The Conscious Competence Learning Model has four stages. Each learner must pass through each stage to progress from incompetence to competence. This model is useful in understanding the Dunning-Kruger Effect.
The four stages of competence are: [1]
- Unconscious incompetence. The individual neither understands nor knows how to perform a task that requires the new skill. Additionally, the individual is not able or does not want to assess his or her deficit compared to skilled individuals.
- Conscious incompetence. The only difference to the first stage is that the individual starts to recognize a deficit. He or she understands that the task to be performed requires a new skill.
- Conscious competence. The individual made progress. He or she is able to perform the task based on the new skill. However, using the new skill requires consciousness and concentration.
- Unconscious competence. The individual developed a routine. He or she utilizes the skill unconsciously with little effort and concentration. The ability to teach the skill to others, however, depends on other personal factors
In 1999, Dunning and Kruger published a study titled Unskilled and Unaware of It. In this paper, Dunning and Kruger describe three propositions. The first two were noncontroversial.
- In many domains, success and satisfaction depend on knowledge, wisdom, and knowing which rules to follow and which decision to make.
- Individuals, however, differ extensively in the knowledge and strategies they apply in these domains.
The 3rd proposition describes many of the encounters seen in the Internet Era, where knowledge and wisdom are acquired by Googling a topic, reading a blog or twitter feed and rarely confirming the provenance of the information, let alone, reviewed, edited sources in a journal.
3. When people are incompetent in the strategies they adopt to achieve success and satisfaction, they suffer a dual burden: Not only do they reach erroneous conclusions and make unfortunate choices, but their incompetence robs them of the ability to realize it.
It's this 3rd condition that is encountered in the #NoEstimates community, where claims are made the decisions can be made in the presence of uncertainty while spending other people's money without estimating the impacts of those decisions on the probability of success. These advocates are an example of the Dunning-Kruger effect in full swing.
- I'm a software developer - not a software engineer who would have taken a probability and statistics class in college.
- I may have not even gone to college and likely didn't pay attention in my High School probability and statistics class.
- I act like it's my money and I can do with as I please.
- I work where there is no governance of the expenditures of the company's money
- I also work where it appears there are no deadlines, not to exceed budgets, no mandatory features needed by those paying my salary, on a needed date, for a needed cost.
- I use words like Value while not understanding in the software development business, or any product development business, that Value can only be determined after I know how much it costs me to obtain that value and when that Value will be available for use.
- I fail to understand that all work in the software development business operates in the presence of uncertainty that creates a risk to cost, schedule, and technical performance of my work. That Aleatory uncertainty can only be handled with Margin. That Epistemic uncertainty can be reduced - hence the name reducible with buy down activities - tests, prototype, and other actions that can easily be applied. But that research shows the majority of problems in software development, late and over budget, comes for aleatory uncertainties. That the margin needed to protect from the risk created by these uncertainties requires estimating. As it also does for Epistemic uncertainties.
- I'm really not interested in learning there are papers, books, articles, tools, and databases for nearly every software development topic, readily available on the web, in journals, at conferences of professional societies, to which I don't subscribe or belong. That these would show how to estimate better, and I could put them to work to increase the probability of success for own my work.
- I really want to believe in my heart of hearts that estimates are waste without ever asking myself - waste for who? Because one of the founders of eXtreme Programming said estimates are waste. Waste for Me, who isn't funding this project? Waste for Me, who isn't receiving the tangible benefits of the cost of this project? Because I really do think it's all about me, and conveniently ignore the PAYOR on my paycheck, signed by the CFO or customer, and my fiduciary obligation to spend the money of those paying in a accountable manner and inform then - to some needed level of confidence - how much I think my work is going to cost, when I think I'll be done, and what I think I can get done in that time for that money.
- Yep I'm right there on the Dunning-Kruger scale and fit the profile of an incompetent individual, who
- Will dramatically overestimates my ability and performance.
- Has a deficit in recognizing someone else’s competence, along with my own.
- Will be unable to use information about the choices and performances of others. Therefore, does not improve my self-assessment.
- Only after developing competence, I will start to gain insight into my deficits.
[1] Clarkson, M.: Developing It Staff: A Practical Approach. Springer, 2001.
