Is There Optimal Competence?

Getting more competence, we get better in what we are doing. But this has also a little danger. We might close ourselves off from the new, and consequently opportunities.

We knew it, we need to disrupt ourselves and even run projects that compete with our own technologies. But I never had this more abstract view, it was inspired by Seth Godin's Blog post Competence  vs. Possibility.

With a deeper look it becomes so clear. The first step into the new may be a step into a turbulent scene - a "cold and stormy night", nothing is clear, no rules, no systematic, no formal aspects. We inevitably make failures, when we enter fields where we do not have proven to be good at. And explorative learning creates competence more quickly. Being competent and jump into the new might lead to radical innovation.

We like to be competent and work hard to maintain our competence. But we are also aware that "blueprint" approaches and experienced robot positions would erect barriers to change.

So, like risk, competence is two-sided, it has an obvious benefit, but also a danger. Therefore it has an optimum, but beware, it is not static - it is of the type life-only-happens-on-the border-between-chaos-and-order. Your actions let it move.

No, we are not industrialists, we are passionate about being innovators at derivative and risk analytics. Working for and with quants and risk professionals with future.