It would seem obvious that the more competent someone is, the more we will like that person. By “competence,” I mean a cluster of qualities: smartness, the ability to get things done, wise decisions, etc.
(A) If this were true, we might like people more if they reveal some evidence of fallibility. For example, if your friend is a brilliant mathematician, superb athlete, and gourmet cook, you might like him or her better if, every once in a while, they screwed up.
(B) One possibility is that, although we like to be around competent people, those who are too competent make us uncomfortable. They may seem unapproachable, distant, superhuman ― and make us look bad (and feel worse) by comparison.
(C) We stand a better chance of doing well at our life tasks if we surround ourselves with people who know what they’re doing and have a lot to teach us. But the research evidence is paradoxical: In problem-solving groups, the participants who are considered the most competent and have the best ideas tend not to be the ones who are best liked. Why?
* fallibility: 실수를 저지르기 쉬움