Character or Competence - which builds a stronger foundation?

The Who and What Question?

Do you trust yourself or another individual with a foundation that is built solely on the depth of character, or on the height of competence? As straightforward as this question may seem, when we try to define competence and character, we realize they are not as simple as they sound. Character is not just “being nice,” and competence is not just “being skilled.” Simply put, Character is the total sum of principles, values, and inner convictions that guide a person when no one is watching. Competence, on the other hand, is the mastery of a skill, art, duty, or responsibility to produce a desired result. If you agree with these definitions, you'd realize the question becomes more uncomfortable. If character is made up of values, principles, and convictions, who determines the source of those values? And if competence is judged by results, who decides what result is worth pursuing?

The Innate Response

I think many of us become conflicted here because competence is easy to admire. Competence is visible. It produces. It performs. It can be measured, applauded, promoted, and rewarded. You can see the results of competence in a person’s work, speech, influence, money, leadership, creativity, or ability to solve problems. Character, however, is quieter. It does not announce itself. It may even look slow, unattractive, or inconvenient in a world that wants fast results. Sometimes, character looks like restraint when everyone else is rushing. Sometimes, it looks like silence when defending yourself would be easier. Sometimes, it looks like refusing an opportunity because the method required to get it would cost the foundations in which your character is built on. And because character is less visible, we tend to underestimate it. Can i ask you something? When raising any building infrastructure, which part of it consumes the most amount of resources, the most amount of time and the most detailed execution? I believe we'd all arrive at the same answer and that is the foundation . The foundation is never seen, never in the spotlight to be admired, and yet carries the weight of every other layer above it. At first glance, we may be impressed by how tall, attractive and exceptional a building may appear to be. In fact, we are drawn to it for this very purpose; the design, lighting, and luxury feel it proports from a distance and in close range. Nonethelss, no matter how ostentacious this infrastructure is externally, the real question still lies beneath it. What is it standing on? Because the height of a building does not matter if the foundation beneath it is too weak to hold it. In fact, the higher the building goes, the more dangerous a weak foundation becomes. I think competence is similar. The more skilled, powerful, intelligent, persuasive, or influential a person becomes, the more important their foundation becomes. Competence may raise a person higher, but character determines whether that height can be trusted.

The Paradox of Competence

The problem with competence alone is that it can build beautifully on a weak foundation. A person may know how to lead, speak, persuade, manage, build, or influence, yet still lack the inner self governor (integrity) that determines how far they are willing to go and what lines they refuse to cross. Without character, competence is dangerous because it only makes a person more effective at whatever they have chosen to do, whether good or bad. Within the same process, a competent person can solve superficial problems, whilst creating deeper ones. They can inspire, but they can also manipulate; they can lead, but they can also dominate; they can build, but they can also destroy with precision. So maybe the issue is not competence itself but rather, competence without a foundation strong enough to carry it.

Reflection

I do not believe character and competence are enemies. A person with character but no competence may have good intentions but poor execution. A person with competence but no character may have excellent execution but destructive intentions. The ideal is definitely not one without the other, however, if we are speaking of foundation, then character must come first. What is the value of building high if the ground beneath it cannot hold it? It only remains tall and visible at the mercy of its external features which can and will most definitly fade away without the required internal support to hold it up. I believe the danger of our time is not that we lack competent people. Perhaps, it is that we have become too easily impressed by competence before asking what foundation supports and holds it up. Without a clear answer to this, competence is only but a charade. And maybe the real question is this: Do we trust people because of their integrity, or because they are useful to us? and how blurred can the line of integrity be, if it's both? Drafted by Princess Faith Odo, refined with AI.

Read next

• Integrity - The State of Oneness
• Can Character Exist Without a Source?
• Competence at the Cost of Character in Careers