The book "Outliers" by Malcolm Gladwell explores some of the surprising determinants of individual success, including the 10,000 hour rule. The rule says that it takes 10,000 hours of practice to become a world-class expert in anything. If you practice 40 hours a week for 50 weeks per year (2 weeks for vacation), then you practice 2,000 hours per year and achieve expert status in 5 years. Gladwell, though, says that it usually takes 10 years.
So, is that what it takes in surveying, or is it more or less than 10,000 hours? Should employee evaluations include an estimate of the percentage of "expert-class" an employee has achieved? What if 10 years pass and an employee is not an expert?
What do you think?
> What do you think?
I think I'm glad that I'm self-employed.
I'd say something more along the lines of 50,000 hours of diverse study/experience. At which point you should have a pretty good clue as to what you need to study/experience for an additional 25,000 hours to get to the “expert” level.
An old friend of mine (a famous Mining Attorney), once told me;
“An Expert, is someone who knows how much he doesn't know.”
Loyal
Gladwell is a great writer, but recent research shows that the 10,000 hour rule might not be true.
http://www.businessinsider.com/new-study-destroys-malcolm-gladwells-10000-rule-2014-7
MT-
Mal was brought up in Elmira, a close 'suburb' of North Aboyne.
Just because it is written, doesn't necessarily make it so !
Cheers,
Derek
Yep. The pace of change should affect the value of prior practice. "We don't do it that way anymore" seems to be replacing "We've always done it that way" more and more often.
5 years of full-time experience can produce expert status in some areas. Trouble is most of us wind up with 1 year of experience five times. Seriously, there are situations and conditions that one doesn't see often. Even within the 10,000 hour span there can be certain problems that don't surface in that time frame.
In our line of work I believe the expert is one that can draw from knowledge and experience to successfully restore complex problem boundaries. IMHO, it's not really how well you perform within your comfort zone, it is more how you perform outside your comfort zone that qualifies a surveyor as an expert.
> 5 years of full-time experience can produce expert status in some areas. Trouble is most of us wind up with 1 year of experience five times.
I've heard that statement many times and it is so true.
> Such rules could not be hard and fast - often people become victims of their own experience, not able to see that they might have been using outmoded or cost ineffective methods and procedures. A lot of experience also tends to come with a lot of baggage. In many professions and industries there is a tendency to seek out folks early in their careers that show an aptitude for growth, or success in diverse tasks/fields.
>
> There is the concept of "Shokunin"; like how Jiro of the documentary "Jiro Dreams of Sushi" (excellent film) spent 80 years perfecting his craft. Every field of endeavor needs at least some Sokunin to explore deeply the tasks and discover what may never be concluded with limited experience. But how many and how deep? Few endeavors are as singular as refined traditional sushi, or some arts. But at what point does it become counterproductive for many other day to day tasks.
>
> Depends on the type of work: I would though agree that for boundary determination there is little substitute for a tremendous amount of experience.
>
> One pilot I know said (as best I can remember) "hours mean little - how many take-off and landings have you done in storms?"
Spot on Gavin. In one hand, experience can really ingrain poor methodology. If your experience is doing the same wrong thing over and over, it becomes, as you point out, baggage. Education can mitigate that, provided the instruction is good.
However, on the other hand, there is a taste, a smell, an inaudible harmony in boundary survey that requires time to acquire the sense to recognize. If I had one complaint about our degree requirement system to licensure, it is that there is not, in my opinion, enough emphasis placed on the experience that is necessary to acquire that sense, nor in the quality of mentors who oversee that experience.
People certainly learn at different rates and in different ways, so 10,000 or any other number of hours can't do it for everyone. As technology does more and more, we need to think about how we can instill that sixth sense that tells you that something is amiss or that the job is well-done. "That's what the computer said" is not an adequate excuse for a screw-up, but bosses hear it all to often.
One of my colleagues, a computer science teacher, thinks that my generation worked out the details and his generation is codifying them. I'm old, but not as old as Newton or Gauss, so he's a little off in his timeline. But the point is a good one.
Corner offices are great places and electronics are great tools, but I hope that future experts know more than just which button to push. Sadly, many of the students I teach know little more about solving problems.
Borrowing from a person on another forum tag line;
"Be careful saying you are an expert because an ex is a has been and a spurt is just a drip under pressure."
Amen to that brother! I've been at it 40+ years and am by no means an "expert" in anything.B-)
Read the book and recommend it for a host of reasons.
It sent a tremor through the athletic world because it showed the “outliers’ that are contrary to the 10,000 rule which has always been in the coaching dialogue. The stories of the Scandinavian/Jamaican high jumpers and the story of Jim Ryun, the noted Kansan distance runner illustrate the importance of genetic coding to success. Gladwell also introduces the variables of time and place in relation to the 10000 hour rule buy the stories of Bill Gates et al and the Beatles.
I have seen how the 10k hour rule affects athletes. I have seen kids who are the last first and last to leave practice improves their game. The ones who wake up early to train and compulsively train in the evening keeping a mental program in their head.. I have seen this in musician that I have known also.
The possibility of a genetic code that induces the 10K hour rule is the topic that Gladwell has hinted.
Of course the genetic coding for physical attributes are given also by the they of muscle structure that athletes have. Is there a physical structure of the brain that that makes success easier or induces the 10k rule in someone. Who knows?
Any way.. .good book about success and genetics.
As for surveying, who knows and who cares.
Blink is another good read by Malcolm Gladwell.
From 10,000 Hours of Practice: “..The elite don’t just work harder than everybody else. At some point the elites fall in love with practice to the point where they want to do little else...
.... The elites are in love with what they do, and at some point it no longer feels like work....”
So, in other words, "find a career that isn't a JOB"
> So, in other words, "find a career that isn't a JOB"
Along that line I've heard many say "find something you love to do and you'll never 'work' a day in your life".
In a way I can vouch for that.
I've had the opportunity to work with someone who is at the very top of their field who loves every minute of what they do. He says he never wants to retire and dislikes vacations. As a result he has been a pioneer. There is a synergy where passion and giftedness intersect. Success is a natural byproduct.
That is very well-said. Whether 10,000 hours is magic or not, it is the result of sufficient dedication and love of a subject rather than the cause. And "expert-status" is truly an undefined term.
I never took vacations. They made me do it just to be square with the hr people.
I'd still come into or call into the office. Minimum I'd just call in from where ever me and my girl went.
> Amen to that brother! I've been at it 40+ years and am by no means an "expert" in anything.B-)
Me too, on all counts.B-)
At the point where I become a true expert at anything, whether it takes 10,000 or a 100,000 hours, it's probably time to move on. To me it's about the journey, not the destination.
