That article concludes that it's very risky to use IQ tests to measure just about anything because there are heaps of weak data around them > As others have po

That article concludes that it's very risky to use IQ tests to measure just about anything because there are heaps of weak data around them > As others have pointed out, statistical corrections are no magical compensation for weak data and that it is risky to reach conclusions about test validities from those currently available (Oswald & McCloy, 2003; Russell & Gilliland, 1995). The only solution is properly conducted primary studies, with larger representative samples, better measures, and so on. Here's the important bit that basically advises not using IQ tests in the exact way that you're using them: > Until they are available, investigators should be extremely cautious about disseminating conclusions about IQ test validities, from correlations between IQ and job performance. CEO is a job title, not a measure of intelligence, or even job performance. There are no shortage of shitty CEOs, just as there are no shortage of shitty performers in just about every possible job.