4 ms·

> Those who know do not speak I'm sorry you say that frequently, because I disagree. I have from time to time come across "experts" who would offer only vague

> Those who know do not speak I'm sorry you say that frequently, because I disagree. I have from time to time come across "experts" who would offer only vague explanations of what they were doing, or would shield their keyboard from your gaze. I have always learned subsequently that their knowledge was rather limited, which is why they didn't want to share it. In my experience, the people who know the most have enough knowledge (and confidence) to share it freely.

washadjeffmad 2y ago
It's definitely circumstantial. There are certainly many more people who are experts in topics who are not consulted or are left out of discussions that are filled by less experienced people who are better at dealing with human processes, bureaucracy and administration, conflict, etc. Lobbyists come to mind - they tend to be educated, intelligent, driven people who thrive under high stakes and pressure, effective at achieving outcomes but not necessarily nuanced subject matter experts (although many are, or have valuable perspectives). At work, I hired someone to be my "lobbyist". He has no experience or background, but he trusts that I do, and I use him to get through to people that I can't communicate with. It's backfired a bit, though, because he's so easy and enjoyable to talk to, as intended, that management wants to recruit him. I've encouraged him and offered support because it's certainly within his capacities, and I'd love to stack the deck a bit.