Successful leadership is that which pushes everyone towards a common goal. The common goal depicts both organizational success and individual success because everyone is involved. My study aims to compare between EQ and IQ in the success or failure of a leader. Given that EQ takes an emotional approach rather than just mental and academic success, EQ was expected  to be the better approach. The study therefore took measures of EQ and IQ through the selected measures of self-reports, ability tests, and IQ tests. There was also a survey done to see what people thought of their leaders and what they preferred to see in them. From a sample size of 150 leaders, the EQ approach yielded 103 successful leaders while the IQ approach yielded 62 successful leaders. This helped to determine that EQ is indeed more effective in successful leadership in comparison to IQ. The study proves the hypotheses and answers the research questions. IQ was seen to be useful but deficient tool of leadership. Indeed, it is important that a leader is able to understand and solve complex issues but that should not be the only goal. If the focus is only on the results, then others may get left behind because they were not motivated to exploit their full potential. Therefore the study recommended that farther studies be conducted on how to enable people with a high IQ create an effective balance in their approach to leadership so as to fully exploit their brilliance.



Emotional Quotient (EQ) and Intelligence Quotient (IQ) are both measures to do with the mind. Often at times people mix them up and for a majority, they cannot tell the difference. However, IQ is a measure that tests one’s capability to solve problems, use logic and to grasp as well as communicate complex ideas. Emotional quotient on the other hand measures one’s ability to recognize emotions in themselves and in others and the use of that recognition in guiding their decisions (Feinberg, 2011). Many at times, people make the assumption that people who are smart in school are equally smart in other areas of their lives but that is not always the case. Being book smart does not necessarily guarantee that one will be street smart as well. Street smartness is actually the larger measure of one’s agility and dynamism to respond to various situations around them by giving working solutions to them. Book smartness often captures just the academic spectrum of one’s life. However, there is so much more to life than just books which is what this case study is seeking to address.

Leadership is one aspect of life where the measure of success does not just depend on ability to solve problems from a complex approach. Leadership is defined as the art of motivating a group of people to act towards achieving a common goal (Muller & Turner, 2010). It is about developing people and enabling them to reach their full potential. This is done through the equipping of people with appropriate tools and strategies with an objective of not only maximizing organizational successs, but also individual lives Great leaders possess a number of traits that are associated with them. These include: clear vision, courage, integrity, humility, and focus amongst others. Good leaders help others get to their goals and they do not mind hiring people who are better than them because the goal is for everyone to be the best version of themselves. Great leaders therefore take great pride in seeing those they help making accomplishments for themselves and for others as well (Dulewicz & Higgs, 2015).

IQ has historically been used to determine a person’s ability to solve structure problems based on knowledge retention and recovery and has been measured using techniques like Stanford-Binet or Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale testing. EQ however has more recently been defined and refined and currently is measured using a model created by psychologist Daniel Golema‌‍‌‍‍‌‌‍‍‍‍‌‌‍‌‌‌‌‌n (Dulewicz & Higgs, 2015). The emotional aspects of leadership have been much harder to measure since they are less structured and thus can vary substantially from person to person. Even though EQ has been around for over twenty-five years we still see it as important but fluid.IQ has always been an easy measure because its focus is on absolute measures. The concern in the test is how much one will score based on the tests they undertake in the Stanford-Binet, Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale among the other tests that are used in its measurement. The scores are what categorize someone’s intellectual prowess when they are faced with complex issues (Aydin et al., 2015).

EQ on the other hand has been in existence and recognized for a but the main challenge has been on how to measure it. There is a recognition that EQ is an important factor in leadership and management but the main issue at hand is that emotions are fluid, and they vary from one person to the other. Getting a universal measurement point has thus been more challenging and hence people have often abstained from getting the appropriate way of gauging a leader’s emotional quotient. However, based on how people react to insensitive and inconsiderate people in authority, the implication is that it has a great role to play in effective and desirable management of people. Daniel Goleman a psychologist created a model that can be used to measure EQ. Goleman defines EQ as the ability to identify, assess and control one’s emotions, emotions of others and that of groups as well. He developed a performance-based model of EQ to help assess employee levels of employee levels of emotional intelligence and identification of areas that can be improved upon. The model has five components namely:

  1. Self-awareness: Individuals with a high level of emotional intelligence are comfortable in their thoughts and emotions and are able to understand how they impact on other people. Comprehending and accepting how one feels is often the first step to overcoming it.
  2. Self-regulation: The ability to manage one’s impulsiveness and emotionality is key. Making quick and irrational decisions may yield mistakes that have the potential of damaging of damaging relationships with colleagues, clients, and other people.
  • Internal Motivation: Having and developing a passion for what one does works better to feed their emotional intelligence. Goleman says having pursuits for money only is not fulfilling. Sustained motivation aids in clear decision-making and gives a better direction regarding the organization’s aims.
  1. Empathy: Besides understanding one’s emotions, understanding those of others is equally important. This helps in identifying certain moods in people within one’s sphere of interaction and it goes a long way into the kind of relationship one will foster with those people.
  2. Social Skill: This goes beyond mere friendliness. Goleman terms it as ‘friendliness with a purpose’. This implies that everybody is treated respectfully and politely with a goal to make use of these healthy relationships for personal and organizational growth (Goleman, 1995).