Dunning-Kruger is a beastly thing.
A has 1 liter of something, unaware there's more: "I own all of this!"
B has 2 liters of the same thing & is aware 1000 more exist. "I have practically nothing"
Yet the 2nd has twice as much.
A has 1 liter of something, unaware there's more: "I own all of this!"
B has 2 liters of the same thing & is aware 1000 more exist. "I have practically nothing"
Yet the 2nd has twice as much.
This makes self-assessment very hard. People with very shallow knowledge assume themselves to be 10 of 10. People with deep knowledge claim less than 1 out of 10; maybe this explains much.
Given any process or any idea, and you'll often find that the strongest detractors and strongest promoters are sure that they know it all, but really have very little depth in the topic.
And then these people in the middle seem to be investigating and suggesting, but without much force at all -- and they seem to understand more and more deeply what the others are fighting about.
Some of the crazy nonsense people say about agile, or (not)estimating, or mob programming, or pair programming, or TDD. Sometimes the "critics" and the "pundits" are both saying things I can't recognize as true.
But they sure have a lot of conviction and certainty.
I have to wonder if maybe there is a shallowness to their understanding that results from over-enthusiasm or early judgment.
I have to wonder if maybe there is a shallowness to their understanding that results from over-enthusiasm or early judgment.
Sometimes those people are me.
