3 ms·

You seem to be incorrectly applying this article as advice on self development and then making an argument against that. The author isn't suggesting that this

You seem to be incorrectly applying this article as advice on self development and then making an argument against that. The author isn't suggesting that this is the way to achieve true happiness. They are suggesting that this is a good strategy to become the best at something, regardless of why you want to be the best at it (financial benefit, personal fulfillment, etc.). > More so, what happens if industry trends shift and it turns out you specialized on the 'wrong' thing What's the alternative to this? Remain mediocre at a number of skills just in case one of them go out of style? If you want to be the best at something, specialize in that thing but keep a pulse on the direction the field is moving and adapt as needed. The world's best mainframe developer probably won't immediately be the world's best PC developer upon switching, but they will be far from starting from square one.

ooobit2 6y ago
That last line depends. There's a lot more to the environment, team, management structure, business goals, financing, and much more that would place them effectively at square one. I agree with your other points. But as an example, I worked previously with some 20+ year executives with huge products... 15 years before the market I was working with them in. So, it's great they knew a lot about launching product in 2005. But I need expertise for 2020. If their ideas cost more than a more modern, more efficient method, I don't need to have to teach them the method uphill against their stubbornness to stick to what they know. This issue played a role in me releasing an entire sales team two months into my role. I don't care that they had the most experienced people. The debate about what they knew and where the company was going was driving up costs and lowering productivity for other teams.
leto_ii 6y ago
> You seem to be incorrectly applying this article as advice on self development and then making an argument against that. From the article: > In our personal lives, it would help to focus on being that person in the community who could be depended on for a particular task/skillset required for a task. [...] Focussing will ensure that you are not distracted and the increases likelihood of you doing a good job. I think the whole article is supposed to be more general life advice, not just career advice. > They are suggesting that this is a good strategy to become the best at something If this is the case then the advice is absolutely trivial. More so, it doesn't address the question of what it means to be the 'best' at something.
- jakemal 6y ago
  Yes, it's life advice, but no assertion is made that this advice should be applied by everyone. It's more "If you want to do X, here is some advice" not "You should do X". I don't think it's possible to define "best" for everything. Being the best tennis player and being the best cook involve optimizing for two completely different objectives. What's more, you can define what best means to you and work towards that. The author's opinion on what best means is irrelevant IMO. Maybe the advice is trivial, but it provoked me to reflect on how I am using my skills. I am going to keep this in mind as I choose how to spend my time. In hindsight it's obvious, but I still think it's a constructive article.

ooobit2 6y ago

That last line depends. There's a lot more to the environment, team, management structure, business goals, financing, and much more that would place them effectively at square one. I agree with your other points. But as an example, I worked previously with some 20+ year executives with huge products... 15 years before the market I was working with them in. So, it's great they knew a lot about launching product in 2005. But I need expertise for 2020. If their ideas cost more than a more modern, more efficient method, I don't need to have to teach them the method uphill against their stubbornness to stick to what they know. This issue played a role in me releasing an entire sales team two months into my role. I don't care that they had the most experienced people. The debate about what they knew and where the company was going was driving up costs and lowering productivity for other teams.

leto_ii 6y ago

> You seem to be incorrectly applying this article as advice on self development and then making an argument against that. From the article: > In our personal lives, it would help to focus on being that person in the community who could be depended on for a particular task/skillset required for a task. [...] Focussing will ensure that you are not distracted and the increases likelihood of you doing a good job. I think the whole article is supposed to be more general life advice, not just career advice. > They are suggesting that this is a good strategy to become the best at something If this is the case then the advice is absolutely trivial. More so, it doesn't address the question of what it means to be the 'best' at something.

jakemal 6y ago
Yes, it's life advice, but no assertion is made that this advice should be applied by everyone. It's more "If you want to do X, here is some advice" not "You should do X". I don't think it's possible to define "best" for everything. Being the best tennis player and being the best cook involve optimizing for two completely different objectives. What's more, you can define what best means to you and work towards that. The author's opinion on what best means is irrelevant IMO. Maybe the advice is trivial, but it provoked me to reflect on how I am using my skills. I am going to keep this in mind as I choose how to spend my time. In hindsight it's obvious, but I still think it's a constructive article.