TASA DE LLENADO DE VASIJA

The ultimate goal of learning and development is acquiring expertise and reaching ultimate performance levels. Learning occurs differently for different

individuals, and is acquired at different rates (Howard, 2009). An area of research that may be of interest is the novice and expert literature. A novice is a person who is new to a certain field, whereas an expert is one who has had prolonged experience and/or education in that field. Needless to say, novices and experts learn, assimilate

knowledge and experience, and develop differently (Dreyfus & Dreyfus, 1986; Howard, 2009).

Novices typically go through five stages in their developmental journey towards expertise. The first stage is where rules are rigidly followed (novice), followed by a slightly more flexible stage where rules are still followed nonetheless (advanced beginner). The next stage is where more goal-oriented plans are followed (competent performer), followed by the stage where enough experience has been

Leadership Development Leadership

Development

76

accumulated for informed decision-making and prioritising (proxcient performer). The final stage (expert) is where rules are no longer relied on and decisions are made more intuitively and almost unconsciously (Dreyfus & Dreyfus, 1986). A similar model developed by Howell (1982) for communication competence may also reflect the learning trajectory in an area or competence. The model also depicts a five-stage process: unconscious incompetence, conscious incompetence, conscious competence, unconscious competence, unconscious super-competence (Tung, 1998). These portray the path from novice to beginner to performer to expert. Unconscious processes tend to be rigid and unaccommodating, thus inhibiting new combinations and associations in the learning process (Rossano, 2003). Thus consciousness is necessary when novel representations, responses, and behaviours are to be learnt and acquired, and when expertise is being developed.

Expertise is developed through experiential learning (Kolb, 1984), where experience, interactions, transactions, reflection, observation, experimentation all play a key role. Reflection-in-action, transformative learning, and critical reflection are all essential for the development of expertise (Tynjala, 1999), where meta-cognitive and reflective abilities are activated, and where “theorising practice and particularising theory” are the key elements of development.

Knowledge must be applied (can a jet be flown without extensive practice?). Thus another key element of expertise development is practice – actual, deliberate, persistent, and focused practice – and adaptation (Howard, 2009; Ericsson &

Charness, 1994). Expertise is developed slowly over a good number of years and as a result of deliberate efforts at improvement (Ericsson, Krampe, & Tesch-Romer, 1993) and extended training (Ericsson & Charness, 1994). This requires time, effort,

77

resources, commitment, motivation, and patience, since practice is not always enjoyable or motivating. The effect of practice has even been argued to surpass and limit the role of innate characteristics earlier believed to explain experts’ superior performance (Ericsson et al., 1993)

Expertise includes advanced problem-solving processes, a great amount of knowledge, advanced knowledge organisation, an ability to use knowledge

effectively, creative ability, automatised actions, and practical ability (Sternberg, 1997). Expertise means mastering knowledge and techniques, being fast and accurate, and having superior memory for representative stimuli in one’s domain, (Ericsson et al., 1993). Expert performance is where the highest levels of performance are attained in a certain domain, including most everyday activities such as thinking,

comprehension, problem solving, sports, finance, and management. To reach expertise, studying expert performance may prove highly beneficial (Ericsson & Charness, 1994).

Outstanding expert leaders seem to have three clusters of competencies that differentiate them from average performers: cognitive competencies, emotional intelligence competencies, and social intelligence competencies (Boyatzis, 2008). Furthermore, expert knowledge seems to be divided into formal knowledge, practical knowledge, and self-regulative knowledge (Tynjala, 1999), and expert performance is mediated by cognitive and perceptual-motor skills (Ericsson & Lehman, 1996). Thus expertise development is a long process, where theoretical and practical knowledge are integrated to form a coherent whole (Tynjala, 1999), where challenges are continuously defined and redefined at higher levels, where continuous effort is made to invest mental resources, build deeper understanding, and single-mindedly apply

78

and practice what is learnt (Lykken, 1998). Finally, a critical difference between novices and experts is the way and the patterns in which cues are organised, stored in memory, and retrieved, and the way in which this knowledge is used as a result (Rossano, 2003).

2.8.1 Students versus Executives

One can apply the above discussion to distinguish between students and executives. Students following graduate degree with less work experience and less exposure to challenging leadership and managerial situations are expected to be at the novice and beginner end of the spectrum. On the other hand, executives with several years’ work experience, as well as the natural life experience that comes with age, are expected to be closer to expertise.

Students (novices), for example, tend to work individually, relying on memorisation and mere reproduction of knowledge rather than cooperation,

knowledge-sharing, and experiential learning, especially in competitive settings. On the other hand, more experienced people (experts) tend to value teamwork and knowledge-sharing in their search for new ways to acquire, apply, and transform new knowledge (Tynjala, 1999).

This should have some bearing on students’ and executives’ competency levels as well as learning and development acquired both from life experiences and developmental interventions. Students would be expected to have a more restricted or narrower learning experience, whereas executives should learn in a more efficient and targeted way that is relevant to their domain of expertise (or desired expertise). On the other hand, the role of developmental readiness in moderating development (which

79

will be discussed in the next chapter) is not expected to be any different across the two groups given a particular level thereof. Its role is expected to hold across age, experience, and expertise. Thus the following hypotheses are suggested:

Hypothesis 2a: Students will have lower leadership competency levels than executives.

Hypothesis 2b: Students will develop leadership competencies at a lesser rate than executives.