3 ms·

"no indication that people with higher IQ are able to reach the top faster"

5 points by nickb 19y ago

ojbyrne 19y ago
A former HR professor had a theory for this. According to him the key to understanding American management is that homogeneity is crucial. Middle managers (and that's the path to the top) are almost always white males (though white females are increasingly acceptable) in the 115-130 IQ range. Lower and you're dumb, higher and you're a flake (or not a team player). So I found it interesting that they mentioned the 130 as a cutoff for the school where the students generally led "ordinary" lives.
- dataangel 19y ago
  Or it could be that IQ seems to be an unreliable metric for just about everything.
- DaniFong 19y ago
  Leta Hollingworth first introduced the concept; she postulated a 'communication range' of around 30 IQ points, beyond which, the impedance mismatch would make it difficult to build friendships.
jedberg 19y ago
I would not expect any correlation between IQ and success. A good IQ test will give you a general indication of a person's logic, reasoning and spacial abilities. It does not test one's ability to empathize or interact with others, two skills which are essential for "reaching the top". Therefore, IQ is really only good for measuring a person's potential for gaining new knowledge quickly, not measuring what their future success should be.
- strey 19y ago
  Could a person's definition of success change with IQ? Many people we consider geniuses had wide ranging interests, so I'm not sure you would catch many of these people if success is defined as expertise in a specific field, as it seems to be in this article. Also, here is another interesting take on that question: http://www.eskimo.com/~miyaguch/grady/realworld.html http://www.eskimo.com/~miyaguch/grady/realworld.html
mathogre 19y ago
"Basically, there is no indication that people with higher IQ are able to reach the top faster. We are finding people who meet the criteria for being skilled surgeons, chess masters, athletes or magicians. Once you start looking at what makes them successful, IQ doesn't make any difference." Hogwash. While IQ is no guarantee of success, how would a city look that had "skilled" surgeons of average or below intelligence? Chess masters? Uh huh. Sure. Athletes? Sorry, I'm not aware that athletics have anything to do with intelligence. Magicians? Shall I laugh now? Hmmm... it's not April Fools day yet.
- alyx 19y ago
  You do realize that we have no way of accurately defining nor measuring Intelligence. IQ tests are nothing short of an ego booster and have been shown time and time again to be inaccurately ways of measuring intelligence. http://www.audiblox2000.com/dyslexia_dyslexic/dyslexia014.htm http://www.audiblox2000.com/dyslexia_dyslexic/dyslexia014.ht...
vlad 19y ago
Wait, so an old test designed to measure the abilities of young kids not relative to each other, but to see if they pass a certain score in order to know if they should be getting special assistance in school, means nothing when trying to "measure" skills, goals, ambitions, and future chance of success of adults, to each other, as well as individually?
vlad 19y ago
One does not need only a mentor; it helps a lot if the person has initiative and can notice patterns themselves that a mentor might never have thought of telling them about. But it does seem true that with a great mentor and lots of practice, many people will achieve greatness regardless of what their "IQ" score might be measured that week.

5 points by nickb 19y ago

A former HR professor had a theory for this. According to him the key to understanding American management is that homogeneity is crucial. Middle managers (and that's the path to the top) are almost always white males (though white females are increasingly acceptable) in the 115-130 IQ range. Lower and you're dumb, higher and you're a flake (or not a team player). So I found it interesting that they mentioned the 130 as a cutoff for the school where the students generally led "ordinary" lives.

dataangel 19y ago
Or it could be that IQ seems to be an unreliable metric for just about everything.
DaniFong 19y ago
Leta Hollingworth first introduced the concept; she postulated a 'communication range' of around 30 IQ points, beyond which, the impedance mismatch would make it difficult to build friendships.

jedberg 19y ago

I would not expect any correlation between IQ and success. A good IQ test will give you a general indication of a person's logic, reasoning and spacial abilities. It does not test one's ability to empathize or interact with others, two skills which are essential for "reaching the top". Therefore, IQ is really only good for measuring a person's potential for gaining new knowledge quickly, not measuring what their future success should be.

strey 19y ago
Could a person's definition of success change with IQ? Many people we consider geniuses had wide ranging interests, so I'm not sure you would catch many of these people if success is defined as expertise in a specific field, as it seems to be in this article. Also, here is another interesting take on that question: http://www.eskimo.com/~miyaguch/grady/realworld.html http://www.eskimo.com/~miyaguch/grady/realworld.html

mathogre 19y ago

"Basically, there is no indication that people with higher IQ are able to reach the top faster. We are finding people who meet the criteria for being skilled surgeons, chess masters, athletes or magicians. Once you start looking at what makes them successful, IQ doesn't make any difference." Hogwash. While IQ is no guarantee of success, how would a city look that had "skilled" surgeons of average or below intelligence? Chess masters? Uh huh. Sure. Athletes? Sorry, I'm not aware that athletics have anything to do with intelligence. Magicians? Shall I laugh now? Hmmm... it's not April Fools day yet.

alyx 19y ago
You do realize that we have no way of accurately defining nor measuring Intelligence. IQ tests are nothing short of an ego booster and have been shown time and time again to be inaccurately ways of measuring intelligence. http://www.audiblox2000.com/dyslexia_dyslexic/dyslexia014.htm http://www.audiblox2000.com/dyslexia_dyslexic/dyslexia014.ht...

vlad 19y ago

Wait, so an old test designed to measure the abilities of young kids not relative to each other, but to see if they pass a certain score in order to know if they should be getting special assistance in school, means nothing when trying to "measure" skills, goals, ambitions, and future chance of success of adults, to each other, as well as individually?

vlad 19y ago

One does not need only a mentor; it helps a lot if the person has initiative and can notice patterns themselves that a mentor might never have thought of telling them about. But it does seem true that with a great mentor and lots of practice, many people will achieve greatness regardless of what their "IQ" score might be measured that week.