25 - A Low Tolerance For Incompetence

“A low tolerance for incompetence” was a phrase used to warmly describe a friend of mine last week. I was struck by how much the same could be said about me. That friend and I had a great conversation about it this week that I found really clarifying.

What do I mean by a low tolerance for incompetence? Doing something mediocre or only good when I could have just as easily, or with only a little bit more effort, done something great. Not doing what you say you will do. Incompetence for me is a function of potential. I’ve always loved John Wooden’s definition of success:

“I define success as peace of mind, which can be attained only through self-satisfaction in knowing you made the effort to become the best of which you're capable”

I see my low tolerance for incompetence as a fundamentally great thing. It is indivisible from high standards, ambition and an impatience to make things happen. I would never give it up. 

But in the past, I’ve allowed my low tolerance for incompetence to exact high second order costs; for others and myself. It can demoralise people and lead to overcaution from a fear that whatever they do is never going to be good enough. So why bother taking any risks. It can manifest as perfectionism and an inability to enjoy wins and milestones.

My Learnings

This is an area I’ve really worked on. I’ve still got a way to go, but have found some things that have really helped reduce those second order costs. 

The first is to apply Hanlon’s Razor - never attribute to malice that which could be attributed to incompetence. This is about what I cognitively associate as the root cause of a particular issue. It’s so easy to fall into the trap of seeing low performance as a product of intent or character, when much more likely it is a product of competence.

Linked to that is the idea of judging talent by its best and character by its worst. I love this idea. Always over indexing to see something as an error of talent vs character. And then looking across everything that person has done to judge talent by its best. Which can then enable the ability to see localised incompetence much more softly, as an opportunity to train.

Overarching all of this is the idea of most generous interpretation, which I’ve found invaluable as a mental tripwire. When I find myself getting frustrated at what I regard as incompetence, checking myself to make sure I am applying the most generous possible interpretation of what has brought it about.

A recent example brought home to me the benefits of these learnings. I was frustrated at what I considered some sloppy work and poor communication. I previously would have let this frustration rise unchecked and in all likelihood work with the person concerned would have ruptured. Whilst the situation as it stood wasn’t tenable, this time I checked myself and judged the talent by its best. There had been real highs. I found a more generous interpretation that could explain the issues. I mapped out and clearly communicated a suggested new approach to work that I hoped would address the experienced issues, being prepared to walk away if that approach wasn’t agreeable. It’s too soon to tell whether it will, but I’m delighted I tried. I found an opportunity with very limited downside, where previously I would have acted in a way that ruled out that opportunity.

To anyone grappling with their own low tolerance for incompetence. My advice would be to never lose it. No-one with a high and ongoing tolerance for incompetence ever did anything great. But seize opportunities in how you deliver that low tolerance so that you limit the downside risks that could otherwise exert a tax on its benefits.