On Docility

So I am taking a class this semester on prudence because I'm not very prudent. When studying the integral parts of prudence in the Summa, I realized that I am docile. Very docile. So the question is, can one be too docile? Do you correct the weaknesses of docility by strengthening the other parts of prudence (such as acumen)? Can you grow acumen or should you just settle with docility?

Thomas writes about the importance of docility: "[P]rudence deals with particular matters of action. Since these are infinite in their variety, one person alone cannot consider them all sufficiently; he would take ages, not a short space of time. ... Aristotle observes that the unproved assertions and opinions of experienced, old, and sagacious people deserve as much attention as those they support by proofs, for experience gives them an eye for principles. This is the bidding of Scripture, Lean not upon your own prudence; also, Stand with the multitude of the priests--that is, the seniors--that are wise, and join yourself from your heart to their wisdom."

This resonates with me and sums up some important motivations for my project (as yet, excessively vague) concerning tradition.