Save content
Have you found this content useful? Use the button above to save it to your profile.
AIA

Are you intelligent enough to be in practice?

by
25th Feb 2013
Save content
Have you found this content useful? Use the button above to save it to your profile.

Mark Lee looks to stimulate debate about the skills required for successful practice by challenging assumptions that intellectual intelligence and technical prowess matter most.

We have all heard about IQ, though few of us really know how this raw measure of intelligence is tested. What is even less well known however is that in recent years other forms of Intelligence have been identified. The most commonly referenced of these is Emotional Intelligence (EQ). But there are others.

Becoming aware of the different types I got to wondering whether any of us is sufficiently intelligent to be in practice?

Different people differentiate the types of intelligence in different ways.

Karl Albrecht considers there to be 6 types:

  1. Abstract Intelligence - symbolic reasoning
  2. Social Intelligence - dealing with people
  3. Practical Intelligence - getting things done
  4. Emotional Intelligence - self awareness and management
  5. Aesthetic Intelligence - sense of form, design, music, art and literature
  6. Kinesthetic Intelligence - whole body skills like sports, dance, music, or flying a jet

Psychologist Howard Gardner however identifies seven types:

  1. Verbal intelligence – the ability to use words
  2. Visual intelligence – the ability to imagine things in your mind 
  3. Physical intelligence – the ability to use your body in various situations 
  4. Musical intelligence - the ability to use and understand music 
  5. Mathematical intelligence – the ability to apply logic to systems and numbers 
  6. Introspective intelligence – the ability to understand your inner thoughts 
  7. Interpersonal intelligence – the ability to understand other people, and relate well to them 

Gardner’s work is most widely cited but is not universally accepted. Has he really expanded the concept of intelligence or is he simply referencing different abilities and aptitude?  For the purpose of this article, it matters not. The question is:  Which aspects of the above lists do you think are the most relevant or important if you are an accountant in practice?

By the way, traditional IQ tests tend to focus on linguistic, logical-mathematical and spatial abilities.

An ideal mix

Do you agree that the best sole practitioners will probably be high functioning and intelligent across most of the 6 or 7 areas of intelligence listed above?

I suspect we can agree which areas are probably least critical in practice: aesthetic, kinesthetic, visual, physical and musical intelligence. I was going to add introspective intelligence to this list but I suspect the best sole practitioners do understand their inner thoughts.

Emotional intelligence

I recall reading a report some time ago from Kaisen Consulting, about characteristics of partners in accountancy and law firms. The report concluded by noting, “What distinguishes partners from non-partners are 'emotional intelligence' factors such as sensitivity to clients' feelings and psychological needs, and the ability to trust people to 'pick up' on what motivates them as individuals.”

I tend to feel that there is a little too much generalisation in such statements - especially as they purported to relate to both accountants and solicitors.

I know plenty of partners and sole practitioners who do not exhibit the qualities described above. Many of them are also deemed to be successful. Equally there are plenty of aspiring partners and ambitious accountants who DO exhibit those qualities but who will struggle to make partner in an environment that does not value them. Whether or not they will ‘make it’ if they run their own practice is also open to doubt.

The ‘US Journal of Accountancy’ explored this idea 10 years ago. They posed the question: “Is success in life and career determined primarily by rational intelligence (the IQ or intelligence quotient) or emotional intelligence (the EQ or emotional quotient)? In other words, what’s more important: intelligence or intuition?”

The authors concluded: “For most people EQ, even if they didn’t recognise it as such—has always been more important than IQ in attaining success in their lives and careers.

“As individuals our success and the success of the profession today depend on our ability to read other people’s signals and react appropriately to them. Therefore, each one of us must develop the mature emotional intelligence skills required to better understand, empathize and negotiate with other people—particularly as the economy has become more global.

“Otherwise, success will elude us in our lives and careers.” 

I can also relate to the suggestion that only about 20% of an accountant’s success is determined by what is normally considered intelligence: the ability to learn, understand and reason (IQ). The other 80% is based on the ability to understand ourselves and interact with people: emotional intelligence (EQ).

Most successful sole practitioners relate well to their clients and try to put their needs first, sometimes even when this could be detrimental to the practice. Equally there are many accountants who see their practice solely in business terms. If a client has unrealistic needs or demands then the fees go up or the client is encouraged to leave.

Conclusion

What’s your take on the idea of multiple intelligences and which do you consider to be the most important for accountants in practice?

Mark Lee is consultant practice editor of AccountingWEB and writes the BookMarkLee blog. This is for accountants who want to overcome the boring stereotype and to be more successful in practice, online and in life. He is also chairman of the Tax Advice Network of independent tax experts.

Replies (5)

Please login or register to join the discussion.

Man of Kent
By Kent accountant
25th Feb 2013 12:37

No

I'm only here because I couldn't hack it in the real world...

Thanks (0)
avatar
By pennylj
25th Feb 2013 12:40

what is success?

The answer to your question depends upon how you measure 'success'. I don't think you have defined sucess though? Do you mean happiness, health, wealth, social status, some combination of these, something else ...?

 

 

 

Thanks (1)
avatar
By User deleted
25th Feb 2013 14:41

In my ...

... very humble experience, the best skill to run a sucessful practice is to have really good people skills, you don't even need to be a good accountant - if you can sign up lots of goods clients you just can buy in any of the other skills you need!

Basically, if you are a good sales man with the right back office team that is the best thing!

Thanks (5)
By Moonbeam
26th Feb 2013 11:34

Intelligence is almost impossible to define

As human beings are a sum of their parts it is pretty difficult to clarify exactly what intelligence is.

I remember at the age of 13 a friend telling me how intelligent she was as she kept getting high scores in the intelligence test books that were very popular then. My own scores were dismal and I felt rather substandard. I knew I wasn't thick, but felt rather overpowered by the friend.

My "friend" got very high grades in her "O" levels whilst my grades were good but not fantastic. But she swotted like mad whilst I decided long ago that good was good enough.

We lost touch when my family moved away. Years later my brother had a flatmate who bumped into Ms superwoman. He commented that she was very boring. I felt rather pleased!

I now feel that someone I meet who is reasonably sparky is likely to be intelligent and no amount of paperwork, medals etc will improve my assessment of them.

I have met far too many people who didn't do well at at school, who feel that they are not as good as others and that is so wrong.

 

Thanks (1)
avatar
By chatman
26th Feb 2013 19:56

EI More Useful than IQ

Definitely with OGA on this one. Knowing how to press people's buttons will get you much further than doing a good job. Not to undervalue doing a good job, just saying that it won't get you so far.

Thanks (1)