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.
|
