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...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document