Social Media’s Value Proportion Might Just Be CQ

I have always been a big believer in IQ (Intelligence Meter) and EQ (emotional intelligence), and as I got older I realized I needed a bridge between the two, and therefore have called this CQ. C stands for Communication, Connective, Collaborative or Creative Intelligence.


© Clare Munn
It’s one thing having emotional intelligence as it allows one to feel, be intuitive and aware, and it’s another to have intellectual curiosity and intellectual capital.
However, neither necessarily mean you have the ability to communicate your intuition/feelings or your intellect effectively. And if you aren’t effective in the communication around either EQ or IQ there is is no outcome for sustainable connection or collaboration.

I believe social media allows us to have all 3: IQ, CQ and EQ. A circular, dynamic, mobile and participatory conversation with the ability to interconnect with other conversations through push and pull abilities. Therefore creating relevant and timely communication. The allure is that every individual or is rated based on how intertwined and developed our network is. Twitter followers, Facebook friends, blog trackbacks, email lists…and so forth.

Yes – it’s truly a delight to see this level of camaraderie on the web. It is as if the power of cities like New York, or London, is accessible by our keyboards. And that is where I believe our CQ comes in.

Without a meaningful level of communication savvy we would not be able to use social media effectively. It occurs too fast and connects too many people and ideas. We must all adapt to to this web of influence. It is a wonderful time to be alive and experience these changes.

Yes, I like CQ. Do you? I am in the midst of writing a book on this subject, if you’d like to comment, the best comments/thoughts will be included in the book with your permission and name reference.

specs

(C) Clare Munn 2008-2011

Comments

  1. Debbie says

    I think you have really summed it up on this one Clare, it all comes down to connection and collaboration. Agreed.

  2. David says

    Everytime I come to this site I come away with something new. What I like about your blog site is that it contains thoughts, process and ways of looking at things you do not see elsewhere.
    So many blogs are comments on what other people say, or following the latest theme on twitter.
    I wish I had something to add to your thoughts but you are way ahead of me.
    Don’t worry, I am not stalking you, I am in the UK.

  3. says

    i agree. so many of us get stuck in our silos and don’t send up enough communicative signals to clue in those who might care about what we’re doing. the biggest threat the internet poses to humanity is the give us the illusion that we are actually a village – we are not. at least not in the nurturing sense. so the trend of social media might save us from isolation – but only if we pursue the conversations further than just the clever sound bites that still seem to be pervasive. deeper people, deeper.

  4. Dawn Piazza says

    I am in constant search of a new thought, idea or model being used in social media, this was my first time on your page and as it is now bookmarked I will be back.

    Truly enlightening…thank you.

  5. says

    I like where you are going Clare and I can’t wait for the book. I think there are interesting parallels to be made between the kinds of conversation we have internally within organizations and the kinds of conversations we have externally. The best conversations involve active hearing and responding to an audience’s driving needs for action, clarification or feedback. Hearing to me is a big part of “C”Q as you define it. Your personal brand or your company’s brand, must be a “learning brand” – both delivering on its promise that it is known for and continually Communicating/collaborating/connecting to remain vital and relevant. And yes the Learning Brand will be in my in-progress book…

  6. derek says

    interesting concept. CQ seems like a good amalgamation of what IQ and EQ should ideally enable if you’re good at them

  7. Stephen says

    I’d be interested in exploring how the CQ of social media may depend on the actualities of human beings out here in the physical world. For instance, if one has emotional intelligence, but not the most developed ability to communicate those qualities or insights, then how, exactly, does social media enhance your CQ-related communications skills? What I’m getting at, is there may be some real-world prerequisites to communicating well via social media. Someone who has challenges communicating in the analog world may experience those same challenges, even when using social media on the Web. If I were writing on CQ as it relates to social media, I might look to understand how non-digital cognition, socialization and interpersonal communications skills factor in to a person’s experience using social media. In any case, sounds like a fruitful topic for a book. I’d love to see some updates on where your thinking is taking you.

  8. Ching says

    The idea of CQ is quite intriguing especially if you take into account what is learned intelligence vs. naturally occurring. Looking forward to reading more.

  9. Bani says

    It will be interesting to lay a parallel between individualist CQ and social CQ as well? How does the collective CQ influence individual’s CQ or is it the other way?

    Looking forward to read more in the book.

  10. Gabriella R. says

    You have got something here for sure. I always appreciate your social media expertise and very much look forward to your book. Social media is the big thing right now, but it seems to me you are looking ahead more than others and I look to you to see where things are going. thanks for the insight!

  11. says

    Col·lab·o·ra·tion n. 1. The act of working together; united labor. 2. the act of willingly cooperating with an enemy.

    This definition says it all.

    As an image-maker and a technologist, I often struggle with what communication and true collaboration means. In social media, we can lose transparency, we are after all, mediating through a box. If you read William Slater’s book ” The Pursuit of Loneliness” you will find that it is one thing to sit across the table and communicate. It is another to connect in the etherial world of web 2.0. How do we bridge this?

    Things that concern me:

    A is for authenticity,accountability and access.

    check out: http://laptop.org/en/

  12. jackie says

    Love the CQ theory, Clare! Having been in the OD field for 20 yrs, I get the IQ, EQ, CQ connection. I’m just finishing a book on social media inside organizations and would love to chat with you on the topic! Feel free to contact me.

    Good luck with the book – keep us posted on your progress!

  13. bill daul says

    A couple of people in our NextNow group refer to Connective Intelligence. I have worked with Doug Engelbart for a LONG time. He has talked about Collective Intelligence…which I always resonated with. Then Bonnie DeVarco, Eileen Clegg and Claudia Welss have been using CONNECTIVE INTELLIGENCE and I find it is a more powerful description of what humanity needs to develop.

  14. sonja nuttall says

    I see “CQ” as creativity (around the communication.) As I’ve said on other blogs, as a designer, I have no idea how any sustainable change can occur with the drabness available online today. I am on a mission to sort this out. We need a play box of creativity for designers and engineers to revolutionize the way we see content online.
    Fonts that make people feel and react.
    Color for the people to play and interact.
    Why not?

  15. says

    Clare, I think CQ is brilliant. Looking forward to reading your book!

    My question for you is this…how do we get oragnizations/corporations to realize that all three are needed in today’s business environment? I have experienced that most corporations are IQ driven and there isn’t a place for EQ (or it’s not readily embraced). But social media forces us to have a high EQ level because we are interacting with people who don’t want to be sliced and diced, but rather communicated/collaborated with (psychographics vs. demographics). Your thoughts? Will your book cover this area? I think corporations would benefit from understanding why the combination of all three is important. Thanks!

  16. mike ashworth says

    I think you raise some interesting points and I agree with you that EQ and IQ need to have a bridge however…

    If I refer to the dictionary definitions of “communication” I think some caution needs to be understood re social media

    1. To express oneself in such a way that one is readily and clearly understood

    2. to have a sympathetic mutual understanding

    I’ll use twitter as an example as that appears to be flavour of the month. Neither of the above two things can be accomplished in 140 characters.

    Certainly they allow a connection to take place (much like the synapses that fire between neurons in the brain) however connection is not the same as communication.

    I have observed all sorts of misunderstandings on twitter which have resulted in issues for the parties concerned.

    Of course if people want to use that connection and take it further (meeting up for instance)then yes communication is possible.

    Mike Ashworth
    Business and Marketing Coach
    UK

    @mikeashworth

Trackbacks

  1. […] a post at Claire Munn’s CQ blog, I see that she wants to weave in a variety of ideas with the “C” part of CQ, including […]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


− one = 5

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>