Scientists: You don’t have to be smart to get rich

Some time ago, Sweden had an army formed by conscripts.

Before enrolling in the army, Swedish recruits had to pass mathematical IQ tests. Thus, the data of 59,387 men in the 70s and 80s of the last century appeared in the hands of scientists. The researchers then obtained data from the Swedish Tax Office on the average annual salary of these men between the ages of 35 and 45 when they were in most professional jobs. Scientists compared this data with that.
A strange picture turned out: up until a certain point, higher intelligence was directly linked to higher earnings. But at the top—among the ultra-high-earning 5 percent—surplus income did not depend on IQ (although this group’s IQ remained above average).

After the minimum annual salary of €60,000, the researchers explained, there is no significant difference in mental abilities, although income levels differ widely. Among the wealthy 1%, a slight decline in intelligence is recorded, even though this group of people earns twice as much income as their closest competitors.

This study is consistent with data from other studies, which did not find many Einsteins in the “upstairs” room. According to a study by economists at the University of Lausanne, the average IQ of an average manager in a large company is 111 points. This indicator is considered above average, but not outstanding. For example, Bill Gates and Steve Hawking had IQs above 140. Actress Nicole Kidman scored over 130.

A study by the University of Oxford found that if the entire society were divided into 100 groups, with the first being the complete idiot and the 100th being the genius, the average CEO of a large company would rank 83.

So what do you miss to become a billionaire?

How do we explain this contradiction? Scientists have provided several answers to this question.

First Explanation: It is entirely possible that the cleverest acted like the monkey from a well-known fable in that he could speak, but was silent so as not to be forced into action. In other words, the more advanced citizens do not want to earn more, because they already have enough of everything. Why should they bear the extra burden? The meaning of this lifestyle is to find a balance between work and leisure, and between personal and social life. So the lack of brilliance of the mind at the top of the pyramid of success can be compensated for by great ambitions.

The other explanation is that brains alone are not enough to develop a highly successful business. Emotional intelligence is required. This is called charisma. For example, leadership qualities, passion, and the ability to build a team around himself. This is what makes Elon Musk unique, who, without being a genius, revolutionized technological entrepreneurship.

And the third explanation is family resources – this is the reward that can compensate for the lack of abilities. And it’s not so much about heredity (although intelligence is often passed on from parents to children), but about the benefits that come from growing up in a good social environment. For example, some psychologists believe that the difference in students’ educational success is 30% in the mental abilities and 20% in the parents’ resources.

And another factor that should not be underestimated is luck. And sometimes being in the right place at the right time is much more important than being able to understand what the factor of the Euclidean cycle is (mathematicians understand that, but the rest of us don’t have to rack their brains).

And in general, even if nature did not endow you with an outstanding mind, you can compensate for this deficiency with high motivation, hard work, diligence and leadership qualities. This is quite enough to ascend to the highest levels of the social hierarchy.