The Importance of Emotional Intelligence for Councillors:

Ian Hunt • 17 April 2023

How to Lead with Empathy

Councillors play a vital role in shaping the lives of the people in your community. Be this in determining planning applications, adjudicating on licensing applications or supporting a resident with housing issues. To be effective in this role, it's important to have emotional intelligence, or the ability to recognise and understand emotions in yourself and others; whilst important it’s something we neglect and hopefully this post can give some thoughts.

Why Emotional Intelligence Matters for Councillors

Firstly, it helps councillors to build strong relationships with their constituents by demonstrating empathy and understanding. This can lead to increased trust and more open effective discussions. From this you get to really understand what’s important not just what is being shouted about.

Second, emotional intelligence allows councillors to manage conflicts and difficult conversations more effectively. Councillors regularly represent constituents on both sides of a debate. Be it the neighbour who wants to build a massive extension; or the new development spoiling the countryside by providing affordable homes for peoples children. By recognising your own emotions and the emotions of others, councillors can defuse tense situations and hope to find solutions that work for everyone – or at least show what you understand the problem clearly.

Finally, emotional intelligence can help councillors make better decisions by taking into account the emotional impact of those decisions on individuals; and with that provide relevant context and explanation to help them accept what's happening.

Developing Emotional Intelligence as a Councillor

So, how can you develop emotional intelligence and lead with empathy? Here are a few ideas:

Practice active listening: Active listening involves paying close attention to what someone is saying and demonstrating that you understand and care about their perspective. By practising active listening, councillors can build stronger relationships with their constituents and better understand their needs.

Develop self-awareness: Self-awareness involves recognising and understanding your own emotions. By developing self-awareness, you can better manage your own own emotions and avoid allowing them to interfere with your decision-making.

Practice empathy: Empathy involves putting yourself in someone else's shoes and understanding their perspective. By practising empathy, and understanding different viewpoints you can make decisions which balance competing interests.

Manage emotions effectively: Managing emotions effectively involves recognising your own emotions and finding ways to manage them in a healthy way. Doing this can help in building resilience as well as avoiding outbursts you may regret another day.

Seek feedback: Seeking feedback from constituents and peers (even those across the political divide) can help councillors to better understand how they are perceived and where they can improve their emotional intelligence.

Conclusion

Much of what you do as a Councillor is about people, understanding your impact on them, and indeed theirs on you is a key step in being effective and leading your community. After all nobody becomes a Councillor without an understanding that the constituents are a key part of the role – even if at times it seems there is no way to square the circle of conflicting public opinion.

< Older Post Newer Post >

Disclaimer

The information in this blog post is correct to the best of my knowledge and belief at the time of publication. Whilst I provide general thoughts comments and views on topics, the comments are a summary and not to be regarded as definitive legal advice. Please take detailed advice if you need it from a suitable professional who can look at your personal circumstances and details.

A false Impression?

by Ian Hunt • 6 February 2024

Robots interfering with an election? Where does it leave the UK?

Managing Elections in the age of AI

by Ian Hunt • 11 January 2024

What impact does AI have on how we manage elections?

What do we have to do?

by Ian Hunt • 26 October 2023

The thorny issue of essential functions and statutory powers in straitened times.

Client Earth v Shell: A wake-up call to Local Government?

by Ian Hunt • 6 October 2023

Looking at the lessons to be learned by local government from recent strategic climate litigation.

Handling the Storm

by Ian Hunt • 19 June 2023

Many words have been written about the report by the House of Commons Committee of Privileges into the conduct of Rt Hon Boris Johnson. The overall outcome will I am sure be contested by those who support him or lauded by his detractors. He is after all one of those characters who people have a certain view about. This missive is focused on a different element – namely what to do when things go wrong. It is an inevitable part of life that things happen, and sometimes things go wrong. It may be small or large, within risk tolerance or not but in any event the reaction of the people involved makes the difference. At the heart of this story was a series of events happening within number 10 during lockdown. Remembering that number 10 is a workplace and for many there was a need to be in the office to do their roles. Indeed, as the fulcrum of the effort to manage the pandemic it is not surprising that some office presence was needed. The challenge came when more “normal gatherings” (or at least non covid normal) and events occurred including parties. The contrast in response can be seen starkly between the Department for Education and the Cabinet Office; one of contrition and one of fight. Admittedly the Department of Education had only one event which was investigated, but it was a social event (within the work context) and designed as such. Once it became public, there was a quick public admission and apology. I cannot say they got away with it, but it has been largely forgotten. Part of the reason it has been forgotten was the approach of Boris; he has dug in and raised the profile of the story repeatedly. His argument is that there were no unlawful gatherings, and the guidance was followed; the committee found: