It History has many examples where the right


It is an
interesting debate, and one can find
enormous literature discussing the relevance and
role IQ and EQ have to play in determining
one’s success. But would it be appropriate to say that one is more important in
today’s world of uncertainty and ambiguity?

Well, one can argue both ways, but the reality is that
context and content go hand-in-hand to determine the output.  The workplace realities are changing. Today organizations
have become networked, boundaryless, flat and lean, indicating a shift in the
way they work, and how power dynamics are determined. Today authority and
ability to influence others are determined not by one’s seniority/ level but by
how swiftly one can gauge and manage the changing priorities within the context
of how people react/ would respond to these changes.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now

A high IQ does
give one an edge to analyze & synthesize
data, but it is EQ which helps an
individual to determine the best approach to deal with the situation or deliver results. The approach
chosen would vary depending on numerous factors like organizational culture, work dynamics,
people involved and motives for engagement.

Would you be
headed in the right direction if your leader is a great orator but lacks
strategic perspective and insights to drive the right agenda? History has many examples where the right purpose coupled
with the wrong approach has led to failure.

IQ & EQ – both complement
each other

The question today is not about IQ or EQ? It is also
not about which is more important and relevant? The real question is how effective
a leader is in understanding the context and being able to leverage
his/her  IQ, EQ or both as the situation demands
to drive people/team or organization towards the aligned goal.

Is management an
art or science?  It is an age-old debate which often gets concluded by saying management is both science and art at the same time.  I find this
debate quite relevant to the topic of EQ and IQ. If I had to draw a
parallel  EQ would represent art
dimension and IQ would represent the scientific dimension in an individual.

I strongly believe that one cannot replace the other
but can underplay or overplay an IQ or EQ dimension based on the context or
need of the situation.

I would like to leave you with a question that might
help you put this debate to rest … Would Virat Kohli be a great captain if he
was not a good cricketer or the other way around?