Framework to Define "Smart"
You want smart friends, smart colleagues, smart leaders and hire smart employees. But how does one go about determining if someone is ’smart’?
Like a bad wedding speech, I could tell you the Webster Dictionary definition of ‘smart. But, I won’t because I think the definition we refer to is different and more applicable. Words and their definitions evolve as society does right?
What Smart Isn’t.
It’s not IQ tests or any form of quantitative-focused left-brained test. It’s not the signal of a STEM degree or quantitative profession.
It’s not the high grades one gets in academic institutions. The work ethic required may indicate something but the grades or top-quartile marks don’t, they are mere illusions and poorly used proxies. I say that as someone who has always been in the top-quartile in grades.
It’s not a prestigious brand or profession defined by high barriers to entry and the materialistic ’success’ of its cohort like doctors or lawyers. The prestige of scarcity is just a mirage that shows perpetual complaints of being “understaffed” internally in many of these professions. Of course, same goes for schools.
I’m not discounting all the above “signals”. They mean something but they alone, nor even a combination of 3 or 4 of them, defines one to be smart.
I’ve had the great fortune of meeting and working with all kinds of brilliant people from all kinds of backgrounds and the common thread is not the prestige of schools, professions or quantitative skill. Some have em all but there are plenty of not-so-smart folk who have all three as well.
Some may argue that “on average” individuals with the above signals may be smart but I don’t think that is the case either. They could be… but my empirical experience says otherwise.
Quantitative rigour is not the determinant for “smart". Nor is a complete understanding of ancient civilization or stoicism. These are merely results.
An individual could be highly quantitative and be able to solve any mathematical problem. But he could be overtly unhealthy, a poor relationship partner and has chosen to not learn anything new. Conversely, an amazing designer who is also a world-class athlete with a superb mental state could be horrible at solving mathematical equations. Which one is smart, are they neither or is one more than the other?
But how would I define 'smart'? I think it's relatively subjective, much like beauty or creativity. Is it a mere “quality”?
What would a smart person be?
Though such definitions should and will evolve (for the better, I hope), I thought about what qualities I’ve observed in those I’ve considered to be smart.
It's a whole number of factors inclusive of: Desire for growth, to learn, to be kind, to choose the path of integrity, to be honest, to seek out truth, to be open, to be humble, the ability to process information, to be persistent.
Wouldn’t a smart person know that humans are social creatures and kindness to one another is key to forming strong relationships? They must know that we must coexist to succeed.
Wouldn’t they believe growth to be the default path? If one doesn’t grow then one falls behind with the changing world.
Wouldn’t they need to be curious to learn? To learn about the world and the perspectives of other human beings? I mean, how could one hope to empathize/understand without being curious?
Wouldn’t a smart person need to be open minded to digest new learnings and change their mind? Doesn’t growth come from iteration and changing one’s mind with new data?
Wouldn’t a smart person have a strong concept of time? Wouldn’t they realize that thinking for the long-term should be a default? That probability requires a long-term time horizon to succeed? Even if they did not have a natural inclination for fast mental processing, wouldn’t working on something for a long-time give enough experience to process it faster?
Components for smart.
I’d narrow it down to ambitious, curious, and humble
An ambitious person will want growth in self. I’m not saying every pursuit in growth of self is good but it’s the process for this never-ending growth that will breed work ethic. A hunger that will lead to persistence. Persistence that would eventually result in rapid mental processing of data (as long its data relevant to their pursuit). It could also be said that a person who in on the pursuit of growth needs to be optimistic. For how can one believe in growth if one is a pessimist and cynic?
A curious person will question. They will question the present and their own beliefs. A curious person will learn and they will eventually develop an understanding of others. One day, they may be able to empathize. When one can empathize, one may default to being kind to others. I believe this will lead to a person with integrity and honesty. How could one choose not to ‘do the right thing’ when one can empathize with those on the other side?
And what good is curiosity if the person is not humble? Isn’t humility what opens up one’s mind to possibilities that one could be wrong? If growth happens from iteration, only the open-minded will be willing to iterate with the onslaught of new information. Only a humble person will be willing to take in the new information and change their beliefs.
Now, who am I to judge whether an individual is smart or not? Is it not a sign of low humility to even consider this? Maybe. But smart is not a binary 0 or 1. Like most things in life, it’s a spectrum where there are so many people who are smarter than me. People who are more curious, more ambitious and more humble.
It creates a pursuit to find more of such people to surround myself with, no? I believe people are the product of our environments. An environment that we can choose to be part of. An environment we continuously invest limited time into. So, wouldn’t the prudent thing be to determine a framework to be selective in what you’d look for in people who would form your environment instead of just “winging” it?
How do you Test For Smart?
I don't think it's an easy task to "know" if someone is smart or not. It definitely won't come up from a case interview or grades.
Ambition, curiosity and humility... it will be hard to see it in action unless you were to actually observe over a period of time. The past acts as examples, mere indicators of the possible.
The hope may reside in finding a pattern in the signals of the past that can change the possible to probable. A demonstration of what the process entailed and how thought translated into execution.
If an individual has portrayed examples of continuation learning, thinking and execution then it is likely they may continue to do so. The longer one has continued to do something, the more likely such behaviour will persist for the foreseeable future of similar duration.
Now, what indicates ambition, curiosity and humility? So many ways. It’s up to you the evaluator to get curious and ask the questions.