I recently witnessed George Guzzardo give a fiery speech in Columbus Ohio about the need for a leadership education in America, or as Oliver Demille depicted it in the audio “ The Four Lost America Ideals,” a liber (LIE-BUR) education.  Both Oliver and George convey that we already have “conveyer-belt education” or K-12 as I would put it.  Basic scholastics are taught here and generally speaking everyone receives a similar method of instruction.  We also already have professional education, which encompasses professional schools; ie doctors, lawyers, trades, basically ”What is your Major?”  There is nothing wrong with these types of education, they are necessary, however we need a 3rd missing educational model.

The leadership education that George and Oliver are talking about was an educational process that was in place at the time of the founding fathers, but in the last 100 years has faded almost out of existence.   In Latin, Oliver Demille refers to it as census plenior education.  This is a poetic education or way of thinking that accepts many meanings, methods and answers to a particular question.  The converse to this, a scholastic or “expert panel” view is referred to as census solum in Latin.  This is the methodology or view that there is only one correct answer.  Without a doubt, this is the dominate educational method in American society today.

George in his talk also spoke about different methods of measuring intelligence.  This intrigued me very much and as I began to write this blog I was lucky to receive his speech on audio to review his thoughts.  I’d like to outline some of his thoughts and take it a step further.

I would venture to say that most people are familiar with IQ (Intellectual Quotient) and are put through an IQ test at an early age.  IQ for the most part is meant to measure aptitude for memory, problem solving and rational analysis.  I remember when I first had my IQ measured in the 5th grade.  I scored higher than the teacher, although I think there were several other kids that did so as well.  Regardless I will never forget hearing that news and the verbal pampering of how “smart” I was.  It stuck with me and I always carried this label that I was smarter or “holier than thou.”  I can’t imagine what it is like for students that get the opposite treatment.  Perhaps this among other poor encouragement in our educational system can explain why our youth grow up with self-image issues.  Back to topic, the truth is that IQ only covers a third, if that, of human intelligence.  This is especially true when we dive into leadership education.

We are introduced to the ides of EQ, CQ and SQ among others.  I recently had the pleasure of spending time with a dear friend of mine and we spoke about these topics.  Although obviously endowed with high IQ he had felt occupational success had eluded him up until now.  He perhaps had been force molded by peers and “counselors” to pursue a technical career, but with little interest he never finished technical training nor exceeded by his own standards.  Today, he has found himself successful in a different function in which dealing with people and hard-work are the primary factors necessary for success.  With this he has found new life and hunger.  What I saw, now educated just enough on the topics to articulate myself, is that not only did he have a high IQ but a high EQ or emotional quotient that allowed him to react better to social situations and people than his counterparts.  This combined with very hard work, has yielded massive results.

Emotional Intelligence, you can read up on in detail, is a highly controversial method of measuring intelligence and rightfully so as its represents census plenior thinking with multiple interactions that scientists have a hard time empirically measuring.  I find that people with high EQ, tend to be very self-aware, decide with their gut while self-managing their emotions and how they impact others.  I also feel social awareness is strong along with relationship management.  I don’t necessarily mean relationship management in the sense that people with high EQ are master networkers and stay in contact with everyone.  I mean that when on a one-on-one or even in a group environment they take time in the setting to focus on and manage the relationship(s) they have in front of them.

SQ or Social Quotient is closely related to EQ but speaks more on a global view.  Perhaps people with high SQ have aptitude for as Oliver Demille puts it “public virtue” or the willingness to sacrifice oneself for the greater good.  We might also categorize this as servant leadership.

Attempts to bring CQ or Creativity Quotient to the forefront of scientific research have proved unsuccessful and perhaps this is why you will only find a subsection of it under creativity on Wikipedia and not a full blown article like the other quotients.  George articulated CQ as at an all-time high in children, hence the wild drawings and creative concepts they derive.  He went on to elaborate that as we grow up in modern society was loose our CQ or it is masked by socio-economic pressures.

While effective in illustrating his point I would differ from George’s linear conclusion.  I would venture to say that many adults maintain a high CQ even if they do not pursue a career in the arts, etc.  What I would agree with is that a heavily centered census solum education somewhat squashes the CQ.  Think about it, how can we empirically grade arts such as poetry, music and drama with the wide variety in our culture today?  How could we ever?

What does this mean for leaders?  They must be cognizant of the need for a leadership education and a census plenior view on how to learn.  Recognition of the various forms of human intelligence and the development of those qualities and traits are needed for effective leadership.  Perhaps leaders need to stray from literal thinking, omit jumping to conclusions and seek first to understand at multiple levels.

Leadership is more than just motivating, empowering and inspiring others, it’s about leading life with a set of principles and setting an example as well.