> The way I interpret DKE is that low level people don’t (yet) know what they don’t know.
That's obviously a part of it, but if that was all of it, you would expect accuracy of assessment of relative ability to consistently get better with relative ability.
But, in fact, the result is basically “everyone seems themselves as closer to the 70th percentile than they actually are”.
Everyone focusses on the low end of DKE to use it as a low-brow dismissal, but the fact that people at the top of the distribution tend to underestimate their relative ability is also interesting.
> imposters DO exist (that’s kind of why we use interviews when hiring people).
Yes, the presence of imposters in hiring and hiring-policy-setting positions is why we use assessment tools that don't work very well to evaluate candidates.
That's obviously a part of it, but if that was all of it, you would expect accuracy of assessment of relative ability to consistently get better with relative ability.
But, in fact, the result is basically “everyone seems themselves as closer to the 70th percentile than they actually are”.
Everyone focusses on the low end of DKE to use it as a low-brow dismissal, but the fact that people at the top of the distribution tend to underestimate their relative ability is also interesting.
> imposters DO exist (that’s kind of why we use interviews when hiring people).
Yes, the presence of imposters in hiring and hiring-policy-setting positions is why we use assessment tools that don't work very well to evaluate candidates.