
Competence, like truth, beauty and contact lenses, is in the eye of the beholder.
– Laurence J. Peter
The World’s Fastest Man in 1980, Allan Wells, would not have made the podium in the 100-metre races at the Beijing Olympics last year. In fact, his winning time of 10.25 would not have even qualified him for the semi-finals.
If you were a trailblazer in the world of personal computing in 1983, you’d be bragging about how your team had just shipped a product that offered a 5 MHz processor, a 5 MB hard drive, dual 5.25 inch floppy drives, support for up to 2 MB of RAM, a graphical user interface, and a mouse.
You’d be bragging, of course, about the Apple Lisa, a machine that sold for the ridiculously low price of $9,995.
And in 1984, one of America’s most influential consumer advocacy groups, the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), launched an all-out war on fast-food restaurants. According to their own press release, their goal was “to pressure fast-food restaurants and food companies to stop frying with beef fat and tropical oils, which are high in the cholesterol-raising saturated fats that increase the risk of heart disease.”
By 1990, their campaign had succeeded. Most fast food chains had significantly lowered the amount of saturated fats in their foods, and replaced them with a substitute that the CSPI had been arguing for since 1987: trans fats.
You know that type of mutated fat this is so dangerous to humans that governments around the world are seeking to ban it? Yeah, that one.
Looking back not even 30 years ago, these people were leaders in their field, the best of the best, “experts.” Today, we’d more likely refer to them as unemployed hacks.
Which brings me to the first point I want to make about becoming an expert: Experts aren’t really experts. They suck at what they do. They just suck a little bit less than everybody else around them at the time.
Expertise as Fog
The other point I want to make about pursuing expertise is this: Expertise does not exist.
Sure, it’s a nice label to be given if you’re being interviewed on CNN, or if you’re being introduced into a debate on the existence of God, but it is not something you can achieve. If you’ve set yourself the goal of becoming “a Ruby on Rails expert”, “a blogging expert”, or even say “a fluent French speaker”, you haven’t set a goal at all.
What is a blogging expert? Someone who makes a lot of money blogging about how to make a lot of money blogging? Or perhaps someone who achieves 20,000 subscribers by churning out list posts and other linkbait that do an excellent job of growing traffic, but a poor job of growing the reader?
And if you apply for a job that requires a “Ruby on Rails expert” and you get hired, does that mean that you are an expert? Maybe all it really means is that you know just enough to convince the person that hired you. Which doesn’t actually mean you know a lot about the framework.
The best way to achieve expertise in your chosen field is to eliminate the word “expertise” from your lexicon. As my seven-language-speaking friend Benny Lewis put it, in an email exchange I had with him on the subject of attaining language fluency:
If you really want to be fluent, I recommend abandoning the thought process of “achieving fluency” entirely. Setting a goal of “speak $language fluently” is too vague to be achievable. It implies that some day you will reach the point where you can finally say, “I speak Klingon fluently!” But that day will never come.
You need to have more concrete goals spread across a small number of days or weeks that eventually add up to something tangible, such as, “This week I will learn vocabulary related to objects in the house” or, “Today I will work on my consonant pronunciation.”
If you think about it, isn’t all learning really language learning? Whether you’re trying to achieve fluency in Italian, or building websites with Ruby on Rails, or baking designer cakes, every skill set is really just a vocabulary for self-expression. The more you know, the more you can say.
Just like spoken language, the language of the Builder has no beginning and no end. So the best way to improve yourself in any pursuit is to forget about “becoming an expert” and to instead focus on expanding your range of communication. Ideally in a way that is clearly measurable by an outside observer.
If you want to be a “competent Rails hacker”, then set a goal to get one of your patches landed in the Rails trunk. If your dream is to be a “successful blogger”, bring it closer to reality by aiming to publish, say, three posts per week. And if want to be a “world-class chessplayer”, make it actionable by playing 10 blitz games per day in a specific opening you’re trying to master, and analyze each game afterwards.
Be less concerned with the adjectives of success–good, great, world-class–and more concerned with taking a worthwhile next step. The path to expertise is the path to nowhere in particular. When you get specific, you get results.
[...] a comment » I just read this blogpost by Brad Bollenbach on Becoming an Expert. He makes two points: (1) experts aren’t really experts. [...]
Great post Brad! Thanks for including some of my tips. :)
An honest personal reflection on just about any skill brings one to the realization that there is generally another, higher level/plane of competency to shoot for…accepting that reality either motivates us to grow our expertise or simply to shut-up and be content in knowing that if there are others above your level, there are many below. Expertise is much more about the ongoing journey than a label defining success/complacency.
One thing I would add is that ‘experts’ in any field need to be more creative in their offerings. New ways of doing the same things are critical in a dynamic marketplace – especially now.
Experts exist at all levels of the workplace. Perhaps drawing off the ‘expert’advice of consumers and ‘blue-coller’ workers – people who are involved in the bare-practical of applying their trade at work. Oftentimes THEY are the ‘experts’ in their field, as opposed to their MBA boss or supervisor.
I think this post gives some rationale for why the 10,000 hour rule (to become an expert) is strictly wrong but points to the right direction. It’s not so much you have to have 10,000 hours per se, as much as you have to have (saliently) more quality hours than some population.
@NewWorldOrder:
Good point.
I think many people have found Gladwell’s 10,000 hour rule encouraging. It suggests that hard work over a long period goes a long way. As Jim Rohn says, “Most people overestimate what they can do in their first year, and greatly underestimate what they can do in five years.”
Then there’s another group of people who already have all kinds of important commitments–kids, relationships, day jobs, etc.–for whom 10,000-hour-thinking is less encouraging. They’re lucky if they can commit 10 hours per week to something new.
With any luck, this article will reach some of those in the latter group. After all, 10 hours per week, precisely spent, was enough for 37signals built their flagship product Basecamp. :)
Wow! Great post and your, might I say, daring heroic act in your belief that expertise doesn’t exist. I guess your going to make a lot of “experts” reading this post very angry.
Hmm… I would say that Mia Micheals is an expert at choreographing dances, and that her dances will be beautiful today, just like they will be in 50 years from now. Just like Pavarotti was an amazing singer 30 years ago, and still is today. Just like Michealangelo’s Statue of David was a work of genius 500 years ago, and still is today.
In some cases, like computer development, it’s a bit easier to say that someone may have been good at something 20 years ago, but just in so far as technological advancements — look how far we’ve come today. Of course, if he is the ‘expert’ he was at the time, you couldn’t just plop him into today’s world and call his contribution trivial. For his contribution may have served as an advancement for the systems we use today. His work in today’s world may not be as impressive, but what makes him an expert are his skills, and abilities to apply them and more importantly, learn. Therefore, that man in today’s world would still be an expert, if his philosophy remained the same, as he would advance with the times, and maintain that ‘expert’ attitude and approach. It’s built on a desire of loving what you do, and wanting to be amazing at it and know everything about it.
In art, it’s much clearer though, I think. Since, a beautiful painting, painted 80 years ago, is still beautiful today and still represents an expert today.
Brad –
Love your site. But it’s been quite a while since you last posted. Please post more!
- Armin Tadayyon
Seconded.
The beauty of this site is that it is not filled up with content just for the sake of it. I’d rather have fewer, higher quality articles than more regular postings.
Wow. I came across your blog through a google search, and have to say it’s awesome. Lot’s of good stuff here. Thanks.
I’d like to third Armin’s comment. I keep coming back for a new article and nothing has popped up yet.
Come back to the five and dime, Brad Bollenbach!
Dude, it’s only worthy and fun if you participate also.
Thought-provoking post. But of course there’s such a thing as expertise – have you ever talked to an expert, or seen one on TV? Or not even an expert, just someone who’s really smart. You just know it when you see it. But you’re completely right that the worst way to become an expert is to set out to become an expert.
You have to find intrinsic value in what you’re studying in order to learn (& say) anything of value about it. If you’re toiling away just to attain the adjective “expert” then you’re motivation will wane. & if you truly enjoy what you’re studying, then you motivated by achieving such titles as “expert”.
It’s been four months now Brad!
[...] read something reasonably awesome recently about how expertise happens. The idea is it doesn’t. If you want to be a master at anything, the only thing you can do is [...]
Looks like you’ve disappeared??? Well, good luck with whatever other projects may be on your mind right now!
Dammit post already!
like the post! still waiting for your next one…
I guess ur done with 30 sleeps?
Well, it was good while it lasted.
There is no way you are going to be an expert in more than one area unless your autistic at being autistic.
Brad; I’ve spent close to two decades conducting research on experts and the development of expertise. We have consistently found that those at the top of the performance pile seldom, if ever, see themselves as experts. They believe they are ‘works in progress’, and know that the day they stop learning, growing and improving is the day they cease being successful.
P.S. It isn’t Gladwell’s 10,000 hour rule. That actually came from a Dutch scholar named DeGroot studying chess masters. I believe Gladwell properly cites the research.