People With High Intelligence Are Prone To Problems At Work.

When you want to hire or promote employees, or just want to set up your team, you are definitely looking for the smartest people to join your team.

Right? But don't be in such a hurry to make a decision.

At work, there are some characteristics that have the lowest standard requirements.

IQ is one of them.

As long as the standards can be achieved, the high intelligence quotient will become a disadvantage in the work.

Enron Corp is a good example.

Enron's management team is considered to consist of the most intelligent people.

But think about the end of Enron.

The US energy trading company promoted their top talents to manage the most profitable sectors, but almost without any supervision.

These managers, though intelligent, are arrogant and unreliable.

They are always risk taking action, resulting in billions of dollars in losses.

The Enron Corp finally went bankrupt in 2001.

Of course, this is also related to your work.

I really need high IQ researchers, analysts or coders.

But because these jobs are independent, you can lock them in a room and let them do their own things.

Even though their EQ is not high or lack of interpersonal skills, they can make little loss because of the nature of their independent work.

But do I really need the smartest people for managers to do such a job?

For those who are really high IQ, their problem is that they always feel that they know more than others.

Maybe this is true, but this does not help others to accept their ideas.

I once directed a senior executive.

Compared with the rest of the team, she always seems to be a step faster.

At least she thinks so.

One of the biggest problems she faces is that she has to understand that others are different from her.

This means that if she wants to complete the project, she needs to take time to convince others.

When you know the correct answer, you usually can't believe why others can't come to the same conclusion and agree with you.

Unfortunately, enterprises or organizations do not operate in such a way.

This is especially true when you have no direct leadership for a colleague who works with you.

The only way to get the situation in your direction is to sell your ideas to your colleagues.

It is not effective to impose your "excellent" solutions and programs on others.

Ironically, sometimes

People may become the most failed managers.

Examples of sports are everywhere.

Those retired superstars are usually unable to become a successful coach or manager.

Because they guide ordinary people who are more mediocrity, and do not have their inherent talents.

Wayne Gretzky is Canada's ice hockey legend.

When he retired, he was a professional scorer in the history of ice hockey.

But his experience as a coach was very unsuccessful.

The same thing happened to Michael Jordan, the greatest basketball player in history.

He is not a success as a general manager, President or owner.

If the top students put their best products into the market, it may not be any better.

I remember when Apple Corp just released iPod, I spoke with the manager of a Creative Technology company in Singapore.

Creative Technology has produced a very outstanding MP3 player from a technical standpoint.

But the frustration of Creative Technology managers is that consumers obviously prefer iPod.

They can't understand why consumers are so irrational.

Not much better.

This is not just about

Applicable.

For example, technicians will help consumers who seek help through the hotline center.

Is it correct to shorten the time for such assistance? Is the value given by the technician worthwhile or not? How does the consumer perceive this suggestion?

Or is this idea of optimizing processing speed a good idea?

Zappos is an online shoe store headquartered in the United States.

Zappos will reward employees who are willing to spend more time answering consumers' questions about buying merchandise.

For Zappos, the user experience of a phone call is much better than other standards.

In Zappos's view, these so-called standards will reduce profit margins.

When employees are just dealing with consumers as quickly as possible, those slogans of consumer supremacy have become empty, ironical platitudes, which are insignificant for salesmen.

At the same time, we should not forget the side effects associated with this culture.

Those who really serve the customers are looking for jobs elsewhere, leaving only some negative employees who only know how to do their job.

By the end, you may get what you want, but you can only be a loser because of the same idea that you think more.

The idea of "better and better" can well define the characteristics of our times.

But at the same time, the negative influence brought by this kind of single-minded idea is worth attracting more attention.

There are some things that sound good in theory, but in fact they are not.

It is one of the most intelligent talents to lead employees.