Be careful with people who always want a step-by-step process, a policy, or a framework to solve problems. They’re usually the ones who don’t know what they’re doing.
If that stings a little, that’s okay. It’s normal. When we don’t fully understand something, we look for structure, rules, role models, clear instructions. That’s how we try to manage the uncertainty and develop competence.
But once you’ve mastered something, you don’t need the rules anymore. In fact, you’ll know when it’s okay to break them — and how to do it responsibly. People who truly understand the rules are the ones who can break them without causing harm, because they get why the rules exist in the first place.
“Rules are there for a reason. You are only allowed to break them if you are a master. If you’re not a master, don’t confuse your ignorance with creativity or style.” JBP
Competent people break rules because they understand the purpose of the rule and also the consequences of the absence of the rule. They then use their expertise to evaluate possibilities and come up with solutions to those possibilities.
Middle management is the worst when it comes to black & white decision-making. They follow rules and think within the guidelines. They are likely to refer to policies, procedures etc. when it comes to people-related matters. But when it comes to their job they twist and bend rules as they like. Why? Because they are competent in their craft! It is the same person who says "We must follow the policy" when the staff misbehaves and who says "You know this is just a guideline" when it comes to completing a task in a certain way.
And this is why I say hire competent people!!! This is why I say that we don't need another framework or a 3-step process what we need is experts who can navigate the complexities within an existing framework.
Competent people know that every problem has a solution but every solution creates another set of problems that will be solved through competence and not by the endless number of models, frameworks, policies or rules. Incompetent people think "If I find a method to solve this problem then I eliminate the problem." No, you eliminated that problem while creating another.
Only competence can beat the dynamics of; a problem solved a problem created. It is an ongoing cycle appreciated by the competent and hated by the incompetent.
Last year I was consulting an HR Director about our Employee Experience Standards which aims to turn HR practices on their head by training the HR team to look at processes differently along the seven pillars of:
ATTRACT - HIRE - ONBOARD - MOTIVATE - PERFORM - DEVELOP - EXIT
While the tool-kit provides very specific actions for each stage of the employees' life she wanted me to tell her exactly what to do so she can implement it. So I said to her, "Look I can tell you what to do but once I am gone you will face changes and new problems and you can use your experience, knowledge, and expertise to solve them as they occur because they will." Her response was, "So this won't fix all my problems?" I just said, "It would, if we stopped the world the moment you implemented all these."
Things change and change will be handled by competence, not by a change management expert (what a BS that is) a new framework or a 5-step rule. Those provide guidance and structure for our thinking of solutions but not for understanding the problems.
Expertise and competence are what truly identify problems and create solutions. Frameworks simply provide structure—but without the competence to fill them with insight and direction, they remain empty shells.
Incompetence relies on rules because it has no understanding of the problem therefore, it cannot evaluate whether the rule it is following is suitable to solve that particular problem.
So maybe it is not that people don't like change and therefore it is the reason organisations struggle. Maybe we struggle because we have incompetent people and incompetence doesn't like change. It likes frameworks, methods, policies, and clear rules but it doesn't work in a world where everything changes so fast!
Here is a test for you. When I threw this (below link) case study to the mid-management including HR they all said; fire the person it is gross misconduct and, a breach of trust and if we don't fire the person we show others that it is ok to steal.
When I show this case study to senior leaders including HR the ones that are highly competent in their roles they don't go straight to firing. They ask millions of questions. They evaluate the consequences of each decision but most importantly they think about this: What are we going to show the team if we fire the person or if we don't? And their answer is not the same as the mid-management of "We will show it is ok to steal."
Click this link to the toilet conundrum and see what would you decide.
Competence is tricky because not everyone with a degree, title, or brand name on the resume or years of experience is competent and it directly correlates with the status quo organisations are struggling with. As companies grow, incompetence grows. That's a fact.
People can have the same qualifications, and experience in the field yet their level of competence will differ. But who is going to make a difference? The highly competent ones. Why? Because you must be the master of your field and know everything about it to turn it upside down (knowing the rules!).
You can only break rules when you know why they exist and what would happen if they didn't. If you are not the master of the field you don't have a sufficient understanding of the variables that contribute to a certain outcome so you will maintain the status quo of the industry and follow others. The lack of competence creates a lack of confidence to deviate from the majority so, you buy into what the mass is doing even if it is not working for you.
Highly competent people not only understand their field/job but have a wide range of knowledge of areas that impact their field. They have mastered everything that low and average performers keep themselves busy with and are onto much more complex problems. Whilst average competence is trying to fix and maintain the existing system, high competence is thinking about how to replace it. High competence is way ahead of the game.
If you are hiring for a role aimed at driving change, seek individuals who offer unique perspectives, original thoughts, and ideas. Look for candidates who have moved beyond the everyday challenges of the field or business, demonstrating a higher level of competence. For example: If you are hiring a new HR to implement change and that person is still talking about engagement agendas that person is not your person.
PS: Because of the existence of the hierarchy of competence, you should not be listening to everyone with a PhD, degree, or title. Listen to what people say and if they are saying what everyone else is saying, go and look for someone who tells you something you never heard of or could have thought of. Somebody who thinks differently from the rest. Those are the people you should be listening to and learn from.
Share this post