The 4C's of Performance

What makes a person successful at work? There are many answers to this question. Formulas for professional success litter the landscape. Some have been examined and tossed out as trash. Others have been applied with decent results but then been discarded after their relevance was exhausted. Still, a good number of the formulas remain in circulation because they contain sound principles. A few of these are even practical to implement. Over the past few years, as I have surveyed the best writing, research and practices on this subject – and factored in my own observations and experience – I have distilled job success down to three core components. I call them the 3C’s – Competence, Confidence and Commitment. Individuals who combine these three ingredients in an optimal manner produce predictable and reliable performance results. In essence, there is nothing new here; however, ferreting out these core components of performance does cut through a lot of the noise and bring some needed clarity and order to the messy landscape.

I have used the 3C’s formula for a number of years as a diagnostic tool and a framework for coaching and training. In working with individual clients, the first step is to identify the results that they are either not achieving, or not achieving with the desired level consistency. The second step involves tracing back the problem to see how it is rooted in competence, confidence and/or commitment. Using the C’s formula does not tell me or the client exactly what to do, but it does help us determine where to start and where to focus. For example, if the performance of a highly competent and confident individual starts to become inconsistent, it is likely that their level of commitment if flagging. We probe around until we identify the source of the “pain” and then work together to resolve it.

While the 3C’s has worked well for me, I have recently come to the conclusion that something important is missing. This has led me to the discovery the 4th “C” – a component that I have labeled “Conscience.” The problem with the 3C’s by themselves is that, while they produce predictable and reliable results, the results may not necessarily be positive ones. For instance, we could probably argue that Adolph Hitler was competent, confident, and committed in carrying out his objectives and that he produced predictable and reliable results. The results, however, consisted of unimaginable atrocities against innocent human beings. History is replete with examples of people who have been extremely competent, confident and committed in performing acts that have led to the detriment of people and organizations. . What was lacking was the 4th “C” – the moral centering influence of conscience. Unlike the original 3C’s, which are active ingredients, conscience plays a stabilizing role in the formula.

Let me take a minute to define each of the 4C’s to make sure we are all operating from the same frame of reference. These definitions are primarily written from the work perspective. They are also a work in progress.

Competence: The demonstrated ability of a person to perform a task or job function. It is essentially applied knowledge and skill that can be directly observed and measured. Competence can be honed through practice, feedback, reinforcement, rewards, and training.

Confidence: The degree to which a person believes he/she has the aptitude and ability to learn and successfully perform a task or job function. Confidence can be inferred through observation and measured through self-assessment. It can be increased through support, coaching, reinforcement and feedback about results.

Commitment: The degree of mental and physical effort a person is willing to expend to successfully perform a task or job function. Commitment can be inferred through observation and measured through self-assessment. It can be enhanced by aligning work tasks and goals with personal and professional interests and passions. It can also be bolstered by highlighting the significance and importance of the task and function with regard to the interests of the organization and those it serves.

Conscience: The ability to accurately reflect on one’s own behavior and determine what motives, thoughts, intentions, attitudes and actions are both true and morally right.

Given these definitions, it is easy to see how the original 3C’s work together and how the 4^th “C” – conscience – play its role. Consider any performance task. If I do not possess the requisite competence to accomplish a job function, it is a non-starter. I can throw good doses of confidence and commitment into the mix, and operate from a healthy conscience, but that combination will only enable me to faithfully beat my head against the wall until I am rendered unconscious. Here is another example. If my conscience is at odds with the task or job function I am expected to complete, it will become a source of dissonance. The inconsistency between what I am expected to do and what I believe is right will either create a constant drag on my performance or cause me to stop performing altogether. These results will occur regardless of my level of competence, confidence or commitment.

Assuming conscience is not an issue, it is easy to see how the original 3C’s work together. If I possess competence and commitment, but lack confidence, I will stick with the job function for a while but will eventually lose heart when I encounter problems or obstacles. This will result in what I call “bailout.” Similarly, I can have adequate competence and confidence, but lack commitment. This end result of this combination is what I refer to as “burnout.” There is not enough fuel in my emotional tank. In that instance, I will stay with the task or job function until I reach of point of boredom, apathy or decide to change my priorities.

Armed with a simple formula for performance, you now have the basic tools for diagnosing performance issues and assessing what can be done to address them. Improving performance or correcting performance deficiencies requires that leader-managers accurately identify which elements of the performance equation are lacking. Failure to do this diagnosis may lead us to send a competent employee to training when the intervention that is needed is coaching and support because of flagging confidence. Likewise, we can give all the coaching and support in the world to an employee but it may have little affect if what the employee lacks is the requisite knowledge or skill to perform the task. The interplay of the 4C’s is what makes managing performance so complex but also very interesting.