Q: Why do I bother to blog about EQ when I don’t care to improve my EQ (it’s fairly innate)?
A: many people in my circle talk about EQ frequently. They are mostly Chinese. Many of the most important “talks” are about my EQ, usually in private. (In contrast, some less in-depth “talks” mention EQ as a generic personal strength/weakness.) In any case, I often have to reflect on my EQ and reflect on the broader framework of EQ, because it is usually a hot potato that I can’t swallow/ignore.

BTW, China follows a loose definition of EQ (qing2shang1) that’s different from Goleman’s definition in many ways.

j4 bpost: EQ/EI has a rich literature around it. Bulk of it is about leadership, but irrelevant to me and brushed aside in the bpost. The remaining “relevant” literature is still rich in quantity and quality. The literature makes for a good topic in my blog.

j4 bpost: I do see some actionable pointers in the EQ literature. Perhaps I can take some action in some of the domains.

— domain: communicating with grandparents during their last few years

— domain: parenting

— domain: strengthen our marriage
conflict resolution

— domain: job interview

— domain: keeping a (good) job
performance review

— domain: cross-cultural communications esp. on the job