IQ And Emotional Intelligence
A lot of talking on these boards has to do with what it takes to be a successful investment banker, trader, or anything related to business. For all of these, certain traits are critical i.e. hard work and attention to detail. I see a lot of people coming on these boards with the expectation that a 3.9 out of a target school will land them their dream job, which is no doubt true to some extent. However, let's just assume that an investment bank takes all of these qualified candidates...what happens to them down the road? Surely some luck will have to do with who gets promoted but as they say "luck is when preparation meets opportunity." It's my belief that emotional intelligence is something that should be addressed more on the boards.
I would argue that there at least 30 IQ points that can be overcome in being successful. To phrase it simply, I think at a certain level there is no difference in the likelihood of being successful in this game between someone with an IQ of 126 versus 156. Both of these people will have more than the necessary skills to be successful in the field of finance. Therefore, I think the people who truly excel are those who often possess certain intangibles that can't be measured by grades. I think of these as the street smart skills--simply knowing how to make money or knowing what your opponent is going to do. This is kind of the reason I think trading firms are willing to take risks on poker players---they are unique and bring assets that aren't measured directly on paper or IQ. There are a lot of these things just as creativity, thinking outside the box, common social skills (something I feel a lot of people lack) that are critical in distinguishing these distinguished analysts the first day they walk in.
So I guess what I'm really asking is if people would agree to some level with my thinking, and if so, how do people go about maximizing their emotional intelligence?
Agree with you 100%. As someone who truly excelled at university, I nevertheless find my emotional IQ is not up to the level I want and I have been focusing more on developing it rather than the IQ in the past few months.
I don't think Emotional Intelligence (EQ) is thinking outside the box, creativity etc; for me it means more like being able to socially interact with anyone, even if you don't particularly like them. In other words, getting along with people. And banking is about people and relationships. If that is what you are looking for, I can recommend a few books by Dale Carnegie (How to make friends and influence people)/Napoleon Hill (Law of Success) They cover this topic in much detail, i.e. how to develop winning relationships etc, and they are very useful for other things like motivation etc.
I am sure you have heard about Carnegie at least - I am not advertising some "Racing Towards Excellence" crap. The books I mention are truly classics and are quite amusing even as a general read.
Good luck.
Yes definitely i would also really like to hear recruiters opinions on this, students that look good 'on paper' and completely disappoint during interviews what their common mistakes are etc.
Warren Buffet:
"If you have a 150 IQ, sell 30 points to someone else. You need to be smart, but not a genius. What’s most important is inner peace; you have to be able to think for yourself. It’s not a complicated game."
Interesting, no?
@r scott morris--interesting quote, though that wiki article makes me think r scott morris is probably closer to 150 than 120...
i dont think i would go so far as to say a 126 can do the same as someone with a 156 IQ. it depends on the job function...i think within banking the gap would be less important; though i'd look at it this way
a 750 GMAT is about the same as a 149 IQ. (by distribution standards, because the GMAT is taken by a sample and a 720 or so is about 130)
I think both IQ and social ability (EQ) are going to be factors in someone's success and that both can (to some degree) be compensated for. (I think EQ can be learned to some degree, but you can't really improve your IQ)
I totally agree, likability goes a long, long way. I'd also contend that you'd be hard-pressed to find someone with IQ 155 working in finance.
Actual 150+ geniuses really have different priorities, which is why they'd research/lecture at university rather than work for some hedge fund. You can't compare a person with IQ 125 and another with IQ 155 because their motivations are simply different. See Grigori Perelman, the Russian mathematician who recently refused the $1m Nobel prize.
I think it's a bit much to say 155 people don't work in finance...if you look at the people at DE SHAW i'd be willing to bet there are few people under 140...I know a number of people who's IQ's are greater than 150 and are going into finance
think about what it takes to get into BX PE or GS SSG or DE SHAW out of ugrad...
^^ Doesn't take much more than at other banks, all interviews at undergrad are the same at all BBs - from what I know, there is no screening criteria by IQ, even at GS and DE Shaw.
10% of success is what you know, 90% is knowing how to maneuver yourself through the world.
just because they don't screen for IQ doesn't meant they don't use proxies for it; for ex i know of a guy going to work for de shaw that had a 790 gmat....thats probably in the 165+ range.
someone mentioned the valedictorian of princeton is going to work there too; i'd expect him/her to have an iq over 150 also.
lol @ correlating test scores or success with IQ
lol @ having zero evidence to the contrary....
numerous studies have shown that IQ and SAT scores are highly correlated....most high IQ societies recongize standard tests such as the GMAT or the SAT (not really anymore because of all the curving etc) as admissions qualifications
what evidence do you have to suggest that there is no such correlation?
Getting along with people is the core of emotional intelligence? Your IQ needs to be higher if you want to make any reasonable statement about the EI in general!
EI is understanding/feeling emotions of other people and knowing how to direct your own/others emotions.
Here is the Wikipedia definition: "Emotional intelligence (EI) describes the ability, capacity, skill or, in the case of the trait EI model, a self-perceived grand ability to identify, assess, manage and control the emotions of one's self, of others, and of groups."
And the stuff about IQ>150 people do have other goals - what kind of retarded assumption is that? Only because you have very high analytical skills does not make you have a specific set of goals in your life. Very intelligent people do just think faster/understand complex relations better, but this does not mean that the view of the world suddenly totally changes.
goals arent a function of iq. Iq is simply the budget constraint.
WIth a 160 IQ you can choose between going into academia or finance. WIth an IQ of 130 you cant(assuming you actually wanna be the shit in academia).
EQ is very useful, but it can be learned and picked up, IQ cannot(for the most part)
IQ is a measure that correlates with nothing you have to do in academia.
Read the book Outliers.....covers this exact topic. After an IQ of roughly 120 success is more about luck. Also correlating GMAT scores to exact IQs is just plain stupid.
EQ cannot be "picked up" any more than IQ can. If you don't have a high EQ, you can train yourself to spot the "signs" that someone is lying to you and that may be enough in most situations, mainly because most people aren't particularly emotionally intelligent and will not be able to successfully conceal the physical manifestations of their emotions, BUT you will never be able to make on the spot correct decisions that are not based on the facts (I.e. I know this guy is full of shit, because he mentioned that X=Z,, and I saw earlier today that X=Y). Pretty much IQ lets you forecast events, EQ lets you forecast behaviors.
Is Teaching Emotional Intelligence the Key to Higher Achievement? (Originally Posted: 09/23/2013)
One of the biggest issues facing the United States today is the quality of the public education system. In 2012 the Economist Intelligence Unit used a combination of international test results and data including graduation and literacy rates to rank the education systems of 50 nations and we came in 17th. Another study by the World Economic Forum has ranked the United States 52nd in the quality of math and science education. Whatever ranking you look at the numbers are not pretty. Simply throwing money at schools has not solved the problem. So how do we turn the tide?
In a recent article in the New York Times Magazine, Jennifer Kahn posits that the key may be developing students’ emotional and social skills. While it has long been widely thought that academic achievement was the key predictor of success, recent studies suggest differently:
These types of programs that develop children’s emotional skills are referred to as social-emotional learning. The theory behind SEL is that the programs can retrain children’s neurological pathways so that they are better able to handle stress and can maintain more stable emotions.One reason educating is so difficult is because each student learns differently and some have a hard time focusing and retaining information. In the article Marc Brackett, a senior research scientist at Yale, says that helping students emotionally may lead to better memory and focus:
In my mind this makes sense. What is the point of teaching algebra when the student has a hard time focusing in class?It is still early days through and there is not enough data to see whether the changes are retained after students leave the classroom. It may turn out that the students revert back to old behavior when they do not have a teacher to reinforce the concepts. Furthermore there is a question of how standardized to make the programs; do you have a script that teachers read from or should the program be more personalized to the classroom? Additionally how is how is emotional growth quantified? It is a very hard subject to test and measuring the growth of the students in the programs is challenging.
What do you guys think? Is this the wave of the future? Should social-emotional learning become part of the curriculum nationwide or is it just hokum?
Slightly off-topic, but maybe we're not throwing money at the right places: The Case Against High-School Sports
Here's the interesting thing about america when it comes to sports...notice only a small percentage are playing the sport and the rest, whom are fat, lazy, love to complain and criticize, are the ones who watch the games. So don't be misled. There's a difference between those who watch sports and who play sports.
I honestly don't know how to fix the education system. One part of me thinks this may help, if it actually results in more emotionally-stable, sociable,well-adjusted kids. On the other hand, it seems like more of the recent trend of giving kids trophies for effort rather than results and will not result in anything more than a bunch of kids whose teachers said they grew up alot this year, but still can't read.
School is a joke. If you are a good student, half the time you just breeeze through doing minimal work until you need to apply to college, or you aren't a good student and you never give a shit. I don't think it provides much more than a base to develop basic test-taking, comprehension and communication skills. I thinkk the real issue in schools is the curriculum that we teach, as you have to be interested in the topic to learn (especially at a young age).
I don't know much about it but it seems like Asia is killing us in education, so they must be doing something right.
I'm sure I read somewhere that whilst Asia dominates in raw score and results, their younger generation's academic achievement is the result of rote-learning and as such they are generally not able to think creatively. How much truth there is in this, I do not know.
You can't teach kids how to have emotions. Some ivory tower academic can talk about "neural pathways" all she wants but I don't believe it.
This is why we need to bring dodgeball back to schools. It teaches social hierarchy, teamwork, communication, and shame (being overweight and un-athletic) lol. A generation of men taught by women...who get destroyed when they enter the real world. /off topic rant
As someone who has been a nationally recognized tutor in an urban, impoverished area, I think a lot of the focus should be on the parents, not the student. A good teacher can positively influence a student for 7-8hrs/5 days a week/8 months per year, but if a parent is not reinforcing or celebrating that positive influence, a teacher's work disappears at the end of day. So much $$ can be thrown at teachers and different educational initiatives, but it is on the student to apply that knowledge. IMO, $$ and education needs to be used more effectively in the form of changing the culture of education in a familial role. Emotional intelligence is a good first step.
Definitely agree with this. A child's development rests more in the hands of parents and the friends they grow up with than teachers and curriculums.
100% agree on the parents being more important than school/curriculum/teachers, unfortunately, there is no way to change that because having kids is a personal freedom and we can't restrict people from procreating and/or force them to raise their kids responsibly
It's more a function of cultural attitudes than anything, US society as a whole just does not place much emphasis on education/academic achievement.
Temporibus assumenda quas voluptatem quia quo. Qui vero amet dolor dolorum placeat. Pariatur nemo placeat optio dolor sint. Enim omnis harum itaque ipsam animi enim. Dolorem magnam dolorum saepe eos. Soluta dolorum sunt labore voluptatem officiis consectetur.
Id accusantium ad repudiandae minus nihil repudiandae. Doloribus quibusdam porro nostrum aut voluptate qui omnis. Voluptatem magnam facere ullam quaerat omnis.
Ut maxime quasi deserunt quisquam ea temporibus excepturi. Eum praesentium sed vitae ducimus ut. Aperiam corrupti maxime nesciunt. Voluptate ut veritatis minus consequatur suscipit.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Odio at quos et vitae. Facere harum in esse qui voluptatem. Rem qui qui non amet quia quisquam. Recusandae sint voluptatem eligendi eum. Ut officiis sapiente amet commodi.
Corrupti tempore iste asperiores dolorem illum mollitia placeat. Consectetur quod aperiam quas dignissimos nesciunt ad. Et rerum ratione qui doloremque eos eos.