Stefano Mazzocchi introduces us to the Circles of Knowledge metaphor:
"Imagine to draw a circle and put everything you know and 'everything you know you don't know' into it. Outside the circle remains what 'you don't even know it exists'. As you learn something new, the area of the circle increases. But this also means that as you increase the stuff you know, you also increase the stuff you know you don't know, and, usually, the second one grows faster than the first. This is the reason why wise and knowledge people usually say (and truly believe!) they don't know much at all, because their 'know/know I don't know' ratio decreases as their learning progresses."
And concludes:
"Ultimately, as your circle increases, you end up learning the Socrat lesson: 'I know I don't know' which, using the circle of knowledge, means that your 'know/know I don't know' ratio dropped to zero as your knowledge reached infinite."
Stefano's Linotype: The Circle of Knowledge >
Related via the same source: a research paper from the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology on a link between personal knowledge and self-assessments:
"Across 4 studies, the authors found that participants scoring in the bottom quartile on tests of humor, grammar, and logic grossly overestimated their test performance and ability. Although their test scores put them in the 12th percentile, they estimated themselves to be in the 62nd. Several analyses linked this miscalibration to deficits in metacognitive skill, or the capacity to distinguish accuracy from error. Paradoxically, improving the skills of participants, and thus increasing their metacognitive competence, helped them recognize the limitations of their abilities."
I am not sure though why I connect this very kind of miscalibration with "middle management".
APA Journals: Unskilled and Unaware of It >
