I've never asked myself that question before. I would say it is not relevant to my daily experience. Rather, my actions, omissions and decisions in the respective encounters with people that evoke a more or less intelligent form of expression. When I witness an accident and lose my nerves because someone is bleeding to death on the road, my intelligence doesn't help me much (for example because I am a lawyer and not a paramedic). As far as I am challenged to solve problems in my professional environment - which is the case every day - I am appropriately intelligent and can contribute to improving human coexistence on the basis of problem solutions. My above-average intelligence does not help me if I find myself in situations that I am not used to. Like rowing from one shore to the other shore of a fjord without calculating that rising winds and tidal currents could lead me away from my destination and I could endanger my life - as happened before when I was fourteen. If my intelligence is below average and I am for example not able to read a foreign subway plan correctly and I get lost in the city, this only shows that I am not yet used to reading plans, because my life reality is mainly driving a car, for example.
What I like about your question and the topic is that it triggers such mental associations and raises the question of intelligence in all its complexity.
The information that "Half of the population will be above average in intelligence, and the other half below" captivates me with its simplicity and truth on the one hand, while on the other it leaves me with the question that the definition of intelligence is again not so simple and cannot be finally given. You just have to find a consensus on that, right?