I had to pare down the original question because I think that both sets of tests lead us into different terrains for answers. I strongly encourage you to repost the question on emotional quotient in order to gauge that answer with this one. I think that the setting in which IQ tests find themselves is radically different than the condition in which such diagnostics were two to three decades ago. With the proliferation of technology, the divergence in career paths is at an unprecedented levels. The static nature of the IQ test does not seem as relevant as it did some time ago. In some settings, it still has a function, but more as one of many different tools. Its impact in terms of being a defining statement and holding a decisive role has become less. As we have come to understand the greater differentiated condition of the modern learner, we are not as likely to easily embrace the IQ test as the sole basis for what an individual can or cannot do. Consider the fact that the modern business arena is more about qualities that are not immediately relevant on an IQ test:
Research carried out by the Carnegie Institute of Technology shows that 85 percent of your financial success is due to skills in “human engineering,” your personality and ability to communicate, negotiate, and lead. Shockingly, only 15 percent is due to technical knowledge.
The qualities that seem to lead people to gravitate towards others in the business setting are not immediately tied to Intelligence Quotient based standardized tests. This is probably where one sees that the role of such tests exist in our lives, but their impact in terms of having a definitive say in terms of the path of our lives have become delineated and diluted over time. It is one assessment that is not even widely used any more, but it is no longer a defining one.