and enthusiasm and their responses were not genuine. Many students in the active control group who received ‘maybe’ ratings lacked a spark, lacked enthusiasm, were indecisive and did not take ownership of solutions. Similar to Phase One findings, employers highlighted the benefits of a mentoring programme in the workplace as a solution to assist in successfully transitioning into the workplace.

In terms of interview success, graduates must understand the importance of engaging the interviewer, smiling and while not appearing over talkative they must demonstrate their knowledge and experience in a short period of time, which according to Moy, (n.d.) is typically 30 seconds to one minute per response. This, in itself, highlights the importance of interview preparation. In rating students, employers highlighted the importance of both the person fit and organisational fit with many stating that successful students fit the profile of the role and the organisation. This concurs with Epigeum Ltd. (2012) which stated that when recruiting, companies are seeking individuals who fit both the job specification and the person specification for any given role. The job specification focuses on the scope of the role, main responsibilities and reporting procedures while the person specification focuses on qualifications, skills and technical expertise, personal qualities, traits and dispositions. Therefore, it is very important that students read the job and the person specifications carefully and prepare for both.

Employers in Phase Three recognised and rated highly students who were committed to their personal development and for having the ability to leverage their EI competence for the benefit of themselves and the wider team. This commitment to personal development concurs with the framework in place in the University of Aberdeen for graduate attribute development, previously discussed in Chapter Two. In this university, one of the four pillars of graduate attribute development is the area of personal development which commences in year one of the undergraduate degree and is embedded in curricula and extra-curricular activities and tasks throughout the student’s academic career.

7.4.2 EI development through curricula

What is significant in terms of results from this study is the need to implement changes in terms of the curricula taught at higher education to include a focus on EI competency. A gap has been found between what employers want and what they are getting in terms of EI competency among entry-level graduates. At a micro level, there is scope to embed EI competency into curricula delivered in higher education. For example, it is a particularly opportune time to instil changes in the newly established TU Dublin. In addition, the broader implications of future mergers with IOTs to become Technological Universities, as proposed by the Higher Education Authority affords many opportunities to incorporate changes into how curricula and learning is delivered. As a starting point, assessment processes for group work could be re-designed to include an emphasis on the process undertaken in terms of the project and the task. In addition, if the revised NFQ as proposed by Carthy, (2013) was implemented this would give education providers scope to embed social and emotional competency development into the curricula, on a mandatory basis. Future research could also examine the effectiveness of the current ‘Professional Development for Engineers’ module in Institute 1 and the ‘Critical Skills Development’ module in Institute 2. There is a need to adopt a broader perspective to such programmes and not confine them to year one of an undergraduate degree programme. There is scope to include follow up sessions with students as they progress in their higher education. There may be potential to expand the ‘Skills for Success in Higher Education’ module currently in place in Institute 1 to include all undergraduate programmes within TU Dublin, on a mandatory basis. There is an opportunity for the TU Dublin to introduce an award for students who engage in graduate attribute development. For example, the template utilised in the University of Aberdeen for the STAR Award could be adapted and changed to meet the requirements of the graduate attribute framework in the TU Dublin. This study proposes the design of a formal award, namely, the TU Dublin X-Cel (Excellence in Personal Development) Award. Formal recognition for engagement in co-curricular and extra-curricular activities would provide an incentive for students to engage from the start to the conclusion of their undergraduate education. In addition, it would provide employers with a more detailed picture of a graduate. While the design and implementation of such a formal award by the TU Dublin would require a collaborative effort to include careers services and employers, a preliminary template for the TU Dublin X-Cel Award is outlined in Section 7.4.3.

This award process could have two intakes, September and January and restrict numbers. It would be important that formal recognition be included which could be through an enhanced transcript, similar to the STAR Award, which would reflect academic courses, grades and co-curricular activities. Similar to this study and the STAR Award in the University of Aberdeen, an e-portfolio element should be included and created by each student in the first year of their undergraduate study to chart their learning, progress and personal development throughout their academic career. The use of e portfolios have contributed to enhanced employability for students in Aberdeen which concurs with Cosshall, (2018) who held that e-portfolios or blogs can be excellent tools for securing work. The involvement of employers would be crucial to the success of the TU Dublin X-Cel Award. Each TU Dublin graduate attribute area would be addressed and tasks designed would fit into the three categories of Bronze, Silver and Gold. For example, involvement in open days, peer mentoring and acting as class representatives could be positioned at the Bronze Award level. Acting as a committee member on a society or sports club, assisting with the co-ordination of recruitment days or event lead could be positioned at the Silver Award level. Finally, volunteering with a charitable organisation, acting as Captain for a society or sport club or acting as a Leader in terms of peer mentoring or support could be positioned at the Gold level. The template presented here is in draft format but does provide an initial framework for design and implementation. Further collaborative work would be required with careers services, academics, employers and management within the TU Dublin. As part of the TU Dublin X-Cel Award students would be required to participate in skills-based employability workshops. The template for the TU Dublin X-Cel Award is presented next.

7.4.3 Template for TU Dublin X-Cel29 (Excellence in Personal Development) Award

7.4.4 EI development through employability workshops

In addition to curricula changes, there is a need to include social and emotional competency development as part of employability workshops run in higher education.

29 Subsequent to this research, TU Dublin have received funding from the Higher Education Authority (HEA) in Ireland to run a transformative student-centred learning initiative which will include recognition of graduate attribute achievement through different award levels and an enhanced transcript.

Such workshops could be a formal and compulsory part of the X-Cel Award offered by TU Dublin and be a collaborative process involving employers and career services. In the two IOTs in this study, careers workshops are offered to students in final year on an optional basis. However, this study suggests that these workshops should form a compulsory part of higher education. In addition, they need to be expanded and broadened to include a focus on EI competency. This study proposes an Employability Series consisting of a series of two-hour workshops that would address different topics such as social and emotional competency development, CV and interview skills and stress management strategies. What is key is how such workshops are designed and delivered as it was the methods to be used which employers highlighted as most important. Critical to these workshops would be the inclusion of employers as guest speakers and observers in the process. In designing the social and emotional aspects of these workshops, theory from the field of EI coaching should be included with methods to be used drawing on the findings from this study in terms of employer feedback on EI coaching design. The assessment centre model could be utilised also. The e-portfolio used for reflective purposes in the TU Dublin X-Cel Award could also be used in the employability workshops to document learning and chart progress. The e-portfolio may be accessed through a TU Dublin centralised website similar to ACHIEVE in the University of Aberdeen. One draft employability workshop as part of the Employability Series is outlined below. A similar design in terms of content and method was used for the tailored EI coaching in this study.

7.4.5 The Employability Workshop Series – Workshop No. 1

Employability Workshop Series

Facilitated by: Ailish Jameson, Employers x 2

Workshop No. 1

Targeted Skills: Intrapersonal: Self-awareness
Interpersonal: Interpersonal Relationships

Duration: 2 hours

Targeted Audience: Final Year Students (20 maximum)

Sample products

Product 1 – design a game. It can be visual, auditory, spoken or a performing game for all. Aimed at 5 year olds and its intention is to teach them the alphabet.
OR
Product 2 – design a new chewing gum that has special proven qualities. When chewed, it improves your ability to learn and remember new information. It comes in three flavours – strawberry, mint and chocolate. It is low in calories, sugar free and not suitable for children under 8.
OR
Product 3 – design a kitchen utensil that will improve efficiency in the home.
OR
Product 4 – design a product for use in the workplace to improve efficiency and increase productivity.

7.5 Critical evaluation of the study

This section will examine the strengths and the limitations of the study and discuss the implications for future research. In addressing strengths and limitations it is acknowledged that strengths and limitations are context dependent; what may constitute a strength in one context may be viewed as a limitation in another.

7.6 Strengths of the study

Firstly, while previous EI coaching interventions in the workplace have been successful, this research was the first of its kind in an Irish context to involve employers at all stages in the process. The collaborative nature of this study was a major strength as it provided a rich insight into the opinions and viewpoints of employers on EI competency among graduates currently exiting higher education. This involvement facilitated the design of a tailored suite of EI coaching workshops with input being gathered from employers on tools and methods to be included. Employer involvement provided an excellent insight into the ‘what’ and ‘how’ in terms of the design and delivery of EI coaching as an intervention. The collaborative nature of this project gave final year students valuable exposure to employers in their discipline of engineering. The mock EI competency based interviews gave an excellent opportunity for final year engineering students to put the EI coaching into practice, to discuss test results with an employer in their discipline and gain valuable feedback from them. Of particular note is the generosity of employers in allowing students to have their personal email addresses to forward on their CVs on completion of their final year exams. The interviews also gave participants an opportunity to gain feedback first-hand from employers directly about the importance of EI in the workplace and its link with career and life success. This research is an important starting point for possible future large-scale research with employers to further investigate the design and delivery of EI coaching interventions to undergraduate students.

Secondly, this research has highlighted the need for a focus on employability in the broadest sense, not simply an emphasis on CV and interview preparation in the final year of study. However, in the first instance, future research is required to determine how higher education institutions are interpreting the concept of employability. In addition, future studies must also investigate the mechanisms in place in higher education to deliver employability skills. This research has demonstrated that while policy documents promote employability within higher education there is a gap between the skills being addressed in higher education institutions and what employers want.

Thirdly, this research has highlighted the need for an examination of curricula in terms of possible changes to reflect the demands of employers in terms of graduates transitioning into the workplace. It is clear from this research that graduate attribute development must form a compulsory part of undergraduate education, and be embedded in the curricula. As stated earlier in this chapter, there is a need for cross-disciplinary work with respect to graduate attribute development. Of importance in terms of developing a graduate attribute agenda, is a need to evaluate how higher education institutions are embedding cultural awareness knowledge and training into the curriculum. One possibility is that students from technical disciplines attend social and emotional competency modules that form part of other non-technical degree programmes. It is recommended that training be delivered to academic staff in order to equip them with the requisite skills and knowledge to embed graduate attribute development into their teaching.

Fourthly, many previous coaching interventions involved an individualised approach and/or provided group coaching targeting specific EI competencies. In this study a dual approach to EI coaching was adopted where students received both one-to one and group EI coaching sessions. This mixed approach to EI coaching provided a more comprehensive means of engaging with the EI coaching process and resulted in wider exposure to the core elements of EI for participants. Each participant received a detailed Workplace Report – which is automatically generated once the test is taken – with a clear breakdown of their scores on the EQ-i2.0. However, individualised session plans were then designed for each participant which were based on the guidance on the Coach’s version of the Workplace Report. However, the guidance given on the coach’s report is quite brief and is often viewed as a first step in the EI coaching process. At the end of the one-to-one session, each participant left the session with their personalised workplace report which could be used as a reference point for future EI development. In addition, individual personal development plans (PDPs) were designed with each participant which were collaborative in nature and targeted both strength areas and areas for further development. This is a particularly positive feature of the Bar-On EQ-i2.0 test as it is a growth model, the language utilised focuses on less, well and highly developed skills as opposed to strengths and weaknesses. While previous group coaching
interventions delivered in the workplace have focused on a number of specific EI competencies, the approach used in this research was broader, with an experiential approach being adopted. Within each group session, tasks and activities targeted a variety of EI competency areas, both intrapersonal and interpersonal. A reflective element was also included in the coaching process which was stressed by employers as key to EI competency development. Worksheets were administered to each participant at the end of each group EI coaching session for private reflection and as a means to record learning and progress. These worksheets provided further support and opportunities for growth and learning. The use of an e-portfolio was an innovative way to document learning and chart progress throughout the process and each participant exited the process with an online Livebinder portfolio tool.

Fifthly, this research adopted a strong ethical framework with confidentiality and anonymity being of paramount importance. No identifying information was recorded with respect to the employers and the participants. Care was taken at all stages of the process to ensure harm minimisation with counselling services in both campuses being made available to students, during and following the research period, in the event that they needed to avail of such services.

Sixthly, this research has provided a preliminary template for a TU Dublin X-Cel (Excellence in Personal Development) Award, which could be offered to students for the duration of their academic careers. What would be crucial when developing such an award would be the involvement of employers in the design and assessment of the TU Dublin X-Cel Award. Such an Award would provide tangible evidence of graduate attribute attainment, EI competency and overall employability. This research recommends that the TU Dublin introduce an Enhanced Transcript for students who participate in the X-Cel Award, similar to the one awarded by the University of Aberdeen. The Enhanced Transcript would clearly outline to employers the participation and involvement of students in co-curricular activities critical to their development as individuals.

Seventhly, this research has designed a suite of EI competency based workshops which could be incorporated into a broader employability package for delivery in higher education. These workshops were designed in line with the expressed opinions of employers in key sectors of Irish industry. This research has also outlined a template for an Employability Skills Workshop, based on theory in the field and employer feedback, which includes methods and exercises, emphasising an experiential and practical approach.

Eightly, the mixed method design of this study was a key strength. This design allowed for the triangulation of both quantitative and qualitative data and, in Phase One gave a broad insight into the opinions of employers across five different sectors in Irish industry. A pilot study was conducted with final year IT/computing students to ensure the efficacy of the proposed methodology for the study, with the tailored coaching being piloted with employers. The study utilised the Bar-On EQ-i2.0 which is considered a robust, accredited test of EI competency. The use of pragmatism as a research paradigm was of particular benefit as it enabled transferability of knowledge and learning which was highlighted by Walker, (2010) in Neale as fundamental to the pragmatic approach. The mixed method approach facilitated triangulation of results in Phase One and Phase Three which provided both statistical and information rich material to inform this study. This integrated approach supports the view by theorists in the field supporting such an approach as it facilitates clarity on a multiplicity of factors, which promote or prevent the development of EI competence.

Ninthly, a key strength of this study was the thoroughness of the statistics. At all stages in the research, assumptions were checked and where violations occurred follow up alternative confirmatory tests were generally performed. The use of bootstrapping byDr McGuinness to cross check all test results was a particular strength, resulting in statistical data that was robust and accurate.

Finally, this research has highlighted the importance of work placements in building both technical expertise and social and emotional competency in graduates. Employers rated highly students who could discuss and critically analyse their work experience and articulate their learning. Employers placed value on the diverse range of EI competencies acquired during formal work placements as well as informal part-time work. What was most important was that students could identify their learning and discuss it openly. Such work placement opportunities must form a compulsory component of all undergraduate degree programmes offered in the newly established TU Dublin. However, critical to this is the need for employers to provide real opportunities for students to apply their knowledge in the work placement and be part of project teams and other incentives which facilitate growth and development in EI competency. To be effective, work placements need to be rigorously assessed both within the work placement organisation and the higher education institution. Again, this highlights the importance of collaboration.

7.7 Limitations of the study

To date, coaching interventions focusing on EI competency development are delivered in the actual workplace over a longer period of time, nine to twelve months. In this study, the intervention was completed over a period of six months with one individualised coaching session per participant and three one and a half group coaching sessions. The primary focus of this study was on employer engagement and involvement, therefore, no measures were in place to examine the benefits and challenges of participation from the student’s perspective. This was not the focus of this research, therefore, data is not available in terms of outcomes for participants. Accordingly, the
maintenance and evaluation stages of the emotional competency framework were not completed with students. However, informal contact was made by students with the researcher to advise them of their progress since completing their undergraduate study with many stating that they had secured employment with many of the employers in this study. This could be an area for future research with a longitudinal study being conducted charting final year students as they make the transition into the workplace and follow them in their first year of their career. This agrees with Bharwanay, (2007) who held that coaching interventions must be ongoing over a period of time and include an evaluation aspect with both students and employers.

The Consortium for Research on EI in Organizations emphasised the importance of employer engagement in relation to successful outcomes of any emotional competency coaching intervention. They argued that EI competency development must be in line with the organisation’s mission and overall strategy. This may have impacted on this study as although employers were involved from the outset, the participants were still in college. They had not made the transition into the workplace, therefore, the group coaching was based on current theory on coaching in the workplace and, for the experimental group based on both coaching theory and employer input. This may highlight opportunities for further research already mentioned where students are monitored as they enter the workplace and throughout the first year of their careers to determine if and how they are applying their knowledge of EI competency to a particular role.

This research was also limited by time and resources which impacted on sample size, particularly in Phase Two. While the EQ-i2.0 is an accredited test and is theinstrument utilised when conducting EI coaching in the workplace, it is costly with each test costing €65 plus VAT at 21%. In this study, students were tested at baseline and post intervention, with EI coaching hours delivered totalling 120 hours. The participants in this research were final year students, therefore, were under enormous pressure in terms of their academic workload, thus, the interventions were required to take place within a very specific timeframe. While students were randomised within institutes, it was not practically possible to randomise across institutes due to the distance geographically.

As already stated, in terms of the quantitative aspects of this study, the sample sizes for the phases of this study were generally small. Small sample sizes can more easily be non-representative of their associated populations, and additionally may result in statistical tests that have low power. Where there is not statistical significance there may have been issues with the statistical power of the associated test.

Another limitation was with respect to effect size. The numbers required for anything other than a large effect were beyond the scope of the resources available, therefore, the study was designed that was capable of detecting only large effect sizes.

In Phase Three, each participant was afforded an opportunity to meet with an employer in their discipline of engineering. There were two employers from each of the five disciplines of engineering represented in this study. Therefore, not all participants met with the same employer which may have confounded the findings.

This study was confined to two Institutes of Technology (IOTs), therefore, this may limit to some extent the generalisability of the findings. However, as this study was exploratory in nature there may be scope to conduct a larger scale study across a number of higher education institutions to determine replicability.

7.8 Future Research

As already stated in this chapter, further research is required to build on the findings from this research. While Phase One of this study included employers from five sectors of industry the focus of the EI coaching was on final year engineering students. Future large-scale research could expand on these findings and replicate this study with a larger sample across different sectors of industry. In addition future research could be conducted within universities as well as IOTs to determine any differences there. With the development of technological universities in Ireland and their emphasis on vocational and professional training (HEA website), there are opportunities to conduct further research in the TU Dublin, in the first instance to explore the six graduate attribute areas in terms of design, delivery and impact on students.

Work experience and work placements were highlighted throughout this study as critically important aspects of undergraduate education. They were viewed as essential to building technical and EI competency development and employers argued that they must form a mandatory part of all undergraduate education. Future research could examine the nature of work experience in all disciplines, the design, assessment and measurement strategies utilised and ensure that a dual focus on technical and social and emotional competency development are included. As previously stated, work experience must provide real opportunities for students to grow and develop which means facilitating students to engage fully in all aspects of the workplace. This could be a gradual process and adopt a scaffolding approach, as previously discussed. In addition, it is strongly recommended, on the basis of findings from this study, that work placements are included as mandatory across all disciplines in TU Dublin and across other newly established technological universities in Ireland.

This study found that EI coaching led to increased EI scores for students in all subscales of the EQ-i2.0, in both the active control and experimental groups. Statistically significant differences were found between the groups for a number of the competencies on the EQ-i2.0. Future research could involve a longitudinal study of final year students as they complete their final year of study and transition into the workplace. It could examine how EI coaching interventions could be of benefit to them in managing the pressures of final year, how they navigate through the recruitment process and how they manage the first year of a career.

The need for EI coaching to be embedded into curricula has been emphasised throughout this study. With the establishment of TU Dublin, opportunities are available to embed graduate attribute curricula into the programmes delivered. Future research could involve a cross-disciplinary approach to graduate attribute development involving academics, careers services and employers. The importance of employer engagement and
involvement in this process is emphasised. This could be achieved through input on module design or practical assessment and through on-site visits and workshops with students throughout their academic careers. It is acknowledged that embedding EI coaching into curricula may prove challenging due to the need for external validation. However, following on from a recommendation by Carthy, (2013) research could include key informants in higher education to explore changes to the NFQ which could potentially lead to social and emotional competency being included as a mandatory aspect of higher education.

Future research might examine the impact of a formal TU Dublin graduate attribute award such as the TU Dublin X-Cel Award outlined in this chapter. It would be interesting to explore perceived benefits of such an award in terms of social and emotional competency development, in terms of transitioning into the workplace and in terms of employability. This could include an exploration of the impact, if any, of an Enhanced Transcript on employability.

Future research should involve an examination of how employability is being taught in higher education. There is a need for a broad approach to employability skills workshops as many initiatives simply focus on CV design and job applications. Future research could examine this concept in more detail and explore how higher education institutions are interpreting this concept and the mechanisms in place to include it in teaching and learning practices within higher education. In addition, the need to include employers in any employability initiatives is emphasised.

7.9 Conclusion

Previous research has demonstrated that EI coaching interventions have positive benefits, at an individual and at an organisational level. To date, research has not been conducted in an Irish context to ascertain the viewpoints of employers in terms of the importance of social and emotional competencies in the workplace and the current levels being displayed by graduates, when entering the workplace. In addition, previous research has not included employers in the design of a tailored EI coaching programme for delivery to final year engineering students. This study has provided detailed and informative data pertaining to social and emotional competency. It has made a novel and important contribution to the field of social and emotional intelligence and with respect to the concept of employability. It has built on previous studies conducted in higher education and the workplace. Importantly, it has broadened the research on EI with respect to technical disciplines and demonstrated the importance placed by employers in key sector of industry on social-emotional competencies for workplace and personal success. The data collected in this study could be used to inform future higher education policy with respect to curricula, graduate attributes and employability interventions. What is important is that any future EI interventions for students in higher education enhance their academic experience, build on their civic responsibility and equip them with both the technical expertise and EI competency to successfully transition from higher education into the workplace.

References

Abu Hassan, Z., Schattner, P. and Mazza, D. (2006). Doing A Pilot Study: Why Is It Essential? Malaysian Family Physician, 1 (2-3): p. 70–73 (Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4453116/)

Arcement, B. (2018). The 5 reasons new hires fail The Business Journals, Jan 11 (Retrieved from https://www.bizjournals.com/bizjournals/how-to/human resources/2018/01/the-5-reasons-new-hires-fail.html)

Association of Higher Education Careers Services (AHECS) website

Austin, E.J., Saklofske, D.H. and Egan, V. (2005). Personality, well-being and health correlates of trait emotional intelligence, Personality and Individual Differences, Vol. 38, No. 3, p. 547-558.

Baker, K., Pryor, M. and Perkins, J. (n.d.) Achieving graduate attributes: making the implicit explicit (Retrieved from
http://www.enhancementthemes.ac.uk/docs/tipzone-article/achieving-graduate attributes-making-the-implicit-explicit.pdf?sfvrsn=20)

Bar-On, R. (1997a). The Emotional Quotient Inventory (EQ-i): A test of emotional intelligence. Toronto, Canada: Multi-Health Systems, Inc.

Bar-On, R. (1997b). The Emotional Quotient Inventory (EQ-i): Technical manual. Toronto, Canada: Multi-Health Systems, Inc.

Bar-On, R. (2005). The impact of emotional intelligence on subjective well-being. Perspectives in Education, 23 (2), p. 41-61

Bar-On, R. (2006). The Bar-On Model of emotional-social intelligence (esi), Psicothema, 18, supl, 13-25

Bar-On R. (2007). How Important Is It to educate people to be emotionally intelligent and can it be done? in Bar-On Reuven, Maree J.G. and Elias Maurice Jesse, Educating People to be Emotionally Intelligent, CT: Praeger Publishers

Bar-On, R., Handley, R. Fund, S. (2005). The impact of emotional and social intelligence on performance in Druskat, V., Sala, F. and Mount, G. (eds) Linking emotional intelligence and performance at work: Current research evidence. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum

Bar-On, R. website The Bar-On Concept of EI (Retrieved from http://www.reuvenbaron.org/wp/the-bar-on-model/the-ei-conceptual-aspect/

Barrett, G.V. Miguel, R.F., Tan, J.A., and Hurd, J.M. (2004). Emotional Intelligence:The Madison Avenue approach to science and professional practice, Unpublished paper in Zeidner, M., Matthews, G. and Roberts, R.D. (2004), Emotional Intelligence in the Workplace: A Critical Review, Applied Psychology: An International Review, 53 (3), 371-399

Barrie S.C. (2006). Understanding what we mean by the generic attributes of graduates Australia: Institute for Teaching and Learning University of Sydney (Retrieved from http://www.itl.usyd.edu.au/GraduateAttributes/barriepaper.pdf)

Baumeister, R.F. (2005). The cultural animal: human nature, meaning and social life. Oxford University Press, New York

Beckmann, A. and Cooper, C. (2004). ‘Globalisation’, the New Managerialism and Education: Rethinking the Purpose of Education in Britain, Journal for Critical Education Policy Studies, Volume 2, Number 2, p. 148-174 ISSN 1740-2743 (Retrieved from http://www.jceps.com/archives/485)

Bharwannay, G. (2007). Coaching Executives to Enhance Emotional Intelligence and Increase Productivity in Bar-On Reuven, Maree J.G. and Elias Maurice Jesse, Educating People to be Emotionally Intelligent, CT: Praeger Publishers

Biesta, G. (2010). Pragmatism and the Philosophical Foundations of Mixed Methods Research in Tashakkori A. and Teddlie, C. SAGE Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social & Behavioral Research (2nd edition), CA: SAGE Publications Inc.

Billett, S. (2015). Integrating Practice-based Experiences into Higher Education, Australia: Springer DOI: 10.1007/978-94-017-7230-3

Bloch, A. (2004). Doing Social Surveys in Seale, C. (ed) Researching Society and Culture (2nd edition), London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Bolton, G. (2010). Reflective Practice Writing and Professional Development (3rd edition), London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Boyatzis, R.E. (2007). The Creation of the Emotional and Social Competency Inventory (ESCI) Findings from a pilot study to achieve a higher psychometric standard with the ECI, Boston: Hay Group (Retrieved from http://e-russell.com/images/ESCI_Article.pdf)

Brackett M.A., Rivers, S.E.and Salovey, P. (2011). Emotional Intelligence: Implications for Personal, Social, Academic and Workplace Success, Social and Personality Compass 5/1, 88-103 (Retrieved from http://ei.yale.edu/wp content/uploads/2013/09/pub184_Brackett_Rivers_Salovey_2011_Compass 1.pdf)

Bradberry, T. and Greaves, J. (2009). Emotional Intelligence 2.0, CA: TalentSmart

Bradburn, N., Sudman, S. and Wansink, B. (2004). Asking Questions: The Definitive Guide to Questionnaire Design — For Market Research, Political Polls, and Social and Health Questionnaires, Revised Edition, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass

Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3 (2). pp. 77-101. ISSN1478-0887 Available from: http://eprints.uwe.ac.uk/11735

Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2013). Successful Qualitative Research, a practical guide for beginners, London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) Two website, Dragon’s Den (Retrieved from https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b006vq92)

Brody, N. (1992). Intelligence (2nd edition), London: Academic Press

Carthy, A. (2013). Emotional Intelligence: Enhancing academic and social learning through encouraging student engagement with emotional skills development, (published doctoral dissertation) Institute of Technology, Blanchardstown (ITB) Dublin, Ireland

Carthy, A., McCann, C. and McGilloway, S. (2010). Exploring the differences in emotional competency across subject domains for Irish undergraduate students ITB Journal Issue 19: 58-71.

Caruso, D.R. (n.d.) A Practical Guide to the Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT) (Retrieved from
https://impetusnlp.wordpress.com/2015/01/22/a-practical-guide-to-the-mayer salovey-caruso-emotional- intelligence-test-msceit/)

Caruso, D.R. (2008). Emotions and the Ability Model of Emotional Intelligence in Emmerling, R.J., Shanwal, V.K. and Mandal, M.K. (eds), Emotional Intelligence Theoretical and Cultural Perspectives, New York: Nova Science Publishers Inc.

Cefai, C. and Cooper P. (2009). Emotional Education: Connecting with Students’ Thoughts and Emotions in Cefai, C. and Cooper, P., Promoting Emotional Education: Engaging children and Young People with Social, Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties, London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers

Cherniss C. (2000a). Emotional Intelligence: What it is and Why it Matters, Paper presented at the Annual meeting of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, April 15 (Retrieved from http://www.eiconsortium.org/reports/what_is_emotional_intelligence.htm)

Cherniss, C. (2000b). Social and Emotional Competence in the Workplace in Bar-On Reuven and Parker, James D.A. The Handbook of Emotional Intelligence, Theory, Development, Assessment, and Application at Home, School, and in the Workplace, US: Jossey-Bass

Cherniss, C., Roche, C. and Barbarasch, B. (2016). Emotional Intelligence, in Friedman, H.S. (editor in charge) Encyclopaedia of Mental Health (2nd edition), MA: Elsevier Inc.

Choi, S., Kluemper, D.H. and Sauley, K.S. (2011). What If We Fake Emotional Intelligence? A Test of Criterion Validity Attenuation, Journal of Personality Assessment, 93 (3), 270-277. DOI 10.1080/00223891

Chopra, P.K. and Kanji, G.K. (2010). Emotional intelligence: a catalyst for inspirational leadership and management excellence. Total Quality Management, 21 (10), p 971-1004

Coe, R. (2002). It’s the Effect Size Stupid what effect size is and why it is important (Paper presented at the British Educational Research Association annual conference), 12 14 September

Cohen, D. and Crabtree, B. (2006). Critical Theory Paradigms, Qualitative Research Guidelines Project. (Retrieved from http://www.qualres.org/HomeCrit 3518.html)

Cohen, L., Manion, L. and Morrison, K. (2011). Research Methods in Education (7th edition), Oxon: Routledge

Confederation of EU Rectors’ Conference and the Association of European Universities (CRE) (n.d.) The Bologna Declaration on the European space for higher education: an explanation (Retrieved from
http://www.fulbright.at/fileadmin/user_upload/studyAustria/bologna.pdf)

Consortium for Research on Emotional Intelligence in Organizations (n.d.) Guidelines for Best Practice, (Retrieved from http://www.eiconsortium.org/reports/guidelines.html)

Coombes, L., Allen, D., Humphrey, D. and Neale, J. (2009). In-depth Interviews in Neale, J. (ed), Research Methods for Health and Social Care, UK: Palgrave Macmillan

Cosshall W.J. (2018). Expert Guide: Using WordPress Blogs for Real-World Portfolios (Retrieved from https://developingemployability.edu.au/featured-resource expert-guide-using-wordpress-blogs-for-real-world-portfolios/)

Creasey, R. (2013). Improving Students’ Employability, Engineering Education, 8:1, p. 16-30, DOI: 10.11120/ened.2013.00006

Creswell, J.W. (2003). Research Design Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approach (2nd edition), CA: SAGE Publications Inc.

Creswell, J.W. (2014). Research Design, Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches (4th edition), CA: SAGE Publications Inc.

Crotty, M. (1998). The Foundations of Social Research: Meaning and Perspective in the research process, London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Curwin, J. and Slater, R. (2002). Quantitative Methods for Business Decisions (5th edition), London: Thomson Learning

Dahlgren, M.A., Reid, A., Dahlgren, L.O., Petocz, P. (2008). Learning for the professions: lessons from linking international research projects, High Educ 56: 129-148 DOI 10.1007/s10734-007-9094-0

Daniels, H. (2016). Vygotsky and Pedagogy, Oxon: Routledge

De la Harpe, B. and David, C. (2012). Major influences on the teaching and assessment of graduate attributes, Higher Education Research & Development, 31:4, 493 510 DOI: 10.1080/07294360.2011.629361

Denscombe, M. (2007). The Good Research Guide for small-scale social research projects (3rd edition), UK: Open University Press

Denscombe, M. (2008). Communities of practice: a research paradigm for the Mixed Methods approach, Journal of Mixed Methods Research, Vol 2. Issue 3, p 270 283

Denzin, N.K. (2017). Critical Qualitative Inquiry, Qualitative Inquiry, Vol 23 (1) 8-16 DOI:10.1177/1077800416681864

Department of Education and Skills website (n.d.) Higher Education (Retrieved from https://www.education.ie/en/The-Education-System/Higher-Education/Higher Education.html)

Department of Education and Skills (2011). National Strategy for Higher Education to 2030, Dublin: Department of Education and Skills (Retrieved from https://www.education.ie/en/Publications/Policy-Reports/National-Strategy-for Higher-Education-2030.pdf)

Derksen, J., Kramer, I. and Katzko, M. (2002). Does a self-report measure for emotional intelligence assess something different than general intelligence? Personality and Individual Differences, Volume 32: 37-48

Doyle, M. (2003). Discourses of Employability and Empowerment: Foundation Degrees and ‘Third Way’ discursive repertoires, Discourse: studies in the cultural politics of education Vol. 24, No. 3, December 2003. DOI:
10.1080/0159630032000172489

Elfenbein, H.A. and Ambady, N. (2003). Universals and Cultural Differences in Recognizing Emotions, Current Directions in Psychological Science, Vol 12, No. 5, p 159-164 (Retrieved from
https://web.stanford.edu/group/ipc/pubs/2003Elfenbein.pdf)

Elias, M.J. and Arnold, H. (eds) (2006). The Educator’s Guide to Emotional Intelligence and Academic Achievement: Social-Emotional Learning in the Classroom, CA: Corwin Press

Ellis, P.D. (2010a). The Essential Guide to Effect Sizes, Statistical Power, Meta- Analysis and the Interpretation of Research Results, UK: Cambridge University Press

Ellis P.D. (2010b). What are the two “families” of effect size? Effect Sizes FAQs: Research that matters, results that make sense, May 31 (Retrieved from https://effectsizefaq.com/category/effect-size/page/2/)

Emmerling, R.J. (2008). Toward an Applied Science of Emotional Intelligence in the Global Workplace: Key Issues and Challenges in Emmerling, R.J., Shanwal, V.K. and Mandal, M.K. (eds), Emotional Intelligence Theoretical and Cultural Perspectives, New York: Nova Science Publishers Inc.

Emmerling, R.J., Shanwal, V.K. and Mandal, M.K. (eds), (2008). Emotional Intelligence Theoretical and Cultural Perspectives, New York: Nova Science Publishers Inc.

Epigeum Ltd. (2012). Job descriptions and person specifications (Retrieved from https://www.epigeum.com/downloads/ulm_accessible/uk/05_people/html/course _files/mp_3_20.html)

Epson Blog Team (2017). Independent working will soon be a best skill to have on your CV (Retrieved from https://www.epson.co.uk/insights/article/independent working-will-soon-be-a-best-skill-to-have-on-your-cv)

Eraut, M. (2009). Transfer of Knowledge Between Educational and Workplace Settings (Retrieved from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/237539394_Transfer_of_Knowledge_ Between_Education_and_Workplace_Settings)

Eurich, T. (2018). What Self-Awareness Really Is (and How to Cultivate It) Harvard Business Review, Jan 04 (Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2018/01/what-self awareness-really-is-and-how-to-cultivate-it)

European Union (2010). The European Employment Strategy: Working to improve employment in Europe. doi:10.2767/12758

European University Association website, What is the Bologna Process? (Retrieved from http://www.eua.be/eua-work-and-policy-area/building-the-european higher-education-area/bologna-basics.aspx)

Expert Group on Future Funding for Higher Education (2015). The Role, Value and Scale of Higher Education in Ireland, Discussion Paper for Stakeholder Consultation (Retrieved from https://www.education.ie/en/The-Education System/Higher-Education/Higher-Education-Role-Value-and-Scale-of-Higher Education-in-Ireland-Discussion-Paper-1-.pdf)

Fasano, A. (2013). The Emotionally Brilliant Engineer (guest post by Sweet, P.) Engineering Management Institute (Retrieved from http://engineeringcareercoach.com/2013/03/20/the-emotionally-brilliant engineer/)

Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A.-G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 1149-1160.

Ferguson, E.D. (2000). Motivation, A Biosocial and Cognitive Integration of Motivation and Emotion, NY: Oxford University Press Inc.

Field, A. (2013). Discovering Statistics using IBM SPSS Statistics (4th edition), London, SAGE Publications Ltd.

Findlow, S. (2008). Accountability and innovation in higher education: a disabling tension? Studies in Higher Education Vol. 33, No. 3, June 2008, 313–329 ISSN 0307-5079 DOI: 10.1080/03075070802049285

Fiori, M., Antonietti, J.P., Mikolajczak, M., Luminet, O., Hansenne, M. and Rossier, J. (2014). What Is the Ability Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT) Good for? An Evaluation Using Item Response Theory, PLoS One 9 (6) e98827, DOI: 10.137/journal.pone.0098827 (Retrieved from
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0098827)

Fishtree.com (2017). The 3 Big Changes that Students Want In Higher Education January 5 (Retrieved from https://www.fishtree.com/blog/the-3-big-changes that-students-want-in-higher-education)

Fletcher, A.J., Sharif, A.W.A. and Haw, M.D. (2017). Using the perceptions of chemical engineering students and graduates to develop employability skills Education for Chemical Engineers 18, p 11-25

Fowler, F.J. Jr (2009). Survey Research Methods (4th edition), Thousand oaks, CA: Sage

Fresh Tracks Innovative Team Building Activities Balloon Tower activity (Retrieved from http://www.freshtracks.co.uk/free-team-building/balloon-tower/)

Frost D.E. (2004). The Psychological Assessment of Emotional Intelligence in Hersen M. (ed in chief) Comprehensive Psychological Handbook of Assessment, Industrial and Organizational Assessment, New Jersey (Retrieved from https://books.google.ie/books?id=eTHpF7yt_WYC&pg=PA207&lpg=PA207&d q=what+are+positive+and+negative+impression+scales&source=bl&ots=yb2yw oB8k1&sig=1xyP5Re1DYwL8df6bNLEfMivavI&hl=en&sa=X&ei=PDXwVK
GPFejU7Abz4IG4CA&ved=0CEwQ6AEwBw#v=onepage&q=what%20are%20 positive%20and%20 negative%20impression%20scales&f=false

Frost, J. (2016a). Understanding Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and the F-test, The Minitab Blog (Retrieved from http://blog.minitab.com/blog/adventures-in statistics-2/understanding-analysis-of-variance-anova-and-the-f-test)

Frost, J. (2016b). Understanding t-Tests, t-values and t-distributions, The Minitab Blog (Retrieved from http://blog.minitab.com/blog/adventures-in-statistics 2/understanding-t-tests-t-values-and-t-distributions)

Gangophadhyay, M. and Mandal, M. (2008). Emotional Intelligence – A Universal or a Culture-Specific Construct in Emmerling, R.J., Shanwal, V.K. and Mandal, M.K. (eds), Emotional Intelligence Theoretical and Cultural Perspectives, New York: Nova Science Publishers Inc.

Gardner, H. (1993). Frames of mind, The Theory of Multiple Intelligences (2nd edition), London: Fontana Press

Glen, S. (2016). Kruskal-Wallis H-Test: Definition, Examples & Assumptions. February 24 (Retrieved from http://www.statisticshowto.com/kruskal-wallis/

Goldkuhl, G. (2012). Pragmatism vs interpretivism in qualitative information systems research, European Journal of Information Systems, (21), 2, 135-146. http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/ejis.2011.54

Goleman, D. (2013). Developing Emotional Intelligence (Retrieved from
http://www.danielgoleman.info/developing-emotional-intelligence/)

Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional Intelligence: Why it can matter more than IQ, US: Bloomsbury

Goleman, D. (2006). Social Intelligence: The New Science of Human Relationships, London: Hutchinson

Goleman, D. (1998). Working with Emotional Intelligence, New York: Bantam Books

Goleman, D. and Boyatzis, R. (2008). Social Intelligence and the Biology of Leadership, Harvard Business Review, September

Grace-Martin E. (n.d.). The Assumptions of Linear Models: Explicit and Implicit (Retrieved https://www.theanalysisfactor.com/assumptions-of-linear-models/)

GradIreland (n.d.) Assessment Centres (Retrieved from https://gradireland.com/careers-advice/interviews-and-tests/assessment-centres

GradIreland (2009). Diversity in the Workplace (Retrieved from https://gradireland.com/careers-advice/equal-opportunities/diversity-in-the workplace

Grant, C. and Osanloo, A. (2014). Understanding, Selecting and Integrating a Theoretical Framework in Dissertation Research: Creating the Blueprint for your “House”, Administrative Issues Journal: Connecting Education, Practice and Research Vol 4, Issue 2 DOI: 10.5929/2014.4.2.9

Grant-Smith, D. and McDonald, P. (2017). Planning to work for free: building the graduate employability of planners through unpaid work. Journal of Youth Studies, Volume 21 2018, Issue 2, p 161-177. DOI 10
1080/13676261.2017.1357804 (Retrieved from https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13676261.2017.1357804)

Grbich, C. (2007). Qualitative Data Analysis: An Introduction, London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Greene, J.C. and Hall, J.N. (2010). Dialectics and Pragmatism Being of Consequence in Tashakkori A. and Teddlie, C. SAGE Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social & Behavioral Research (2nd edition), CA: SAGE Publications Inc.

Guber, P. (2015). Self-Awareness is the Most Important Skill for Career Success, LinkedIn, May 07 (Retrieved from https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/i-were-22 self-awareness-most-important-skill-career-success-guber)

Guile, D. and Griffiths, T. (2001). Learning Through Work Experience, Journal of Education and Work, Vol. 14, Issue 1, p. 113-131 DOI: 10.1080/13639080124403

Gutiérrez-Cobo, M.J., Cabello, R. and Fernández-Berrocal, P. (2017). The Three Model of EI and Performance in a Hot and Cool go/no-go Task in Undergraduate students. Frontiers in Behavioral neuroscience 11: 33
DOI: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnbeh.2017.00033/full

Halpenny, S. (2016). A practical model of graduate employability, York Learning and Teaching Forum, June 3 (Retrieved from

A practical model of graduate employability

Haigh M. and Clifford V. (2010). Widening the Graduate Attribute Debate: a Higher Education for Global Citizenship, Brookes e-journal of Learning and Teaching, Vol 2, Issue 5 (Retrieved from
http://bejlt.brookes.ac.uk/paper/widening_the_graduate_attribute_debate_a_high er_education_for_global_citize-2/)

Hay Group (2011). Emotional and social competency inventory (ESCI), a user guide for accredited practitioners, US: Hay Group (Retrieved from http://www.eiconsortium.org/pdf/ESCI_user_guide.pdf)

Heale, R. and Forbes, D. (2013). Understanding triangulation in research, Evidence Based Nursing, Volume 16, Issue 4, http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/eb-2013-101494

Helyer, R. (2015). Learning through reflection: the critical role of reflection in work- based learning (WBL), Journal of Work-Applied Management, Vol. 7 Issue: 1, pp.15-27, https://doi.org/10.1108/JWAM-10-2015-003

Higher Education Authority (HEA) (2015). The Irish Survey of Student Engagement Results from 2015, Dublin: HEA (Retrieved from http://www.hea.ie/sites/default/files/isse_report_2015_final-tagged.pdf)

Higher Education Authority website. New Technological Universities will be created under the reforms set out in Ireland’s National Strategy for Higher Education (Retrieved from http://hea.ie/policy/he-reform/technological-universities/)

Hoerr, T.R. (2000). Becoming a Multiple Intelligences School, Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development

Hoskins, T. (n.d.) Parametric and Non-Parametric, Demystifying the Terms, Ireland: Mayo Clinic Department of Health Sciences Research (Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.629.3640&rep=rep1& type=pdf)

Huber, C. (2013). Measures of Effect Sizes in Stata 13 (Retrieved from https://blog.stata.com/2013/09/05/measures-of-effect-size-in-stata-13/)

Hughes C. and Barrie S. (2010). Influences on the assessment of graduate attributes in higher education, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, Vol 35, No. 3, 325-334

Humphreys, J. (2014). Arts and science students feel ‘less prepared’ for the workplace, Irish Times (Retrieved from http://www.irishtimes.com/news/education/arts-and science-students-feel-less-prepared-for-the-workplace-1.1986701)

IBM Knowledge Center website, Testing Homogeneity of Covariance Matrices (Retrieved from https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/en/SSLVMB_23.0.0/spss/tutoria ls/glmm_patlos_homcov.html)

IBM Corporation (2013). IBM SPSS Advanced Statistics 22 (Retrieved from http://www.sussex.ac.uk/its/pdfs/SPSS_Advanced_Statistics_22.pdf)

Ilyasova, K.A. (2015). Emotional Competencies: Connecting to the Emotive Side of Engineering and Communication DOI: 10.1109/IPCC.2015.7235815

Institute 1 (n.d.) Mission Statement Dublin: Institute 1

Institute 1 (n.d.) Professional Development for Engineers module descriptor Dublin: Institute 1

Institute 1 (n.d.) Skills for Success in Higher Education module descriptor, Dublin: Institute 1

Institute 2 (n.d.) Access Policies Dublin: Institute 2

Institute 2 (n.d.) Career Skills Development module descriptor Dublin: Institute 2

International Engineering Alliance (2013). Graduate Attributes and Professional Competencies (Retrieved from http://www.ieagreements.org/IEA-Grad-Attr Prof-Competencies.pdf)

IrishJobs.ie website, (2012). Tailor your CV to fit the Job Description, Jan 15 (Retrieved from https://www.irishjobs.ie/careeradvice/tailor-your-cv-to-fit-the-job-description/) Irish National Framework of Qualifications (NFQ) Grid of Level Indicators (Retrieved from http://www.nfq-qqi.com/)

Jameson, J., Strudwick, K., Bond-Taylor, S. and Jones, M. (2012). Academic principles versus employability pressures: a modern power struggle or a creative opportunity? Teaching in Higher Education Vol. 17, No. 1, February 2012, 25 37. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2011.590978

Johnson, B. and Christensen L. (2012). Educational Research, Quantitative, Qualitative and Mixed Approaches (4th edition), CA: SAGE Publications Inc. (Retrieved from https://uk.sagepub.com/sites/default/files/upm binaries/38123_Chapter2.pdf

Joseph, D.L. and Newman, D.A. (2010). Emotional Intelligence: An integrative meta analysis and cascading model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95, 54078. 10.1037/a0017286

Kaplan, Seth, Cortina Jose and Ruark Gregory A. (2010). Oops….We Did It Again: Industrial-Organizational’s Focus on Emotional Intelligence Instead of on Its Relationships to Work Outcomes, Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 3, 171-177

Keefer, K.V. (2015). Self-Report Assessments of Emotional Competencies: A Critical Look at Methods and Meanings, Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, Vol. 33(1) 3 –23 DOI: 10.1177/0734282914550381

Keith, L. and Jenness, M. (2017). Reflection: A Tool For Success, STEP Journal, p. 74- 77 (Retrieved from https://www.step.org/sites/default/files/employers/Reflection_article_ _STEP_Journal_Oct_17_-_LK_MJ.pdf)

Keogh, J., Maguire, T. and O’Donoghue, J. (2015). Graduate Work-Readiness in the 21st Century. Higher Education in Transformation Conference, Dublin, Ireland, 2015, pp. 385-395

Kezar, A., (2001). Theory of Multiple Intelligences: Implications for Higher Education, Innovative Higher Education, Vol. 26, No. 2, p. 141-154

Kilmartin, D. (2010), The Six Top Growth Industries in Ireland (Retrieved from http://campus.ie/surviving-college/job-news/six-top-growth-industries-ireland today

KinchLyons, (2015a). Module 1: Overview of Emotional Intelligence and the EQ-i2.0 Model, Dublin: KinchLyons

KinchLyons, (2015b). Module 2: The Science Behind the EQ-i2.0: Psychometrics, Dublin: KinchLyons

Kinser, P.A. and Robins, J.L. (2013). Control Group Design: Enhancing Rigor in Research of Mind-Body Therapies for Depression, Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine, Volume 2013, Article ID 140467
DOI: 10.1155/2013/140467 (Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23662111)

Knight, P. and Yorke, M. (2007). Learning, Curriculum and Employability in Higher Education, Routledge Falmer, London

Koestler Parapsychology Unit Study Registry (2015). Exploratory and Confirmatory Analyses (Retrieved from http://www.koestler parapsychology.psy.ed.ac.uk/Documents/explore_confirm.pdf)

Kumar, R. (2011), Research Methodology, a step-by-step guide for beginners (3rd edition). CA: Sage

Laerd Statistics website Kruskal-Wallis H Test using SPSS Statistics (Retrieved from https://statistics.laerd.com/spss-tutorials/kruskal-wallis-h-test-using-spss statistics.php)

Lakens. D. (2013). Calculating and reporting effect sizes to facilitate cumulative science: a practical primer for t-tests and ANOVAs, Frontiers in Psychology https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00863

Lavrakas, P.J. (2008). Convenience Sampling Encyclopedia of Survey Research Methods DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781412963947.n105

Lazarus, R.S. (1991). Emotion and Adaptation, New York: Oxford University Press

Le Maistre, C. and Paré, A. (2004). Learning in Two Communities: the challenge for universities and workplaces, Journal of Workplace Learning, Vol. 16 Issue 1/2 pp. 44 – 52 DOI 10.1108/13665620410521503

Lennick, D. (2007). Emotional Competence Development and the Bottom Line: Lessons from American Express Financial Advisors in Bar-On R., Maree, J.G. and Elias, M.J. (eds) Educating People to be Emotionally Intelligent, CT: Praeger Publishers

Lieberman, M.D., Eisenberger, N.I., Crockett, M.J., Tom, S.M., Pfeifer, J.H. and Way, B.M. (2007). Putting Feelings into Words, Affect Labeling Disrupts Amygdala Activity in Response to Affective Stimuli, Association for Psychological Science, Vol 8, No. 5

Livebinders.com website http://www.livebinders.com/welcome/home Lopes, P.N., Grewal, D., Kadis, J., Gall, M. and Salovey, P. (2006). Evidence that emotional intelligence is related to job performance and affect and attitudes at work, Psicothema Vol 18, supl pp132-138

Louis, W.R. (2009). Writing Up Power Analysis (Retrieved from https://www2.psy.uq.edu.au/~uqwloui1/stats/wl_power0709.doc)

Lynch, K. (2016). ‘We don’t have students anymore, just customers’ Irish Times online, December 12 (Retrieved from http://www.irishtimes.com/news/education/we don-t-have-students-any-more-just-customers
1.2896508?mode=print&ot=example.AjaxPageLayout.ot)

Lyons, T. (2016). Become a STAR – the importance of interview preparation, April 25 (Retrieved from https://www.allenrec.com/become-a-star-the-importance-of interview-preparation/)

Mahon, A. and Bergin, S. (2018). Why Irish universities are in thrall to neoliberalism, Irish Times online, June 19 (Retrieved from https://www.irishtimes.com/news/education/why-irish-universities-are-in-thrall to-neoliberalism-1.3536327)

Mann, G.K. (2012). Emotional Intelligence: A New Concept of 21st Century, Indian Journal of Positive Psychology, Vol 3, No. 4

Marais, D. and Perkins, J. (2012). Enhancing Employability through self-assessment, Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences 46, 4356-4362

Mason J. (2006). Mixing methods in a qualitatively driven way, Qualitative Research Vol 6 (1), 9-25, DOI 10.1177/1468794106058866

Mayer, J.D., Salovey, P. and Caruso, D.R. (2000a). Emotional intelligence as Zeitgeist, as Personality, and as a Mental Ability in Bar-On and Parker, J.D.A. (eds) The Handbook of Emotional Intelligence Theory, Development, Assessment, and Application at Home, School, and in the Workplace, CA: Jossey Bass

Mayer, J.D., Salovey, P. and Caruso, D.R. (2000b). Models of Emotional Intelligence in Sternberg R. (ed), Handbook of Intelligence, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Mayer, J.D. and Salovey, P. (1997). What is Emotional Intelligence? in Salovey, P. and Sluyter, D.J. (eds), Emotional Development and Emotional Intelligence, New York: Basic Books

McAleese, D. (2000). The Celtic Tiger: Origins and Prospects, Policy Options, July-August, p 46-50 (Retrieved from
http://www.tcd.ie/Economics/staff/dmcleese/Web/mcaleese.pdf)

McBride, D.M. (2010). The Process of Research in Psychology, CA: Sage Publications Inc.

McGuinness, S., Bergin, A., Kelly, E., McCoy, S., Whelan, E., Smyth A., and Banks, J. (2014). Further Education and Training in Ireland, Past, Present, Future Research Series Number 35, Dublin: The Economic and Social Research Institute

McQuaid, R.W. and Lindsay, C. (2005). The Concept of Employability, Urban Studies, Vol 42, No. 2, 197-219. DOI: 10.1080/0042098042000316100

McSweeney, F. and Williams, D. (2018). Social care graduates’ judgements of their readiness and preparedness for practice, Social Work Education, DOI: 10.1080/02615479.2018.1521792

Mernagh E. (2010). Taking Stock: Ten Years of the Bologna Process in Ireland (Retrieved from http://www.eurireland.ie/_fileupload/2010/Bologna/Taking%20Stock%20
%20Ten%20Years%20of%20the%20Bologna%20Process%20in%20Ireland%28 1%29.pdf)

Mikolajczak, M. (2009). Going Beyond the Ability-Trait Debate: The Three-Level of Emotional Intelligence, Electronic Journal of Applied Psychology. 5(2): 25-31, DOI: 10.7790/ejap/v5i2.175

Miles, S. (2015). Why Nonverbal Communication is important In Interviews (Retrieved from https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/why-nonverbal-communication-important interviews-shavonda-miles)

Miley, I. (2018). Work-related stress in Ireland doubled over five years – ESRI, RTE News 27 November (Retrieved from https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2018/1127/1013566-workplace-stress/)

Mitchell, M. (2017). Just finished college? Here are some tips for that first big job hunt, TheJournal.ie (Retrieved from http://www.thejournal.ie/readme/graduate-jobs- ireland-3494980-Jul2017/?utm_source=email)

Moncho, C. (2013). Cultural Humility, Part II – Promoting Cultural Humility In the Workplace, Aug 26 (Retrieved from https://thesocialworkpractitioner.com/2013/08/26/cultural-humility-part-ii promoting-cultural-humility-in-the-workplace/)

Morehouse, M.M. (2007).“An exploration of emotional intelligence across career arenas“, Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 28 Iss 4 pp. 296 – 307 Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/01437730710752184

Morgan, D.L. (2014). Pragmatism as a Paradigm for Social Research, Qualitative Inquiry, Feb 3, (Retrieved from http://www.researchgate.net/profile/David_Morgan19/publication/265335316_Pr
agmatism_as_a_Paradigm_for_Social_Research/links/5408b86a0cf2187a6a6ca2 7d.pdfhttp://www.researchgate.net/profile/David_Morgan19/publication/265335 316_Pragmatism_as_a_Paradigm_for_Social_Research/links/5408b86a0cf2187a 6a6ca27d.pdf) DOI: 10.1177/1077800413513733

Morin, A. (2011). Self-Awareness part 1: Definition, Measures, Effects, Functions, and Antecedents, Social and Personality Psychology Compass 5/10, 807-823, 10.1111/j.1751-9004.2011.00387.x

Morrison, K. (2009). Higher education students in part-time work in a Chinese city, Evaluation Research in Education, 22: 2-4, 121-144 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09500790903499764

Moy, R. (n.d.) The Secret to a Really Good Interview is simply knowing when to shut your mouth (Retrieved from https://www.themuse.com/advice/the-secret-to-a really-good-interview-is-simply-knowing-when-to-shut-your-mouth

Multi-Health Systems Inc. The EQ-i2.0 model (Copyright image)

Multi-Health Systems (MHS) Inc. (n.d.) Become the authority in Emotional Intelligence (Retrieved from https://tap.mhs.com/Portals/0/EQ-i%202%20PIS web.pdf)

Multi-Health Systems Inc. (2011). EQ-i Workplace Report Steve Sample (Retrieved from http://www.acer.edu.au/documents/sample_reports/EQ-i_2.0-Workplace Report-Client.pdf)

Multi-Health Systems Inc. (2004). MSCEIT Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Resource Report, NY: Multi-Health Systems Inc.

Multi-Health Systems Inc. (n.d.) The Model Evolution from EQ-i to EQ-i2.0 (Retrieved from https://tap.mhs.com/Portals/0/Model%20Evolution%20Flyer web.pdf)

Myers, L.L. and Tucker, M.L. (2005). Increasing Awareness of Emotional Intelligence in a Business Curriculum, Business Communication Quarterly, Vol 68, No. 1, 44-51

National Strategy for Higher Education to 2030 (2011). Report of the Strategy Group, Dublin: Department of Education and Skills

Nelson, L.H. (1998). Realism and Nominalism, University of Kansas (Retrieved from http://vlib.iue.it/carrie/reference/worldhistory/sections/14realis.html)

Nghiem LD., Goldfinch T. and Bell M. (2010). Embedding Graduate Attribute Development into the Engineering Curriculum: Less is More? Proceedings of the 2010 AaeE Conference, Sydney (Retrieved from
http://ro.uow.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5616&context=engpapers)

Ngonyo Ngoroje C. and Yazdanifard, R. (2014). The Impact of Social and Emotional intelligence on Employee Motivation in a Multigenerational Workplace, Global Journal of Management and Business Research Administration and Management, Vol 14, Issue 3, Version 1.0, p30-36 (Retrieved from https://globaljournals.org/GJMBR_Volume14/5-The-Impact-of-Social-and Emotional-Intelligence.pdf)

Norman, G. (2010). Likert scales, levels of measurement and the “laws” of statistics, Advances in health science education: theory and practice, December, 15 (5): 625:632, doi: 10.1007/s10459-010-9222-y.

Northern Illinois University Faculty of Instructional Design (n.d.) Howard Gardner’s Theory of Multiple Intelligences (Retrieved from https://www.niu.edu/facdev/_pdf/guide/learning/howard_gardner_theory_multipl
e_intelligences.pdf)

O’Boyle E.H., Humphrey R.H. Pollack, J.M. Hawver T.H and Story P. (2011). The relation between emotional intelligence and job performance: a meta-analysis. Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 32 (5), pp 788-818. DOI 10.1002/job.714

O’Brien, C. (2015). Many students feel they are not learning job skills, Irish Times, November 5 (Retrieved from http://www.irishtimes.com/news/education/many students-feel-they-are-not-learning-job-skills-survey-says
1.2417489?utm_source=morning_digest&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign= newsdigest)

O’Brien, C. (2017). What are the must-have skills for today’s graduates? Irish Times online (Retrieved from https://www.irishtimes.com/news/education/what- are the-must-have-skills-for-today-s-graduates-1.3020229

Oliver, D. (2011). University Student Employment and Expectations of the Graduate Labour Market, Journal of Industrial Relations, Vol 53, Issue 1, February, p 123-131

Oommen A (2014). Factors Influencing Intelligence Quotient. Journal of Neurology & Stroke 1(4): 00023. DOI: 10.15406/jnsk.2014.01.00023

Ormerod, R. (2006). The History and Ideas of Pragmatism, The Journal of the Operational Research Society Vol. 57, No. 8, p.892-909

Patel, S. (2015a). What is a research paradigm (Retrieved from http://salmapatel.co.uk/academia/the-research-paradigm-methodology epistemology-and-ontology-explained-in-simple-language)

Patel, S. (2015b). Epistemology (Retrieved from http://salmapatel.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/2015-07-15-16_49_04 Epistemology-What-is-the-empistemology-of-Learning_.png)

Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods (2nd ed). CA: Sage

Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods (3rd edition). Sage Publications, Inc.

Perkins, J. (2015). personal communication, May 4 Educational and Employability Development Adviser, Careers Service/Centre for Academic Development, University of Aberdeen email 4/5

Perkins, J. and Fantom P.S. (n.d.) The ‘STAR’ Award: Recognising Student Learning & Contribution to University Life in Jackson N. and Willis J. Lifewide Learning & Education in Universities and Colleges, UK: Learning Lives (Retrieved from http://www.learninglives.co.uk/uploads/1/0/8/4/10842717/chapter_b3.pdf)

Petrides K.V. (2009). Psychometric Properties of the Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire (TEIQue) in Parker J., Saklofske D., Stough C. (eds) Assessing Emotional Intelligence. The Springer Series on Human Exceptionality. Springer, Boston, MA DOI 10.1007/978-0-387-88370-0_5 (p85-101)

Petrides, K.V. (2011). Ability and Trait Emotional Intelligence in Chamorro-Premuzic T., von Stumm, S. and Furnham, A. (eds), The Wiley-Blackwell Handbook of Individual Differences, (1st edition), UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Petrides, K.V. (2001). TEIQ Version 1.50 (Retrieved from http://www.psychometriclab.com/admins/files/TEIQue%20interpretations.pdf)

Petrides, K.V., (2010). Trait Emotional Intelligence Theory, Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 3, 136-139

Piaget, J. (1950). The Psychology of Intelligence, UK: Routledge

Piper, H. and Simons, H. (2005). Ethical Responsibility in Social Research in Somekh, B. and Lewin, C., Research Methods in the Social Sciences, London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Platt, J.R. (2015). Why Emotional Intelligence Is Key to Your Success: Engineers need more than technical smarts to get ahead in their careers, 3 August IEEE (Retrieved from http://theinstitute.ieee.org/career-and-education/career guidance/why-emotional-intelligence-is-key-to-your-success)

Plucker, J.A. and Epsing, A. (eds) (2014). Human Intelligence: Historical Influences, Current Controversies, Teaching Resources (Retrieved from http://www.intelltheory.com/ethorndike.shtml)

Prince, H. and Alexander, L. (n.d.) What is Self-Awareness, The Insights Group Ltd, 2013-2017 (Retrieved from https://www.insights.com/resources/what-is- self awareness/)

pryor, M. and Perkins, J. (2011). ACHIEVE: Graduate Attributes Making the Implicit Explicit (Retrieved from
http://www.enhancementthemes.ac.uk/pages/docdetail/docs/presentation/achieve graduate-attributes-making-the-implicit-explicit)

Richardson, J.T.E. (2011). Eta squared and partial eta squared as measurements of effect size in educational research. Educational Research Review, 6, 135-147.

Roberts, M. (2018). The In-Basket Exercise and How to Use It (Retrieved from https://www.thebalancecareers.com/in-basket-exercise-1669403)

Roberts, R.D., Zeidner, M. and Matthews, G. (2007). Emotional Intelligence, Knowns and Unknowns in Matthews, G., Zeidner, M. and Roberts, R.D. (eds), The Science of Emotional Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns, New York: Oxford University Press

Robson, D. (2011). A brief history of the brain, NewScientist (Retrieved from
https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21128311-800-a-brief-history-of-the brain/)

Ryan, L. (2018). Never Ever Go to a job interview without these ten things April 4 (Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/lizryan/2018/04/04/never-ever-go-to-a-job interview-without-these-ten-things/#3ef1d4bd2cce)

Salemi, V. (n.d.) How to make sure the real you comes through in job interviews (Retrieved from https://www.monster.com/career-advice/article/personal-branding-how-to represent-the-real-you-0622)

Salguero, J.M., Extremera, N., Cabello, R., and Fernández-Berrocal, P. (2014). If You Have High Emotional Intelligence (EI), You Must Trust in Your Abilities: The Interaction Effect of Ability EI and Perceived EI on Depression in Women. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment 1 –11 DOI: 10.1177/0734282914550384 (Retrieved from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/266794262_If_You_Have_High_Emot ionalIntelligence_EI_You_Must_Trust_in_Your_Abilities_The_Interaction_Effe ct_of_Ability_EIand_Perceived_EI_on_Depression_in_Women)

Salovey, P. and Grewal, D. (2005). The Science of Emotional Intelligence, American Psychological Society, Vol 14, No. 6

Santos, M. (n.d.) Employers only look at your resumé for six seconds? The numbers you need to know for job hunting (Retrieved from https://business.financialpost.com/executive/careers/employers-only-look-at your-resume-for-six-seconds-the-numbers-you-need-to-know-for-job-hunting)

Saraiva M. and Nogueiro T. (2010). Employability and the Bologna Process, Proceedings of EDULEARNIO Conference 5-7 July, Barcelona Spain, (pages 005337-005343)

Schnell, A. (n.d.) What is regression to the mean? (Retrieved from https://www.theanalysisfactor.com/what-is-regression-to-the-mean/)

Search Inside Yourself (SIY) Leadership Institute website ‘Results’ (Retrieved from https://siyli.org/results)

Shiota, M.N. and Kalat, J.W. (2012). Emotion (2nd edition) CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning

Slingo, L. (2017a). Career Advice: How to answer: What are your Strengths (Retrieved from https://www.cv-library.co.uk/career-advice/interviews/how-to-answer/what-are your-strengths/)

Slingo, L. (2017b). Career Advice, How to answer: What are your Weaknesses (Retrieved from https://www.cv-library.co.uk/career-advice/interviews/how-to-answer/what-are your-weaknesses/)

Smith, V. (2016). The Effects of Cultural Diversity in the Workplace, March 23 Linked- In (Retrieved from https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/effects-cultural-diversity workplace-valencia-smith)

Smolkowski, K. (2018). Gain Score Analysis (Retrieved from https://homes.ori.org//keiths/Tips/Stats_GainScores.html)

SPSS Tutorials (n.d.) Cramér’s V Tutorial (Retrieved from https://www.spss- tutorials.com/cramers-v-what-and-why/

St. Denis R. (n.d.) The Emotionally Intelligent Engineer, presentation to PENC Leadership Institute

Starr, J. (2011). The Coaching Manual (3rd edition), UK: Pearson

Stein, S. and Book, H.E. (2011). The EQ Edge: Emotional Intelligence and Your Success (3rd edition), US: Multi-Health Systems Inc.

Strauss, K. (2016). These Are The Skills Bosses Say New College Grads Do Not Have, Forbes, 17 May (Retrieved from http://www.forbes.com/sites/karstenstrauss/2016/05/17/these-are-the-skills bosses-say-new-college-grads-do-not-have/#b3cae27596eb)

Sursock, A. and Smidt, H. (2010). Trends 2010: A decade of change in European Higher Education, Belgium: European University Association (EUA)

SurveyMonkey website (2015). Terms of Use (Retrieved from https://www.surveymonkey.net/mp/policy/terms-of-use/

Tan, C-M. (2012). Search Inside Yourself, The Unexpected Path to Achieving Success, Happiness (and World Peace), US: Harper Collins

Technological University of Dublin (TU Dublin) website A new University for a changing world (Retrieved from https://www.tu4dublin.ie/news/a-new-university-for-a changing-world/)

Technological University of Dublin (TU Dublin) (2014). DTU Graduate Attributes, Dublin: Technological University of Dublin

Teo, T. (2006). The Critique of Psychology From Kant to Postcolonial Theory, Canada: Springer

The British Psychological Society (2015). The Design and Delivery of Assessment Centres, a Standard produced by the British Psychological Society’s Division of Occupational Psychology, Leicester: The British Psychological Society

The London Psychometric Laboratory website (Retrieved from http://www.psychometriclab.com/Dictionary%20entry.pdf)

Turculeţ, A. (2015). Teachers for the 21st century. Will emotional intelligence make the difference? Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 180, p. 990-995

University of Aberdeen website, Requesting Documentation (Retrieved from https://www.abdn.ac.uk/infohub/life/requesting-documentation.php#what-is recorded)

University of Aberdeen website, STAR Award Position Award Levels (Retrieved from
https://www.abdn.ac.uk/careers/content images/STAR%20Award%20Roles%20Poster%202018%20final.pdf)

University of Aberdeen website The STAR Award (Retrieved from https://www.abdn.ac.uk/careers/skills-attributes/star-award.php)

University of Washington education courses website Assessing Normality (based on
Kirk, Ch 3) (Retrieved from
http://courses.washington.edu/p524au05/notes_handouts/Lab1024_normal.doc)

Van Rooy, D., Alonso, A. and Viswesveran, C. (2005). Group Differences in emotional intelligence scores: Theoretical and practical implications. Personality and Individual Differences, Volume 38, (3): 689-700

Walker, R. (2010). Mixed Methods Research: Quantity Plus Quality in Neale, J. (ed) Research Methods for Health and Social Care, UK: Palgrave Macmillan

Watson, J.C., Lenz, A.S., Schmit, M.K. and Schmit, E.L. (2017). Calculating and Reporting Estimates of Effect Size in Counseling, Outcome Research and Evaluation p. 111-123 (Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1177/2150137816660584)

Watson M. and Coombes L. Surveys in Neale, J. (ed), Research Methods for Health and Social Care (2009). London: Palgrave Macmillan

Wechsler, D. (1944). The Measurement of Adult Intelligence (3rd edition), Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins

Weiner, B. (1992). Human Motivation Metaphors, Theories and Research, CA: Sage Publications Inc.

Weisinger, H. (1998). Emotional intelligence at work: The untapped edge for success. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass

Wersun A. (2010). Triple translation: academic and managerial discourses of knowledge transfer policy in a new university in Scotland Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education Vol. 31, No. 5, December 2010, 665-682

Williams, L.J. and Abdi, H. (2010). Fisher’s Least Significant Difference (LSD) Test, in Salkind N. (ed.), Encyclopedia of Research Design. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage (Retrieved from https://www.utd.edu/~herve/abdi-LSD2010 pretty.pdf)

World Bank (2011). Strengthening Skills and Employability in Peru Final Report Labor Skills Programmatic AAA – Report No. 61699-PE (Retrieved from http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTPERUINSPANISH/Resources/PeruSkills LaborReportMay242011.pdf)

World Bank (2015). Emotions are Worth as much as Knowledge June 22 (Retrieved from http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2015/06/22/las-emociones valen-tanto-como-los-conocimientos)

Yorke, M. (n.d.) Employability, What it is – What it is not, Learning and Employability Series 1, UK: The Higher Education Academy (Retrieved from http://www.employability.ed.ac.uk/documents/Staff/HEA Employability_in_HE%28Is,IsNot%29.pdf)

Zeidner, M., Matthews, G. and Roberts, R.D. (2004). Emotional Intelligence in the Workplace: A Critical Review, Applied Psychology: An International Review, 53 (3), 371-399

List of Publications

Journal publications

2019: International Journal of Engineering Education: Article in progress for submission Spring/Summer 2019

Jameson, A., Carthy, A., McGuinness, C. and McSweeney, F. (2016) Emotional intelligence and graduates – employers’ perspectives Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences Vol. 228, p 515-522

Jameson, A., Carthy, A., McGuinness, C. and McSweeney, F. (2015) The 21st Century Graduate: Delivering a tailored approach to social and emotional competency training for final year students to enhance graduate attributes and increase employability Arrow.dit journal

Book Chapter

Emotional Intelligence, the Graduate and the Workplace in Carthy A. with Jameson A. (2016) The Emotionally Intelligent College, Transforming Third Level Education to Help Students and Educators Reach their Maximum Potential, UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing

Conference presentations

May 2018: International Conference on Workplace Psychology (IWP)

Paper: Jameson, A., Carthy, A., McGuinness, C. and McSweeney, F. Making the Transition: Emotional Intelligence coaching for final year students tailored to employers’ expressed needs’

June 2017: University-Industry Interaction Conference (UIIC)

Paper: Jameson, A., Carthy, A., McGuinness, C. and McSweeney, F. Employability and graduate work readiness: Developing a tailored approach to social and emotional competency development in final year undergraduate students

May 2017: European Association of Workplace Psychology (EAWOP)

Jameson, A., Carthy, A., McGuinness, C. and McSweeney, F. Emotional Intelligence and

Graduate Employability: Employers’ perspectives

June 2016: Higher Education in Advances Conference (HEA’d) Valencia

Jameson, A., Carthy, A., McGuinness, C. and McSweeney, F. Emotional intelligence and
graduates: an employers’ perspective

December 2015: International Conference on Engaging Pedagogy (ICEP)

Poster Presentations

November 2018: Learning and Innovation Centre Research and Innovation exhibition. Jameson, A., Carthy, A., McGuinness, C. and McSweeney, F. Social Emotional competence, graduates and employability

October 2016: Learning and Innovation Centre Jumpstart exhibition. Jameson, A., Carthy, A., McGuinness, C. and McSweeney, F. Graduate employability and Emotional Intelligence (EI): An employer’s perspective

Funding Awards

TU Dublin Programmes for the Future initiative (PFI) –

Awarded €10,000 Contributed significantly to the Bar-On EQ-i2.0 pre and post testing costs.

List of Appendices

A. Breakdown of the Bar-On EQ-i2.0
B. The Bar-On EQ-i2.0 – Client Workplace Report
C. The Bar-On EQ-i2.0 – Coach Workplace Report
D. National Framework of Qualifications (NFQ) Framework
E. NFQ Framework – Revised (Carthy, 2013)
F. University of Aberdeen STAR Award: Position Award Levels
G. The Consortium for Research on EI in Organizations: Guidelines for emotional competency training
H. Institute 1 Form 4FAD17 application for ethical clearance of a project
I. Institute 1 Form 4FRD03 Impact on human subject and/or researcher application
J. Institute 1 Form 4FRD04 consent form
K. Student Information Sheet
L. Employer survey
M. Semi-Structured interviews: Employer information sheet
N. Semi-structured interviews: Topic Guide
O. Presentation to students on research and EQ-i2.0 (Pilot group and Final sample)
P. Bar-On EQ-i2.0 certificate of competency in administering test
Q. One-to-one EI coaching session (anonymised)
R. Group EI coaching sessions – active control group
S. Group EI coaching sessions – experimental group
T. Mock EI competency based interviews: Information sheet (employers and students)
U. Mock EI competency based interviews: Template for use by employers
V. Mock EI competency based interviews: Rating sheet
W. G*Power output – Phase One
X. G*Power output – Phase Two
Y. Phase One Results: Detrended QQ plots for GLM residuals in terms of competency importance, as reported by employers
Z. Phase One Results: Detrended QQ plots for GLM residuals in terms of current levels of EI competency being displayed by graduates when entering the workplace, as reported by employers.
AA. Phase Two Results: Repeated-measures ANOVA residuals for competencies that violated Box’s test of Equality of Covariance Matrices
BB. Phase Two Results: Repeated-measures ANOVA results: Residuals for EI competencies that violated Levene’s test of equality of variances

Appendix A

Breakdown of Bar-On EQ-i2.0

Appendix B

Appendix C

Appendix D

Appendix E

Appendix F

Appendix G

The Consortium for Research on Emotional Intelligence in Organizations
Guidelines for Emotional Competence Training

Appendix H

Application for ethical clearance of a project

Revision History

Purpose

This form is to be used by (name of institute) staff conducting research, all undergraduate and all postgraduate students where ethical clearance for a project involving research may be required (postgraduate students by research should refer to form 4FAD06 “Research ethics and code of good research practice”). This form should be completed by the staff member/student in consultation with their research/dissertation supervisor and signed by the staff member/student and supervisor. Please return the form to the academic staff member responsible for supervising your piece of research. The supervisor shall then having signed this document forward same to the head of the relevant department. Please note that ethical approval must be granted prior to the start of the research.

Reference

Acknowledgement

Name of institute acknowledge the work of the “Research Ethics Committee” of the name of institute and thank them for their permission in using their literature in the formation of the above mentioned risk assessment documents.

Ethical considerations

Please refer to the Institute policy document on “Research ethics and code of good research practice” (3RD01) as required in completing this form.

Please expand sections as required

Identification of ethical issues and/or risk

Plagiarism

For INSTITUTE’s policy on plagiarism please review 3AS08 on the DMS.

I have read and understand the policy document regarding plagiarism Institute 1

Signature ______________________________________

Date ______________________________________

Applicant declaration

In accordance with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and Institute principles, policies and procedures, I declare that the information provided in this form is true to the best of my knowledge and judgement.

I will advise the relevant Head of Department of any adverse or unforeseen circumstances or changes in the research which might concern or affect any ethical issues or risks, including if the project fails to start or is abandoned.

I attach the following completed supplementary forms as relevant:

I agree to abide by the decision of the Research Ethics Committee. Please sign, date and forward to your academic supervisor.

Applicant signature ____________________________________

Date ____________________________________

World Medical Association Declaration Of Helsinki – Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human
Subjects

Academic supervisor

Where any of the supplementary forms listed on the previous page (4FRD03 – 4FRD14) have been attached to this application please satisfy yourself that they are in order before signing below and forwarding to the head of your department.

I approve this study to be carried out.

Signature: ____________________________________
Date ____________________________________

Head of Department

I approve this study to be carried out under the auspices of my department:

Signature: ____________________________________

School: ____________________________________

Date ____________________________________

In the event whereby the Head of Department feels that further consideration is required, the proposal and associated documentation should be forwarded to the Head of School.

Head of School

I approve this study to be carried.

Signature: ____________________________________

Date ____________________________________

In the event whereby the Head of School feels that further consideration is required, the proposal and associated documentation should be forwarded to the Chairperson of the Institute Research Ethics Committee

Appendix I

Impact on the human subject and/or the
researcher

Revision History

Acknowledgement

Name of Institute acknowledge the work of the “Research Ethics Committee” of the name of institute and thank them for their permission in using their literature in the formation of this document.

Researcher

Signature: _______________________________

Title: _______________________________

Date: _______________________________

Appendix J

Consent and advice form given to subjects prior
to their participation in research

Revision History

Note:
A completed form is required for each participant and this is to be retained by the researcher for a period of 3 years.

Acknowledgement

Name of Institute acknowledge the work of the “Research Ethics Committee” of the name of institute and thank them for their permission in using their literature in the formation of this document.
Please note:

• For persons under 18 years of age the consent of the parents or guardians must be obtained or an explanation given to the relevant Head of Department and the assent of the child/young person should be obtained to the degree possible dependent on the age of the child/young person. Please complete the consent form, 4FRD05, for research involving “less powerful subjects” or those under 18 years.
• In some studies, witnessed consent may be appropriate.
• The researcher concerned must sign the consent form after having explained the project to the subject and after having answered his/her questions about the project.

Appendix K

INFORMATION SHEET – STUDENTS

PhD Research

My name is Ailish Jameson and I am a PhD Researcher in the (name of institute). I am currently pursuing a PhD examining employability and emotional intelligence (EI) skill development in final year students. My Principal Supervisor is Dr Aiden Carthy, name of institute email: email details given.

Phase 1 of this research involved a survey of employers in different sectors to determine (i) what they feel are the most important social and emotional competencies graduates should possess, when working in their particular sector, and (ii) the level to which they believe graduates currently possess such competencies. Phase 1 concluded with a series of qualitative interviews with a sample of employers in these sectors to gain more in-depth and information rich data.

Phase 2 of the project will involve the design of coaching modules to final year level 8 engineering students. There will be two student groups, a control and an experimental. All participating students will get the opportunity to complete the online accredited Bar-On Emotional Intelligence Quotient Inventory (EQ-i2.0) which is a psychometrically sound, validated assessment instrument that is applied to EI assessment. It is a self-report measurement and takes 20 minutes to complete.

Each student will then meet with me to receive one-to-one feedback on results and will be given a detailed report. Individual coaching will also be provided at this session which will take 40 minutes approximately. Group coaching will then be delivered to the two groups; the control group will receive general EI coaching workshops based on current programmes being delivered in the workplace and the experimental group will receive EI coaching, tailored to the needs specified by employers in this research. There will be three coaching workshops which will last one hour approximately. All participants will have an opportunity to complete a mock competency based interview with myself and an employer in the engineering sector. You will then be asked to complete the EQ-i2.0 post-intervention to measure any changes. It is hoped that your participation in this research will ultimately be of benefit to you in terms of your employability.

This research will adhere strictly to Data Protection legislation with anonymity and confidentiality guaranteed. Any contact details given by students will only be used for the purposes of this study and will not be used for any other study or purpose. Your assessment answers and results will be held in the strictest confidence. Your EQ-i2.0 report will be made available to you and will not be communicated to any other party. Your participation is voluntary and you are free to withdraw from this research at any stage in the process, without giving reason for withdrawing and with no impact on your marks or your relationship with the name of institute. All participating students will be entitled to a summary of the results of this research, should they wish it.

If you have any questions you can contact me by email at (email address) or on my mobile number (mobile number).

Many thanks for your time.

Ailish Jameson
PhD Student October 2016

Appendix L

Institute logo

Emotional Intelligence, Education and Employment Employer Survey

PhD Researcher: Ailish Jameson, (Name of Institute)
Email:

Lead Supervisor: Dr Aiden Carthy, (Name of Institute)
Email: (email given)

Q1. Are you?

Male ☐
Female ☐

Q2. What is your age?

21 and under ☐

22 to 34 ☐

35 to 44 ☐

45 to 54 ☐

55 to 64 ☐

Q3. In what sector does your organisation belong? (please tick one)
Engineering ☐

Professional Services (Accounting/Business/Finance/HR/Law/Retail) ☐

Sciences (incl. Pharmaceutical/Life) ☐

Social Science ☐
IT/Computing ☐
Other ☐

Please specify:

____________________________________________________________________

Q4. How would you describe your organisation in terms of size?

Small – Fewer than 50 employees and has either an annual turnover and/or

☐ an annual Balance Sheet total not exceeding €10m

Medium- Between 50 employees and 249 employees and has either an
☐ annual turnover not exceeding €50m or an annual Balance

Sheet

total not exceeding €43m

Large An enterprise that has over 250+ employees
☐ –

Q5. The following is a list of ten social and emotional competencies which have been deemed important for the workplace. For each competence listed, please tick one box indicating how important it is for you as an employer that graduates possess this competence.

1. Emotional Self-Awareness: Recognising one’s emotions and their effects

Very Important ☐ Important ☐ Neutral ☐ Somewhat ☐ Not Important ☐
Important at all

2. Emotional Self-Control: Keeping disruptive emotions and impulses in check

Very Important ☐ Important ☐ Neutral ☐ Somewhat ☐ Not Important ☐
Important at all

3. Initiative: Readiness to act on opportunities

Very Important ☐ Important ☐ Neutral ☐ Somewhat ☐ Not Important ☐

Important at all

4. Motivation: Focused and committed to the goals of the team and the organisation

Very Important ☐ ☐ Neutral ☐ Somewhat ☐ Not Important ☐
Important at all

5. Adaptability: Flexibility in handling change

Very Important ☐ Important ☐ Neutral ☐ Somewhat ☐ Not Important ☐

Important at all

6. Positive Outlook: Persistence in pursuing goals despite obstacles and setbacks

Very Important ☐ Important ☐ Neutral ☐ Somewhat ☐ Not Important ☐
Important at all

7. Empathy: Sensing others’ feelings and perspectives, and taking an active interest in their concerns

Very Important ☐ Important ☐ Neutral ☐ Somewhat ☐ Not Important ☐

Important at all

8. Communication: Listening openly and sending convincing messages

Very Important ☐ Important ☐ Neutral ☐ Somewhat ☐ Not Important ☐
Important at all

9. Conflict Management: Negotiating and resolving disagreements

Very Important ☐ Important ☐ Neutral ☐ Somewhat ☐ Not Important ☐
Important at all

10. Teamwork: Working with others toward shared goals

Very Important ☐ Important ☐ Neutral ☐ Somewhat ☐ Not Important ☐
Important at all

Q6. For graduates who are currently entering your workplace organisation, how would you rate their typical level of competence in each of the ten areas below – please tick one box?

1. Emotional Self-Awareness: Recognising one’s emotions and their effects
Excellent ☐ Very Good ☐ Good ☐ Fair ☐ Poor ☐

2. Emotional Self-Control: Keeping disruptive emotions and impulses in check
Excellent ☐ Very Good ☐ Good ☐ Fair ☐ Poor ☐

3. Initiative: Readiness to act on opportunities
Excellent ☐ Very Good ☐ Good ☐ Fair ☐ Poor ☐
4. Motivation: Focused and committed to the goals of the team and the organisation
Excellent ☐ Very Good ☐ Good ☐ Fair ☐ Poor ☐

5. Adaptability: Flexibility in handling change
Excellent ☐ Very Good ☐ Good ☐ Fair ☐ Poor ☐

6. Positive Outlook: Persistence in pursuing goals despite obstacles and setbacks

Excellent ☐ Very Good ☐ Good ☐ Fair ☐ Poor ☐

7. Empathy: Sensing others’ feelings and perspectives, and taking an active interest in their concerns
Excellent ☐ Very Good ☐ Good ☐ Fair ☐ Poor ☐

8. Communication: Listening openly and sending convincing messages
Excellent ☐ Very Good ☐ Good ☐ Fair ☐ Poor ☐

9. Conflict Management: Negotiating and resolving disagreements
Excellent ☐ Very Good ☐ Good ☐ Fair ☐ Poor ☐

10. Teamwork: Working with others toward shared goals
Excellent ☐ Very Good ☐ Good ☐ Fair ☐ Poor ☐

Q7. Are there other social and emotional competencies that are not included on the list above that you feel are of importance for graduates to possess when working in your Organisation?

____________________________________________________________________

Thank you for the time you have taken to complete this Survey.

All information supplied by you in this Survey will be held in strictest confidence and will conform to Data Protection regulations

Logo given

Appendix M

INFORMATION SHEET – EMPLOYERS

Thank you for agreeing to participate in my research. My name is Ailish Jameson and I am a PhD Researcher in the (name of institute). I am currently pursuing a PhD examining Emotional Intelligence, Education and Employment. My Principal Supervisor is Dr Aiden Carthy, (name of institute and email address).

Phase 1 of my research involved, in the first instance a comprehensive survey of employers in different sectors to determine what they feel are the most important social and emotional competencies graduates should possess, when working in their particular sector, and the level to which they believe graduates currently possess such competencies. Phase 1 concludes with a series of qualitative interviews with a sample of employers in these sectors to gain more in-depth and information rich data. Results from Phase 1 will inform phase 2 of the project, the design of domain specific modules in social and emotional competency training which will be delivered to final year students to address the needs of employers in each of the sectors included in this research. Therefore, it is expected that the output from this research will ultimately be of benefit to employers, as it will help students to develop those specific social skills most prized by them.

This research will adhere strictly to Data Protection legislation. With your permission this interview will be recorded, for transcription purposes. However, all of the data that I collect will be anonymous and confidentiality will be respected at all times. Your participation is voluntary and you are free to withdraw from this research at any stage in the process.

If you have any questions you can contact me by email at (email address) or on my mobile number 086-3055576.

Many thanks for your time.

Ailish Jameson
PhD Student May 2016

Appendix N

PhD – QUALITATIVE INTERVIEWS

TOPIC GUIDE – FINAL 22 April 2016

EMPLOYERS

Area 1 – Competencies – ratings, relevance and opportunities

1. Can I ask you to rate these competencies in terms of importance (Very Important (5), Important (4), Neutral (3), Somewhat Important (2), Not Important at all (1)) – give handout30

1. Emotional self-awareness
2. Emotional self-control
3. Initiative
4. Motivation
5. Adaptability
6. Positive outlook
7. Empathy
8. Communication
9. Conflict management
10. Teamwork

2. Can you now rate them in terms of the current level displayed by graduates entering your workplace on a scale of Excellent (5), Very Good (4), Good (3), Fair (2), Poor (1) – give handout

1. Emotional self-awareness
2. Emotional self-control
3. Initiative
4. Motivation
5. Adaptability
6. Positive outlook
7. Empathy
8. Communication
9. Conflict management
10. Teamwork

30 The original survey was given to employers but only included two sections, one to rate the EI competencies in terms of importance and the other to rate them with respect to the current levels being displayed by students.

3. How would (go through each of the ten competencies) be important/relevant in your work setting?
4. What opportunities are there for employees to use each of the ten competencies in the work setting? Give examples.
5. Can you give me typical scenarios that could arise in your workplace setting that would challenge entry level employees in terms of their social and emotional skills?

Area 2 – Recruitment

6. What social and emotional competencies are assessed at interview stage?

7. Are there any other ways social and emotional competencies are assessed?

8. How do you measure whether a graduate has the required competencies?

9. If you were reading through a curriculum vitae and saw that a graduate had completed EI coaching would that influence you in terms of hiring them? In what way?

Area 3 – workplace training in EI

10. Does your organisation provide training programmes on social and emotional competency development?

11. How do you believe emotional intelligence coaching would be of value to you as an employer?

12. A core element of this research is employer involvement through the survey and these interviews. A critical element of the coaching again is employer involvement through co-facilitation of a session and a competency based interview with potential graduates. Would you be open to this?

13. Are there competencies that are not on the list I gave you at the start of the interview that you feel are important for your organisation?

14. Do you have any comments on the approach that should be taken in terms of EI coaching?

15. Is there anything else that you would like to add before we finish this interview?

Appendix O

Appendix P

Appendix Q

One-to-one coaching session (anonymised)
Facilitator: Ailish Jameson
Session Plan
Date: 6 December 2016
Client name: Steve Sample

Well developed areas
Self-Perception composite particularly Self-Regard (112)

What do you believe are your strengths? Provide an example where you used your strengths to your advantage?
How can you use your strengths to achieve more of your goals (personal, academic, job)?
Would you say this is a real strength of yours?
This suggests to me that this is true of you?

Self-Perception composite particularly emotional self-awareness (117)

Can you give me an example of how you use that skill?
How do your emotions affect other people?
What things do you feel really happy about? Sad? Angry? Describe how you
experience these emotions physically, behaviourally, cognitively.
Are there emotions that you are more comfortable with than others?
Would you say this is a real strength of yours?
This suggests to me that this is true of you?

Interpersonal composite in particular interpersonal relationships (106)

How do you define being a team player in a college or work setting? Give an example of
where success can be attributed to the team rather than your efforts alone.
Can you give me an example of how you use that skill?
Would you say this is a real strength of yours?
This suggests to me that this that true of you?

Stress management composite in particular stress tolerance (111)

How do you tackle stressful situations at work/college? What is an example of
where you had to manage stress in order to get the job done?
What circumstances are stressful for you?
How do you manage these stressful times?

Less developed areas

Interpersonal composite particularly social responsibility (70)

What have you done recently to help someone in need?
How do you define being a team player in a college or work setting? Give an example of where success can be attributed to the team rather than your efforts alone.
Can you give me an example of how you use that skill?
Would you say this is a real strength of yours?
This suggests to me that this that true of you?

Interpersonal composite particularly empathy (75)

Describe a situation where you were not as sensitive to someone’s feelings as you should have been? Why do you think this was the case? What could you have done differently?
In your opinion, what is the difference between sympathy and empathy? How do you ensure you display these differently?

Self-expression composite particularly emotional expression (83)

Are there some emotions that you feel more comfortable expressing than others?
How do you express how you are feeling? Give examples.
In general, do you find yourself bottling up emotions?

Stress management composite particularly Optimism (92)

Would you describe yourself as having positive or negative expectations about how things will turn out? Example
Describe a project/task where you experienced several setbacks. What was your approach for overcoming these difficulties? How do you manage risk?
Can you give me an example of how you use that skill?
Would you say this is a real strength of yours?
This suggests to me that this that true of you?

Wellbeing indicator – 96 satisfied with life and enjoys company of others generally

Inconsistent item pairs

‘When I wake up in the morning I look forward to the day’ (2 occasionally) ‘I am content’ (4 often)

5. Explore Benefits

What is the ideal situation here?
If you had a choice, what would you do?
What kind of support would be helpful?
If you were going to work on one or two areas, which ones would you choose?
What benefits would you like to achieve by improving in those areas?

Part 6. Transition – next steps

3 skills
Optimism

Over the next week or couple of weeks, jot down in your notebook any setbacks or disappointments that come your way, along with examples of your self-talk, the thoughts that flow from it and the feelings and behaviours that follow. Examples may be losing your keys to losing a promotion.
Note any negative thoughts about different situations in your life.

Debate and dispute your self-talk.

Try reframe the situation so that you can view it as an opportunity, a challenge or a test of your ability to affect the outcome in an optimistic and positive way.
If you could have three wishes what would they be?
If you come home from a bad day at work/college, what activity would make you feel better? Over the next week build in positive activities (they don’t have to be large!) that will help you become more optimistic. Think of someone who you consider an optimistic person and think about what you could learn from his or her example.

Empathy

Over the next week or so, listen to what others are telling you.
Check that you are accurately understanding what they are saying before you respond to them.
Focus on the other person. Make eye contact and pay close attention to facial expressions and body language. Check your interpretations of what’s happening by means of questions like ‘are you saying that…?
See if you can put into words what the other person’s statements and behaviour tell you about his or her internal experience

Emotional expression – self-confidence, self-awareness

See if you can find safe ways of expressing emotion during the next week or so. Tune into how you are feeling when you do this.

Keep a journal of different situations, your feelings, describe what happened, exactly what you were/are feeling and why.

Look at emotional expression and assertiveness.

Social responsibility

What community organisations are you involved in? What active roles do you play?

In your notebook, write down five things you could do that would be appreciated by people in need. Now think of one thing that you could do this week that would help others..
Write down three most worthy causes, charities or non-profit organisations you can think of. Next to each, record the single most important thing, other than donating money, that you could do for each of them. Then select one action and follow through on it.

3 qualities

Examples: Team player, clear communication, good listener, approachable.

SMART goals – transfer to Action plan

Implement 3 of the skills above. Keep a journal. Review at end of week.

Appendix R

Appendix S

Appendix T

PhD Research – EI, graduates and the workplace
PhD Researcher: Ailish Jameson
Mock EI competency based interviews
Information sheet – students and employers

Appendix U

PhD Research – EI, graduates and the workplace
PhD Researcher: Ailish Jameson
Mock EI competency based interviews: Template for use by employers

Section 1 – Background

1. What motivated you to sign up to the EI coaching process?

Section 2 – One-to-one coaching session

1. Can you talk to me about your EQ-i2.0 test results, specifically focusing on your areas of strength, i.e. highly and well-developed EI competencies?
2. Can you give an example/s of how you use these strength areas in your life, for example, college, work, general?
3. Can you talk about any EI competencies that were less developed?
4. What steps, if any have you taken since the one-to-one coaching to address these less developed competencies?
5. What has been the result of taking steps to address these less developed competencies?

Section 3 – Group coaching session

1. Can you talk me through the group coaching process, highlighting your key areas of learning?
2. Can you give me an example of how you might apply some of the learning acquired in the group coaching in the workplace?

Section 4 – Application of EI competencies to the workplace

1. How do you believe that social and emotional competencies are relevant for the workplace?
2. Could you describe a situation/s where these competencies would be useful in terms of achieving results in the workplace?

Section 5 – Benefits and Challenges of participation

1. Do you believe there were any benefits to your participation in the EI coaching process? If yes, explain. If no, explain.
2. What, if anything, did you find challenging about participating in the EI coaching process?
3. Have you anything else you would like to add before we finish?

Appendix V

PhD Research – EI, graduates and the workplace
PhD Researcher: Ailish Jameson
Mock EI competency based interview rating sheet

Student Name: __ Date of Interview:

1. How would you rate the student’s ability to identify key learning from the EI coaching
process? Rating: Very Poor Poor Neutral Good Very Good (Please circle one)
Explain:

________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________

2. How would you rate the student’s knowledge of the application of EI competencies to
the workplace? Rating: Very Poor Poor Neutral Good Very Good (Please circle one)
Explain:

__________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________

3. How would you rate the student’s understanding of the link between emotional intelligence competencies and employability? Rating: Very Poor Poor Neutral Good Very Good (Please circle one)
Explain:

________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________

4. As an employer, all things being equal on the technical and qualifications front, would you hire this student based purely on your perception of their emotional intelligence (EI)?

Yes □ Maybe □ Undecided □ No □
Explain:

__________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________