Intelligence within Organisational Behaviour: Lecture Notes

The following covers the objectives which we need to learn for the topic of ‘Intelligence’. The notes below are guidelines to what we should know, they do not go into detail, to find more detail please use the search at the top and find the corresponding theory on the website.

Objective: To critique definitions of intelligence

  • Intelligence is the capacity of an individual to process information and use the information to behave effectively. (Arnold)
  • We don’t know where intelligence comes from, is it genes? Social environment? How much is inherited?

Objective: To compare and contrast two opposing schools of thought: “One general intelligence” versus “multiple intelligences”

  • Binet and Simon and Spearman – One general intelligence says that all intelligences are from one place, Spearman noting this as factor ‘g’. researchers such as Binet and Simon, Spearman and
  • Eysenck follow this because they found strong correlation between cognitive abilities.
  • Multiple intelligences still follows the cognitive abilities but believes there are more. Gardner said there were 7, whilst Sternberg expanded on Spearman’s ‘g’ factor and added three different theories;
  • Analytical, Creative and Practical. He named these the Triarchic Theory of Intelligence.
    Systems models of intelligence
  • Gardner (1983) – Linguistic, Spatial, Musical, Logical-mathematical, Bodily Kinaesthic, Interpersonal and Intrapersonal.
  • Sternberg (1985) – Builds on Spearman; Analytical, Creative and Practical

Objective: To explain Goleman’s model of ‘emotional intelligence’ and its application.

  • Emotions Intelligence is the ability to identify, integrate understand and reflectively manage out own and other peoples feelings. (Buchanan)
  • Emotion can be a key source of motivation
  • Started by Salovey and Mayer (1990), popularised by Goleman (1995, 1998) who says it is very important.
  • 5 dimensions; Self-awareness, regulating feelings, motivation, empathy and social skills.
  • Woodruffe (2001) questions the usefulness of the theory, as only emotional intelligent people will recognise the tests. He was a Interpretivits, saying its an idea not objective truth.
  • Others were positivists, who believed it was a thing.