You actually believe you know more than you do – Dunning-Kruger Effect
Introduction
Sometimes, we encounter individuals who choose a course of action they believe is correct—even if it might be misguided. This scenario is often explained by the Dunning-Kruger effect, where people overestimate their knowledge or experience when they want to be in charge. It is incredibly challenging for leaders, who feel compelled to do what is right, stay informed, and ultimately make the final call.
A Classic Example
“In 1995, McArthur Wheeler walked into two Pittsburgh banks and robbed them in broad daylight, with no visible attempt at disguise. He was arrested later that night, less than an hour after videotapes of him taken .from surveillance cameras were broadcast on the 11 o’clock news. When police later showed him the surveillance tapes, Mr. Wheeler stared in incredulity. ‘But I wore the juice,’ he mumbled . Apparently, Mr. Wheeler was under the impression that rubbing one’s face with lemon juice rendered it invisible to videotape cameras [2] (Fuocco, 1996). We bring up the unfortunate affairs of Mr. Wheeler to make three points. The first two are noncontroversial. First, in many domains in life, success and satisfaction depend on knowledge, wisdom, or savvy in knowing which rules to follow and which strategies to pursue. This is true not only for committing crimes, but also for many tasks in the social and intellectual domains, such as promoting effective leadership, raising children, constructing a solid logical argument, or designing a rigorous psychological study. Second, people differ widely in the knowledge and strategies they apply in these domains [3] (Dunning, Meyerowitz, & Holzberg, 1989; Dunning, Perie, & Story, 1991; Story & Dunning, 1998), with varying levels of success. Some of the knowledge and theories that people apply to their actions are sound and meet with favorable results. Others, like the lemon juice hypothesis of McArthur Wheeler, are imperfect at best and wrong-headed, incompetent, or dysfunctional at worst.” [1]
The Dunning-Kruger Effect for Leaders
This classic example illustrates the Dunning-Kruger effect: the tendency to believe we know more than we actually do. For leaders, avoiding this mindset can be particularly challenging. Leaders often feel responsible for being correct, gathering enough information, and taking action—even when they lack essential expertise.
Rely on Strong, Knowledgeable Individuals
A proven way to avoid this pitfall is to surround yourself with strong, knowledgeable individuals and trust their insights. For example, it would be impractical for a general to direct a seasoned helicopter pilot on combat maneuvers without personal flight experience. The same applies in business: if you seek profitability and growth but lack direct experience, you should consult team members who possess it.
Acting with Limited Expertise
Yet leaders sometimes must act when no one on the team has the needed expertise. In that case, you do your best with the information at hand. When you have people with relevant experience, consult them, hear their strategies, and then choose. Overconfidence arises when the leader assumes they know best without adequate support.
Identifying Possible Overconfidence
If you suspect the Dunning-Kruger effect might be in play, observe your team’s behavior in discussions. Are they hesitating or softening their feedback to avoid bruising your ego? Are they afraid to engage, sensing resistance? If you find a team member’s solution flawed and believe your own knowledge surpasses theirs, you have identified a gap—either in their experience or your own leadership approach.
Addressing Misalignment and Capability Gaps
Often, the misalignment between leaders and teams stems not from ego but from a lack of essential capabilities. Reflect on this: “Do I truly have an expert on my team in this area? Am I relying on them effectively?” If they need further development, consider investing in their education or providing closer guidance so that both you and they can align on the decision-making process. The Dunning-Kruger effect intensifies when leaders feel pressured to have all the answers themselves.
Sales and Business Development Challenges
In sales and business development, this occurs when an experienced salesperson has a reliable process they trust, but the leader demands a different approach without fully grasping the salesperson’s methods. Conversely, the leader’s process can be essential—particularly in high-growth or startup environments where inbound leads are limited and brand recognition is minimal. Leaders should collaborate with the salesperson to merge both approaches, monitor deals step-by-step, and pinpoint gaps.
A Real-World Sales Example
For example, when onboarding an enterprise salesperson to a startup that relies on proactive selling instead of waiting for brand-driven inbound leads, friction may arise. The salesperson might not close deals quickly, while the leader expects immediate results. Before concluding that the rep is underperforming, assess whether you are imposing your own process without understanding theirs. If, in the end, they are not a good fit, you can choose to move on—but ideally, you collaborate to align your methods for improved outcomes.
Conclusion
Recognizing the Dunning-Kruger effect means acknowledging your own limitations, trusting the specialists you hire, and ensuring you’re not overconfident when the data and expertise around you suggest otherwise. By staying open to collaboration, feedback, and ongoing learning, leaders can keep this effect in check and guide their teams more effectively.
References
- Kruger, J., & Dunning, D. (1999). Unskilled and unaware of it: How difficulties in recognizing one’s own incompetence lead to inflated self-assessments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(6), 1121–1134. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.77.6.1121
- Fuocco, M. A. (1996, March 21). Trial and error: They had larceny in their hearts, but little in their heads. Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, p. D1.
- Dunning, D., Meyerowitz, J. A., & Holzberg, A. D. (1989). Ambiguity and self-evaluation: The role of idiosyncratic trait definitions in self-serving assessments of ability. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(6), 1082–1090. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.57.6.1082
