Overconfidence can be an asset and a liability

A show of overconfidence, not just garden variety confidence which is being sure of oneself, influences decisions at every level.

Also read: 5 books to deal with tough challenges at work and life

Think of the many politicians who tried to convince us that the death toll during the covid-19 pandemic wasn’t that high, the suffering not that dire, and that everything was under control. Overconfidence may seem disastrous, but author and researcher Vivek Nityananda makes a case for its benefits in his recent book, Beyond Doubt: Overconfidence and What It Means For Modern Society (Westland, 289 pages, ₹599). He lays out the many pitfalls of overconfidence but also says it could be a source of motivation and optimism.

On the other end of the spectrum is imposter syndrome, or the feeling that one isn’t good enough or one’s achievements are a matter of luck. One of the reasons for this, he explains, is that we’ve internalised the idea that perfection must come easily, that the results of hard work aren’t to be valued as much as those who confidently breeze through life and stack up win after win. Again, it’s women who seem to suffer from imposter syndrome more than men, which has implications in the workplace. The Beyond Doubt book, while explaining the psychology of overconfidence, is an interesting study in the ways in which men and women tackle similar situations.

“Acknowledging the potential for overconfidence and allowing for it (should be) a part of planning processes," Nityananda says.

In an interview with Lounge, he discusses the advantages and downsides of overconfidence and how overconfident people tend to be more charismatic to win you over so that you typically don’t realise their limitations. Edited excerpts:

What is it that makes people believe a person’s show of overconfidence? Would it be the language they use, tone of voice, body language, the way one holds space?

Several of the things you mentioned are important. Eye contact, poise, mental speed or even speed of movement all come across as signs of confidence. They come together to create an impression of charisma that people tend to be swayed by.

Overconfident people are also likely to keep defending their positions and resist other people’s opinions, so it’s possible we end up caving in and agreeing with them.

You provide a fair bit of evidence to show that overconfidence can have disastrous consequences—do most people manage to keep up the act or do most people who are overconfident end up in trouble?

This is a tough call. Being overconfident and “faking it" might… mean you are less deterred by failure and eventually get better at whatever it is you’ve pretended to be able to do. Of course, this would only work if you actually engage with the problem at hand—if you’re faking it without putting in the work, you’re not going to get too far. That said, faking it could work well in jobs that mostly involve impressing others. This would be in contrast to jobs that have objective measures of objective success.

Overconfidence (in small doses) gives you the motivation to keep going, helps your mental health and allows you to make the best of new opportunities. The difficulty is knowing when you’ve gone too far with faking it.

Also read: How byte-sized mindfulness can transform your day

What role does culture play in people being overconfident or underconfident? Are some cultures more confident than others?

When psychologists run their studies, they often find individualist countries are more overconfident. So, people from the US often self-enhance more compared to people from some east and south-east Asian countries. Indians are often also among the most overconfident in these studies.

We see similar differences in stock markets and in the response to the covid-19 pandemic. During the 2008 financial crisis, stock markets in Japan and Singapore were not as volatile as other countries. Vietnam, Singapore, South Korea and Taiwan also successfully kept death rates low in the first wave of the pandemic. However, others argue that it all depends on the type of task you’re given.

For example, people from Japan and Taiwan seem to self-enhance on traits such as respect and loyalty rather than on independence and originality.

How does overconfidence play out in the workplace?

Overconfidence could influence many different aspects of work. Confident people are more likely to be hired, independent of ability. They are likely to be promoted and reach leadership positions. This might not all be bad—some industries benefit from this since it allows the right level of innovation and risk-taking.

But on the flip side, overconfident leaders and CEOs are less likely to heed advice and make errors of judgement.

And does overconfidence play out differently depending on hierarchy and privilege?

The consequences of being overconfident differ depending on how society views you—and that is linked to hierarchy and social norms. This is best illustrated by looking at how confident women fare. They often face negativity and poor evaluations. When they ask for a raise, they are less likely to get one than men.

The benefits—and negative consequences—of overconfidence will, therefore, not be the same for everyone. And who reaps the benefits will vary depending on the country and society…. I’m sure race and caste play a strong role in who is overconfident and who is punished for being overconfident.

Also read: AI Tracker: How AI is transforming healthcare, in two stories

Let’s talk about social media, which is where much of life is lived now. What role does overconfidence play in being popular on social media? Is there a difference in the impact of overconfidence in real life and online?

I haven’t come across a lot of studies that make the comparison between overconfidence online and in person. I would expect some patterns to be similar—you might have more influence by being overconfident, people might trust you more. This would be especially true if people stood to gain by believing what you’re saying. This pattern should play out until you make errors that have consequences for the people who believe in you.

There is some work showing that the internet increases polarisation of opinion and using more emotional language helps spread messages within a social media bubble but not across different groups. This would suggest that social media and the internet could increase our confirmation biases.

Among your solutions to overconfidence is giving independent, timely feedback, but what if the overconfident people/organisations don’t listen? After all, overconfidence is about believing despite all evidence to the contrary.

Giving timely feedback early on should help prevent people from getting overconfident in the first place. But otherwise, it’s about playing a long game. Consistently engaging with others and focusing on details and feedback won’t change minds overnight but could have an effect in the long term.

At some point, evidence becomes hard to ignore, especially if people start to see the negative consequences of overconfidence. On the other hand, if believing something untrue boosts someone’s social standing and gives them material advantages or votes then it’s going to be hard to change their minds.

As Upton Sinclair put it, “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it."

Also read: Smartphone tech so cool it doesn’t exist yet—except in prototype