Voters should reject political leaders who thrive on insults

The emerging trend in which leaders trade insults, sometimes with unprintable language, is most unbecoming.

It is worst when people we look upon to provide leadership at the highest levels, to descend to pedestrian language and behaviour.

Whereas this conduct is sometimes in response to undue provocation from colleagues or competitors, it nevertheless betrays their lack of a critical category of intelligence.

Intelligence has been defined as the ability to grasp and reason correctly with abstractions, so as to direct actions or solve problems.

Thus, an intelligent person is one who has the ability to appraise situations and act in the best way possible, or offer effective and efficient solutions.

Whereas many of us may be familiar with IQ as a measure of intelligence, studies have shown that there are several kinds of intelligence that one requires to effectively operate within the social landscape.

Of these, three are particularly core to leadership within a diverse environment such as ours. These are: Rational intelligence – generally known as IQ; Emotional intelligence – also known as EQ; and Cultural intelligence – often referred to as CQ.

The 2010 Constitution made some reasonable effort to ensure that in both elective and appointive offices, we should retain leaders with reasonable levels of IQ.

This explains why, in higher echelons of national and county leadership, there are express requirements for defined educational qualifications – such as university degrees.

The assumption is that with higher levels of IQ – demonstrated through superior academic achievements – leaders will most naturally find it easier to interact with complex ideas and offer appropriate solutions.

True to fact, some of our leaders have acquitted themselves quite admirably in the discharge of their duties – commensurate with their qualifications. As for the rest, the verdict is in the public domain.

Whereas this requirement for higher levels of IQ is laudable, an even more important category of intelligence – the EQ – appears overlooked.

In leadership, emotional intelligence (EQ) may be defined as the ability to grasp and reason objectively with emotive issues or in emotive situations.

An emotionally intelligent person is able to remain calm and collected even in highly provocative situations.

Huge premium

With high EQ, leaders can assess and navigate emotional landmines and successfully restore order and sanity. In contrast, those with low EQ pick up quarrels and fights over non-issues, having not learnt the noble secret of choosing battles carefully.

The blunt truth is that EQ often has little or no relationship to IQ. We have seen professors with a string of degrees but whose fuses are at less than a watt – reacting and at times exploding at the slightest provocation.

Sadly, this is the nature of many of our top leaders – especially in the political arena. They are completely unable to constructively handle critique and criticism. The words that come from their mouths and the emotions that explode from their hearts, expose EQs that are well below par. Thus, they look pitiable as they engage in tirades that are totally contradictory to their high status.

Interestingly, whereas a huge premium has been placed on IQ, studies have shown that high EQ with low IQ, will take you farther than high IQ with low EQ.

This is easily demonstrable at the smallest family unit. Check out the most stable families and compare them with the delinquent ones – is it an IQ or EQ problem at play?

It follows therefore that if we are going to choose leaders for our largest family unit – the nation, EQ should be at the top of our considerations.

Insults, name-calling and foul language are not only unbecoming of a leader, but are a definite sign of their lack of emotional maturity. Give such a wide berth.

- The writer is the Presiding Bishop of Christ is the Answer Ministries (CITAM)

[email protected]