Emotionell intelligens
Talare som utforskar hur självmedvetenhet och empati formar bättre ledare, team och organisationer
Speakers Associates represents 77 speakers on Emotionell intelligens, including Joy Poole, Lauren Ducrey, Gopi Krishnaswamy, Neelu Kaur, Martin Brooks, Nikki Bhamra, Kit Symons & Holly Sedlacek, Paul McGee, Scott Tillema och Mc’Dole Chigborogu.
Senior leaders are visible by default and known by accident. Their teams, boards, and markets form sharp views of who they are long before the leader has shaped that view themselves. The cost of that gap is trust, influence, and the willingness of others to follow them through hard decisions.
Senior leaders are judged on how they show up long before anyone weighs what they say. In a room of equally credentialed peers, the person who appears composed, deliberate, and authoritative shapes the decision. Most leaders have never been taught what their face, hands, and posture are doing while they speak.
Burnout is now a productivity line item, not an HR footnote. Senior teams under sustained pressure show up performing, but quietly disengage from the work and from each other. The response cannot be another wellbeing programme; it has to address the identity and resilience layer underneath performance.
Most marketing organisations spend the majority of their budgets on content their target audience never sees. The problem is not a capability gap: it is a structural bias toward self-promotion that neither better tools nor bigger teams will fix. The only effective response is a different kind of leader: one willing to reorient the entire function around a question the business has not traditionally been built to answer.
Mental health is now a board-level cost line, yet most workplace wellbeing programmes still struggle to move people from passive consumption of resources to honest conversation. Managers know empathy and communication matter. They lack the language, and often the permission, to use either when it counts. The gap between policy and practice is where the damage compounds.
Engagement is not a survey score. It is the quiet question of whether people are willing to bring real judgement, real disagreement, and real commitment to work that increasingly feels transactional. The leaders who can rebuild that contract have a culture advantage. The ones who cannot are watching performance erode in ways the dashboards cannot explain.
Senior leaders are being asked to deliver more under more pressure, with smaller teams, sharper scrutiny and a workforce that no longer tolerates burnout as the price of ambition. Wellbeing budgets have grown, yet engagement, retention and mental health indicators have not improved at the same rate. The gap sits in leadership behaviour itself: what leaders model under pressure shapes whether an organisation is psychologically safe or quietly corroding.
People speak in front of colleagues, clients and boards every day and most do it badly. Composure breaks under pressure, messages land flat, and the gap between what someone knows and what they can convey costs the organisation credibility. Leadership programmes rarely address this directly, treating presence as a personality trait rather than a trainable behaviour.
Inclusion programmes have multiplied. Trust in them has not. Boards now face a sharper question: how do you produce measurable inclusion outcomes inside commissioning, hiring and team behaviour, without slipping back into compliance theatre or political signalling that alienates the people you need on side.
In most leadership teams the talent is already in the room, but the thinking is not on the table. Decisions slow because people hesitate or defer to consensus instead of saying what they actually think. What looks like alignment is often silence, and silence has a cost in execution speed and the quality of what gets decided.
Organisations can train a leader to think more strategically and still end up with someone whose team does not truly follow them. The problem is not capability – it is the narrowing of perception that comes from prioritising rational analysis and output over awareness, presence and inner coherence. A leader operating from this narrow bandwidth can articulate a strategy and still fail to create the conditions in which people do their best work.
Senior leaders rarely fail on strategy. They fail on the way they land it with the people who have to execute it. Teams fracture because leaders default to one communication style and assume the room will adjust. The cost shows up as disengaged direct reports, stalled change programmes, and meetings that produce nodding rather than commitment.