Executive Intelligence

[Torvald Von Mansee]

My father once related to me an article he read that the most effective executives/leaders have an IQ of about 120. They're smart, but not so smart that they see too much and get mired down in making too many decisions/etc. (I suppose I should try and locate the article)

So, is it possible for an executive to be TOO smart? Is it preferable to have a Ronald Reagan or George W. Bush instead of a Teddy Roosevelt or Thomas Jefferson?

Anyway, discuss.

[Raptor1]

I always despised the IQ model, it's such an unintelligent way of determining intelligence...

Before you ask these questions you must define 'smart', people can be arguably smart in certain ways and arguably ignortant in others.

[Oberon]

Hmmm, tricky question really, and as Raptor says, smart comes in all kinds of different ways (A George W Bush quote IIRC) and some people who might be pretty bad at maths and english literature might be a fantastic battlefield leader.
Furthermore, what defines a good battlefield leader? One who achieves success in all his battles? Or one who seeks to achieve his goals without bloodshed. For this, in my opinion, I defer to Sun Tsu.

However, what makes a good president? Common sense helps, and a good grounding in reality.

Although, it could easily be argued that a president is only a figurehead for his government and as such is merely the mouthpiece of his advisers, and therefore what is really needed is what we call the 'gift of the gab' and that is something that Ronald Reagan had in abundance in my opinion. That guy could break the ice with a quick joke or a jibe at his own government and go on to lay down a memorable quote, like the one in my signature. Reagan knew how to talk to people, Roosevelt was another one who knew how to connect to people, with his fireside chats he endeared himself to the public. JFK endeared himself to the public. Once you've got your foot in the door with the general public, then they will remember you. Sure, you'll get those who disagree, you'll always have them, but as the years go past, memories are always jaded in favor of the good times and the bad times are forgotten and your place in history is ensured.

No-one is perfect, even when the public expect them to be, but it's the memory you leave people with after office that will be your legacy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histori..._United_States

[CaptainHaplo]

When it comes to the executive side of things, be it business or government, intelligence is not the only ingredient that must be considered. However, given the premise of the question, here is my answer....

You need an exec that is either at the first level (not really too smart but smart enough to oversee and direct the big picture) - or EXTREMELY smart - meaning beyond the ability to see the details - but smart enough to know that if they get too bogged down in the details they end up not being able to see the forest. There is a pretty big gap between those two levels, and that is where the majority of "smart" people who try to lead screw up - they can get into the details too much - and lose the bigger picture.