The psychology of intelligence is one of the most divisive subjects. Although some also see intelligence as an essential concept for understanding differences among people, others deny its usefulness and conceptual coherence (Deary, 2014). Emotional intelligence (EI) is a construct that13,14 has gained particular prominence in the current discussion. Psychology of Intelligence is one of the most controversial topic. Although there are even people who believe that intelligence is a very important concept to explain variation in people, on the contrary there are others and yes, they exist who also even refuse its utility and conceptual coherence (Deary 2014). This has risen to special prominence in the present debate, a concept known as emotional intelligence (EI)13,14. One strand of research has examined the effect of EI on students’ academic performance. In a study of Human Resource Management students, certain sclales were employed including the Learning Potential Computerised Adaptive Test (LPCAT) and Jerabek’s Body ‐ Mind Emotional Intelligence Test. Results A positive relationship was found between EI and academic performance, while inferential statistics suggested that the study variables were not significantly different in terms of gender. These findings highlight EI as a potential incremental predictor of success beyond cognitive. Still another line of investigation shows how EI is affecting leadership style and then influencing how leadership influences subordinates’ perceptions of the organizational climate. Some researchers have suggested models in which the leadership style mediates between leaders’ EI and employees’ attitudes regarding responsibility, reward systems, warmth and support at work. By the means of a questionnaire-based quantitative approach, research has confirmed that leaders high in EI are more likely to assume leadership styles that promote positive organizational climates. It is noteworthy that the effects of various leadership styles on employee perceptions were only marginally different, but that of EI on leadership effectiveness was significant in general. However, limitations exist. Many studies have been encountered with the small sample size, only cross-validation used and unable to make comparisons among various industries or economic sub-sectors. These limitations limit the ability to generalize results and imply that a larger, more heterogeneous sample should be studied. In addition, although EI is known to be associated with occupational success and leadership capabilities, the evidence for an association between EI and academic achievement has been mixed. For example, one study conducted amongst business undergraduates (N=193) utilising the Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire–Short Form (TEIQue-SF; Petrides 2009a ) found that participants’ sex did not impact on their performance during an SJT. They discovered that worldwide EI scores did not predict GPA. Surprisingly, medium GPA students also scored significantly higher on well-being compared to both low and high GPA students thereby suggesting the potential of a two-way interaction of EI with academic performance. In conclusion, although emotional intelligence may not be powerful overall predictor of academic success its influence on leadership styles, work setting and career advancement should not be diminished. Future studies should employ larger samples, between-industry comparisons and longitudinal research.