An AQ Awareness Quotient^® is a theory and an on-line instrument.  It quantifies the difference between what Leaders of an organization believe the employees’ perception is as compared to the employees’ actual responses.

The seven components of the model are as follows:

• Clear communication of the overall Purpose and Goals of the firm,
• Clear definition of the Structure or tasks required to accomplish those goals, 
• Confidence in and a desire to follow the Leadership of the firm,
• A desire to address issues of Conflict and seek a permanent solution,
• A fair and consistent application of Rewards and Consequences,
• A conscious effort to utilize Team Effort,
• A belief that the organization is ready and able to Change. 

Through the administration of an insightful series of opinion generating questions, a measurement is calculated and a comparison is made to the actual reactions and beliefs of the employees as they respond to the exact same questions as management. The larger the gap, the larger the impact will be seen as:

• the more time is wasted,
• profits are lost,
• windows of opportunity are missed,
• morale declines,
• resistance to change escalates.

It is a teaching experience that focuses not on good or bad but on developing leadership skills. 

The instrument is further divided to compare the reactions of upper level executives to middle managers through first-line supervisors. This detailed breakdown allows organizations to tailor resolutions to their specific management environments. All of the data is stored in a database environment where future efforts can be analyzed to show progress. The results are presented clearly and succinctly to immediately allow the information to be used as a tool to close the gap identified.

AQ Awareness Quotient^®

Bruce Watier, Ph.D.

The AQ Awareness Quotient^® Theory follows that organizations typically function in an atmosphere of adaptation. Leaders of organizations are faced with the challenge that they have an expectation of what the organization should produce, given the resources it has at its disposal and the markets available. The organization has invested much time, funds and effort into development of personnel for an expected timely and positive outcome.  Unfortunately, many times the observed outcome is less than desired.  The organization is now thrown out of equilibrium and, like all things in nature, it will strive for balance.

The leader believes the source of the problem rests in the employees’ inability or lack of desire to accomplish the results in the stated time frame. The leader then goes about labelling the perceived culprit and assumes the employees are in agreement with the leader’s beliefs. Once the labelling process commences, the Awareness Quotient^® begins to expand based on two principals the Pygmalion Effect and Halo-Horns Phenomenon.

The Pygmalion Effect finds its roots in the ancient Greek mythological poem Metamorphoses. In the poem the sculptor Pygmalion sculpts a beautiful woman out of ivory. He falls in love with the statue and prays to Venus to bring it to life. Venus does bring the statue to life, giving way to the popular saying “be careful what you ask for…”.

George Barnard Shaw expanded the theme in his play Pygmalion.  In the play, a British gentleman bets that he can turn Lisa Doolittle (a cockney flower girl) into a cultured lady by behaving around and towards her as if she were indeed a cultured lady. She soon takes on the behavior of such a lady and he wins the bet.

The Pygmalion Effect came to be understood as “you get what you expect” regardless of the expectation being positive or negative. The effect is more popularly known as “self-fulfilling prophecy" i.e. there is a strong inherent force that creates the sensation that we must always be correct in our beliefs. This feeling that we must always be correct in our beliefs is the first corollary of the Awareness Quotient Theory.

The Pygmalion Effect is the key that unlocks and opens the door to the Halo-Horns Phenomenon. The leader will extend an overall impression of an employee or group based upon one particular trait or perceived behavior that is of value to the leader. If the leader believes an employee or group displays a positive behavior or trait, the leader will evaluate and believe the employee or group is duplicating the behavior in other areas or tasks (halo effect). Conversely, if the leader believes an employee or group has displayed one particular behavior or trait that is believed by the leader to be negative the leader will believe that trait or behavior duplicated in other areas or tasks (horns effect). Here lies the second corollary of the AQ Awareness Quotient^®

 

These features of human behavior empower leaders of an organization to make decisions and take risks based on a concept that they are correct and usually reject the premise that they could be incorrect in their beliefs. If this was not the case then procrastination would fill the void; too many windows of opportunity would be missed; and the organization would wallow in a state of striving for mediocrity

However, the organization is out of balance and a state of dissonance exists putting tremendous pressure on the organization to do something or eventually it will implode. Leaders typically start a regiment of either lowering of expectations to seek some level of success and reduce the pressure or wasting time by abandoning leadership and forgoing organizational leverage for personal task accomplishment.

The organization is usually oblivious to the possibility that another event is occurring. This event is the reality that the organization functions, in other words the “Culture” that exists and directs the organization. The degree of awareness the leaders have to the gap between what the leaders believe and the reality that the organization lives indicates the ineffectiveness of the organization. Leaders can never hope to start delivering on their wants or potential of the organization until this gap is closed.

The potential gap will always be filled with application of resources such as:

• lack of profits;
• leadership time;
• leadership frustration;
• organization frustration;
• organizational conflict.

Leadership will occur naturally based on either positional or personal power. The effectiveness of leadership is measured in the ability of associated groups to accomplish, in a timely manner, and sustain, strategic organizational goals. It is very difficult to be a leader if you have no followers. The leader must be extremely careful not to confuse satisfying one’s own needs and agenda with an assumption or belief that the organization holds corresponding beliefs, priorities, and urgency.

 Bruce L. Watier, Ph.D