Since its introduction in Psychology, by the North American psycholinguist Noam Chomsky, the term competences has probably been one of the most used in recent years in the area of Psychology.
This is because in all areas where psychologists are inserted, human development is promoted.
This implies that all kinds of theories have been made about it and that there are different applications and uses for this concept.
These applications have been used to study both language and thought phenomena, as well as to predict success in a job in a company, or, in general, in life.
However, despite the fact that this notion is clear about its origin and follows a line of advance within Cognitive Psychology, it has taken another path in the field of Business and Management Psychology, based on the work of McClelland and his studies about job skills.
For a long time there has been a kind of divorce in psychology between theories that arise from scientific research and theories that arise as a result of professional practice.
This division has occurred due to the fact that research in Cognitive Psychology was carried out taking the form of construction of scientific knowledge typical of the positivist paradigm. This form of research was based on isolating an element in such a way that it remained pure, stable and repeatable, causing that practically these investigations had no use of practical value, with exceptions, that could use fields of applied Psychology such as Organizational Psychology.
It is for this reason that Organizational Psychology was doomed to develop parallel to research in Cognitive Psychology the same concepts that had been introduced by the latter, since research in the field of General Psychology, by isolating both the components, prevented an approach to the subject from a holistic point of view, and did not allow a real vision of all the factors that intervene when a worker performs a certain task.
According to García Azcanio (2003, 2005), in recent years cognitive psychologists have turned the course of their research and, instead of experimentally reproducing phenomena, they study cognitive processes in natural situations. This makes it possible for there to be a rapprochement between the theorists of General Psychology and those of Business Psychology, a fact that a few years ago was unlikely due to the level of research in General Psychology that reduced the possibility of their application to different fields.
The objective of this article is not to review the works that have been carried out in the field of Organizational Psychology regarding competencies. Neither is a detour towards the investigations that have been developed historically in the field of intelligence, nor in the historical use of the terms Competence-Performance. It is more important to review the new theories about intelligence, which are gaining strength today in the field of Cognitive Psychology and which can further enrich the theoretical framework that has been created around the term competences.
At present, and due to the complexity that field investigations are taking, it is vitally important to integrate the findings that have recently been obtained in the framework of General Psychology with the conceptions that may arise derived from studies in professional action.
This for various reasons. First, it allows enriching the theoretical framework with which professional action is assumed. Second, it gives this professional action methodological tools with which to deal with daily practice. Third, it allows research in General Psychology to have a practical outlet through which feedback can be obtained that makes it possible to enrich and improve said research. And finally, it allows General Psychology a more natural approach in the study of human beings.
Regarding the last point, Norman (1989) states that a component of pure cognition can be described, but the human being is more than that, it is an organism with a biological base and an evolutionary and cultural history, it is a social being that interacts with others, with the environment and with himself.
Central discussions of traditional cognitive science have ignored these aspects of behavior. The results indicate that there has been considerable progress in some respects but great sterility in others. And it is precisely the scientific approach in areas such as that of an organization, which provides that most natural vision of the human being.
For this reason, the points of view of two of the main theorists of intelligence within Cognitive Psychology will be presented here: Howard Gardner and Robert Sternberg. In the case of Daniel Goleman, although he is also one of the main exponents of the subject, his works, on Emotional Intelligence, have been reviewed on countless occasions by theorists of Business Psychology. It is more interesting to review here the approaches of the two aforementioned authors to allow a rapprochement between their conceptions, about human competencies in general, and the approach that has been given to the term organizational competencies in the business framework, very much in vogue in these days (García Azcanio, 2006).
It is worth clarifying that the relevance or mode of application will not be discussed. Instead, this article will focus on the central proposals and will be presented as possible proposals to analyze. Anyway, at some point or other, reflections will be made even if these are not the objective.
Two authors and their conceptions about intelligence.
Robert Sternberg and the Theory of Successful Intelligence.
Robert Sternberg is a prestigious American psychologist who is Professor of Psychology and Education at Yale University. This author has defined intelligence as “the combination of a person's analytical, creative and practical skills. In other words, it is the ability to adapt to an environment, select environments that are compatible with each other and create the environment in which one is better with oneself ”.
Says the author: "Rather, I defend a concept of successful intelligence, according to which this intelligence is the ability to achieve success in life, given personal norms, within one's own socio-cultural context."
Thus, he introduces the difference between inert intelligence and successful intelligence. For him, inert intelligence is what is demonstrated by taking an IQ test, or an academic assessment test or any of the many tests that exist, in which many individuals do well, but do not predict their success in life real.
For its part, Successful Intelligence comprises the ability of the individual to adapt, select and modify environments to achieve their individual goals and those imposed by society and culture. Thus, any individual who is successful in any given area has an intelligence for action and achievement, that is, a successful intelligence.
Sternberg's proposal is based on the idea that the location of intelligence must be sought in three areas simultaneously: the individual, the environment and the interaction of both, in this way cognitive and contextual factors are combined. Intelligence is linked to a wide variety of skills that are important to act effectively in everyday life.
Sternberg (1986), proposes that intelligence should be understood in terms of three aspects or levels of information processing, hierarchically structured: the level of the mechanisms of intelligent or component functioning; the experiential level; and the contextual level.
The component level has to do with the elementary components or processes that operate with representations or symbols and that explain intelligent behavior. The mechanisms that Sternberg (1986) proposes are:
- Metacomponents or executive processes that are used for planning, selection of strategies and evaluation of tasks Resolution components or non-executive processes, used in the actual execution of a problem solving strategy Components of knowledge acquisition or processes used in the acquisition of new information.
The experiential level relates intelligence to the continuum of experiences established by the subject with his behavior in different tasks and situations, which in turn may or may not be new for him. When a situation or task is new, a set of skills intervenes for its performance that should be automated as they become familiar. In the opinion of Sternberg (1986), the performance of a subject is more adequately measured, either when it is a novelty, or when the individual is so used to the situation that the process has been automated.
Finally, the contextual level refers to the question of the relationship between intelligence and the external world. According to Sternberg (1986), intelligent behavior implies adaptation, selection and modification:
- Adaptation: It occurs when a person tries to fit in well in the environment they are in. Selection: It appears when a person prefers to find a new environment instead of adapting to the one they are in. Modification: It occurs when the individual cannot find (select) an environment that seems more convenient than the current one, and it does not satisfy you. Here the individual makes changes in the environment in which she is to modify it approximately to her personological characteristics, capitalize on her strengths and compensate for her weaknesses.
As can be seen in the concept that the author provides about intelligence, he defines three types of abilities or intelligences: creative, analytical and practical.
Creative intelligence is the ability to go beyond the given and engender new and interesting ideas. Tackling a range of problems begins, some newer than others. People who develop their creative intelligence perceive connections or solutions to problems where other people do not.
Analytical intelligence involves the conscious direction of our mental processes to analyze and evaluate ideas, solve problems, and make decisions. This type of intelligence is involved when the components are applied to relatively familiar problems where the judgments to be made are abstract in nature.
It is not completely equivalent to the academic intelligence commonly assessed in schools and assessed by IQ tests. The latter only measure a part of analytical ability: the one closest to school performance, and leaves out aspects such as problem solving, decision-making, etc., previously raised.
Finally, practical intelligence is the ability to translate theory into practice and abstract theories into practical relationships. It involves individuals applying their skills to the kinds of problems they face in everyday life, such as at work or at home.
Sternberg suggests an expansion on traditional conceptions of intelligence to include not only memory and analytical skills, but also practical and creative skills. These abilities of successful intelligence are closely related to the levels expressed above. Thus, analytical intelligence is expressed at the component level, creative intelligence at the experiential level, and practical intelligence at the contextual level. (Sternberg, 2001).
For Sternberg, what is important is not the intelligence potential that one possesses, but the way to use that potential effectively and successfully. For this, the component, experiential and contextual levels of intelligent behavior must be assessed. This could strike a balance between analytical, creative and practical skills. Only in this way will it be possible to integrate the different dimensions that make up human cognition and think of programs that develop it.
Sternberg (1997) himself states that analytical, practical and creative skills are of vital importance in companies. Analytical intelligence enables individuals to solve problems and make decisions, as well as evaluate and analyze ideas. This ability is very important for managers and workers in general of any organization to possess this ability in a certain area, as it allows workers to perform adequately in it.
Practical intelligence, for its part, is associated with acquiring and using tacit knowledge. For this author, tacit knowledge refers to action-oriented knowledge, which is typically acquired without direct help from others and which allows individuals to achieve goals that have personal value for them. The acquisition and use of this knowledge is important for competent performance in real-world activities.
In his opinion, promotions are an example of the importance of tacit knowledge for practical intelligence. The individuals who are promoted in an organization are usually the ones who have formulated an idea of how the system they are in really works, regardless of whether someone tells them how it works, they make it work for themselves. A person who enters a certain workplace and manages to grasp the rules of that system to achieve success, and manages to comply with them, will be an outstanding worker and will be able to obtain the goals that he sets. This will make him an indispensable worker for the organization.
Creative skills allow the subject to provide solutions or products that are innovative and that had not been previously thought of. This intelligence is key for any organization, as it equips it with individuals capable of empowering it and finding solutions to very complex problems, and of creating innovative products that provide a higher level of competitiveness to the company.
The search for these three skills of Successful Intelligence in a company is of vital importance, since identifying, possessing or enhancing them, in the workers and administrative staff of an organization, enables the maximum possible performance to be achieved by the worker in their job position and can be a strength and a competitive weapon to face and resolve adversities in the environment, and achieve greater competitiveness.
Sternberg (1997) defines a series of twenty criteria that people with Successful Intelligence present in common:
1. People with Successful Intelligence are self-motivated. The capabilities of people do not matter, if they are not motivated.
2. People with Successful Intelligence learn to control their impulses. Quick and impulsive decisions can derail a company's development ideas.
3. People with Successful Intelligence know when to persevere. It is important to know how to distinguish when perseverance is necessary and when it is an obstacle to the fulfillment of business objectives, in order to achieve good results in the institution.
4. People with Successful Intelligence know how to make the most of their abilities. It is important for the company that individuals know their capabilities and develop them, as this will make them more efficient and increase the productivity of the organization.
5. People with Successful Intelligence translate thought into action. It is not only important to have ideas, but also the ability to act on those ideas. Thus, the company will be able to take full advantage of the potential of its human resources.
6. People with Successful Intelligence are product oriented. It is important not only to take care of the production process but also the product.
7. People with Successful Intelligence complete tasks and reach the end. This ability is essential for the achievement of the mission and the fulfillment of the objectives of the organization.
8. People with Successful Intelligence have initiative.
9. People with Successful Intelligence are not afraid to risk failure, they correct their mistakes and learn from them.
10. People with Successful Intelligence don't procrastinate.
11. People with Successful Intelligence accept fair reproach. Unjustified reproaches can be the cause of serious weaknesses in the business environment. Successful Intelligence People accept responsibility if they have really made a mistake.
Recognizing the mistake is the step to avoid doing it again.
12. People with Successful Intelligence refuse self-pity. Constant self-compassion is very detrimental to adaptation.
13. People with Successful Intelligence are independent, they trust themselves, if they want to do something, they know that the best way is to do it themselves and not let others assume responsibilities that are theirs.
14. People with Successful Intelligence try to overcome personal difficulties. It is a mistake to try to avoid the personal difficulties that life brings us, but we must try to separate these from professional life.
15. People with Successful Intelligence focus and concentrate on achieving their goals.
16. Successful Intelligence People don't try to do too much at once or do too little.
17. People with Successful Intelligence have the ability to postpone gratification. It is very necessary for the company that its workers not only settle for short-term satisfactions, but also seek long-term satisfactions that allow them further development.
18. People with Successful Intelligence are able to see both the small details and the bigger picture of the projects they undertake.
19. People with Successful Intelligence have a reasonable level of self-confidence and believe in their ability to achieve their goals. Self-confidence is a necessary tool to achieve success in business and in life in general.
20. People with Successful Intelligence balance analytical, creative and practical thinking. There are times in life when we need to be analytical, at other practical, and at other creative. It is important to know when these skills are applied.
Sternberg (1997), by identifying these twenty criteria or competencies, enables their clear understanding and identification, and thus greater access to the potential of the individual and his development. At the same time, following what is proposed by these works, these are the central characteristics that enable success, which can lead companies to greater efficiency in the use of their human resources.
Successful Intelligence is not global, that is, having it does not imply that the person can perform successfully in all tasks. Rather, what it means is that that person possesses a skill in a specific area that will lead to success. This idea is very important from the organizational point of view, because it allows to exploit the competences of an individual in a certain area, where its effectiveness has been demonstrated, which can be used for the benefit of the company.
An example of how not taking this into account could lead a subject to failure, we have it in the fact that when moving workers who have a successful performance in a certain position, to another area using their previous performance as a criterion, in many In these cases, these subjects do not have the same level of performance, and may even fail.
Thus, the concept of Successful Intelligence explicitly recognizes personal, social, and cultural values, as well as their interaction. Actually, you cannot talk about adaptation, selection, or modification outside of a cultural context, nor can you talk about any kind of intelligence outside of a cultural context. Behavior that can lead to success in one culture can lead to failure in another. (García Azcanio et al., 2005).
For Sternberg (1997), this type of intelligence is developable, and in fact very important, since it is the type of intelligence that will determine the success in life of the people who possess it. Furthermore, people who excel at something, or simply succeed in life, is because they possess Successful Intelligence.
However, it can be pointed out as a Sternberg deficiency that, despite mentioning emotional abilities, does not give them sufficient weight and does not develop them in depth in his studies, dedicating himself exclusively to cognitive abilities. Furthermore, this author talks about developing these capacities, but he dedicates himself entirely to describing them and creating tests that allow their identification and evaluation, without paying due attention to what could be more important: their enhancement.
These factors, however, have been privileged by the approaches of another great researcher on the subject: Howard Gardner, whose theory will be examined in the next section.
Howard Gardner and the theory of Multiple Intelligences.
Howard Gardner is a professor at Harvard University and has received numerous honors and published numerous papers on this topic. This author defines intelligence as "a biopsychological potential to process information, which can be activated in a cultural environment to solve problems or create products that have value in a culture."
Intelligences are not something that can be seen or counted, they are a potential, presumably neural, that may or may not be activated depending on the value that is given to it in a particular culture, the opportunities available in that culture and the personal decisions made. by individuals and / or their families, teachers, etc.
Gardner (1997) is given the task of identifying seven competencies on the basis of two prerequisites that he considers necessary, and eight criteria that, according to him, identify, when they appear, that an intelligence exists. So the prerequisites are:
- Human intellectual competence must master a whole set of problem-solving skills, allowing to solve genuine problems or difficulties encountered and create an effective product. It must have the potential to create or find problems, thus establishing the foundations of the new knowledge.
Furthermore, according to Gardner (1997), a general prerequisite for a theory of multiple intelligences is that it encompasses a whole range of skill types that are valued by cultures. These prerequisites are used to ensure that a human intelligence must be useful and important in a given culture.
The eight criteria considered by Gardner (1997) to determine intelligence will be briefly exposed below:
- Possible isolation for brain damage: From working with people who have suffered brain damage in specific areas of the brain, the existence of idiots savants, prodigies and other exceptional individuals who perform remarkably in an area, while observing mediocre performance, even delayed in other areas of skills.A core operation or identifiable sets of operations: It is established that each intelligence has one or several operations that process information, which can be internal or external, and drive the activity of that intelligence. developmental hallmark, along with a definable set of end-state expert performances: Each of the intelligences has its roots in the evolutionary history of people. An evolutionary history and credible evolution:The various intelligences have their roots in the evolution of human beings and even other species.Support of experimental psychological tasks: These cognitive studies demonstrate how people have different levels of competence in cognitive areas, because there are several intelligences that work in isolation from each other.Support of psychometric findings: Many of the tests support the idea of various intelligences, not only logical-mathematical or linguistic, but also spatial or other more personal ones such as scales that assess personal maturity, self-esteem, etc. Susceptibility to coding in a symbolic system: A necessary intelligence must be codified in a symbolic system, as it allows the processing of important information, which has a meaning that is a product of culture.
Thus, let us briefly address the seven competencies enunciated by Gardner (1997):
- Linguistic Intelligence: This intelligence is constituted by the sensitivity to the sounds, rhythms and meanings that come from the words. It includes the ability to handle the different functions of language, both orally and in writing. Musical Intelligence: It is the ability to discriminate, produce, transform, and appreciate musical forms, this includes sensitivity to rhythms, tones, and timbres. Logical Intelligence -Mathematics: It implies the ability to use numbers and logical schemes effectively, as well as the ability to handle chains of reasoning. Among the processes involved in it are those of classification, inference, calculation, categorization, hypothesis demonstration. Spatial Intelligence:It is the ability to accurately perceive the visual-spatial world and make transformations on those initial perceptions. It implies the ability to visualize and represent visual ideas, as well as to orient adequately in space. Kinesthetic-corporal intelligence: This intelligence implies the ability to use and control the movements of the body to express both feelings and ideas; in addition to the ability to handle objects with skills either to produce or transform things (for example in the sculptor) Interpersonal Intelligence: It is the ability to perceive, discern and respond appropriately to moods, feelings, intentions, desires and motivations of other people Intrapersonal Intelligence: It implies the ability to know oneself (with strengths and limitations), that is,accessing one's own feelings and thoughts, and being aware of moods, intentions, motivations and desires, and thus interpreting and guiding behavior according to that knowledge.
This author has discussed the existence of three other types of intelligence, which are: naturalistic, spiritual and existential intelligences (Gardner, 1999). But these types of intelligence are still under investigation and have not been definitively added to the list.
Intelligences are always expressed in the context of specific tasks, disciplines and fields. Thus, there is no pure intelligence in the performance of any activity, nor is society interested in it. Instead, one can speak of one or more human intelligences or intellectual tendencies of the human being, which are part of its faculties.
Here, a very important triad is introduced which is made up of intelligence, scope and field. The fields have to do with different disciplines, occupations and other companies that we can learn and about which we can be evaluated according to the level of skill that we have achieved. In this sense, human beings are born in cultures that group together in a huge number of areas.
However, although human beings participate in the fields, they can also be considered in an impersonal way: this because, in principle, the experience of a field can be contained in a book, a computer program, or some other kind of artifact.
Almost all domains require skills in a set of intelligences, and all intelligence can be applied in a wide range of cultural domains.
The field, for its part, includes people, organizations, award mechanisms and everything that makes it possible to make a judgment about the quality of personal performance. Thus, to the extent that an individual is judged competent in a certain field, she is likely to be successful in it.
This conception can be applied to Management by Competencies in the company, since, the combination of the different types of intelligences, would be the competencies that are expected of an individual given a given position (that demands those competences) in the field of labor organizations. The field in this case would be the institution itself and the people in charge of evaluating and determining whether the person in question is competent or not and whether or not he will be successful in the performance of that function.
The role of the field is clearly observed, not only in the selection of personnel, where people are evaluated by comparing the competencies possessed with those demanded by the job and it is assessed whether this person will be successful or not in the performance of said position in order to contract them; also in the decisions that are made when promoting an individual within the organization; or to select workers for training.
In addition, the relationship between the concepts of intelligence, scope and field is crossed by a cultural element, which is of great importance, not only in Gardner's work, but also for the theory of competency management, since it implies that there is a difference In the way of relating these three elements, depending on the culture in which individuals are inserted, that is, taking it to the field of companies, it is not the same to make a selection of personnel in Cuba, than in Japan. Furthermore, there are crucial differences between two companies even when they belong to the same country. This contrasts with some more general conceptions, although in reality they are not all, which try to promote management models by competencies, or profiles of generic competencies, from one company to another,regardless of the differences that may exist in terms of culture.
Another important approach made by this author, and that can be applied in the field of competency management, is the idea that in almost all socially useful roles there is an amalgam of intellectual and symbolic competences that "work" to achieve valued goals.
In fact, when faced with the same type of intelligence, different individuals can develop it in different professions. On the other hand, individuals who differ in the type of intelligences that predominate in them, can perform successfully in the same profession, since this profession shares a combination of different types of intelligence that can allow successful performance. For example, for a lawyer, linguistic intelligences, logical-mathematical, interpersonal, etc. can be important indistinctly.
Furthermore, there are infinite combinations of competencies that allow the individual who possesses them to perform adequately in a wide spectrum of professions determined by the culture in question.
It is considered that something important to do in an organization is to determine the combinations of the different types of intelligences that are necessary for a successful performance, and define, for each position, within the combination of intelligences that define it, the one that is necessary that predominates.
For Gardner (1997), a dialectic is constantly at work between the roles and functions valued in a culture, and the individual intellectual abilities that its inhabitants have. The ultimate goal of the professional or personnel manager market is to achieve the most effective match between the demands of various roles and the capabilities of specific individuals.
Similarly, Gardner (1999) has suggested two main distinctions when relating his theory to the job:
- The first has to do with the sphere or sector. Businesses divide, and compete with each other, into sectors. For example: sectors that deal mainly with communication, finance, sectors that interact with the public, etc. The second has to do with the roles played in each sector.
As for the sectors, he suggests there is no correspondence between sectors and intelligences. Any sector can use a wide range of intelligence. Furthermore, people who possess varying forces of intelligence tend to gravitate to whatever position they want, depending on their interest, passion, or training.
This is related to the idea raised above that there are combinations of intelligences that are useful to perform in a position, although it does not stop there.
The second distinction has to do with the different roles presented in companies. Each of these departments defines the roles to be played by their respective members.
In turn, each of these roles needs, to be performed successfully, a set of different skills that are determined by a competency or by the combination of two or more specific competencies.
In summary, across sectors and business functions, the full range of intelligences and their combinations can be employed. Each of the intelligences can be ordered in a business environment, and the most crucial roles in business can be assumed by people who possess varied mixes of intelligences.
For those people involved in the personnel selection process, the aforementioned has clear implications. There is no point in judging people in terms of a single set of dimensions, on the contrary, it is necessary to strive to know as much as possible about the most favorable ways of thinking and problem solving of candidates and employees, and to use this knowledge to hire and train workers, in order to form good teams and make critical decisions.
It is also important to highlight the fact that, in the aforementioned, Gardner (1999) considers that institutional learning should be promoted in companies, as well as being able to turn said company into an intelligent organization, in learning.
This author, despite providing a fairly complete theory of human intelligence, is not without criticism (García Azcanio et al., 2005).
First, it is dedicated to providing an exhaustive analysis taking results of research from different areas of related sciences, however it neglects a fundamental problem: how to measure intelligence? It is known that in order to enhance something, the first thing that has to be done is a diagnosis and Gardner's theory ignores this detail.
Second, and in relation to the first, although it speaks of empowerment, in its theory it focuses on identification, and leaves the role of developing these capacities to the will of the environment, without providing effective tools for it.
Antagonistic conceptions?
In summary, these two authors, apparently, start from different conceptions of human capacities. This is due to the way they both operationalize the concept of intelligence.
Sternberg proposes a type of intelligence, which he calls successful intelligence, which contrasts with the inert intelligence, which according to him Gardner studies. This successful intelligence is a combination of three types of skills, analytical, creative and practical. This type of intelligence involves action towards a goal, and it is what accounts for the success that may or may not be achieved in life.
For his part, Gardner argues that there are seven types of intelligences, (the others are still under discussion), these intelligences do not occur in everyday life independently, but appear combined among them. It is this combination that enables individuals to develop in a given area.
For Sternberg there are general criteria, which all people with successful intelligence possess, that allow them to be identified. For Gardner, what makes it possible to identify “smart people” is that they can solve problems or create products in a certain area.
The differences between these two authors could seem wide even though the very essence of their concept of intelligence is not so divergent. However, after an exhaustive analysis of both theories, it can be concluded that these two ways of conceptualizing intelligence are not as irreconcilable as their authors suggest.
The differences lie more in the angle from which they look at and investigate the controversial concept. While Sternberg focuses on a more global vision of the term, Gardner fragments it into several parts when defining 7 concepts that he considers types of intelligence.
If you delve into the concept of Successful Intelligence, you don't necessarily have to exclude any of the multiple intelligences. For example, to be successful in life, a person with musical intelligence can carry out a series of actions that lead to success in her professional life.
As can be seen in the previous example, these theories are not antagonistic. On the contrary, they can complement each other because they look at the same phenomenon from two different angles; which leads to different explanations.
Sternberg focuses more on the product by conceiving intelligence through the result of its manifestation. Gardner focuses more on process when devising a developmental theory with implications for education.
Thus, in each person with "Successful Intelligence" there is a developed combination of "Multiple Intelligences" that leads the individual to succeed in life. In the same way, in each of the "Multiple Intelligences" there is the "Analytical Intelligence", the "Practice" and the "Creative", which allow the empowerment by the individual of this intelligence.
Example: the individual who has a predisposition for music, has to be able to generate new and interesting ideas, analyze and evaluate them, solve problems, make decisions efficiently and apply his skills to everyday problems.
Only if these skills are involved can you turn that predisposition into a capacity that leads to success in life, both professionally and personally. Thus these "irreconcilable differences" are determined more by will than by theoretical reality.
As has been seen, this issue is very controversial and requires more in-depth studies. The main objective of bringing it up is to encourage debate and research.
Where are the social values?
In this section we will go on to analyze a problem that is presented in common, both to these two theories, as well as to many of the theories that address the issue of human competencies in the company: this is the problem of culture and values social.
One of the most important criticisms that has been made of cognitive psychology is that it marginalizes the role that culture plays in the development of higher cognitive processes.
In authors like Gardner and Sternberg we can see that there is an attempt to solve this deficiency. In the case of Sternberg (1997), he tries to solve the problem by conceiving culture as the one that provides the criteria for evaluating behavior as intelligent. For him, Culture is an external factor that interacts with the individual. In the same way, Gardner (1997) makes a similar approach although operationalized in a different way when he uses his triad scope - field - intelligence, which is crossed by a strong cultural value where it is the field that judges the behaviors as adequate or not and judges people as competent or not for a certain area. Of course,the fact that these factors of the field and the field are crossed by culture implies that the fields and fields will vary from one culture to the other. Thus, like Sternberg, what is deemed competent in one culture may be irrelevant in another.
Although Sternberg and Gardner have succeeded in proposing these concepts, they still remain in proposals, as they are not well implemented. This is due to the fact that both authors in their work, after raising these concepts, treat them superficially and dedicate themselves to developing other aspects in depth.
When studying the work of authors such as Vygotsky (1979) and Bruner, it necessarily follows from it that the criteria for success are cultural elements, thus it is impossible to draw up lists of criteria for success that are useful and applicable in different cultures.
Following this idea, conceiving man as a social being has important implications, since it implies that studying man cannot be separated from the characteristics of the culture where he is inserted.
This has important repercussions in the area of business psychology since management by competencies itself arises in capitalist societies where, despite the talk of managing the man in the company, the important thing is not the man himself, but the product that of man is derived and the gains that this implies.
This is clear from the very emergence of competency management when McClelland (1973) defines competencies in terms of the gains they may represent for the company. thus, these types of models are transferred from one culture to another, with only a few changes, which seems to us wrong.
In this sense, a problem can be seen in the transfer of this type of business management models to daily practice. You definitely have to be careful with the concepts you work with, since the culture and social system in which a given organization is framed have peculiarities that notably differentiate it from other systems where this type of management is studied and implemented.
An example of this is the approach made by authors such as Goleman (1997), Sternberg (1997), Spencer and Spencer (1993), Gardner (1999), etc., which refers to the fact that although these capacities, abilities, both cognitive as well as emotional, they are developable, it is preferable to look for individuals who already possess them.
In fact, the different ways of carrying out personnel selections in those countries, seek above all the skills already possessed rather than skills to be developed. Training would be an afterthought to be implemented later if needed, but based on prior capacity building.
Thus, despite the fact that, as has been seen throughout this work, the ideas of Gardner and Sternberg are very useful and can be applied to the business field, we must be careful and not fall into the error, which is being done common, of transferring these theories without prior investigation to the practice of a given organization. It must first be adapted to the culture in question, the social system and the individuals that make up that entity.
If we start from the idea of Vygotsky (1979) that capacities can be enhanced and in fact develop throughout the individual's life, we necessarily arrive at the conception that personnel selection cannot exclude people, since that there must be a whole system of social values and a whole conception of the human being and its priority, which allows the emphasis to fall more on developing human beings than on using them solely as a source of profit.
Bibliography:
- Alles, Martha Alicia (2000): "Strategic management of human resources: Management by competencies"; Ed. Granica; Buenos Aires.Cuesta Santos, Armando (2001): “Competences Management”; Ed. Academy; Havana; Cuba. Chomsky, Noam (1971): “Aspects de la theorie syntaxique”; Éditions du Seuil; Paris. Chomsky, Noam (1981): "Current Problems in Linguistic Theory and Theoretical Issues of Generative Grammar"; Ed. XXI Century; México.García Azcanio, Andrés (2003): “Human Potential. The notion of Competencies ”; Diploma work to opt for the title of Bachelor of Psychology; Faculty of Psychology, University of Havana.García Azcanio, Andrés (2005): "The current notion of Competences from Cognitive Psychology"; at http://www.monografias.com/trabajos24/nocion-competencias/nocion-competencias.shtml. (Revised September 2005) García Azcanio,Andrés (2006): “From Cognitive Psychology to management by competences in tourism companies” (Reflection); in Turistic Challenges Magazine (in edition); University of Matanzas "Camilo Cienfuegos"; ISSN: 1681-9713.García Azcanio, Andrés et al. (2005): “Cognitive Theories of Human Competencies to enhance Competency Management in the hotel sector”; CD of the III International Symposium TURDES 2005; ISBN: 959-16-0348-7.Gardner, Howard (1997): "Structures of the mind: The theory of Multiple Intelligences"; Fund of Economic Culture; Bogota; Colombia.Gardner, Howard (1999): "Intelligence Reframed: Multiple Intelligences for the 21st Century"; Basic Books; New York.Goleman, Daniel (1996): “Emotional Intelligence. Why is it more important than IQ ”; Ed. Javier Vergara; Buenos Aires.Goleman, Daniel (1997):"The practice of emotional intelligence"; Ed. Kairos; Barcelona.McClelland, David C. (1973): “Testing for Competence rather than for Intelligence”; American Psychologist; January.Norman, D. (1989): "Twelve problems for cognitive science"; in Poggioli, L. And Navarro, A. (1989): “Cognitive psychology. Development and prospects; McGraw-Hill; México.Spencer, Lyle and Spencer, Signe M. (1993): “Competence at Work, models for superior performance”; John Wiley & Sons; New York Sternberg, RJ (1999): "The theory of successful intelligence"; Review of General Psychology, 3; pp 292-316 Sternberg, RJ (2001): "Successful intelligence: Understanding what Spearman had rather than what he studied"; in Collis, JM and Messick, S. (Eds.): "Intelligence and personality: Bridging the gap in theory and measurement"; Mahwah, NJ;Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; (pp. 347-373). Sternberg, RJ, Castejón, JL, Prieto, MD, Hautamäki, J., and Grigorenko, EL (2001): “Confirmatory factor analysis of the Sternberg triarchic abilities test in three international samples: An empirical test of the triarchic theory of intelligence ”; in European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 17 (1) pp 1-16 Sternberg, Robert J. (1986): “Human capacities. An approach from information processing ”; Ed. Labor, SA; Barcelona.Sternberg, Robert J. (1997): "Successful Intelligence"; Ed. Paidos; Barcelona.Vygotsky, LS (1979): "The development of higher psychological processes"; Ed. Criticism; Barcelona.Zayas Agüero, Pedro (2001): "Theoretical-methodological conception of personnel selection processes"; Optional thesis to the degree of Doctor of Psychological Sciences;Faculty of Psychology; University of Havana.
Chomsky's notion of Competition-Performance can be reviewed in Chomsky, Noam (1981): “Current problems in linguistic theory and Theoretical issues of generative grammar”; Ed. XXI Century; Mexico; and in Chomsky, Noam (1971): "Aspects de la theorie syntaxique"; Éditions du Seuil; Paris.
McClelland's notion about organizational competencies can be reviewed in McClelland, David C. (1973): “Testing for Competence rather than for Intelligence”; American Psychologist; January.
Norman's criteria in this regard can be found in Norman, D. (1989): "Twelve problems for cognitive science"; in Poggioli, L. And Navarro, A. (1989): “Cognitive psychology. Development and prospects; McGraw-Hill; Mexico.
About Emotional Intelligence see Goleman, Daniel (1996): “Emotional Intelligence. Why is it more important than IQ ”; Ed. Javier Vergara; Buenos Aires; Goleman, Daniel (1997): "The practice of Emotional Intelligence"; Ed. Kairos; Barcelona.
See Cuesta Santos, Armando (2001): “Competences Management”; Ed. Academy; Havana; Cuba; Alles, Martha Alicia (2000): "Strategic management of human resources: Management by competencies"; Ed. Granica; Buenos Aires;
Zayas Agüero, Pedro (2001): "Theoretical-methodological conception of personnel selection processes"; Optional thesis to the degree of Doctor of Psychological Sciences; Faculty of Psychology; University of Havana; García Azcanio, Andrés (2005): "The current notion of Competences from Cognitive Psychology"; in
www.monografias.com/trabajos24/nocion-competencias/nocion-competencias.shtml; García Azcanio, Andrés et al. (2005): "Cognitive Theories of Human Competences to enhance Competency Management in the hotel sector"; CD of the III International Symposium TURDES 2005; ISBN: 959-16-0348-7; among others.
Sternberg, Robert J. (1997): "Successful Intelligence"; Ed. Paidos; Barcelona.
Sternberg, RJ (1999): "The theory of successful intelligence"; Review of General Psychology, 3; pp 292-316.
Sternberg, RJ (2001): "Successful intelligence: Understanding what Spearman had rather than what he studied"; in Collis, JM and Messick, S. (Eds.): "Intelligence and personality: Bridging the gap in theory and measurement"; Mahwah, NJ; Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; (pp. 347-373).
Sternberg, Robert J. (1986): “Human capacities. An approach from information processing ”; Ed. Labor, SA; Barcelona.
Sternberg, RJ, Castejón, JL, Prieto, MD, Hautamäki, J., and Grigorenko, EL (2001): “Confirmatory factor analysis of the Sternberg triarchic abilities test in three international samples: An empirical test of the triarchic theory of intelligence”; in European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 17 (1) pp 1-16.
Gardner, Howard (1997): "Structures of the mind: The theory of Multiple Intelligences"; Fund of Economic Culture; Bogota; Colombia.
Wise idiots. These are individuals with exceptional performance in a very specific area, but with an impaired performance level in other areas of cognitive abilities.
Gardner, Howard (1999): "Intelligence Reframed: Multiple Intelligences for the 21st Century"; Basic Books; New York.
It is good to clarify here that this is also influenced by other factors such as culture, interaction with other individuals, and so on. Here it is discussed whether the theories are antagonistic, therefore the debate is focused on them and other factors are excluded although their importance is recognized.
Referred by García Azcanio, Andrés (2003): “Human Potential. The notion of Competences ”; Diploma work to opt for the degree of Bachelor of Psychology; Faculty of Psychology, University of Havana.
