This study set out to investigate which career path a group of intellectually gifted individuals chose, if any. How did they actually like their work, and what were the reasons for satisfaction or dissatisfaction with their chosen career? In all, 287 Mensa members (216 men and 71 women) constituted the research group. Their average age was 34.4 years (SD = 8.8) and all had obtained IQ scores equal to or higher than the 98 th percentile. The study was designed as a survey operationalized as an Internet-based questionnaire using the SPSS Dimensions software. A shortened version of the Work and Life Attitudes Survey (Warr, Cook & Wall, 1979) was included as part of the questionnaire. Quantitative data were analyzed as dispersions within the research group whereas qualitative data were content-analyzed using the so-called VSAIEEDC Model. Results show that participants tended to pursue careers mainly in Technology, Science and Social Work and to a lesser degree in Practical and Aesthetic work. Work satisfaction for all these fields was shown to be average. However, for individuals choosing to start their own company and, or assume leading managerial positions, satisfaction with work and career is very high. This article focuses on possible reasons for differences between subgroups in the sample and discusses a possible way forward to improve work satisfaction for intellectually gifted individuals at work, where needed.Keywords: Giftedness, Social Fit, Human Resource Management, Mismanagement, Intellectual Capital.Introduction Research (e.g., Schlosser, 2001; Yewchuk, Äystö & Schlosser, 2001) and literature more or less anecdotal in nature (e.g., Lewis, 1997) focuses increasing amounts of time and effort explaining success or the lack thereof, not only in the field of high ability studies but perhaps even more so in general management and human resource studies. Prompting such research is, of course, a desire to find factors, which, a) could more or less predict success or expertise, and b) are assumed to facilitate or even cause it (van der Heijden, 2000).However, while the somewhat nebulous meaning of "success" is not necessarily tied to giftedness, it is more often associated with marketability (Adler, 1985; Hamlen, 1991). As such it is not unusual to argue that developing gifted education and special provision for the gifted and talented population is important for success or alternatively continued societal welfare and development (e.g., Wilms, 1986).Singapore researchers Teo and Quah (1999) make the following observation:The Gifted Education Program (GEP) in Singapore has been in existence … [since 1984] … for more than a decade. But few of its graduates have made exceptional contributions to self or the nation; a nation with hardly any natural resources and which relies a great deal on its human resources for surviving in a competitive world. (p. 24, with author's clarification in brackets)It would seem the equation between desired success and giftedness is not simple and straightforward, even ...