The Dunning-Kruger Effect at Work in the Minnesota Masonic Heritage Center
I recently read an article called, “Why Expertise Matters” by Adam Frank. It was suggestive of the CEO’s actions throughout the planning and construction of the Minnesota Masonic Heritage Center, where many experts were included throughout the process and then ultimately dismissed; their advice largely ignored.
Frank expands on the cognitive bias of individuals who suffer from illusory superiority called the Dunning-Kruger effect. He cites Tom Nichols’ definition in, “The Death of Expertise: The Campaign Against Established Knowledge and Why it Matters.” Nichols writes:
“The dumber you are, the more confident you are that you’re not actually dumb. And when you get invested in being aggressively dumb…well, the last thing you want to encounter are experts who disagree with you, and so you dismiss them in order to maintain your unreasonably high opinion of yourself.” Not that the CEO wasn’t intelligent, but it certainly identified many of his decisions on unfamiliar subjects and how he treated experts in those fields.
Frank writes about individuals with extensive training and experience in specific areas whose credentials become a liability when working for those who demonstrate the Dunning-Kruger effect.
He further defines the characteristics of these experts:
“…being a true expert means having a healthy dose of humility. If you have really studied something and really gone deep into how it works, then you should come away knowing how much you don’t know. In a sense, that is the real definition of an expert — knowing the limits of one’s own knowledge.”
That summed up many of the consultants brought into the loop from 2014-2016 on the Minnesota Masonic Heritage Center project, including myself.
I had witnessed the CEO not only dispute experts, but also ignore their recommendations or make decisions actively going against their advice time and time again throughout the planning and construction of the Minnesota Masonic Heritage Center. Specifically, the initial research and design of the Ladd museum came to mind as the CEO’s personal theories about the history of Freemasonry and origins of the Craft supplanted those of nationally recognized experts, such as Art Arturo de Hoyos. He later selected local replacements willing to translate his own personal view of the Fraternity. Furthermore, during May 2016 the CEO explained to me that anyone could design and build a museum or set up a library; he didn’t need experts around to tell him how to do it.
I had repeatedly encountered his attitude in a variety of meetings, especially when his vision needed validation. The creation of the lodge room painting is one such example. As a Masonic scholar, art historian, and artist, I had extensively researched and designed a new version of King Solomon’s Temple. My designs and those of Joe Burns for the historic portraits were subject to review by primarily the CEO and not any fraternal scholars, historical architects, or other organized committee specifically assembled to review commissioned artworks. To be clear, there was no committee assembled to represent the consensus of the Fraternity in Minnesota. The Grand Lodge was curiously absent throughout many changes that occurred after initial approval by the Board of Directors.
Those called upon to review any design changes and provide feedback were the Minnesota Masonic Charities staff, specifically the CFO, Director of Communications, the executive administrative assistant, and the general director of the Minnesota Masonic Heritage Center. Not a single one of these individuals had any training or background in fraternal history or art. All waited for the CEO to speak and then agreed with his edict, rubber-stamping his own personal opinion.
The CEO used a similar approach for the handling of the Fort Scott scenery, ignoring an expert’s advice, timelines, and safety concerns. For example, when addressing the health hazards of dusting color, the CEO explained that the pigments were inert and not harmful.
I am no chemist, but it is common knowledge that lead, cadmium and arsenic are common in historical dry pigments and those are harmful when inhaled.
The CEO sought confirmation for his theory from a paint company in Duluth (who notably did not understand historical scenery or the dry pigment paint system). This company would not have any reason or history evaluating the chemical components of dry pigment used in the production of painted scenery. However, his individual consultation with another company, albeit an inappropriate one, provided him with a sense of legitimacy that could validate his future actions.
The CEO repeatedly questioned my scenery restoration process, suggesting alternatives to ensure that the collection would be hanging within a year. He advised me in an area that he knew nothing about; an area in which I was an expert. He clearly discounted my life’s work of almost thirty years studying historical scene painting methodology, paint application, and the use of dry pigment when creating Masonic scenery. In the end, I was just one of many experts dismissed so that the entire endeavor could solely remain the singular vision of the CEO.
As many would argue, this was intended as an edifice of one man’s vision, not the cumulative work of many Minnesota Freemasons.
To be continued….
