Adopting a "growth mindset" reaps considerable rewards.
Research at Stanford University has shown that students who believe their intelligence can be developed outperform those who believe it is fixed. And the same positive patterns continue on into adulthood.
Employees in a "growth mindset" company are 34% more likely to feel a strong sense of ownership and commitment to the company.
On the flipside, a cocktail of competencies and performance management can foster an organisational culture where employees feel they need to excel at everything, without so much as breaking a sweat.
And when people work for an organisation that values 'innate talent' above growth and development, they're ill-equipped to deal with any risk to that image of natural excellence.
Employees in a "growth mindset" company are:
- 47% likelier to say that their colleagues are trustworthy;
- 34% likelier to feel a strong sense of ownership and commitment to the company;
- 65% likelier to say that the company supports risk taking;
- 49% likelier to say that the company fosters innovation.
Does our culture rely too heavily on the idea of "innate talent" as a measure of potential? Do we discourage people from making the effort – and the mistakes – needed to learn and grow?
When it comes to personality and behaviour tests, "traits" and "types" sound like classic fixed mindset language, without much room for manoeuvre. So are we labelling people under the banner of self-understanding, and then encouraging them to play it safe in their comfort zones?