Starting a new business (at least for me) can be kind of scary. All the doubts and insecurities are relatively normal, but can be exacerbated by the fact that often, early on, you’re kind of on your own. Even with additional folks, advisors, friends, and family, it can still be very very quiet sometimes. One thing that I’ve found is that while I enjoy learning new things, I also seek out evidence that directly contradicts or supports many of the premises on which the business is being built. Contradictions help test teh strength of the assertions, and supporting information, frankly, makes me feel good.

One such premise is that with focused feedback, disciplined practice, and consistent application of energy, hard work can compensate for (and sometimes surpass) natural talent. As someone who eagerly associates with people who are better than me, finding out that I have a chance of improving myself is reassuring. ;) Another constant question is the accuracy of self-evaluation. There is certainly no substitute for objective outside perspective on what you’re doing. But in reality you don’t get access to that all the time. Am I paying too much for this or that? Did I hire the right vendor? Am I handling this meeting properly? So, this morning when I saw this post on The Genius in All of Us it made me feel good. Talking about a Cornell study on the relationship between self-assesment and skill level they said:

“Not surprisingly, they’ve shown that people with poor skills are also quite bad at assessing their own abilities. They tend to be grossly overconfident, demonstrating a notable deficiency in ‘self-monitoring skills.’ The opposite is also true: better performers have far more humble predictions, and subsequently more accurate assessments, of their performances.”

This pretty much squares with my assesment of how the world works and somewhat reassures me as I always try to have a plethora of humble predictions.