Often, a less experienced manager may be more capable of leading their team than someone who has spent decades in the field, because the former possesses something more influential in the work environment: emotional intelligence.
Emotional intelligence does not mean that a manager must be nice to everyone, nor that they should avoid firmness or difficult decisions. It is simply that the leader knows how to understand themselves, how to read the emotions of others, and how to deal with differences, pressure, anger, fear, and ambition in a way that does not allow emotions to turn into random decisions.
You may find a manager who has many years of experience and knows the details of the work from A to Z, but loses their team because of a harsh word, a hasty decision, or an inability to listen. Conversely, a leader with less experience may come along who knows when to speak, when to be silent, when to hold someone accountable, when to give another chance, and when to admit they were wrong. The first knows the work well, while the second knows how to lead the people who do the work.
This is precisely where the importance of emotional intelligence lies in both government and private institutions. An organization is not just systems, regulations, offices, goals, and performance indicators; ultimately, an organization is a group of people. An employee who feels that their manager hears them, respects them, and appreciates their effort is often more willing to contribute, take responsibility, and show initiative. However, an employee who works under leadership they fear more than they respect may do what is required, but they will not necessarily give their best.
An emotionally intelligent leader realizes that people do not work in the same way. One employee needs guidance, another needs a space of trust, a third needs a word of appreciation, and a fourth needs a frank confrontation to develop. Treating them all the same way is not fair, just as constant firmness is not strength, and constant flexibility is not weakness.
Hence, I believe that when organizations look for new leaders, they should not only ask: How many years have you worked? What positions have you held? And what achievements have you made? Rather, they should also ask: How do you deal with your team when they make a mistake? How do you act when the majority disagrees with you? Can you apologize? Do you listen before you judge? And can you make a difficult decision without insulting those who disagree with you?
These questions may reveal more about the leader than their professional file does. This does not mean that emotional intelligence replaces experience; the organization needs both. However, in my view, a leader who possesses a high degree of emotional intelligence can compensate for a lack of experience by listening to specialists, leveraging their team, and making decisions based on available knowledge. As for the person with vast experience who lacks the ability to understand people, they may find themselves unable to benefit even from the expertise around them.
A successful leader is not necessarily the person who has the answer to every question, but the person who knows how to reach the correct answer and who has the ability to reach it. It is not a requirement that they be the most experienced person in the organization, but they must be the most capable of gathering expertise and directing it toward a single goal.
In the end, experience can teach a person how to manage work, but emotional intelligence teaches them how to lead people. This, in my opinion, is the dividing line between a manager who keeps an organization as it is, and a leader who can take it to a better place. Organizations do not always need the leader who knows more than everyone else, as much as they need the leader who makes everyone capable of giving their best.
