There are three orders of intelligence: 1) Leadership intelligence, 2) Social intelligence, 3) Technical intelligence.
The lowest order is 3, ‘Technical Intelligence’:
Technical intelligence is simply ‘on paper intelligence,’ or the intelligence we can measure, e.g. IQ. Someone can be amazingly intelligent, in his field, but this kind of intelligence somehow is not enough to describe what we humans understand as ‘whole’ or ‘complete’ intelligence. This kind of intelligence explains how a super smart person can score so well on tests, be the top of his class, or even be a nuclear physicist — but, in everyday life make totally stupid decisions. This person may be intelligent on paper, but he causes just as many traffic jams, votes for demagogues like Obama, and makes just as many stupid decisions and mistakes in normal life, just like anyone else. A person with very high technical intelligence but zero social intelligence cannot recognize a leader or leadership qualities even if they bite him on the ass! This also explains the scientists and academia who voted for Obama — twice! Which begs the question, “what is intelligence?”
The second order of intelligence is ‘Social Intelligence’:
Social intelligence is the ability to communicate with people effectively, to reach a predetermined goal. But it is much more than that; it also implies situational awareness, the ability to think on your feet and react intelligently to new, unexpected circumstances. It could also be called ‘environmental-intelligence'. But, now here’s the crux, people with social intelligence aren’t necessarily good leaders. They can recognize a leader or leadership qualities, they can even lead a team, depending on their degree of social intelligence, but being socially intelligent does not make you a leader. However, having high social intelligence makes one also less leadable — this person thinks about problems before jumping to a conclusion. ‘Wicked Problems’ are not decided upon quickly or rashly, but first after a great deal of thought and research — never reflexively. Someone with high social intelligence can also recognize demagogues and trends, can discern between propaganda and fact, and can also be critical of himself and recognize when he is being mislead, or if he himself is being biased. This is a very difficult thing to do, and in my opinion is the start of ‘real’ intelligence.
The Highest order of intelligence is ‘Leadership Intelligence’:
Leadership intelligence is the ability to lead in and through unknown situations. A leader possesses all of the social intelligence skills; thinking on your feet, pro-active thinking and acting, being able to communicate and manipulate people effectively etc. But it is NOT leading from behind. Machiavelli is a perfect example of someone very high in social intelligence, but not leadership intelligence. A Leader does not lead from behind, or behind the scenes — that is Machiavellian, or very high social intelligence, and that’s where the difference is too. Someone with Leadership Intelligence can hold and captivate his followers and yet — he knows that leadership is not just slick words and good presentation skills, it is truly thinking ahead, far, far ahead, and calculating unknown-unknowns, taking risks, sometimes huge risks, and having the perseverance to own his problems and see them through to the very end. Making tough, unpopular decisions is the mark of a leader and indicator — in the negative case — of a demagogue. Now here’s the crux, or double-crux if you will; A good leader, i.e. someone possessing high leadership skills, can also make mistakes — and display low social intelligence — but... this is usually the exception which proves the rule.
