wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn defines experience as follows:

"go or live through; "We had many trials to go through"; "he saw action in Viet Nam"

know: have firsthand knowledge of states, situations, emotions, or sensations; "I know the feeling!"; "have you ever known hunger?"; "I have lived a kind of **** when I was a drug addict"; "The holocaust survivors have lived a nightmare"; "I lived through two divorces"

go through (mental or physical states or experiences); "get an idea"; "experience vertigo"; "get nauseous"; "undergo a strange sensation"; "The chemical undergoes a sudden change"; "The fluid undergoes shear"; "receive injuries"; "have a feeling"

the accumulation of knowledge or skill that results from direct participation in events or activities; "a man of experience"; "experience is the best teacher"
the content of direct observation or participation in an event; "he had a religious experience"; "he recalled the experience vividly"

feel: undergo an emotional sensation; "She felt resentful"; "He felt regret"
have: undergo; "The stocks had a fast run-up"
an event as apprehended; "a surprising experience"; "that painful experience certainly got our attention" "

Now "go through" & "feel" describe experience as being a verb, while "the accumulation of knowledge or skill " is referred to as being a noun.

So when we hear people ranting about how they have 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, or even 1000 years of experience in a certain area, does that necessarily mean that they are knowledgeable and skilled in relation to everything related to that area.

How are the numbers of years related to the knowledge and skill one person may acquire? is it based on the assumption that many problems and activities must've been conducted at that time and so that person must have a absorbed a lot of it? the same concept if applied to someone working in a cafeteria, it would mean that the person's weight shall be proportional to how much food he has seen through out his years of work at that place, which is totally absurd.

How do people gain knowledge and skills in the first place? people are selective, lazy, a lot live in denial, a lot are Narcistic, judgemental and are horrible listeners. If a person blocks all his input ports, then how would new information ever be added? if a person is in denial of the problems he faces, how can he ever improve the way he conducts his business/work? if a person is too lazy to investigate into problems and whenever faced with one, either throws it on another person, plays the politics game, .....etc.

"Experiential educationis the process of actively engaging students in an authentic experience that will have benefits and consequences. Students make discoveries and experiment with knowledge themselves instead of hearing or reading about the experiences of others. Students also reflect on their experiences, thus developing new skills, new attitudes, and new theories or ways of thinking" (Kraft & Sakofs, 1988).
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experiential_learning

We learnt in Automatic Control systems, that there are closed loop control systems that self adjust to what is required based on feedback, and there are open loop systems which continue operation regardless of the results, as they donot have any feedback, and do not adjust to what is required.

If we implement the same concept to human beings, and find there are extreme patterns of behavior, we may as well assume that they are open loop systems who haven't received any feedback to their actions (or blocked it out) and so continued on their same path and we find people popping up on tv shows like american idol thinking they have the greatet voices when they can hardly stay in tone.

and so we can deduce that in order to self adjust, we need feedback, honest feedback, and we need to acknowledge such feedback and understand it, however, it would be inaccurate to make an assumption that all people do have closed loop systems, and are able to analyze the feedback and correct their information and their system so to produce the required results.

and so it is my thinking that the number of years of experience should not be considered as an indication of the knowledge, skills and experience one may possess, but the ability and willingness to learn should be assessed first, and based on that assessment the number of years of experience maybe used as a measure, otherwise, the number of years on their own would be no more or no less than a constant in a yet undefined equation.

I think most people would agree with your central theme (just because someone is experienced doesn't mean they are competent). But isn't that why ISO9001 requires "competent" people? :rolleyes:

Experience, along with training, qualifications, skills and knowledge can all contribute to make someone competent. But you can be competent at something without having any experience, training or qualifications.

Not sure about some of your "McGregor Theory X" statements. (So, people are lazy, are they?) :confused:

So when we hear people ranting about how they have 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, or even 1000 years of experience in a certain area, does that necessarily mean that they are knowledgeable and skilled in relation to everything related to that area.


"The race goes not always to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, but that's the way to bet." Damon Runyon

Baldrick...glad you agree with the central scheme

i understand your concern when i make comments such as "people are primarily lazy" it simply means, that the majority of people aren't really as concerned about their jobs and willing to learn as you would expect them to be, or else we wouldn't have had so many medical, technical and political scandals, we wouldn't have had 3 quarters of the world's entire population as poor as they are today, we would;ve found a cure for cancer, we would've colonized mars, we would've achieved so much......

but the wrecklessness, the denial, the laziness, the negativity, they're all in the way, and where do they come from, they're coming from helplessness, once one feels helpless infront of a problem, he becomes frustrated, and the bigger the problem, the bigger his frustration he'd be, and then an attitude starts developing that doesn't just affect the big problems, but all problems alike................

there are types of people, i'm sure you read animal farm

i understand your concern when i make comments such as "people are primarily lazy" it simply means, that the majority of people aren't really as concerned about their jobs and willing to learn as you would expect them to be, or else we wouldn't have had so many medical, technical and political scandals, we wouldn't have had 3 quarters of the world's entire population as poor as they are today, we would;ve found a cure for cancer, we would've colonized mars, we would've achieved so much......

I think you're confusing greed with laziness. Two very different things.

but the wrecklessness, the denial, the laziness, the negativity, they're all in the way,

It also sounds like there might be some projection (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection) going on here.

and where do they come from, they're coming from helplessness, once one feels helpless infront of a problem, he becomes frustrated, and the bigger the problem, the bigger his frustration he'd be, and then an attitude starts developing that doesn't just affect the big problems, but all problems alike................

You're describing the entire history of humans. What's your point?

there are types of people, i'm sure you read animal farm

I did. In the story, the "commandment" "All animals are equal" degenerated into "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others." Animal Farm was an allegory of Stalinist totalitarianism, and Orwell seems to have accurately predicted the basis of the downfall of the Soviet Union. Unfortunately, the equality business doesn't seem limited to despotic regimes; it's also an identifying characteristic of capitalism. I think that means that it has something to do with human nature, no?

So what's your grand solution?

I have a hunch Mirrorcrax is undergoing a personal crisis reflected in the topic of this thread.

Being a youthful member of Generation Y (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_Y), can be traumatic when you look at all those folks ahead of you in their careers, banking on their "exerience," who aren't getting out of the way to make room for your career progress.

It's easy to question the value of "experience," when there are so many examples of folks with "25 years of experience" who have really just repeated the same year of experience 25 times in a row and still don't have it right.

The reality of life is smart folks don't succumb to frustration and continue beating their heads against a wall :frust: - they find a way around or over the wall.

The aphorism which comes to mind for this situation is "Light a candle rather than curse the darkness."

Mr. Wyne, my modest and simple observation is:
I don't see people's competence best described through number of years, just as i don't think that good movie critics can be judged based on how many movies they watched.

Experiencing something, doesn't necessarily mean you handled it the best way and that you shall add such knowledge to the next company you'll work in, you could have gone through a traumatic natural disaster, and dealt with it in one way, it's true you'll have better foresights at what to expect, but that's if the next disaster occurs following the same pattern as the one you had experienced.

all i'm saying here, and that's more of a modest observation than a "Grand Conclusion", that people should stop putting so much emphasis on the number of years and start focusing on other points that express their competence, such as the returns their companies enjoyed based on their contributions, the number of problems decreased, the number of losses cut-down, the result of those years is what should matter, you could sit on a mountain for 50 years but doesn't make you any rock expert, just a guy who sat on a mountain for 50 years.

:topic: You brought up an interesting point mr. Wyne, which i'm curious to hear more about, especially from your side, Equality and its relation to the human nature, what do you think is the relation? and what do you think would be the result if one member of a community tips the scale on another?

Mr. Bucey, as always i appreciate your feedback, and you are right on the point of the frustration of being young, having one's competence judged based on that alone and nothing else, i wouldn't call it a "personal crisis" though, as i believe i'm already taking some sort of actions by discussing my point of view amongst competent professionals such as your goodself, to get valuable feedback on the matter and i'm always looking for a way to develop my skills and knowledge, believe me it would just be much easier to put a counter beside me and let it roll away as i record its reading in my cv as experience that should be perceived as competence.

I believe you would share my frustration if you had come across bosses and people who act out their positions in an organization, who walk around spilling out hollow words they donot fully comprehend, to give the false illusion of competence, backed up by many, many, many years of experience, but what is the end result? what do they achieve? .... communication skills come into play as well, what good is a trainer who has all the certificates, all the years of experience, but can't communicate with the attendance...

Mirrorcrax, you are right to notice that experience doesn't always guarantee performance.

I wonder if you are present to notice what these people you write about are doing when they're not wandering the halls.

I can say with assurance that when you meet me I don't come across as a remarkable person. My experience has built a sort of database in my head, where pieces of random-looking information are stored until they are mined based on relevancy to a subject at hand. This invisible force comes out best in my writing, as I seldom have the chance or pull off a sustained stretch of verbal brilliance. My experience is best shown in my writing audit reports, white papers on various subjects (especially where dots are connected between my various types of experience and the subject's points beiong made) and the occasional newspaper column.

I do not know the person you are describing, and if I watched him/her in the halls I might find myself agreeing with you. I do fault the organization that does not properly mine the experienced employee, but places him/her in a management position by default where possibly the best use would be as a sort of internal consultant.

My best advice to you would be to keep observing, but try to find the good stuff to watch too. I think you may have made up your mind a tad too hastily. Learn how the organization works (and how it allows the inane sounding behavior you describe) and what function this person is performing/ supposed to be performing. Offer to do a project with this person, so you can see up close what he/she knows and offer some of your input as theories or suggestions. Classify, weigh, compare with other input besides your own, and then write something that expresses your conclusions and why your approach is better.

There is certainly a place for new ideas. My employer is embracing me, bless them, for my being from the outside and my considerable experience that contributes to my work in so many ways. Employers can do that for you too, but there's an apprenticeship to be served and it sounds like you're it.

I will use the great artist/inventor Leonardo DaVinci as an example. In those days the art of painting (which I understand he disliked) was passed down through apprenticeships. He had to learn how the painting was done before he could expand on current methods. Although his genious was soon enough recognized, he endured a lack of appreciation for his style at the time. Now he's held as being held as an example of genius and artistry before his time.

You can be like Leonardo. Watch and learn how it is being done, and when you collect your data create a style you think is most effective and be ready to defend it. When you have this and can present your case effectively I suspect you'll get the recognition you sound like you deserve, though likely not right away.

I hope this helps!

JenniferKirley, thanx for your honest response which i have found sincere, kind and highly diplomatic ..... It is my understanding that my observations maybe wrong at times regarding people, and i do agree with the apprenticeship idea, and i do agree that i'm in such a phase where i have to slowly build up potential untill i'm strong enough to rise, i would just like to clarify that i'm not refering to any specific person or a certain evil character that dominates and supresses me, but, due to the nature of my job i get to visit several companies, and i meet with a lot of incompetent BS slinging many-years-of experience blabbing no good pretenders who get hired where they are just because they have spent a number of years of their lives doing a certain thing, but not necessarily with any sincerity, and did not necessarily develop the needed competencies, and so they only become speed bumps along the path to completing any project, because all they wanna do is just to pretend to work, look upset, look serious, look smart, walk around with a coffee mug, talk about sports and come at you with stories of success of their previous employer which they didn't even contribute to......... those are some of the examples of behaviour based upon which i have drawn such an observation, so how do i know they don't work? ....well because i'm their consultant, and whenever a certain task is agreed on to be completed in a certain period of time, it never is, and whenever any sort of work on their behalf is to be performed they just throw it on the next guy, ..... and i do realize that there are also a lot of people who have invested the time they had and continue to invest the time they have by learning, seeking knowledge, listening, and developing their skills

No one I know didn't experience the frustration brought on by lack of experience, and being constantly reminded of the deficit. But even ten-year-olds are aware, although perhaps not explicitly, that they know more than five-year-olds, and the five-year-olds resent being reminded of it.

In my own experience, it seems that the phenomenon Mirrorcrax is observing is caused more by politics than by competence, or the lack thereof. It's a sad fact that in many companies, experienced people aren't allowed to use their experience. Of course there are cases of blatant incompetence, and people who refuse to learn from their own mistakes and the mistakes of others, but those people are in the minority.

Look at it this way: experience must have considerable value if Mirrorcrax notices that some people who have it don't take advantage of it. In other words, what he is saying is that if more experienced people used their experience, things would be a lot better. So it's not a question of the intrinsic value of experience--only a fool or a young person would argue against it--but whether or not we use experience to our best advantage.

I don't know if you will find this comforting, but this philosophy has certainly helped me through crises.

People generally do what the system they are in expects them to do. I don't believe people are inherently lazy (I have yet to meet a person who wants to be apathetic, wants to be lazy). But most of the behaviors you see are the result of the overall system.

Dr. Deming stated "How would they know different?" That is a calming thought.

I suppose I was "fast tracked" in my 20's by being on nuclear submarines in the Navy.

Some things do take time. My first six years at Hanford (out of the past 14) were very frustrating, and I was nearly fired in my seventh year. Now, in the past three years I have "exceeded expectations" every year, and am getting notoriety outside of Hanford.

You may want to consider reading Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged. I don't 100% buy her philosophy, but it does offer an interesting insight into systems behavior. And I do find Tom Peters rather excilerating for the boisterous change attitude.

Good advice and insight from Wes, Jim and Steve.

I especially like the remark that the phenomenon is more politics than competence.

If it comforts, it may be cold comfort to hear how much company you have:

http://money.cnn.com/blogs/talkback/2006/08/call-it-gray-ceiling.html

Of course there are plenty to argue the other side. I wonder if any of these responders are the persons you have negatively described?

Excuse my presumption! I, of course, have experience: both the good, "cumulative" kind and the mind-numbing "repetitive" kind. Jim Wynne is on track, along with Steve Prevette, in talking about the environment (physical and political) in which the "experienced" folk find themselves. Some of those environments are more stimulatingand "growth-inducing" than others.

My colleague, Jennifer (she of the short finger:( :( ), correctly infers that not all folk exhibit their accumulated experience in a visible, vocal manner which is readily apparent to the outside observer.

Mr. Bucey, as always i appreciate your feedback, and you are right on the point of the frustration of being young, having one's competence judged based on that alone and nothing else, i wouldn't call it a "personal crisis" though, as i believe i'm already taking some sort of actions by discussing my point of view amongst competent professionals such as your goodself, to get valuable feedback on the matter and i'm always looking for a way to develop my skills and knowledge, believe me it would just be much easier to put a counter beside me and let it roll away as i record its reading in my cv as experience that should be perceived as competence.

I believe you would share my frustration if you had come across bosses and people who act out their positions in an organization, who walk around spilling out hollow words they donot fully comprehend, to give the false illusion of competence, backed up by many, many, many years of experience, but what is the end result? what do they achieve? .... communication skills come into play as well, what good is a trainer who has all the certificates, all the years of experience, but can't communicate with the attendance...The above quote is an interesting surmise, and was, in fact, accurate for about two years back in the 60's. I can't pinpoint any "epiphany" which changed my outlook, but I did get the idea that I (only I) was responsible for my future success or failure. Similarly, my responsibility to others was limited to being fair and honest and did not include making moral judgments about them or what they did with my data. Comparing my intelligence and ability to theirs was non-productive. If I found myself stymied, I concentrated on finding a way past the roadblock, around, over, or ramming through. I didn't always make the best decision, but I made more right ones than wrong ones. The one thing I avoided at all costs was wasting time and effort complaining about the situation. It didn't take a "dope slap" to let me know that "venting" only diminished me in the eyes and minds of family, friends, coworkers, and, especially, superiors.

So, there is some data. It is as "fair and honest" as I can make it. How you use it is up to you.

Another point to follow up on - over the years I have certainly had my share of detractors, self proclaimed experts, snake oil salesman. For the most part, I can look at where they are after the long run, where I am, and be happy.

I have lived in a society which glorifies experience based on older age, we even have a proverb that says "he who is one day older than you, knows one year more than you do"

One point which was made actually caught my attention, which is communication, it's true that some people may have developed experience but lack the communication ability to re-deliver to others, be it verbally, written, or in any other form or media

However, i can't help but focus on the outcome, for instance, i recall first starting with this whole iso9001:2000 deal, along with a colleague who had been working in the same company for more than five years, and in only 6 months i surpassed his performance, and got credit for it by all my clients and superiors, i wouldn't say that i have faced all that he has faced, all i'm saying is that, experience in years being referred to as a direct measure of one's competence, is like linking the number of years a company has operated to its revenue/success/ and client base, which may and may not be true, but may be true if such a company had a (competence building system) which collects data, analyzes it, compares it to where it wants to achieve and continually improves and acts to achieve planned results

the question that would settle this issue is if any statistic was done on the matter, such as the average percentage of people who are able to analyze information and reach conclusions to those who can't/or simply don't have the urge or will to do so

if more than 50% of people are able and willing to develope competency by experiencing certain situations over a certain period of time and draw conclusions or just simply perform corrective action and register it for future use in similar situations then i was totally wrong and yeah the number of years one has lived or worked some where can be used as an indication of his ability to contribute to the success of another similar place with similar objectives

I have lived in a society which glorifies experience based on older age, we even have a proverb that says "he who is one day older than you, knows one year more than you do" I don't find that's reliably and consistently true. I believe the tone is set by management; if management is young and thinks young people have the desired qualities in leadership positions, younger persons will more likely be promoted. the question that would settle this issue is if any statistic was done on the matter, such as the average percentage of people who are able to analyze information and reach conclusions to those who can't/or simply don't have the urge or will to do soI'm not aware of any such study. The problem with statistically representing this sort of thing is that it's so hard to isolate and manipulate an independent variable. The crux of such a challenge is in your term "don't have the urge or will to do so". Statistically analyzing urges and will could be a big problem. Surveys could try, but they only measure a declaration. They don't measure willingness very well because willingness is subject to details and conditions as they arise. Willing to do this, less willing to do that.

I think a large part of the problem is that many younger people haven't developed the ability to navigate the political waters necessary to advance. Achievement isn't enough; a person's achievements must be promoted or made apparent somehow in order to be recognized.

The intangible question of leadership ability isn't being discussed. Achievement doesn't equate to an ability to help a group achieve, something that a person should be considered upon for promotion. You haven't described how the achievers you mention are clearly shown to be superior leadership candidates.