It’s OK to Be Humble if You Are Accurate

“Nearly 80% of people believe they are among the top 50% most emotionally intelligent people”

Brackett, Rivers, Shiffman, Lerner & Salovey, 2006

Better/Worse than Average Effects

Ask anyone how good they are on something (anything).Our own 360-degree feedback research suggest you might find that generally people elevate what they think about themselves relative to others ((Nowack, K. (2010). Leveraging Multirater Feedback to Facilitate Successful Behavioral Change. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research 61, 280-297)).

•  People with a below average IQ to overestimate their IQ
• In a survey of faculty at the University of Nebraska, 68% rated themselves in the top 25% for teaching ability
• Svenson (1981) surveyed 161 students in Sweden and the United States, asking them to compare their driving safety and skill to the other people in the experiment. For driving skill, 93% of the US sample and 69% of the Swedish sample put themselves in the top 50% (above the median)
• A survey was attached to the SAT exams (taken by approximately one million students per year) asking the students to rate themselves relative to the median of the sample (rather than the average peer) on a number of vague positive characteristics. In ratings of leadership ability 70% of the students put themselves above the median and in ability to get on well with others 85% put themselves above the median and 25% rated themselves in the top 1%
• In contrast to what is often believed, research has found that Better-Than-Average effects are not universal, especially with more difficult tasks where people tend to rate themselves lower than others (e.g., juggling)

 The “Humble” Under-Estimators

In a recent HBR article, Kaplan & Kaiser show that it is just as detrimental to overdo a strength as it is to under do it–those expressing the “right amount” of a strength showed an associated with a measure of leadership success ((Kaplan, R. & Kaiser, R. (2009).Stop overdoing your strengths. Harvard Business Review. February 2009, 100-103)).

As they point out, leveraging and emphasizing strength might lead to actually interfere with being flexible and adopting new behaviors. If you receive feedback that you are admired for your perseverance in the face of ambiguity and challenge you might find that “letting go” and backing off won’t come easy–even if it is clear that ” repeatedly banging your head against the wall” creates a dent in the wall and a possible concussion that further impairs your reasoning and thinking.

We have looked at this “leveraging strengths” concept from an interesting angle in the last few years. In our use of 360 feedback assessments we have an interpretation based on the Johari Window concept that shows self-ratings compared to others who provide feedback in a graphic manner.

We can classify individuals into four types based on the profile that emerges from their self-other ratings. We have polite labels for these quadrants that include:

• Potential Strengths–Underestimation of self-ratings compared to others
• Confirmed Development Areas–both self and other ratings are low
• Confirmed Strengths–both self and other ratings are high
• Potential Development Areas–Self ratings are inflated relative to others

When we find individuals who are the “Underestimators” (about 25% to 30% of those taking our 360 assessments) and have a substantial number of competencies appearing in the “Potential Strengths” quadrant are unlikely to leverage their strengths. We find that almost all of the clients with this profile tend to display strong perfectionist tendencies, set high goals for themselves and others and tend to be very self-critical.  They tend to be “hyper-vigilant” to the negative things in their report as if they are trying to confirm they really aren’t as strong or solid as others experience them to be.

In short, they tend to blow off all the “strengths” as seen by others and dwell on anything that isn’t perfect in their report (or the one open ended comment that is neutral out of the rest that are overwhelmingly positive and ruminate on it for years).

No matter what we try to do, these clients won’t leverage their strengths as seen clearly by others. All they want to do if focus on what they see is their “developmental opportunities” or weaknesses. Even when they “discover” their strengths they just tend to glance beyond it and move to “what they don’t do very often or very effectively.

Delusions are still cognitive blind spots whether they are in the direction of the “worse or better than average effects.”  As far as delusions go, I’d rather deal with those who are more humble, self-critical and harsher on themselves than those who think they walk on water.

If you don’t believe me, just ask them….Be well….

Ken Nowack

Kenneth Nowack, Ph.D. is a licensed psychologist (PSY13758) and President & Chief Research Officer/Co-Founder of Envisia Learning, is a member of the Consortium for Research on Emotional Intelligence in Organizations. Ken also serves as the Associate Editor of Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research. His recent book Clueless: Coaching People Who Just Don’t Get It is available for free for a limited time by signing up for free blog updates (Learn more at our website)