這是一種普遍的感覺: 當(dāng)你忙于做好工作時，其他人的事業(yè)似乎進展得更快。這是怎么回事？
在許多情況下，答案是你的貢獻沒有被看到和認可。這種情況發(fā)生的一個重要原因是，人們在評估能力方面并不擅長——這是在職場取得成功的一個關(guān)鍵特征——而對能力的認知于成功的重要性不亞于實際能力。
但難道不是結(jié)果說明一切嗎？事實上，它們不會，甚至當(dāng)一切都是關(guān)于數(shù)字的時候也不會。想想一個推銷員: 他的銷售額可能會上升，但可能并非因為他的努力，而可能是由于產(chǎn)品的優(yōu)良品質(zhì)或者營銷效應(yīng)最終取得了成果。如果銷售額下降，這可能是競爭加劇的結(jié)果。
通常很難區(qū)分業(yè)績的實際驅(qū)動因素，包括運氣和難度水平起了多大的作用。正因為如此，人們傾向于基于其他因素來評估能力，這意味著要想說服別人相信你的專業(yè)知識，僅僅產(chǎn)生結(jié)果還不夠。說服別人的一個方法是展示你對自己能力的信心。
1982年的一項開創(chuàng)性研究探索了信心和能力認知之間的聯(lián)系。心理學(xué)家 Barry Schlenker 和 Mark Leary 要求48個受試者對60個想象中的人的能力(以及其他特征)進行評估，這些人當(dāng)時正面臨網(wǎng)球賽事或期末考試。受試者得到了兩個關(guān)鍵的信息: 他們知道想象中的人預(yù)測自己的表現(xiàn)會是什么——從非常差到非常好; 然后他們知道了這些人的"實際"表現(xiàn)。在此之后，他們必須對每個想象中的人的能力進行打分。
瞧，本人的預(yù)測對別人如何感知他們的能力有很大的影響: 觀察者認為那些做出樂觀預(yù)測的人比那些謙遜者更有能力——不管這些預(yù)測有多準確，以及他們的實際表現(xiàn)有多好。即便有人做出了樂觀的預(yù)測但給出了糟糕的結(jié)果，他們的能力仍然被認為幾乎是那些做出糟糕表現(xiàn)預(yù)測的人的兩倍。這似乎表明，如果有人問你希望如何表現(xiàn)，你應(yīng)該給出一個積極的、自信的回答。一個負面的預(yù)測可能會讓你被認為明顯缺乏競爭力——不管你實際上表現(xiàn)得有多好。
在過去的幾十年里，研究人員仔細研究了展示自信相對于表現(xiàn)謙虛的影響，得出了相當(dāng)矛盾的結(jié)論。但是 Schlenker & Leary 在1982年的研究支持了那些最初的發(fā)現(xiàn)。這項研究發(fā)現(xiàn)，展示自信確實會產(chǎn)生積極的效果，但只有當(dāng)它是非比較性的時候。換句話說: 只要不聲稱別人不稱職，表揚自己的能力似乎就沒有問題。
但是為什么人們認為自信的人更有能力，即使他們的表現(xiàn)并非如此呢？一種解釋是，我們傾向于相信別人告訴我們的，并通過選擇有利的信息來確認我們的信念。這個術(shù)語叫做確認偏差。因此，如果你表現(xiàn)自信，其他人往往會相信你知道自己在說什么，然后他們會過濾那些模棱兩可的信息(比如有多少運氣可能幫助或傷害了你) ，以維持他們的最初印象。
雖然說，明知自己不會有好的表現(xiàn)而假裝自信是不明智的，但是過于謙遜可能也不會帶來益處。正如我們在 Schlenker & Leary 的研究中所見，人們傾向于放棄表現(xiàn)謙遜者而選擇表現(xiàn)自信者，從而通過這樣的決定懲罰了前者。謙遜被認為是在規(guī)避可能的失敗，試圖讓批評者的帆船無風(fēng)啟航。如果專家本人不相信他或她自己的能力，別人怎么會相信呢？
為了讓別人相信你的能力，你應(yīng)該讓溝通成為一種習(xí)慣，讓別人知道你擅長自己的工作——不要對自己的核心能力有任何自我貶低。
這并不總是那么容易做到。為了感受到更真實的自信，你可能首先需要說服自己。問問自己: 我擅長什么？到目前為止，我最大的成功是什么？為什么別人要被我領(lǐng)導(dǎo)？我知道的哪些部分他們不知道？如果很難回答這些問題，那么你就遇到了一個困難：就自己擁有哪些專長而言，如果你連自己都說服不了，又如何能說服別人相信呢？
“大膽地贊美自己,”哲學(xué)家弗朗西斯·培根(Francis Bacon)說，因為正如他說的那樣，“事情總是關(guān)聯(lián)的?！比绻阆氪_保自己的成就得到認可，想想上司和同事如何看待你和你的能力。你認為他們對你的能力和專長有很好的了解嗎？如果答案是否定的，你能夠在完成任務(wù)中表現(xiàn)出更多的自信嗎？這并不一定意味著要抓住每一個機會表揚自己；相反，它意味著秉持一種樂觀的態(tài)度。通過對自己的能力展現(xiàn)出更多的自信，你的能力和貢獻就能獲得更多的認可。
英文原文
It’s a common feeling: while you are busy doing a good job, others seem to be advancing much faster in their careers. What’s going on?
The answer in many cases is your contributions are not being seen and recognized. One important reason this happens is that people are simply not great at assessing competence — a crucial trait for succeeding at work — and perceptions of competence are just as important for success as actual competence.
But don’t results mostly speak for themselves? They don’t, even when it’s all about numbers. Consider a salesman: his sales may rise, but they could have risen without his effort due to the superior quality of the product or marketing efforts that finally bore fruit. If sales go down, it could have been the result of increasing competition.
It’s often difficult to disentangle actual drivers of performance, including how much luck and difficulty level played a role. Because of this, people tend to evaluate competence based on other factors, meaning you have to do more than produce results to convince them of your expertise. One way to do this is by demonstrating confidence in your abilities.
A pioneering study from 1982 explored this connection between confidence and perceptions of competence. Psychologists Barry Schlenker and Mark Leary asked 48 subjects to rate the competence (among other characteristics) of 60 imaginary people who were facing a tennis tournament or a class final examination. Subjects received two crucial pieces of information: they learned what the imaginary people predicted their performance to be — from very poor to very good; then they learned the people’s “actual” performance. After that, they had to rate each imaginary person’s competence.
Lo and behold, the person’s prediction had a strong influence on how subjects perceived their competence: Observers evaluated those who made optimistic predictions as much more competent than their modest contemporaries — no matter how accurate those predictions were and how well they actually performed. Even with an optimistic forecast and a horrible result, they were still rated as almost twice as competent as those who accurately forecasted their poor performance. This seems to suggest that if someone asks how you expect to perform, you should give a positive, confident response. A negative forecast may lead you to be perceived as distinctly less competent — no matter how well you actually perform.
Over the last few decades, researchers have scrutinized the effects of projecting confidence versus modesty, gathering rather contradictory conclusions. But a recent replication of Schlenker & Leary’s 1982 study supported those original findings. This found that projecting confidence does lead to positive effects, but only when it is non-comparative. In other words: praising your competence seems to be fine as long as you do not claim that others are incompetent.
But why do people view confident others as more competent, even when their performance suggests otherwise? One explanation is that we have a tendency to believe what we are told, and to confirm our beliefs by selecting information that supports them. The term for this is confirmation bias. So if you project confidence, others tend to believe you know what you’re talking about, and they will then filter ambiguous information (like how much luck may have helped or hurt you) to fit their initial impression.
While it’s unwise to project fake confidence when you know you won’t perform well, being too modest likely won’t serve you well either. As we saw in Schlenker & Leary’s study, people tend to penalize humble actors by deciding against them and choosing the confident ones. Modesty is regarded as hedging against possible failure, an attempt to take the wind out of critics’ sails. If the expert doesn’t trust in his or her abilities, how could anyone else?
In order to convince others of your abilities, you should make it a habit to communicate that you are good at what you do — without any self-deprecation regarding your core competencies.
This doesn’t always come easy. To feel more authentic demonstrating confidence, you may first have to convince yourself. Ask yourself: What am I good at? What was my greatest success so far? Why should others be led by me? What do I know that they don’t? If you have a hard time answering these questions, you have a problem — how should you convince others of your expertise if you aren’t convinced yourself?
“Praise yourself daringly,” the philosopher Francis Bacon said, because, as he continued, “something always sticks.” If you want to ensure that your achievements are recognized, think about how your manager and colleagues see you and your abilities. Do you think they have a good sense of your competence and expertise? If not, could you be demonstrating more confidence in your tasks? This doesn’t necessarily mean praising yourself at every opportunity; rather it means projecting an optimistic attitude. By displaying more confidence in your abilities, you set yourself up to be recognized for your competence and your contributions.
杰克·納舍|文
杰克·納舍是慕尼黑商學(xué)院教授，斯坦福大學(xué)教授，國際談判顧問。他的作品曾在《華爾街日報》、《快公司》和《福布斯》等刊物上發(fā)表。
譯言網(wǎng)網(wǎng)友 玉堂春曉|譯 周強|校
《哈佛商業(yè)評論》
聯(lián)系客服
