The Dunning-Kruger Effect
12 May 2010 in Musings Write by Paolo Terni
The Dunning-Kruger Effect: people with low levels of ability in a certain field vastly over-rate their talents because they lack the skills to judge their own competence (definition from Mind Hacks Blog).
I see it all the time in trainings: Workshop participants learn something. They get the hang of, say, how to lead a motivational interview, and then I watch in horror as, all of a sudden, they go about touting their skills and marketing themselves as professional interviewers.
This is another reason why I like Solution-Focused practice.
Of course the Dunning-Kruger Effect is still lurking in the background when I lead the Solutionsurfers Training Program for Brief Coaches.
However, as part of the program and inherent in the SF practice itself, lots and lots of positive and specific behavioral feedback is given.
Participants quickly learn to observe details and little cues: what did I say exactly? How did clients respond to that? What did they do specifically? What did they say, and so on.
Trainees are taught to observe, observe and observe, paying close attention to behavioral cues and nuances in the interactions.
They are taught to share those observations with other participants.
They are also taught to think about what they would do differently, if they had the chance to have the same coaching interaction again.
This is a powerful way of defusing the Dunning-Kruger Effect. Granted, it takes time. But I know of no other way,
Our job as trainers is to bring our students quickly to the “other side” of the Dunning-Kruger Effect where improving people’s skills reduces their self-assessment as they also learn to judge their ability level more accurately (again in the words of Mind Hacks Blog).
Paradoxically, then, a trainer does a good job if, at the end of a training program, (on a scale from 1 to 10), the trainees rate their skill levels at a 6, 7 or an 8, rather than at a 10. it means they are being realistic and it means they appreciate the difficulties involved in the skill-set taught. Experience will move the trainees forward on their proficiency scale!
For more thoughts on the issue, check out Coert Visser’s posting.
7 Comments to: The Dunning-Kruger Effect
What do you think?
WHAT'S IN A NAME?
A friend of mine asked me why I chose the name briefcoachingsolutions for my website.
Easy: it is the shortest description for what I do.
Solutions: that is what my clients arrive at: solutions. For their goals, their needs, their problems. They arrive at better solutions. Faster. With less effort. Solutions sustainable in the long run because they are based on what is already working in the clients' situations
it is also the description of my approach: solution-focused.
Coaching: that is the tool I use to help clients...
Read more
Thanks, Paolo, for reminding me: what we are doing in training is probably training the observation (awareness) of the students while they are doing the newly learned activity. This is what I like about sf brief coach trainings: we invite and allow the students from the very beginning to connect to their existing observational skills. So the message is: continue doing EVERYTHING was helpful so far AND watch, what occurs now — instead of saying: try out this.
Thank you, Kati,
I LOVE the way you frame SF brief coach trainings: “continue doing EVERYTHING that was helpful so far AND watch what occurs now – instead of saying: try out this”.
Thanks for stopping by,
ciao,
Paolo
Hm — in our trainings, we DO tell people: “Try out this”. There are skills involved in SF coaching like: “Phrase the scaling question in a way that 10 is what is wanted and 0 or 1 is what is not or less wanted”. We also ask people about the assumptions in their questions, e.g. if someone asked: “Who does this remind you of in your family” we say that this is a question that we would not traditionally ask in an SF interview and explore what the assumptions behind it are.
But I think this is the difference between teaching SF and teaching coaching. There are more good ways to coach than good SF ways to coach :-)
kind regards,
Kirsten
Kirsten,
thanks for your comment.
Yes you are right – we do tell trainees what to do.
In the SF Brief Coaching Training we hand out cards with questions to ask clients.
That is the starting point – and then we let trainees find their own, unique way of formulating the question in a way that matches their own way of communicating – maybe with a hint of humor, maybe with a little story… whatever works for them.
Moreover, we do not tell “this is a question we would not traditionally ask”; we explore the issue with the trainee in a SF way – e.g. “suppose you knew…” i.e. we try to model the SF practice in every interaction with trainees – and they watch what occurs, as Kati said :)
Have a good day,
thanks for stopping by!
Hi Paolo,
well … if you don’t have the competence of knowing what SF assumptions and techniques are (maybe defined by the work of Steve de Shazer and Insoo Kim Berg or the clues by SFCT) — doesn’t the Dunning-Kruger effect make it very plausible that no amount of “supposing” will get you that competence? (Great paper btw. — I just read it). Coaching is different from teachin imho, and there are skills that are more easily acquired by being taught than being coached and skills that are more easily acquired by a mixture of both, all depending on the level of competence of the learner. I think Coert Visser has a very interesting model around that (but best ask him) :-)
kind regards,
Kirsten
I agree 100%, Kirsten: coaching is different from teaching.
And I am familiar with Coert’s model, I find it very useful!
In my post I did not mention a generic coaching or a generic teaching; rather, I mentioned a specific program: Solutionsurfers Brief Coach Training.
In that program SF Brief Coaching is taught using SF in each and every interaction with the trainees: we teach by showing not by saying (as Wittgenstein would say :)
A protocol for a SF coaching conversation is given – but then practice, feedback and observation are what the program is about.
I also believe that by not directly answering questions we are instiling curiosity: they can read about SF assumptions & techniques. We are there to train them to use them.
Thanks again for your comment!! :))
Paolo
[...] was proud of him. I already posted here about the Dunning-Kruger effect, i.e. about the fact that novices over-rate their abilities – [...]