I really don't think it does. I think the author rightly points out that while intelligence (as we measure it - ie an ability to solve abstract problems) is use

I really don't think it does. I think the author rightly points out that while intelligence (as we measure it - ie an ability to solve abstract problems) is useful in particular situations (generally involving complicated technical work), it's not the limiting factor which determines success in other areas. I think the message to take away from this is that if people describe you as "intelligent", you shouldn't rest on your laurels. Intelligence is just a small part of the toolkit required to be successful in business. The reality is that in the real world you need other skills to succeed in business. The article linked resonates with my experiences in large, engineering dominated companies. Those who rise to the top do so not because of their technical skills but because of their ability to work with people. Those with poor social skills don't move up the hierarchy. Of course technical skills remain important even up the chain - a project manager needs to be able to understand what's happening below him - but there is far less need for the ability to solve complicated or abstract problems. Success is measured in a lot of ways, and this is just applied to business. In other areas (perhaps academia, large companies which value techical work, open source projects) intelligence correlates more directly with success.