In the first, a study by the University of Edinburgh and the University of California, San Diego, concluded that overconfidence frequently brings rewards.

Researchers used a mathematical model to simulate the effects of overconfidence over generations.

The model pitted overconfident, accurate, and underconfident strategies against each other.

Investigators reached the view that overconfidence frequently yields rewards - as long as the rewards associated with the conflict are sufficiently large compared with the costs of competing for them.

In contrast, so they claimed, people with unbiased, accurate perceptions usually fare worse.

May I venture that, as the song goes, it ain't necessarily so?

Around the same time the above story appeared, a rogue trader with a major Swiss bank was rumbled after committing an eye-watering $2 billion fraud.

Overconfidence undoubtedly played its part.

Gifting, hard work and, yes, front, were probably among the key factors that saw this individual put in charge of multi-million dollar deals.

But it was overconfidence that compounded poor judgment and resulted in a bigger mess than if the perpetrator had owned up sooner.

Other researchers have postulated that there is a demonstrated systematic tendency for some people to be overly optimistic about the outcome of planned actions.

This so called 'optimism bias' includes over-estimating the likelihood of positive events and under-estimating the probability of negative events.

The leaders and other colleagues that I've worked with that I have most admired are those that displayed a healthy self-confidence together with high degrees of professional competence and personal humility.

You see, it takes a healthy view of your own self worth both to be able to instill confidence in others and, when required, to admit that you got it wrong.