5 guidelines for assessing the effectiveness of leaders' intellect

It is common to suspect that leaders, whether in business or politics, are an unimpressive bunch who don't measure up to the heroes of the past.

In fiction, of course, "the idiot at the top" really is an idiot, such as Chauncey Gardiner, the simpleton played by Peter Sellers in the 1979 movie "Being There" with his inane comments about his garden taken as great wisdom for society to live by.

But in real life, the balance between "simple" and "brilliant" leaders is often seen differently by the lenses of history.

What are some principles for assessing the effective intellect of leaders? Here are five guidelines:

EQ is critical. "Emotional intelligence," the concept popularized by Daniel Goleman in the book of that name, is more important than raw intellect for a leader. EQ includes factors such as self-awareness, altruism, personal motivation and empathy.

IQ is valuable, if it doesn't get in the way. A first-rate intellect can be a great asset for leaders if they can discipline themselves in making and executing decisions.

Don't overrate articulation. In business or government, articulating an exciting vision is not as important as following through.

If they haven't, they face the danger of equating success with climbing an organization pyramid. But at the upper reaches of government or business, there is no longer a pyramid to climb. The challenge becomes creating new steps, or a new endeavor altogether.

Integrity is not about perfection. Few leaders pass that test.

Perhaps integrity for leaders is as simple as not lying when you don't have to, a test that sociopathic leaders fail, in business and in politics.

British philosopher Isaiah Berlin famously distinguished between "foxes" and "hedgehogs." "The fox," he said, "knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing."

Hedgehogs, which see the big picture and stubbornly drive toward their goal, seem to succeed more often as leaders than foxes.