The definition of the term expert must be understood in right sense otherwise scope for misunderstanding .....
Most of the corporate employees are generally acclaimed to be experts in different areas. By repeatedly doing the same job for several years, naturally one is expected to develop high level of skill which is widely referred as expertise, in the job that they have been doing. The question is whether such ‘expertise’ is limited only to doing the job or also knowing well about the job ‘beyond’ doing?
In the corporate world, the expertise is always expected and appreciated only if it is limited to ‘doing’ and not knowing as the knowledge beyond the ‘work space’ holds no respect. The corporate believes that ‘knowing’ is theory and ‘doing’ is practical and only by doing, the corporate can benefit commercially.
Reflect the below mentioned example carefully.
There is an expert cook; indeed the cook is expert in making several dishes with fishes, prawn, shrimp etc. Whether it is grilled fish or fish in gravy, none can beat the taste of the dish made by the cook.
The recipe of the cook is unique, proprietary and secret. The taste of the dish comes mainly from the domain knowledge of the cook i.e., the ingredients used for cooking, their proportion, time of incorporation of different ingredients, cooking time etc.
When the dish made of Crawfish was served, many people who absolutely know nothing about cooking refused to eat the dish. The reason was that the crawfish served had straight tail and it is not worth eating. Only when the dead crawfish is cooked will have straight tail and if the live crawfish is fried in oil, the tail would coil.
It is commonsense that crawfish with coiled tail is only worth eating and the one with straight tail is not. The cook who knows the science of cooking and is expert but his expertise was limited only to cooking.
To choose what is right and not, mere commonsense is sufficient. While having expertise, one should never neglect the importance of ‘commonsense’. The expertise of some people in the corporate in general is like the expertise of the cook. They know only to cook the crawfish but never know that a crawfish with straight tail is not worth eating.
Expertise must always go with commonsense and only then it becomes successful. Experts must connect to the world to understand the existence of ‘knowledge domain’ beyond their ‘expertise’ and the same can be learned or understood only through commonsense.
The corporate must understand the difference between ‘skill’ and ‘knowledge’ and while developing the former, the later also must be given due respect and importance. Otherwise, one would become like an expert cook and would learn that the crawfish with straight tail is not worth eating from his customers.
Dr S Ranganathan, ClinRise Derma Pvt., Ltd., Chennai
Learn more from the following management books
Bamboo Business Approach: A Natural Phenomenon Mirrored in Corporate Strategies
In the realm of business, the bamboo plant offers a fascinating metaphor for certain corporate strategies. Known for its unique reproductive cycle, bamboo experiences a phenomenon called "mass flowering" where all plants in a population bloom simultaneously, set seeds, and then die. This rare event, occurring only once every several decades for some species, has intriguing parallels in the business world, particularly in marketing strategies that flood the market with products in a short burst to maximize impact and profit before receding.
When You Insist on Quality: A Strategic Message to Corporate Leaders
In today's competitive business environment, understanding the true essence of quality is crucial for corporate leaders. Quality should not merely be about consistency and uniformity but should also embrace creativity and innovation. This article explores how leaders can redefine quality standards to foster both excellence and innovation within their organizations.
Understanding the Adaptive Leadership Styles in Corporate Environments
In the dynamic world of corporate leadership, adaptability is often a necessity rather than a choice. Leaders may alter their behaviors and strategies to navigate the complex landscape of organizational politics, market conditions, and internal team dynamics. This flexibility, while sometimes perceived negatively, can be a strategic advantage, echoing survival traits found in nature.
