In the time that I’ve been answering questions about IQ and intelligence, I’ve received a disproportionate number of questions about IQ from those in academia–especially students who are comparing themselves to their colleagues. This is to be expected, just as we might expect golfers to inquire about the physiological aspects of hitting a long drive. High intelligence, as measured by IQ and problem solving ability, is a vital human attribute that enables a scholar to stand head and shoulders above his or her colleagues–especially in mathematics and theoretical physics where powerful abstract thinking is vital. The intensity that people in the top intellectual echelons bring to the quest for “top-dog” status was captured in the 1997 movie Good Will Hunting. When Fields Medalist, Professor Gerald Lambeau, acknowledges that the young janitor at the University, named Will Hunting [played by Matt Damon] has superior mathematical talent, he says:
I can’t do this proof. But you can, and when it comes to that it’s only about..it’s just a handful of people in the world who can tell the difference between you and me. But I’m one of them… Most days I wish I never met you…Because then I could sleep at night, and I wouldn’t have to walk around with the knowledge that there’s someone like you out there…And I didn’t have to watch you throw it all away.
Acknowledging that he is less gifted in mathematical talent than Will Hunting, Professor Lambeau accepts his upper limit with bitter regret, yet in spite of this personal defeat he so reveres the gift of mathematical genius that he laments even more the prospect that Will Hunting’s greater talent may be squandered.
While those who aspire to the highest echelons of intellectual achievement value high intelligence, many are less enamoured with IQ as a measure of cognitive brilliance. While IQ is a reasonably valid measure of intelligence for IQ’s between 70 and 130, their value is limited in ranking people whose intelligence is in the genius realm. Problem solving at the highest levels draws upon deeper cognitive skills than can be measured in any test administered over a period of a few hours–a point made by British psychologist, Liam Hudson:
It is amply proved that someone with an IQ of 170 is more likely to think well than someone whose IQ is 70, and this holds true where the comparison is much closer–between IQs of, say, 100 and 130. But the relation seems to break down when one is making comparisons between two people both of whom have IQs which are relatively high…A mature scientist with an adult IQ of 130 is as likely to win a Nobel Prize as is one whose IQ is 180.
Outside of academia, most people tend to be more focussed on attaining some degree of affluence, and IQ may be valued only to the degree that it can be translated into monetary gain. The common chide, “If you’re so smart, why ain’t you rich,” reflects the belief that a high IQ that doesn’t yield a degree of wealth has little value. Indeed, much of the cache of IQ is the belief that it is positively coordinated with a high income.
In the world of business, especially in companies like Apple and Microsoft that require skills in computer science IQ is at a premium. In 1993, Forbes journalist Richard Karlgaard, in a conversation with Bill Gates asked, “What Microsoft competitor worries you most?” Without hesitation, Gates responded, “Goldman Sachs.”
When Karlgaard responded with surprise that Gates named an investment banking company rather than a computer company, Gates clarified:
Software is an IQ business. Microsoft must win the IQ war, or we won’t have a future. I don’t worry about Lotus or IBM, because the smartest guys would rather come to work for Microsoft. Our competitors for IQ are investment banks such as Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley.
Indeed, the competition for the best and brightest is a war fiercely waged by the best companies in the hi-tech fields, because these so-called HiQ’s are the only people capable of pushing innovation to new heights.
