Experiment and innovation of nature corporate must learn

Most corporate generally make a mistake in differentiating competency from ability.  They automatically assume ability to be competency.  Although both the terms may appears to be the same, but conveys totally a different meaning in the corporate parlance.   

All ‘able’ people may not have the competency in anything or need not be competent at all and all competent people need not have the ability beyond competency.  It may be very confusing, but this is what the meaning or explanation nature has defined and conveys to man. 

To know it better one has to simply watch the behavioural repertoire of crow in the garden.  The crow is a good hunter, that knows how to steal, that also often settle down just with garbage as scavenger.   What crow doesn’t eat on earth is difficult to list or describe.  However, it is also very intelligent and smart.   Crow is very successful largely because of its ability than the competency as it seldom relay on any special competency for its survival. 

Can we ever say a crow to be very competent?  Take the example of an eagle or a lion or a tiger.  All are expert hunters.  Their ability and competency is one and the same.  They survive largely through their competency.    If they relies simply on their ‘ability’ neither the lion nor the eagle or tiger could ever successfully hunt any prey in their life. 

Ability helps the crow to be successful so is competency in the case of lion or tiger or eagle.   The discussion is not about which is superior or required the most in life.  Do corporate and its HR knows to differentiate them and ‘use’ them appropriately?

Largely, sales people need ability whereas competency is required for the marketing.  If the corporate interchange the above and experiment competency for sales and ability for marketing, it would end up in searching a foot for the shoe than shoe for a foot.   Only continuous efforts with no results will be the outcome if they follow the above style. 

How marvelously the nature has superimposed ‘ability’ over ‘competency’ in some animals and ‘competency’ over ‘ability’ in others.  According to the need and the situation, such artful creation of both talents has been embroidered.   

When the ability is more, naturally the competency will reduce and when competency is more, interestingly the ability will have less value is the law of nature.  Look at the life of giraffe it has long neck so it can sense the danger from a great distance.    But it is not a competent runner and hence cannot escape from the predator by running fast. 

It is not mere business law the corporate should apply in managing the task vs. people, the law of biology or essentials of nature should be included in the principles of corporate governance.  Instead of experimenting or doing things on trial and error basis and then proving it to be right or wrong, learn from nature.  It has done endless series of experiments, research, innovation, trial and error and has proven what is right and what is wrong. 

In the business clock, the effort of a moth defines and determines the fortune of a year, the effort of an hour determines and defines the fate of a day and the effort of a second script the fate of an hour.  Time only matter everything.  The business clock starts early but ends late.  Corporate expects people to come to office earlier than the set time and leave the office much later than the office hours.  Time management, effort & efficiency management and result achievement is possible only if some simple definitions are understood by the corporate.  

Distinctively use ‘able’ and ‘competent’ people for the right job only then the right result can be achieved.