A Meta-Analytic Examination of the Relationship between Learning Agility and General Cognitive Ability

The construct of learning agility has been used as an important factor for identifying high potentials and selecting managers for many years. Other attributes of an individual such as emotional intelligence, various personality traits, and one's general cognitive ability also have been applied...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inJournal of managerial issues Vol. 35; no. 1; pp. 18 - 33
Main Author De Meuse, Kenneth P
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Pittsburg Pittsburg State University - Department of Economics 22.03.2023
Pittsburg State University, Department of Economics
Subjects
Analysis
Book publishing
Cognitive ability
Emotional intelligence
Employment services
Intelligence tests
Leadership
Learning
Managers
Meta-analysis
Personality traits
Physical instruments
United States
United Kingdom
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:The construct of learning agility has been used as an important factor for identifying high potentials and selecting managers for many years. Other attributes of an individual such as emotional intelligence, various personality traits, and one's general cognitive ability also have been applied to select future and current leaders. Some critics of learning agility have asserted that the construct is largely a substitute measure of cognitive ability. The current paper investigates the empirical relationship between those two individual attributes. Initially, a meta-analytic review of the extant literature is performed. Subsequently, the results of a study that administered three different measures of cognitive ability--the Wonderlic, Watson Glaser, and a Numerical Test--as well as a measure of learning agility--the TALENTxl--are reported. In summary, both the meta-analysis and the empirical study found little relationship between the learning agility construct or its specific facets and general cognitive ability. The results were similar regardless of the instruments used to measure learning agility or cognitive ability. Implications for scholars and practitioners are highlighted.
ISSN:1045-3695
2328-7470