i participated in my health-care cluster's inter-hospital debates today. here's the motion and what i said during my part of the debate:

EQ is more important than IQ in the conduct of research. Debate. (Proposition)

Good afternoon, honorable judges, worthy opponents, and members of the floor.

EQ has time and again been proven to be more important than IQ in any setting. And given that it’s a hot topic amongst management consultancy services and leadership training, it’s no wonder there’s a strong emphasis on EQ in the working individual. When the Harvard Business Review printed an article on Emotional Quotient in 1998, the number of readers increased way more than any previously published article in that journal for the last 40 years. The revolution of EQ was further developed when Dan Goleman published the book, Emotional Intelligence, in 1995, leading EQ to become a much sought-after characteristic trait in the work setting. What better place, therefore, to apply EQ in the research setting, where many aspects revolve around us humans?

(rebuttocks rebuttocks rebuttocks)

The aims of research are as my first speaker stated: to resolve PROBLEMS and generate SOLUTIONS to these problems. To do this, we obviously need a motivated team of researchers. Like-minded people who have a common goal in mind – TO OBTAIN ACCURATE & TRUTHFUL RESULTS. As the saying goes, THERE IS NO ‘I’ IN TEAM. If you look closer, however, there’s still a ME in it. Truth be told, good team mechanics begins with the individual. This is where EQ PLAYS A MAJOR PART IN THE CONDUCT OF RESEARCH.

Goleman in his 1995 publication, Emotional Intelligence, says that EI accounts for 67% of job performance. And I am sure that we can see how this is applicable in the context of the workplace. Being able to empathize with your fellow colleagues, knowing how to empathize with others, the ability to work under time constraints and the constant stress, being able to manage one’s emotions and not let them hinder the path of work. These are things that your typical IQ skills such as reasoning, cognitive abilities and logic would not be able to grant you.

Furthermore, IQ is a genetic trait. Like Type I Diabetes or Autism, it’s something that is irreversible most of the time. EQ on the other hand, is an acquired characteristic. Studies have shown that when normal kindergarten children are put together to play with handicapped children, not only do they gain an empathic sense at the end of the day, but they learn how to attune themselves to the needs of these special children.

Similar to the research setting, we are put in a constantly changing work environment. We need researchers who are capable of adapting easily to these changes. People who have a high EQ. This is why we believe that a high IQ does not necessarily take precedence in the research setting. One who values EQ to be of higher importance than IQ is who we want.

Ladies and Gentlemen, at the end of the day, we need to understand that the main beneficiaries of research are us mankind. Would you not want the best possible people, armed with a reasonable amount of IQ and even more EQ to discover new findings that can affect the way we live our lives? After all, research is a study done by HUMANS for HUMANS. And what better psyche to understand the human, other than the human himself? This is why it is an imperative that the motion must stand, EQ is more important than IQ when conducting research. Thank you.

my team mates say that when i read it out, i sound like i'm selling cars. Protons, to be exact.

---