EQ vs. IQ: Why Do Smart People Fail?



Learn Management Articles on management-info.biz. EQ vs. IQ: Why Do Smart People Fail? article will help answer your questions on Management Articles.We at management-info.biz specialize in Management Articles. Management Articles at management-info.biz provides the most up to date news and articles. If you have questions please do not hesitate to contact us.

Why do smart people fail? Why people who are emotionally intelligent succeed while those with merely a moderate IQ considerably fail? First we need to understand that emotional intelligence (EQ) is not the opposite of IQ; EQ is actually complementary to IQ resembled in academic intelligence and cognitive skills, and studies actually show that our emotional states affect the way our brain functions as well as its processing speed (Cryer qtd. in Kemper). Studies have even shown that Albert Einstein's superior intellectual ability may have been linked to the part of the brain that supports psychological functions, dubbed the amygadla. The natures of EQ and IQ differ however in the ability to learn and develop them. IQ is a genetic potential that is established at birth and happens to be fixed after a certain age (pre-puberty) and can not be developed nor increased after then. EQ on the contrary can be learned, developed and improved at any age, and studies have actually shown that our ability to learn emotional intelligence increases as we get older. Another difference is that IQ is a threshold capability that can only show you the road to your career and gets you working in a certain field but it is EQ that walks through that road and gets you promoted in that field. Therefore, striking a balance between IQ and EQ is an important element of managerial success. For some extent, IQ is a driver of productive performance; however IQ-based competencies are considered 'threshold abilities' i.e. the skills needed for you to do an average job. On the other hand, EQ-based competencies and skills are by far more effective, especially at higher levels of organizations where IQ differences are negligible. When a comparative study matched star performers against average ones in top organizational levels, 85 % was attributed to EQ-based competencies rather than IQ (250). Dr. Goleman says that even though organizations are different, have different needs, it was found that EQ contributed by 80-90% of predicting success in organizations in general (251). EQ vs. IQ: Case Study To better illustrate the value-added of EQ competencies relative to IQ, we refer to the case, which was conducted by Dr. Goleman and two renowned EQ researchers, to analyze how EQ competencies contributed to profits in a large accounting firm (251). First, the participants' IQs and EQs were tested and analyzed thoroughly, then they were organized in work teams and each work team was trained on one form of EQ competency like self-management and social skills; however they left one team with participants with a high IQ to act as a control for the study. Then when they evaluated the economic value-added of EQ competencies and IQ, the results were remarkable. The team with high social skills scored a 110% incremental profit, while the self-control partners scored a massive 390% incremental profit which was valued at $ 1,465,000 more profit per year. Conversely, the partners with high cognitive and analytical skills, reminiscent of IQ, added just 50% incremental profit, which indicate that IQ give support to performance but this support is limited owing to its being a threshold capability; EQ-based competencies apparently supports performance far more.


How To Be Funny! - Earn 60% of $49.95 per sale! One of a kind niche e-book teaching people how to be funny in just 7 days flat!
A Second Home In New Zealand. - Unique guide reveals insider secrets on how to migrate, live, work or invest in New Zealand the smart way.


Article Index: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57 | 58 | 59 | 60 | 61 | 62 | 63 | 64 | 65 | 66 | 67 | 68 | 69 | 70 | 71 | 72 | 73 | 74 | 75 | 76 | 77 | 78 | 79 | 80 | 81

More Articles:


1. Alcohol and Events
Naturally alcohol is an important part of many events. People associate having a few drinks with relaxation and enjoyment.Obviously participants must not drink before taking part in dangerous activities, particularly motorised and shooting events. All insurance companies specify that no alcohol at all is taken before or during any such events. It is impossible to police a situation where people are allowed 'one or two' so usually soft drinks or tea and coffee is provided during activities. When …

2. Pareto's Law- Your Formula For Success By John Payne
A 'dirt-world' retail business I used to manage had a large turnover, a very high profit, and less than 100 lines. Early in 2001, I was contracted to manage another business. This one carried over 800 different lines, yet had a turnover of only about a sixth of the other business, and a lower profit margin. They both had a comparable amount of traffic and credibility in the market, so how can it be that the results were so different?The explanation starts with Vilfredo Pareto, an Italian econo…

3. How To Take The Pain Out Of Performance Reviews
The Painful ApproachFor many years, 'performance management' was of an annual event dreaded by both the management and the workforce. For a week or two every year the manager would virtually isolate himself and ponder the stack of review forms staring him in the face. Chances are there was very little data tracked, so he'd try to rack his brain for the past year so he could 'evaluate' his employees. In the meantime, a silent tension was building within each of the employees. Always anticipating …

4. Don't Throw Money Away On Training - Planning Well Will Cut Costs and Increase Value
We've all done it. The glossy brochure with catchy headlines promoting training courses which seem too good to miss. We either see them ourselves or employees bring them to us with a previously unknown 'need' to have this training. Before we know it a large chunk of the annual training budget has gone on courses we didn't even know existed. This sort of reactive approach to training and development costs far more than systematic training and is usually far less effective. So, how do we do this …