An average performance
rating at work generally elicits two different responses. An incompetent person
would translate it to mean a good or even a great performance! A competent person
would chide themselves for not getting a superior performance rating. Why this
difference in perception?
Research conducted by
David Dunning, professor at Cornell and Justin Kruger, explains this
fascinating difference. Incompetent people tend to overestimate their
capabilities and competent people tend to underestimate their capabilities! For
the purposes of the research, incompetent people are those who score low on
tests of logic, English grammar and humor. They tend to over estimate how they
performed on these tests. Their incompetence causes them to lack “self-
monitoring skills,” which manifests itself as an inability to recognize the
level that they truly are at.
On the flip side,
competent people underestimated their performance on these tests. They believe
everyone is performing at the same level as themselves, or better than them.
They underestimate their performance levels based on that assumption.
Psychologists refer to this phenomenon as the “false consensus effect.”
A common occurrence in
workplaces today- some people take longer to complete their projects or longer
to finish their work. This seemingly inefficient behavior could actually mask
the true competence of the person. They possibly take longer to finish their
work due to the higher standards they set for themselves in line with the
“false consensus effect.”
Being aware of the
quality of work is a display of enhanced self-monitoring skills, as opposed to
incompetent people who may churn out a piece of work and not be aware of the
lack of quality. Self-awareness is high for competent people, which implies
that they are well aware of their shortcomings. This knowledge of their
perceived shortcomings may cloud their ratings of their performance and
deliverables.
A bigger implication of
this at work is in the area of managing employees. Competent employees are
conscious about their work performance and about the value they add to the team
and the company. Managers should explicitly tell and thank these people for
their contribution and recognize them for their efforts. This will boost their
morale and help them realize their true potential, and improve their overall
performance. Incompetent employees, on the other hand, may not understand
subtle hints about improving their performance. Managers should explicitly tell
them what needs improvement with as much details as possible.
It is critical for
managers to distinguish between seemingly different behaviors at work that may
indicate incompetence versus true incompetence. An employee who does not speak
up in meetings is not necessarily incompetent. They may be too shy to speak up in
a group. Or they may need to solidify their thoughts and validate their ideas
before presenting them to a group. They maybe under-estimating themselves and
not offer an opinion for fear that it may not add value. These employees are
aware of not talking for the sake of talking. Managers need to gently urge
these employees to speak up. Call them out and ask for an opinion. Entrust them
with important assignments and convey a belief in their abilities. On the flip
side, managers need to watch out for incompetent employees who speak more than
required in meetings. These employees believe that they are competent and may
offer opinions and ideas that do not add value to the conversation.
In essence, if you feel
you are not competent enough at work and want to improve, there is a high
chance that you already are a competent person and are more competent than you
give yourself credit. Rest assured, you are a valued employee!
No comments:
Post a Comment