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. Jack Welch--Success Is Getting Back Up on the Horse By Alan Boyer
A few months ago I had the opportunity to spend a few minutes with Jack Welch, past CEO of GE. A fantastic opportunity.Some of the things he said about who they hire and what they are looking for in managers sort of hit home with what I am telling clients, and what I am telling my teen leadership group (our Rising Stars program).The Best Managers Aren't Perfect But They Keep Getting Back on the HorseJack Welch--"We look for people that are not perfect. People that have made mistakes, but know …

2. Change Happens: Change and Transition Management for the Individual By L. John Mason
Life change is unavoidable. The pace of change has increased to a record rate with the latest innovations and information technologies. Our body's primitive response mechanism has not been able to keep pace and we are living with "overwhelm" as a daily companion. We do not have time to adapt at a genetic level, so we must learn to use behavioral adaptations to survive and thrive.Each of us is a unique person with our unique habitual response to stress. Some of us respond to stress with anger, …

3. Five Principles of Effective Communication By Brenda Townsend Hall
The problem with communication is the illusion that it has occurred. George Bernard ShawI’m sure this has happened to you: a colleague has just done the exact opposite of what you wanted him to do. How can that be, you ask yourself. I told him exactly what I wanted. Yes, maybe you told him but did you check that he was listening, that he understood, that he agreed and that he would carry out the required action? Obviously not. The first principle of effective communication is to get appropriat…

4. Management Training: Are You Satisfied With The Results? By Marcia Zidle
If you’re not satfied with the results of your management training programs, maybe it’s because you handle training as a ‘one shot’ event rather than a process of developing your people to be better managers.One of the common misconceptions is that a manager can take a course and voila he is now skilled in communicating with others, or managing his time or delegating work. Rome wasn’t built in a day. Neither will people change in one day. Particularly many leadership competencies require se…