Civil Status.

According to Gotto & Steber (2014), civil status is one of the fundamental
components of the modern state. It stabilizes the core elements of individual identity
that are acquired and/or certified in the civil register at birth: name, forename, sex, date
of birth, parentage, and possibly, nationality. It is a kind of corset composed of
elements of the legal order, which encases our biological existence, so defining the
legal individual subject on the basis of his corporeal materiality. Without the corset of
civil status, one has no legal personhood; this essential fact is recognized in the legal
principle that civil status as such is immutable, and like the body itself, non- alienable.
This account of civil status as legal subjectivity emphasize its fundamental juridical
dimensions, but it also indicates that civil status is intimately tied to the social and
biological relationships contained in marriage, reproduction, and the family, to the
states stake in these, and to the individuals subjective sense of self.
Educational attainment. As cited by Minton (2012), Deary (2004) reported on a study
of 20,000 students in British secondary schools, who were tested for IQ at 11 years of
age, which was correlated with their educational attainment ( measured by their GCSE
results) at 16 years of age. The correlation was positive, giving a co-efficient of 0.74.
Lynn and Milk (2007) cite Luo et al.s account of their being three theories to explain the
association between intelligence and educational attainment. These are (i) a naturebased argument, that general intelligence appears to be more biologically rooted than
school achievement, (ii) a nurture- based argument, that intellectual abilities are partly a
product of education; and (iii) their own position, that intelligence and school
performance are both partly determined by basic cognitive process, which are
measured using tasks such as simple reaction time, inspection time, and memory recall

and recognition task. Whatever the underlying causes, the association between
intelligence and educational attainment does seem to be consistent- the study reported
by Deary (2004) above is the largest of nine similar cross- national studies cited by Lynn
and Milk (2007), in which it was found that intelligence is associated with educational
attainment at a correlation of between -0.45 and 0.74.
Sex. As cited by Burke, Kumra & Simpson (2014), the reported research of Eagly and
Carli reveals some sex- related differences in leadership styles. A meta- analysis of 162
studies of leadership style found that female managers overall adopted a more
democratic and less autocratic leadership style than male managers did. In contrast, no
sex-related differences were found among managers in the gender-stereotypical
tendencies for men to be more task-oriented and women more interpersonally oriented;
these differences were stronger in non-managerial samples, especially among
university students. Additionally, Eagly and Johnson argued that organizational norms
about appropriate managerial behaviour tend to suppress any sex differences in the
aspects of style captured by measure of task and interpersonal orientation. Yet, these
norms surely differ across organizations, given that women did tend to have a more
interpersonally oriented style than men in leader roles that were less male-dominated.
Eagly and Johnson also argued that womens preference for democratic and
participative leadership styles made sense given strong gender norms prohibiting
women from leading in an autocratic, directive manner. Yet, this sex-related difference
in leadership styles was also stronger in less male-dominated leader roles. It thus
appears that there is more leeway for culturally feminine leadership styles in contexts
where greater numbers of women inhabit leader roles.

Job Position. According to Bradberry and Greaves (2006), the relationship between
emotional intelligence and job title is the most dramatic. Scores climb with titles, from
the bottom of the corporate ladder upward toward middle management. Middle
managers stand out, with the highest emotional intelligence scores in the workplace.
But up beyond middle management, there is a steep downward trend in emotional
intelligence scores. For the titles of director and above, scores descend faster than a
skier on a black diamond. CEOs, on average, have the lowest emotional intelligence
scores. Business journals often say that the higher the job title, the less real work to do;
the primary function is to get work done by other people. Yet among executives, those
with the highest emotional intelligence scores are the best performers. It founded that
emotional intelligence skills are more important to job performance than any other
leadership skill. The same holds true for every job title: those with the highest emotional
intelligence scores within any position outperform their peers.
Leadership Styles. Leadership style is the manner and approach of providing
direction, implementing plans, and motivating people. As seen by the employees, it
includes the total pattern of explicit and implicit actions performed by their leader
(Newstrom, Davis, 1993).
Leadership style is the way in which a leader accomplishes his purposes. It can
have profound effects on an organization and its staff members, and can determine
whether the organization is effective or not. Leadership style depends on the leader's
and organization's conception of what leadership is, and on the leader's choice of
leadership methods. Depending how those fit together, a leader might adopt one of a

variety styles, each reflected in the way the organization operates and the way its staff
members relate to one another.