The internet of things and the future of search

The old search

Back in 2008 I wrote about how Yahoo could take on Google. 7 years have passed and there has been great innovation in search, yet my idea is still valid.

We still use intermediary search sites such as Skyscanner rather than Google flights. Job boards dominate rather than jobseekers connecting directly with recruiters. The intermediary site whether it is Ebay connecting buyers and sellers, Lastminute.com connecting hotels with travellers and Autotrader connecting car sellers with purchasers all still dominate. Whether on your mobile on the web, there's many of these intermediary platforms of varying quality offering you a wide range of apps or websites to download the same data multiple times.In the online job space (which I had an early hand in back in the 1980s) , I have LinkedIn, Jobsite, Monster, Jobserve, Reed and so on. Yet many of them advertise the same jobs. My phone has an increasing number of job apps on it, none of them talking to one another so that when I respond to a job on one platform, it then doesn't come up on searches elsewhere. In the accommodation space, should I use lastminute.com, hotels.com, hotelscombined.com, kayak, trivago, expedia. The list goes on, yet it's mostly the same hotels. Airbnb has innovated by generating new opportunities to stay but it's still the same old model of intermediary platform connecting vendors and purchasers. There's nothing in principle to stop the same vendors listing on multiple sites. A decent search engine could do this and eliminate the middleman to produce a consistent joined up search experience. A vendor would simply self publish and then the search engines would index it, the public would find it and the intermediary sites and the proprietary searches would diminish.

The new connectivity

We talk about the Internet of Things and more "things" being connected and getting online. I'm glad to see this having written the UK's first guide to getting online, back in 1992. It's a natural evolution from companies and university to individuals and PCs to mobile phones to other devices. However these devices will need to communicate meaningful information in a meaningful way otherwise we will get lost in the noise.  We talk about intelligent fridges that self order. I think such things are a waste of time. I might want to eat different food one week, perhaps I'm bored with the same stuff, perhaps there is a special occassional or I have friends over. So I will always need an ah-hoc ordering mechanism that I can plug into to replenish my fridge, freezer, larder and anything else I care to order from a supermarket. Why should I need a special device in my fridge, another in my freezer, another in my larder to track all this when instead I could have a voice activated ordering system embedded in my kitchen wall and I can ask to put milk, bread and pasta on the shopping list just by speaking to it and which integrates with recipes to order what I need. What value does an "intelligent" fridge really add here other than maybe to remotely query it from the office incase I need to buy milk on the way home? We need to also manage the data around internet of things, as some of the things are household related rather than related to me as an individual. The association between data generators and people is not 1-1 and this causes an issue for privacy, personalisation and advertising.

The new intelligence

having studied AI briefly at Edinburgh University and my Computer Science thesis on Character Recognition, I have a bit of a background in this area but certainly don't claim to be an expert. Sadly there aren't many jobs in the field. When I did study AI it was all about making sense of complex real world situations such as recognising objects, reading handwriting, and so called expert systems.  We can simplify this and say that for a machine to be intelligent it needs both a body of knowledge (including access to knowledge via various means) and to know what do with that knowledge. Wikipedia by itself is knowledge but a database by itself is hardly intelligent. A clever person who suffers memory loss would similarly struggle - the deduction and reasoning are perhaps still there but the memories for the algorithm to draw on are no longer accessible. Intelligence, whether in machines or people, is the ability to take facts and apply a method in other to use the knowledge usually in a beneficial way. More fundamentally, it's data and a complex algorithm. Terms such as the "knowledge graph" refer to the building blocks of such an algorithm and Google's purchase of Metaweb was an important step in modelling objects (entities) and the relationships between them to gain a better understanding of the world.

data evolution

In order to have the Internet of Things work properly we need an agreed schema so that devices can share data in a meaningful way. It isn't going to be much use if an intelligent fridge has a schema that tries to speak to my Grocery provider in a way that varies depending on what model of fridge I have and what Grocery provider I use for my shopping. We are only going to make sense of IoT when there are common schemas and common APIs and these schemas can be adapted dynamically as enhancements to them are agreed. 

So this brings us back to the web and the semantic web. Despite 20 or more years of search engines we still don't have a product based search engine. I can't ask Google to find me all the jobs in an area by extracting data from job boards. I can't ask Bing to find me all the events near me because there is no schema for event publishing that allows them to be found and classified. I am still stuck in the land of the intermediary search, whether it is Skyscanner for flights, Autotrader for cars for sale, Zoopla for properties for sale or rent, Tourism sites for some event information, and so on. We need a web which is open so that data can be published not just to the Internet of Things but to the web in general. If I am publishing an event why can't I just put it on my own website and list it for free and for it to be indexable as an event in a search engine. Why should I be paying a site listing intermediary to do something that should be free?

I did hint at this in 2008 but things have moved slowly in the world of structured search. Perhaps the internet of things will bring about the long overdue change which makes search really useful. We can then use this data foundation as the basis for evolving algorithms in order that the internet can begin to be intelligent. Intelligence is after all data and an algorithm.

Craig

Original article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/internet-things-future-search-craig-cockburn please feel free to also comment there.

Dear Recruiter. If you're not mobile friendly, you lose applicants

I complained to an agency that advertising on the LinkedIn App and on other mobile friendly job boards but these leading to an agency or employer site which were mobile hostile was proving a frustrating experience. "Please upload your CV, this is a mandatory field", but the functionality to do so on a mobile didn't work, therefore the application couldn't be made. Have these people never heard of links? Here's mine: www.craigcockburn.com

Anyway, the agency response was

"'I've have been in discussion with our platform provider over this, and they have done extensive research which shows that very few people want to do this – and as a result, they have put their efforts into developing other parts of the process, for a better overall user experience"

I refer you to these stats on mobile job applications

http://www.recruitment-international.co.uk/news/uk-jobseekers-turning-to-mobile-devices-more-than-ever-24153.htm

62% of jobseekers using mobile. I suggest the agency sacks its platform provider.

Dear companies, this simply won't do

#1 the invalid security certificate (from a bank)

#2 the website which directs you to taleo. Liked by HR people, hated by applicants. It would be even better if the stylesheet loaded. They may have an accessibility statement, but I might struggle to read it.

#3 a website that you are supposed to be able to read, without a magnifying glass. Every little helps!

#4 No, I can't read this on a mobile.

#5 you actually expect me to complete this? Seriously. Oh it's that Taleo again. Jobseekers, give up here.

#6 I'm afraid Glassdoor isn't much better. Agile is a skill, not a company name.

#7 or CGI who are a "team of builders" but can't build a website.

#8 If you're using a mobile, you cannot apply. 62% of candidates abandon ship here. Yes I understand the technical constraints and complexities. I've worked on mobile friendly sites since 2009. What's your excuse?

There's clearly some way to go before 2/3 of jobseekers get a satisfactory experience.

I'm looking for an investor for my movejobs.com portal. It's not a job board but as you can see, I have a lot of relevant first hand experience on the job seeking process and how it is failing to meet the needs of candidates. Prospective investors, please contact me.

Craig

Original article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/dear-recruiter-youre-mobile-friendly-you-lose-craig-cockburn please also feel free to comment there

Windows 10. A long way to go before it's user friendly.

I had the experience of upgrading to Windows 10 on two devices and took advantage of the free upgrade programme. As someone technically aware, I am concerned that the difficulties I faced would put a lot of other people off, so although the process has gone well for some and Windows 10 is certainly a massive leap forward over Windows 8, there are a number of fundamental concerns, these are.

1. When Microsoft brought out Windows 8, people disliked it. They liked Windows 7. So why not make Windows 10 look like Windows 7. I don't really want the dancing tiles on my start menu thanks. A simple option to get rid of them or for them to be available via a link rather than every time I click start would have been a huge help. Microsoft is trying to force tiles on everyone and as we saw with Windows 8, these are not to everyone's taste.

2. A large number of people, including myself (but only on one of my devices) cannot get Cortana to enable. Here is the bug I logged . The issue here is that the search function on the start menu appears to be slow without this enabled. However as you can see from my comments, the "guess and search" response to fixing this is very 1980's thinking. In 2015, Windows 10 should be looking at the settings and enabling Cortana if I am in a supported area. If it isn't enabled, I should have a button to fix it and a help popup explaining why it isn't working rather than guess and search and experiment with settings. We were done with this type of problem solving 20 years ago. If a core part of Windows 10 isn't enabled, perhaps Microsoft should have invested in an OS that can diagnose and fix the problem or guide users towards a solution.

3.  Upgrade errors that are hexadecimal. This is still a thing in 2015? I coded on mainframes in the 1980s and such a thing might have been acceptable then but it is a joke these days. You have programmers, code a look up table between error codes and what they mean. This computing problem was solved decades ago. Users are not interested in hexadecimal dump values in a consumer oriented OS. Must do better.

4. The performance is an issue, perhaps related to point 2. The solution to the performance is that there isn't one other than fiddle about with startup settings, guess, try and hope. In response to the guess, try and hope solution I wrote this

Perhaps I should work for Microsoft. No disrespect to the person who answered the query, but for this to be the best Microsoft solution is in 2015 rather a joke and is not much different from the early days of DOS and tweaking that 640K of RAM to see what worked.

 There are plenty programs out there such as Soluto, Advanced System Care and others that can monitor boot time, track slow apps and suggest improvements. If Windows is trying to appeal to the general user who isn't technically aware this should be the process. Busy people do not have hours spare to sit at a PC making system admin changes and waiting for a PC to repeatedly boot.

 i. Windows should automatically detect there is a performance issue or

ii. The user could ask a windows application to investigate performance issues

iii. Windows makes the appropriate changes and notes the performance of certain programs at boot time and makes recommendations for non essential apps to be deferred or switched off.

 iv. The system is then reevaluated and there is an option to send in diagnostics if needed.

 The very idea of tweaking msconfig and switching off everything is far too low level for the average user and when you are done, the probable assumption is that everything will be turned back on including services that might have been off to start with and this will then make the problem worse. 

 Microsoft, you are a multi billion pound company and this is 2015 not 1985. You must do better than this. Do you think Apple, Google or Amazon would have designed something like this?

5. A combination of the hex dump values and the missing registry setting. I got Windows 10 working great on my laptop but had to tweak the registry to do so. Microsoft, aside from the user hostile error messages which I have already criticised you on, putting a one liner in the registry is a simple programming issue you should have put in the upgrade software. Why not?

6. I wanted to link my Google accounts to Windows Calendar. When doing so, you get the usual privilege grab of Microsoft wanting to run my Google account and delete my email. My Google account however has a calendar but not email so Microsoft can ask all it likes about managing my email, but it won't get its way with me. Microsoft appears unable to deal with the fact my Google account is a login with a calendar attached and no email account. When Windows 10 did import my calendar, it didn't respect the calendar settings and I have the incredibly annoying birthday calendar turned off. So Windows 10 reminded me about several thousand birthdays. A huge number of people, myself included several times fed back to Google what an annoying feature this was in G+. You can read the trail here. G+ is now dying a death - Google trying to force users into features they disliked and failing to take this on board, a bit like Windows and the forced tiles. The user is king, not the product development board.

7. My main PC (3 years old) worked fine with Windows 7 but after upgrading wouldn't shut down. The shutdown process kept hanging indefinitely. I tried switching off fastboot as recommended here but it didn't fix it. We've had server logging systems for ages in the corporate environment in which errors are flagged when servers are unusually slow. Windows 10 needs something like this - shutdown took over 5 minutes! Analyse the last log, look up the solution and implement it. Instead the user is left with doing this 
shutdown -F -T ## -C “Your message here”
Really? In 2015? 

I realise that not every OS upgrade will go smoothly, but the appalling way Microsoft handles error conditions (some with Cortana that just look like bugs), diagnosing them automatically and of fixing them for the average user who isn't PC confident does wonder if there is anyone at Microsoft truly focussed on the end user experience for technical problems. We shouldn't have to Google (sorry, BING) around the web for solutions. An intelligent OS should refer to a knowledge base that's updated, vetted and then implement the solution automatically.

I have interviewed for Google, Amazon and Microsoft over the years. I'm available if you want a fresh approach to problems that are customer centric.  Especially asmy ideas from 2008 about search are still valid. 

thanks

Craig. www.craigcockburn.com

Original article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/windows-10-long-way-go-before-its-user-friendly-craig-cockburn please also feel free to comment there.

Digital by Default

I prefer Digital by Default, I prefer a quick video chat, IM or email to having to print a form or post a letter. I prefer attending meetings by video rather than wasting hours getting there and I prefer the convenience of doing things online.  I first worked for the "transformational government" agenda as it was called then in UK Central government in 2008 and then later for Direct Gov in 2010 and the Scottish Government in 2014. I believe strongly in Digital by default, going right back to 1992 when I wrote Britain's first guide to getting online.

Yet compared to 1992 some things still haven't changed. We talked then about remote working, teleworking and the benefits it would bring. I wrote a research paper on it in 1994 talking about how the web would be great and encourage collaboration. I invented an early browser in 1990, some of the benefits of that electronic way of working we are still waiting for.

Where are we really at in 2015? We sit in cars in traffic jams and crowd onto public transport to go to jobs, many of which can be done virtually. We get on trains and planes to go to meetings that could be done by teleconference. We spend lonely nights in hotel rooms wondering if that business trip was really necessary. You're reading this remotely. You don't know which continent I was in when I wrote it never mind whether I was in an office, at home or on the beach. It's about the output we deliver rather than where we sit when we deliver it. We realised that long ago with dress codes, I care nothing about what someone wears provide they do the job and I will probably count in single figures the number of times in the rest of my life when I will wear a tie. It's usually about what we do and the difference we make, not the fashion style we have sitting in a office spending most of the day on a phone. Life can be so much better than this - so can society.

The government wants us to do Digital by Default and I embrace this. There are certain jobs in which a physical presence is highly desirable or essential such as a nurse or a special needs teacher. For many others though it should be digital by default first, then physical presence second. There are two ways of working : remotely from a location I choose or  predominantly sitting with my colleagues in a shared environment (with video conferencing for other locations). Sitting in a traffic jam to go to an office just to spend the day on the phone to people in other offices should be confined to the past. We could work like that in the early days of the 20th century thanks to Alexander Graham Bell. In 2015 I would hope we could do much better.

The benefits to society of properly being digital by default are vast. It would eliminate most traffic jams, it would mean less time away from home and hence less childcare costs, it would create a happier workforce, it would cut company costs, it would transform society. We wouldn't be spending billions of pounds on high speed rail links just so people can arrive at a meeting 20 minutes earlier. People in remote locations could do well paid jobs rather than having to move house. People who lose their jobs could get another job without having to uproot their families and change their children's schools. I spent 4 years on the road getting up at 4am on a Monday and returning at 11pm on a Friday just to sit at a remote desk and for those 4 years missed out on my children growing up. Life can be so much better than this. 

I applied for a job with the UK government recently and the job was allegedly promoting a digital agenda and said "extensive travel required". I pointed out as part of my application that citizens can interact with government wherever they are. If citizens can interact with government remotely, perhaps we should be asking why government can't set the example first that it expects citizens to follow. They asked me for a supporting statement in no more than two pages of A4. I responded by asking how many words of an email that represented and why I should be expected to think in A4 terms rather than wordcounts in 2015. Sometimes we need to challenge people to think more creatively. I got a letter in the post today from the council (which has my email address) telling me my recycling options have changed, I think they missed the point. I went to my bank to find they no longer open on a Saturday but rather than correlating the branch's postcode with mine to find they are my nearest branch or telling me via online banking they instead put a note up in the branch's window. We clearly have some way to go to be digital by default and there are some easy quick wins out there. I get invited to Digital Leaders meetings that don't have an option to attend digitally. I do wonder if they get the irony.

How does "digital by default" align with filling up the environment with CO2 emissions to trail up and down the country going to meetings?  Why in 2015 are we contemplating having offices with printers rather than digital by default? We spoke about the paperless office decades ago. There's a simple way to make this happen, turn the printers off for an hour a week, then a day a week then two days a week then for good. The paperless office that we have fought for will become a reality and the trees will thank us for it. We don't need to ask at the bottom of an email "please don't print this" as there will be nothing left to print with. There's nothing like a hardware problem to get a business to update its processes quickly. I worked in a company of over 100,000 people where the directors complained about the paperwork. I said, you are a director - perhaps you can direct people to give you less paperwork? Is the paperwork running the company or are you? The comment, on the heavily moderated not very digitally enabled intranet didn't see the light of day. I will keep making it until I get a response. Sometimes you have to challenge ways of working.

There was an experiment done in the early days of e-commerce to see what people could order online and if they could get by in life ordering things via the computer. Perhaps we should start thinking about the workplace in the same way - I can write this, email, video chat, collaborate from home. My home environment uses modern technology rather than some offices still struggling with Windows XP. I have to ask, if we are Digital by Default can we all just do a little to be digital by default rather than just talking about it. As someone with a disability, I would welcome this too. I have difficulties that public transport can't fix. I have a reduced immunity so public transport presents a health risk. Yet, I am mobile enough to not qualify for a disabled sticker on my car. I don't want to get in a car and add to CO2 emissions and I also don't want to take a car looking at the car in front in a queue every day. I am here on the internet, being productive and digital by default as I am sure are many other disabled people. Who would like to join us in a social revolution?

Original article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/digital-default-craig-cockburn please also feel free to comment there

Why Dr Travis Bradberry is wrong

On 28 Feb 2016, Dr Travis Bradberry published an article How Body Language Trumps IQ and within 24 hours it's had well over 300,000 views. I guess that's what happens when you're a successful author and an LinkedIn influencer. However page views does not make you correct.

Popularity is not a proof

A survey of people 500 years ago asking if the earth was the centre of the universe or that the earth was created in 7 days would produce the answer that both were true. A survey of people 200 years ago about evolution or whether women should get the vote would produce different answers to today. Similarly try asking people in the American South about civil rights 100 years ago or people in South Africa about equal rights in the 1980s. History is littered with examples of people propping up positions for cultural reasons and being unwilling to embrace a future where human beings are considered equals and truth prevails.

His article will get more page views than mine, that doesn't make it correct. At its core his and other similar articles I have commented on espouse the value of body language and that it is more important than intelligence. This may well back up his book sales but I disagree on a number of levels.

1. It takes us back to primate values. It subsumes the clearest communication of all - articulate speech and the thing which makes us most human - spoken language.  Primates show different parts of their anatomy to be attractive. Do you really want to be considering a person for a job based on primate values?

2. It assesses people on their ability to perform in an interview, not their ability to perform in a job. Too much focus on optimising the interview process and dealing with body language, handshakes, appearance, etc ends up optimising people who are good at stage presenting themselves for a 1 hour interview and not people who are good at actually doing the job. The interview process should optimise for the candidate and recruiter making a decision about getting the best candidate for the job rather than the best person who is good at interviews and dealing with a suboptimal recruitment process.

3. It disadvantages people unfairly. The pseudo crap about a strong handshake means a strong personality. Do you believe that? Really? Better not employ Dr Stephen Hawking then. A strong handshake implies a strong handshake - nothing more, nothing less. A 30 year old rugby player man interviews a 28 year man who plays rugby in his spare time and a 21 year old woman who likes painting as a hobby. Do you think the woman is probably at a disadvantage in the strong handshake stakes? If so, why do you do it? You might as well determine candidates via an arm wrestle, it makes as much sense. This is a good place to start learning about disability in the workplace:  https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/disability-confident-campaign. In the comments section a Senior trial and appeal Counsel  agreed that "I squirm and shift about as I am disabled, what does that do for your body language assessment? People use a variety of connections to assess for different characteristics. My clients find me approachable because I talk to them in their language". I agree with the legal expert.

4. Promoting a singular body language interpretation promotes one cultural value set and does not respect cultural, ethnic or religious variation. Different cultures have different values. Deal with it.

5. Body language such as the "lean forward" being interpreted as a positive thing. Try that in a wheelchair. Bit hard doing that and shaking someone's hand when they are standing and you are not and still giving them that oh so important eye contact at the same time. However, not all disabilities are so obvious. That weak handshake, maybe you have MS? Whether you cross your legs or not, maybe you're not putting up a barrier, perhaps you just have a tired foot. We have the depth and preciseness of language to draw on yet so many people fall back on the easily misconstrued, ambiguous and discriminatory primate tribe selection criteria. 

6. The science does not prove Dr Bradberry's assertion. Business is littered with successful people with unusual dress codes, body language and appearance. Albert Einstein, Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg. Howard Hughes, Angela Merkel, Sir Richard Branson, Larry Page, Steve Jobs. Instead, if you prefer people with confident voices and great body language, you'd instead give a job to Hitler, Josef Stalin, Osama Bin Laden, Mussolini or Jimmy Saville. Do you not agree that despite the oft-quoted facts that body language makes up most of communication that the content of our words is the most important part and that our primate past shouldn't form a part of the decision making process?  If you say it confidently enough you could end up with confident liars, take a look. What does assessing someone on their dress sense say? It says the interviewer has superficial values. 

7. The article contradicts itself at the most basic level. In an article about body language, the article uses none. In an article about posture, the article uses none other than a stock image. I would have personally preferred a picture of the high achieving lady the article is about as this could have helped to convey the point. Instead we got a Getty stock image of a lady in a blazer under "grab some success" Here it is: http://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/photo/go-out-and-grab-some-success-royalty-free-image/504242015 ". Was Amy Cuddy's body language not good enough? Not even a video? You do know that her research has been questioned and mathematically debunked?http://datacolada.org/2015/05/08/37-power-posing-reassessing-the-evidence-behind-the-most-popular-ted-talk/ Being famous does not make you right, especially when the facts are scientifically scrutinised. 

8. When I'm "hiring" ie choosing to use, a doctor, dentist or other professional I look at their qualifications, experience, reputation and understanding of my needs. How they sit, the strength of their handshake, the way they cross their legs, other arbitrary body functions are of NO INTEREST WHATSOEVER and it makes me astonished that someone of Dr. Travis Bradberry's reputation promulgates the ideology that because this is how a number of people behave it is acceptable to continue in this fashion. It used to be acceptable to keep slaves, deny women the vote and have segregated areas for ethnic minorities and thank goodness those practices are now illegal and socially unacceptable. If you followed the "body language" hypothesis that most communication is non verbal, then noone would value Dr Hawking. Body language is riddled with opportunities for misinterpretation. An experienced communicator will put into clear and unambiguous speech what they want to say rather than rely on the ambiguities of non verbal communication. Crossed legs? Is that a barrier you're putting up there or maybe your foot is sore? Weak handshake? Is that a sign of a weak person or maybe you have a disability? Clear speech is what matters. The rest is noise.

9. In an era when we should be promoting Digital working to help reduce congestion, help the environment, give people more flexible work options and help the disabled into work, why are we placing so much emphasis on handshakes and face to face contact and face to face meetings. Are they really necessary? I've had 5 offers in succession that have gone from phone interview straight to offer. I don't turn down face to face interviews, but at the end of the face to face interview I wonder why it was really necessary to travel 800 miles just to shake someone's hand and the rest could have been done with Skype. Placing too high an emphasis on physical contact is a tradition that is fading out. 

10. If such respectable hiring managers rigorously applied these great criteria to themselves, they should fire themselves straight away! The candidate is hiring you to supply a job, just as much as you are hiring the candidate to fulfil it. 

Thanks, Craig

I leave you with comments made by others, many successful in their chosen fields. Oh and the picture at the top? It serves to remind us that words are more important than how the person was standing, and all men (people) are indeed created equal.

Let's not forget that among the most convincing people out there are con artists and psychopaths. They have gotten all this "why you should trust me" stuff down to a fine art. As business manager or recruiter, you have to ask yourself what your hiring priorities are. If you only want someone who can look and sound the part, then the above advice is all you need.

This assertion is not supported by the research. I refer you once again to Hunter & Schmidt's 1998 meta-analysis of the factors behind workplace success. When organizations are persistently recruiting for this kind of fluff instead of what the literature actually shows, no wonder hiring is such a hit-and-miss affair!

"Working to improve your body language has a profound effect on your emotional intelligence." Really now! Look at Stephen Hawking, who by the way has a disability, and we all know he is very emotional in his talks, down to earth and very intelligent. Maybe you should listen to one of his lectures. What about Helen Keller? Ludwig van Beethoven? Ray Charles? Stevie Wonder? And on and on I could go. YOU CAN BET THEIR BODY LANGUAGE HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THEIR INTELLIGENCE. "Studies show that people who use positive body language are more likable, competent, persuasive, and emotionally intelligent." I take this statement as one who does not use, nor have positive body language skills, are less than all others, how unfair. Think about all those who are disabled! "Learning to use positive body language will make people like you and trust you more." HOW CRUEL. Wow! Again I say think of all those who are disabled.

For the sake of balance, I'd like to point out that there was a (much larger and more powerful) failed replication of the power pose: http://datacolada.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/5110-Ranehill-Dreber-Johannesson-Leiberg-Sul-Weber-PS-2015-Assessing-the-robustness-of-power-posing-no-effect-on-hormones-and-risk-rolerance-in-a-large-sample-of-men-and-women.pdf There was also an analysis of the original study and they suggest that the first result was likely a false-positive (they found a result by chance, rather than because of their manipulation):http://datacolada.org/2015/05/08/37-power-posing-reassessing-the-evidence-behind-the-most-popular-ted-talk/ IQ is a very robust and well established concept whereas the evidence for power-posing is very weak. I'm therefore sceptical about the ability of body language to "trump" IQ. Also EQ is a contentious concept at best.