Iq & Eq, Intelligence and Cognitive Intelligence

A Assessment Name: Cognitive intelligence and Emotional Intelligence in Modern organisations “Intelligence is an abstract concept for whose definition continues to evolve with modernity, these days it refers to a variety of mental capabilities, including the ability to reason, plan, solve problems, think abstractly, comprehend complex ideas, learn quickly, and learn from experience as well as the potential to do so” (Bonnies Strickland, 2nd,2001).

This essay will be a discussion on what cognitive intelligence and emotional intelligence are, how they both represent intelligence, and how they play a role within an organisation through their strengths and limitations. This essay will discuss the recent popularity of emotional intelligence and that cognitive intelligence is not essentially the main predictor for organisational behaviour in modern organisations.

Cognitive intelligence generally can be referred to IQ tests or General Mental Ability (GMA) to name a few and is defined as “the general efficacy of intellectual processes” (Ackerman, Beier, Boyle, 2005, as cited in Cote & Miners). Results in genetic behaviour points to beyond doubt that GMA or IQ has a strong genetic background, although heritability has shown the increase of GMA with age (Bouchard, 1998: Bouchard, McGue, 1998 as cited in Schmidt 2004).

Cote and Miners 2006 believed cognitive intelligence also demonstrates as task performance based and is in relation to the organisational citizenship behaviour (OCB), this is then reflected to the organisations activities, achievement and objectives. Since the end of World War 1 measures of GMA have been used in the recruiting and hiring of employees (Yerkes, 1921 as cited in Schmidt, 2004), though the most popular GMA tests still in modern society is the Wonderlic Personnel Test.

The strengths of GMA & IQ tests are that they have been used as a predictor in personnel selection for over 80 years and have substantial evidence supporting it as a strong predictor of job performance in organisations. Schmidt has stated that GMA is positively linked to several life outcomes such as the level of education and the income of adult. Studies have been carried out on the effectiveness of GMA in relation to occupational level, according to Shmidt 2004; these include cross-sectional studies and longitudinal studies.

Shmidt also stated that cross-sectional studies relied on people’s rankings of the occupational level of different occupations, similarities between the mean ratings across these studies excluding the regard of age, country of origin or social class. These studies concluded that mean GMA scores increased with occupational level, so if GMA score was high for an individual they would find it harder to enter higher occupational levels. This suggests that having a lower GMA rating was a requirement for a higher job occupation (Schmidt, 2004).

Longitudinal studies focussed on the prediction of occupational fulfilment later in life by the measurement of GMA scores in the early part of life (Schmidt, 2004). Wilk, Desmarais and Sackett 1995 used the results from the National Longitudinal survey, in which young adults were tested over a 5 year period to measure GMA, these studies predicted the hierarchy of occupational level (as cited in Shmidt, 2004). This meant if the GMA score was- high they were most likely to move into a higher complexity job, where as if their score was low they were most likely to move down into a less complex job (Schmidt, 2004).

However, limitations are known for GMA testing through certain literature has led to the conclusion that GMA may not be as well understood, this can be drawn from the research conducted on GMA’s constructs and measures as well as its moral judgements (Viswesvaran & Ones, 2003). An example of this is the question of the group differences of the results and also the grounds of GMA being not good (enough) predictor (Goldstein, Zedeck &Goldstein as cited in Viswesvaran & Ones 2003).

Analogy has been used from psychological testing literature that underlines GMA’s role in real life situations and environments (Reeve & Hakel: as cited in Viswesvaran & Ones, 2003). There are points of criticism that revolves around GMA; firstly is central criticism this is seen in articles by Goldstein et all, and it validates GMA for low real-life predicaments. Also it is seen that GMA tests should be acknowledged on the terminology used as some words can be seen as racist or fascist, words like discrimination and adverse can impact bias or unfair results (Viswesvaran & Ones, 2003).

It has been belief that cognitive attuned staff give modern organisations the competitive advantage in the organisational domain this is due with the cognitive ability to process technical, numerical and vast amounts of information (Schmidt & Hunter, 1998. 2000; Michaels Handfield- Jones and Axelrod, 2001, as cited in Cote & Miners, 2006). Although, the limitations of one possessing cognitive ability alone and very minimal if any emotional intelligence can result in a poor performance rate if one is to completely rely on only skills that are cognitive in the work place ( Cherniss, Goleman & Bennis, 2003).

Recently theorists have suggested that one’s intelligence does not only exist of cognitive intelligence, but also a grave amount of interpersonal and emotional intelligence. In modern management, one of the most proactive concerns is that of emotions related to performance of organisations (Cote & Miners, 2006). Emotional intelligence has been discussed as a new predictor that is non-cognitive in relation to organisational performance and was popularized by Daniel Goleman in 1995 (Goleman, 1998 as cited in Cote & Miners, 2006).

Emotional intelligence is defined as “a set of abilities that includes the abilities to perceive emotions in self and in others, use these emotions to facilitate performance, understand emotions and emotional knowledge, and regulate emotions in the self and in others” (Cote & Miners, 2006). Strengths of EI is correlated to the limitations of cognitive intelligence, as stated before people who score high in GMA tests can do poorly in organisations and social relations (Cherniss, 2010). An example of this would be the syndrome of Asperger’s.

EI can influence job performance with the competencies of self-control, empathy, integrity, social skills, reliability, conscientiousness and motivation (Cherniss, 2010). In organisation behavioural perspective, EI can assist individuals with low GMA scores to manage their impressions well and in turn receive high performance ratings. This can be achieved by the development of links to co-workers who can provide assistance and can enrich learning- potential to that individual which than can lead to a higher level of occupation (Mehra, Kilduff & Brass 2001 as cited in Cote & Miners, 2006).

According to Mayer and Salovey’s model, there are four main areas on EI: Identifying emotions, Using emotions, Understanding emotions and managing emotions. This model was the only model in which was supported by a confirmatory factor and measures by desirable psychometric properties (Cote & Miners, 2006). Limitations of Emotion intelligence is the dearth of studies which relates to job performance thus, is the relation of criticisms of the ‘scientific status’ of emotional intelligence in organisational behaviour (Becker, 2003; Landy, 2005, as cited in Cote & Miners, 2006).

Barret and colleagues referred to emotional intelligence as “the Madison Avenue approach to science and professional practice”, he implies that the increase awareness of EI relates to the outspread of its nature which contrasts the scientific evidence (Cote & Miners, 2006). Studies have suggested that there is no relation or consistency between job performance and emotional intelligence, specifying on particular tasks as academic performance (Petrides, Frederickson, and Furnham, 2004, as cited in Cote & Miners, 2006).

The display of competencies of emotional intelligence such as being empathetic, affiliated, highly self-aware and agreeable is not beneficial of being an effective leader (Antonakis, 2003, as cited in Pratt, Douglas, Ferris, Ammeter, and Buckley, 2003). Also, often the high need of affiliation for those requiring can place importance on individual interests rather than the organisations success (Antonakis, 2003, as cited in Pratt, Douglas, Ferris, Ammeter, and Buckley, 2003).

Also, disperses of high emotional occurrences in the organisation setting, with that the concern of the negative feelings towards others could be misinterpreted. Therefore, recognising an individual’s emotions at all times is not beneficial to active and effective leadership qualities. Psychological ability defined by Wedeck as “the ability to judge correctly the feelings, moods, motivations of individual”, which can be incorporated by that of general intelligence (Cote & Miners, 2006).

Thus, because emotional and cognitive intelligence both represent that of general intelligence though in separate content domains, they may be associated with each other but would not correspond perfectly. However, several organisations have incorporated EI and GMA, IQ into their employee development programs also business schools have added EI to their curriculums (Boyatzis, Stubbs and Taylor, 2002 as cited in Cote& Miners, 2006). Most mining organisations such as (Anglo American) also have incorporated aptitude and psychological tests which include both EI and GMA, as part- of their application to job recruitment.

Goleman, Mayer, Salovey and Caruso have all argued that both emotional intelligence and Cognitive intelligence make linear yet independent contributions to job performance (Cote & miners, 2006). By the combination of emotional and cognitive intelligence, people can receive higher performance in organisations. Concluding, this essay has discussed the strengths and limitations of both cognitive intelligence and emotional intelligence in relation to GMA, IQ and EI testing within the organisational level.

The essay has also viewed cognitive intelligence and emotional intelligence operating in modern organisations either individually or incorporated together. Cognitive intelligence displays specific abilities in task and problem solving, strategic and analytical aspects of intelligence. Emotional intelligence demonstrates proficiency in producing the components of empathy, self-regulation and self-awareness in an organisational structure. Haslam (2007) summarised that many theorists discuss that one’s intelligence does not only compose of cognitive abilities but also an array of multiple interpersonal and emotional intelligences.

References Cote` S, & Miners C. H. (2006). Emotional Intelligence, Cognitive Intelligence and Job Performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 51(1), 1-28. Anglo American. Retrieved from: http://www. angloamerican. com. au/careers/employment- programmes. aspx Cherniss, C. (2010). Emotional intelligence: Toward clarification of a concept. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 3, 110-126. Haslam, N. (2007). Introduction to Personality and Intelligence. London, UK: SAGE Publication. Inc. Roberts, R. D. , Matthews, G. & Zeinder, M. (2010). Emotional intelligence: Muddling through theory and measurement. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 3, 140-144. Schmidt, F. L. , & Hunter, J. (2004). General mental ability in the world of work: Occupational attainment and job performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86(1), 162-173. Viswesvaran, C. & Ones, D. S. (2002). Agreements and disagreements on the role of general mental ability (GMA) in industrial, work, and organizational psychology. Human Performance, 15(1/2), 211-231.