Credibility vs Ability: try to be constantly cultivating both
/By Duncan Anderson. To see all blogs click here.
Reading time: 4 mins
Summary:
Ability = what you can do
Credibility = what others think you can do
On my very first day of full time work when I was 22 I was told: ‘It’s not good enough to do a good job [ability], you have to have others know you are doing a good job [credibility].’
At university how well you do are your grades. No time needs to be spent on credibility.
At work your performance is not so simple. There are typically no set measures of performance like an exam or assignment. As such IMO you can’t spend no time on credibility and expect others to know what your abilities are.
*aside: if you are doing something that has not been done before it’s normally not possible to have set measures of ‘performance’ like tests, assignments, static rubrics, etc.
1. Ability * 2. Credibility = 3. Outcome
As almost all jobs are multiplayer games, what you can get done is a function of ‘what others think you can do’ AKA credibility.
In a multiplayer game having high ability but low credibility it will seriously hamper what you can get done.
They tell you to constantly work on yourself (ability), IMO you should also constantly work on others' understanding of your ability (credibility).
Credibility vs Ability vs Liability vs No-ability vs Civility
No-ability: 1. High Ability * 2. Low Credibility = 3. Low Outcome
So much of outcomes are about mindset.
Henry Ford — 'Whether you think you can, or you think you can't--you're right.’
“Growth mindset = you belief you can improve” vs “Fixed mindset = you are born smart / dumb”
“Learned help yourselfness = you can do things that you have never been done before” vs “Learned helplessness = can only do something you have not done before if someone shows how to do it”
*aside: there is always a pioneer, to do something new someone has to be first.
In a multiplayer game, you need others to think the project / initiative / investment / etc can work out. This is partially determined by your credibility.
If your abilities are high but your credibility in the mind of your peers is low then often they will not be on board to try.
This likely means your outcomes will be below what your ability. Unfortunately your ‘low credibility’ is ‘no-ability’ :(. ‘Low credibility’ could lead to ‘sub-ability’ as you are substituted out of the role!
Liability: 1. Low Ability * 2. High Credibility = 3. Low Outcome
Sometimes someone is given credence for high credibility because eg of their role title.
So they’ll start a project and their team will be on board… but then a bad outcome occurs because of low ability.
This leads to the team lead being a ‘liability’.
So, in effect what you can get done is the high water mark of your ability and credibility.
If you don’t lead a team, what work you will be considered for is a function of your ‘credibility’. Want high opportunity? Have high credibility.
Civility: Ability = Credibility
If you have high ability but low credibility then you’ll want to launch projects that the team won’t be onboard with and you’ll get annoyed, aka no civility.
If you have high credibility but low ability then you’ll start projects you shouldn’t and have bad outcomes and annoyed people, aka no civility.
IMO you should be always consciously cultivating credibility… indeed at work you have no choice as IMO people are consciously or subconsciously always adding or subtracting credibility from you
I wrote a blog about strategies for building credibility here.
A few further thoughts:
Building credibility = fostering loyal opposition
Building credibility = failing openly
Building credibility = being a team leader
But more than this, IMO you need to constantly communicate what you are doing and why.
IMO you should be writing about strategy / progress / what we have learned / what we should stop doing / etc each week.
Done well this serves the dual purpose of ‘figuring out what to do’ and ‘building credibility’.
Jingle: you might think that consciously building credibility makes you feel like a phoney… but IMO you won’t find it very funny if what you can get done is significantly less than your ability!
“Credibility > Ability” = Liability
“Credibility < Ability” = No-ability
“Credibility = Ability” = Civility
IMO best to try and make sure your “Credibility = Ability”
If you only take one thing away
I used to try really hard to improve my abilities. I used to try really hard to do a good job (quality output). But in hindsight I don’t think I was trying similarly hard to build credibility.
IMO, each week, one should be able to:
Articulate if one has improved (grown abilities)
Articulate if one has done a good job
… and articulate if one has grown credibility.
If you can’t clearly articulate if you have grown credibility then it’s like you haven’t.