High IQ problem

[Geoffrey]

Can you suggest what should an employee X do under the following circumstances?

1) Has an IQ in the range 140 to 160

2) His ideas and hypotheses are nearly 100% correct, but his colleagues/boss finds it difficult to understand and doesn't have the patience/resource to let him explain in detail or prove it.

When I say nearly 100% correct....they are the ideas/hypotheses which was proven automatically after some time, or which didn't require much resources to prove, and hence was easily proven by Mr X himself.

3) He feels he is not being utilized to even 25% of his full potential due to the above reasons.

In spite of that, he is being rated as the top performer in his present firm.

 

[Ken Abbott]

Wall Street is full of inarticulate intelligent underachievers. It's kind of like having a 1000 hp engine with no transmission with which to translate the power into motion. Without the ability to express oneself, intelligence is essentially useless.

 

[Yike Lu]

I see three options: learn to communicate better as Ken says, bet money on your calls, or go to a place that does understand you.

 

[Geoffrey]

Thank you very much Ken & Yike for your replies...I think I can make them understand if they give me time and resource to prove/explain my intuitions. I have done that many times successfully.

Even though an IQ of 140-160 isn't too high, one of the expert I spoke to was suggesting it could be due to a mis-match in IQ level between myself and the others in my present firm. I haven't verified this yet, but I feel it is mostly true.

 

[bigbadwolf]

If the others are quants, their IQs will probably be in the same range as well. My theory is that below a certain threshold (IQ 125?, IQ 130?), abstract thought isn't possible and only comes into its own after 140, or maybe 150.

 

[Daniel Duffy]

IQ and EQ.

EQ test

http://psychology-tools.com/empathy-quotient/

 

[Ken Abbott]

BTW: IQ is a pointless measure. Once you're an adult, it tells you nothing. Furthermore, no one cares about IQ. In my 30 years in the business, I have not heard a single reference to IQ, which brings me back to my original point: intelligence is useless unless it can be applied. A moderately intelligent but effective engineer will always be more successful than a theoretician.

 

[Yike Lu]

Don't underestimate the power of being willing to bet on what you say. I listed that second option for a reason.

 

[ygmwy]

What is the issue? Trading? Coding? In trading, it's about making risk conscious decisions--making the most responsible trades whether you make or lose money. If you suggested to bet all or nothing on something that turned out to work in your favor, that's not necessarily a good trader. If you're talking about coding, you need to make sure that others can use your code and understand it. If others can't work with you, and you are irreplaceable, then that does not work for the team. I'd rather have an average coder that can code with others than a genius coder who can only work by himself. Think ofit from a manager's point of view. So what exactly is the problem???

 

[TraderJoe]

Every person has three beings:
1. what you think you are
2. what other people think you are
3. what you really are

You should strive to bring these into alignment. The smartest people I have met do not really think of themselves as being smart. Learn to cultivate humility.

Your knowledge level in an area is inversely proportional to the confidence you have in your own knowledge and ability. The more you learn about a subject, the more you will realize just how little you know.

 

[APalley]

Every person has three beings:
1. what you think you are
2. what other people think you are
3. what you really are

You should strive to bring these into alignment. The smartest people I have met do not really think of themselves as being smart. Learn to cultivate humility.

Your knowledge level in an area is inversely proportional to the confidence you have in your own knowledge and ability. The more you learn about a subject, the more you will realize just how little you know.

Also known as the Dunning-Kruger effect

 

[Geoffrey]

Thank you all for your replies

@bigbadwolf, I think not all firms which initially made money in this business had people with high IQs? Other factors played a role then? I can see things are changing now in the industry.

@Daniel, I will see how I fare on EQ.

@Ken, I agree with you, but may be that is because most of the quants/quant developers by default have this level of IQ?

@Yike, If I had that option, I would have definitely gone for it.

@wayoung, I do both coding and quant research. Your point I think is closer to my situation, going by the feed backs I receive from others including colleagues.

@TraderJoe...very good one. I have been discussing this problem with others for sometime now. I think I have an idea what the problem is...just trying to figure out how to solve it the best way.

 

[ygmwy]

@Ken, I agree with you, but may be that is because most of the quants/quant developers by default have this level of IQ?

No, IQ is just a really bad measure of intelligence. Besides that, no one I know on Wall Street is arrogant enough to brag about their IQ. There is always someone better than you...especially in the quant world.

 

[systemtrader]

no one I know on Wall Street is arrogant enough to brag about their IQ. There is always someone better than you...especially in the quant world.

Obviously, not everyone on Wall Street.

 

[bigbadwolf]

No, IQ is just a really bad measure of intelligence. Besides that, no one I know on Wall Street is arrogant enough to brag about their IQ. There is always someone better than you...especially in the quant world.

I don't think there's an agreed-on definition of "intelligence" -- so the IQ can't be a bad measure of it since it's undefined, vague, and fuzzy. The IQ is what you get when you take a particular test. Does it matter? It seems to matter to the US army, which has a cutoff of 85: they found it's too difficult and expensive to train people with lower IQs. And the SAT and ACT function as IQ tests in all but name: admissions officers know there's a correlation between the scores and subsequent academic performance. While it's important not to fetishise the IQ, it serves a purpose: that's why it's in existence. If I had to choose between two candidates, ceteris paribum, I'd go for the one with the higher score.

 

[sak]

If IQ score was of any value or had any correlation with $$ wouldn't wall st firms and funds be already testing candidates for their IQ. I don't know of any recruiter that does it and don't know of any successful individual who got themselves tested. Don't confuse bull market with being a genius.

 

[bigbadwolf]

If IQ score was of any value or had any correlation with $$ wouldn't wall st firms and funds be already testing candidates for their IQ.

The universities do it for them (in terms of taking people with high SATs, ACTs and GREs). And a quant/coding interview serves as an ersatz IQ test: the brainteasers and other problems posed test agility of mind and speed of response.

 

[pingu]

@Yike, If I had that option, I would have definitely gone for it.

This is a cop out. You ALWAYS have this or something close to it.

 

[Daniel Duffy]

A little learning is a dangerous thing;
drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring:
there shallow draughts intoxicate the brain,
and drinking largely sobers us again.

Alexander Pope (1688-1744), An Essay on Criticism

 

[euroazn]

My, my, Geoffrey, from the way your original post is written I would say you should give up a full 20-40 points of IQ for even a farthing more of sociability.