Empathy At Work

Empathy is colloquially understood as walking in someone else’s shoes. Empathy in action has both affective, cognitive and behavioural aspects. It is “… the ability to perceive the meaning and feelings of another and to communicate those feelings to the other person” (Brunero et al., 2010, p. 65). Another definition of empathy is a person’s ability to determine another’s mental state, beliefs and intentions (Shamay-Tsoory et al., 2009). A complex, multipart process, empathy involves both affect and emotion, cognitive reasoning in support of another, and prosocial helping behaviour to respond appropriately to another (Paiva et al., 2005). The word empathy itself is derived from the Greek empatheia which translates as passionate affection, or to be much affected (Levy, 1997). Titchener (1909) links the modern understanding of empathy to the German word einfühlung which literally translates as feeling into someone.

In a wide-reaching meta-analyses of empathy training studies, Teding Van Berkhout and Malouff (2015) looked at the use of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that offered a variety of training approaches in support of prosocial behaviour and empathy. The RCTs included in the meta-analyses included various methods of empathic interventions which included role-playing, games, lectures or a mixed methods approach, all contrasted with a randomized control group which did not receive empathic interventions. Participants in the various empathy training sessions were tested using a variety of self-report and objective measures. In the 2015 meta-analyses, it was uncovered that young adult and adult professional learners reported better results from the training sessions versus those involving youth and children.

Studies that used a mixture of self-report and objective methods, particularly studies that required participants’ reflection on other’s emotions and provide ratings of empathic behaviour, were more effective at attaining training goals (Ted Van Berkhout & Malouff, 2015). Those empathy training studies that employed a four-pronged approach to pedagogy which included instruction, modeling, practice, and feedback had slightly higher effect sizes than other studies (Ted Van Berkhout & Malouff, 2015). Understanding that empathy is a complex, multipart process, it was noted that studies that targeted cognitive and behavioral, or cognitive, affective, and behavioral aspects of empathy showed slightly higher effect sizes or impacts those studies targeting only affective and cognitive empathy (Ted Van Berkhout & Malouff, 2015).

Empathy and Success

The fictional lawyer Atticus Finch in To Kill a Mockingbird described empathy as key to being an effective lawyer and self-aware human being: “(y)ou never really understand a person until you consider things from his point of view… Until you climb into his skin and walk around in it (Lee, p. 61).” Individuals possessing higher levels of emotional intelligence, of which empathy and emotional regulation play a significant part, are said to have greater success in maintaining relationships, higher levels of persuasion and negotiation capability, and able to cope with times of stress and change more effectively (Furnham, 2012; Goleman, 2009). Ickes (1997) calls empathy “every day mind reading” and suggests it is a fundamental dimension of overall emotional intelligence (p. 2). There is contemporary research to suggest that individuals with strong empathy are more successful social, romantically and professionally (Goleman, 1995).

Figure 1

Empathy and Leadership

One of the critical qualities of an effective people leader is empathy (Bar-On & Parker, 2000; George, 2000; Goleman, 1995; Salovey & Mayer, 1990). Managers who are more empathetic and in tune with the emotional needs of their direct reports are viewed as more effective by their own bosses (Gentry, Web & Sandri, 2007). Managers with strong cognitive empathy get better performance from their direct reports (Goleman, 2013). According to the Center for Creative Leadership (CCL), empathetic leadership is positively related to improved job performance based on data analyzed from 6,731 managers from 38 countries (Gentry, Weber, & Sandri, 2007). The CCL research study also found that 50 per cent of managers are poor performers in their leadership roles due to a lack of emotional intelligence and gaps in empathy, and ineffective management can cost organizations millions of dollars a year in indirect and direct costs (Gentry, 2010; Gentry and Chappelow, 2009). The CCL 2007 research study suggests that empathy can be taught and practiced by professional learners.

As you read and listen to the game materials, you should be taking notes and making observations about how different stakeholders think, act and want. As a project management professional, you’ll want to capture those details in a structured way as you work through the project. The Project Management Insitute (PMI) provides some standardized templates and tools to capture this information. This is one that the authors use in their project management work.

References

Bar-On, R., & Parker, J. D. A. (2000). The handbook of emotional intelligence. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Inc.

Fast, L. A., & Funder, D. C. (2008). Personality as manifest in word use: Correlations with self-report, acquaintance report, and behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94(2), 334-346. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.94.2.334

Gentry, W. A., & Chappelow, C. T. (2009). Managerial derailment: Weaknesses that can be fixed. In R. B. Kaiser (Ed.), The perils of accentuating the positives (pp. 97–113). Tulsa, OK: Hogan Press.

Gentry, W. A. (2010). Managerial derailment: What it is and how leaders can avoid it. In E. Biech (Ed.), ASTD leadership handbook (pp. 311–324). Alexandria, VA: ASTD Press.

George, J. M. (2000). Emotions and leadership: The role of emotional intelligence. Human Relations, 53, 1027–1055.

Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional intelligence. New York: Bantam Dell.

Goleman, D. (2013), Empathy 101, DanielGoleman.com, Retrieved from http://www.danielgoleman.info/empathy-101/

Hoffman, M. L. (1982), “Affect and Moral Development,” New Directions for Child Development, 16:

83-103.

Hoffman, M. L. (1990), “Empathy and Justice Motivation,” Motivation and Emotion, 14(2): 151-171.

Isbister, K., & Nass, C. (2000). Consistency of personality in interactive characters: Verbal cues, non-verbal cues, and user characteristics. International Journal of Human – Computer Studies, 53(2), 251-267. doi:10.1006/ijhc.2000.0368

Lee, H. (1999). To kill a mockingbird (40th Anniversary ed.). New York: HarperCollins Publishers.

Paiva, A., Dias, J., Sobral, D., Aylett, R., Woods, S., Hall, L., & Zoll, C. (2005). learning by feeling: Evoking empathy with synthetic characters. Applied Artificial Intelligence, 19(3-4), 235-266. doi:10.1080/08839510590910165

Salovey, P., & Mayer, J. D. (1990). Emotional intelligence. Imagination, Cognition and Personality, 9, 185–211.

Schaffer, H. R. (1996). Social development. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers.

Svennevig, J. (2014). Direct and indirect self-presentation in first conversations. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 33(3), 302-327. doi:10.1177/0261927X13512307

Titchener, E. B. (1909) Lectures on the Experimental Psychology of the Thought-Processes. New York: Macmillan, Google Book Search. Web. 1 Dec. 2011.

Walumbwa, F. O., Avolio, B. J., Gardner, W. L., Wernsing, T. S., & Peterson, S. J. (2008). Authentic leadership: Development and validation of a theory-based measure. Journal of Management, 34, 89–126.