The Myth of Self-Confidence

I was listening to an interview with the famous NY Times journalist, Bob Woodward talking about his new book. In it Woodward recounts how the self-confidence of an administration official caused him to disregard the advice of his most senior advisors about post-invasion Iraq. Woodward's impression is that this official is very knowledgeable and charming, and that his intellect gives him a lot of self-confidence.

Hearing this story set me off searching for information from leadership scholars about self-confidence. Notably, they don't have much to say. What I did find was a lot of information about self-esteem, which is quite a different matter. I got to thinking that perhaps people are confusing self-confidence with self-esteem.

Self-confidence is an important attribute for leaders. Ironically, true self-confidence relies on self-esteem. Too much self-confidence without self-esteem produces arrogance, dominance, power and control. When I think about the most noble and competent leaders I've known, they all share a willingness to relinquish control. It makes sense. When you really have confidence in something and you know in your heart and your gut it's right for you, others and the situation, its easier to pay attention to what others have to say and to openly collaborate.

Chris Argyris, a former Yale University professor and the James Bryant Conant Professor of Education and Organizational Behavior at Harvard University studied formal organizational structures, control systems, and management on individuals and how they responded and adapted to them. He encourage leaders and managers to have confidence in their actions by being willing to test what he called their espoused theory-of-action against their theory-in-use.

The relationship between espoused theory and theory-in-use is similar to the relationship between grammar-in-use and speech. These relationships contain assumptions about self, others and context which constitute a microcosm of science in everyday life. The words we use to convey what we, do or what we would like others to think we do, can then be called espoused theory. (Argyris & Schön 1974: 30)

"When someone is asked how he would behave under certain circumstances, the answer he usually gives is his espoused theory of action for that situation. This is the theory of action to which he gives allegiance, and which, upon request, he communicates to others. However, the theory that actually governs his actions is this theory-in-use."(Argyris and Schön 1974: 6-7).

Perhaps you're thinking to yourself, I'm sure I don't espouse one theory and do something else. You maybe right. The best way to find out is to test your theory-of-action by asking others for feedback about the impact of your actions and behavior and comparing it to your true intentions. Don't be surprised if you find there's a difference. It's a well documented phenomenon of human nature that we do not see ourselves as others see us. Notice if you quickly conclude that the observers are wrong in their assessment.

When leading others, charisma and pure intellect are both an asset and a liability. Such gifts give us the confidence in our actions. These same gifts might prohibit us from being open to sharing control and having confidence in others. When you are committed to the your espoused intentions, honest feedback should be welcomed. It's a useful way to test the effectiveness of your actions.

For information on Argyris's research and theories, http://www.infed.org/thinkers/argyris.htm

Double click on the comments link below and share your thoughts. You do not need a blog to post a comment.