They are full of confidence, but when you listen closely, their content is shallow. Yet, some people are highly evaluated and continue to get promoted.
Normally, we think, "They're just making themselves look better than they actually are."
However, in the workplace, it is often the case that people who stand in a position where they are evaluated develop their skills afterward.
In other words, those people are not just "making themselves look big"; they are people who stand in places where skills are acquired first.
[Is Overconfidence Over Once It's Exposed?]
There is a study that investigated this phenomenon from the perspective of "who gains status" within an organization.
It is the research by Kennedy, Anderson, and Moore.
This isn't a self-help talk about "having confidence." It's a paper that looked at who the surrounding people perceive as competent and to whom they grant influence and status.
The question was simple.
Do overconfident people lose their evaluation once their actual skills are exposed later?
Normally, you'd think their evaluation would drop.
They were all talk.
They were getting ahead of themselves.
They overestimated themselves.
It seems likely they would lose their status being seen that way.
However, the results were different.
In the study, participants watched videos of individuals speaking in a group and evaluated how much influence and respect they seemed to command, and how much like a leader they appeared.
At first, the observers did not know the person's actual ability.
Next, they were informed of the person's self-evaluation and their actual performance.
In other words, they reached a state where they knew, "This person had more confidence than actual skill."
Before knowing the actual skill, the evaluation of overconfident people was 4.78 points.
Accurately self-evaluating people were 3.96 points, and those lacking confidence were 3.83 points.
This much is understandable. People feel that those who are dignified seem competent.
The problem is what happened next.
Even after it was known that they had "more confidence than skill," the evaluation of overconfident people was 4.74 points.
Accurately self-evaluating people were 4.24 points, and those lacking confidence were 4.21 points.
It hardly dropped at all.
Rather, they were still seen more highly than those who evaluated themselves accurately or those who lacked confidence.
In another experiment, given the same level of skill, those who showed strong confidence were evaluated more highly.
In other words, overconfidence was not necessarily "over once exposed."
Even with the same skill, appearance can drive evaluation.
However, this is a laboratory study.
Evaluating a video is not the same as an actual promotion.
If you keep running on confidence without substance, trust will erode somewhere.
Therefore, this is not a recommendation for bluffing.
[People Look at "Behavior" Before Skill]
Still, there is something to be learned from this.
People are not looking at skill itself alone.
Speaking confidently.
Placing judgment first.
Moving forward without hesitating too much.
Appearing in the arena frequently.
That behavior creates the impression that "this person seems useful."
And that impression calls for opportunity.
Being entrusted because you have skill.
This is correct.
But that's not all.
Skills are acquired because you stood in the position to be entrusted first.
This is also happening in reality.
[What People in the Safety Zone Are Losing]
People whose growth stops at work often stay in the safety zone rather than having low ability.
The safety zone is the "range where you don't have to fail."
Turning into a note-taker without speaking at meetings.
Waiting for the boss's judgment without giving your own opinion.
Listing only options in a proposal without writing a recommendation.
Turning down slightly difficult work saying, "I'm not confident yet."
All of these are safe.
You won't be embarrassed.
You won't be questioned.
The responsibility is light.
Instead, the opportunities to be thought of as "let's let this person try" also decrease.
Stepping out of your comfort zone doesn't mean suddenly taking a huge gamble.
Offering a hypothesis just once in a meeting.
Including just one line of your own proposal in a report.
Accepting a slightly difficult job saying, "I'll try it."
This much is fine.
Step forward slightly.
Learn what you lack.
Look it up afterward.
Do it a little better next time.
Skill follows this small stretch.
The feeling that "I think I can do it" is close to this.
It's not just positive thinking.
It's the feeling of thinking, "It's not perfect, but I can probably make it work if I try."
People with this feeling find it easier to start moving.
Easier to continue effort.
Easier to stay firm even when they fail.
Therefore, waiting until you have the skill before stepping forward can be too late.
Many people think like this:
Acquire skill
↓
Gain confidence
↓
Step forward
But people who grow at work have a different order:
Step forward slightly
↓
Responsibility is born
↓
See what is lacking
↓
Correct
↓
Acquire skill
↓
Turns into real confidence
[Three Practices Are Enough]
So, the following three practices are sufficient.
First.
Offer a hypothesis first in meetings.
It doesn't have to be the correct answer.
"At this point, Plan A seems good."
"It's still rough, but this is the direction."
People who can place the first axis of judgment in a stagnant place are evaluated.
Second.
Don't stop at reporting; place a proposal.
Just saying "I looked it up" is weak.
"There are three options, but in the current situation, it's C."
Opportunities are taken not by those who collect information, but by those who can place a judgment.
Third.
Go for jobs that seem 60-70% doable and 30-40% scary.
A small facilitator role.
A primary proposal.
An improvement proposal.
An explainer role.
This much is just right.
If it's too scary, you'll be crushed.
But if it's not scary enough, you won't grow.
On top of that, change only your actions first.
Speak from the conclusion.
Don't be too vague with word endings.
Reduce unnecessary preambles.
When you don't know, don't stop at "I will check," but say "I will check and get back to you by X o'clock."
And, be sure to collect the skill after stepping forward.
If you skip this, you just become a shallow, overconfident person.
Research what you said.
Crush your weaknesses.
Learn the forms.
Get feedback.
Show confidence first.
Let the skill catch up later.
Only those who can rotate this order will not end with just an evaluation but will truly grow.
[Serious people should step forward first]
It's frustrating when people who are full of confidence but shallow are evaluated.
But there is something to be learned from that.
People are not looking at skill itself alone.
The attitude of stepping forward.
The attitude of judging.
The power to move the arena.
They are looking at those things too.
Serious people should remember this.
If you stay silent until you have the skill, you won't be a person without skill, but a person who doesn't exist.
You aren't entrusted because you can do it perfectly.
You become able to do it because you stand in the place to be entrusted.
Confidence can be a post-payment for skill.
If you want to be evaluated → @nakemono_shikou
[References]
Kennedy, J. A., Anderson, C., & Moore, D. A. (2013). When overconfidence is revealed to others: Testing the status-enhancement theory of overconfidence. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 122(2), 266–279. doi: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2013.08.005
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191
Stajkovic, A. D., & Luthans, F. (1998). Self-efficacy and work-related performance: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 124(2), 240–261. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.124.2.240
