4 ms·

Yes, focus on your strengths. I like this quote: "For years I have urged managers to concentrate their efforts in areas in which they are strong and to waste a

Yes, focus on your strengths. I like this quote: "For years I have urged managers to concentrate their efforts in areas in which they are strong and to waste as little effort as possible trying to improve the areas in which they don't have much competence." Peter Drucker (1909 - 2005), Austrian author of management-related literature

lazyjones 13y ago
This is in contrast to a lot of recent advice on improving cognitive skills, which tells us to do things that are hard, not those we are already good at (basically the old specialist vs. generalist debate).
- seren 13y ago
  I think that the rationale is that if you are already good at something, you probably like to work in that area, and it won't be a chore to become even better at it, you can become more "naturally" better. I heard in recent coaching/leadership training that, as human beings, we have a tendency to focus on our weakness or negative feedback, even if you got some positive feedback at the same time. So it can cloud you judgement on how to improve because you miss the big picture. But it is more in an overall development sense, and is rather orthogonal to develop cognitive skills or brain training.
  - 6d0debc071 13y ago
    Comparative advantage[1] would be reason enough by itself. Why invest in becoming a good programmer if you're bad at programming if you'll probably never be as super-great at it as someone who found it easy and does it all the time? It would make more sense for you to work on something you're already really good at and trade with them to get the code you want. In terms of the generalist vs specialist thing I'm reminded of the idea of T-shaped people. Broad general competence to allow you to meaningfully be part of the system, and deep specific competence to allow you a comparative edge. Always end up wondering what the trade-offs are on how deep the tail of that is compared to the height of the top though. 1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_advantage http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_advantage
- userulluipeste 13y ago
  One may have "improving skills not already good at" in his agenda, but then shouldn't expect the resulted performance to be the same as with "being already pretty good at". That was the underlying idea of the blog post - the performance comparison.
shubhamjain 13y ago
Another quote that comes immediately in my mind: "97% of advice is worthless.". Honestly, I can't think of any reason why a person must not extend his / her scope to different activities.
- henrik_w 13y ago
  Or "A witty saying proves nothing" (Voltaire). Taking myself as an example: I like programming, and I am good at it. I don't like administration. So I don't try to become a manager, or a project manager or similar. I am sure I could if I tried, but I would not be very good at it. So for me it works out really well to focus on my strengths (making sure I am as good of a programmer as I can be). The result is that I program every day and enjoy it.
  - lazyjones 13y ago
    > I like programming, and I am good at it. I don't like administration. So I don't try to become a manager, or a project manager or similar. I like programming and was quite good at it. In fact, people bugged me to start a company based on a website I'd built until I gave in. 13 years later I've been a "manager" for all this time, still rather bad at managing people, but successful enough for 7-figure dividends. I can't say I regret trying it and not focusing on my strengths instead (I'd probably be a somewhat highly-paid employee in tech somewhere if I had done so). Also, I can still program every day and enjoy it.
jotm 13y ago
Yet you won't know what you're really good at until you've tried it. And that takes time - basically, the 42 year old just had more time to figure out what he's good at.

lazyjones 13y ago

This is in contrast to a lot of recent advice on improving cognitive skills, which tells us to do things that are hard, not those we are already good at (basically the old specialist vs. generalist debate).

seren 13y ago
I think that the rationale is that if you are already good at something, you probably like to work in that area, and it won't be a chore to become even better at it, you can become more "naturally" better. I heard in recent coaching/leadership training that, as human beings, we have a tendency to focus on our weakness or negative feedback, even if you got some positive feedback at the same time. So it can cloud you judgement on how to improve because you miss the big picture. But it is more in an overall development sense, and is rather orthogonal to develop cognitive skills or brain training.
- 6d0debc071 13y ago
  Comparative advantage[1] would be reason enough by itself. Why invest in becoming a good programmer if you're bad at programming if you'll probably never be as super-great at it as someone who found it easy and does it all the time? It would make more sense for you to work on something you're already really good at and trade with them to get the code you want. In terms of the generalist vs specialist thing I'm reminded of the idea of T-shaped people. Broad general competence to allow you to meaningfully be part of the system, and deep specific competence to allow you a comparative edge. Always end up wondering what the trade-offs are on how deep the tail of that is compared to the height of the top though. 1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_advantage http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_advantage
userulluipeste 13y ago
One may have "improving skills not already good at" in his agenda, but then shouldn't expect the resulted performance to be the same as with "being already pretty good at". That was the underlying idea of the blog post - the performance comparison.

shubhamjain 13y ago

Another quote that comes immediately in my mind: "97% of advice is worthless.". Honestly, I can't think of any reason why a person must not extend his / her scope to different activities.

henrik_w 13y ago
Or "A witty saying proves nothing" (Voltaire). Taking myself as an example: I like programming, and I am good at it. I don't like administration. So I don't try to become a manager, or a project manager or similar. I am sure I could if I tried, but I would not be very good at it. So for me it works out really well to focus on my strengths (making sure I am as good of a programmer as I can be). The result is that I program every day and enjoy it.
- lazyjones 13y ago
  > I like programming, and I am good at it. I don't like administration. So I don't try to become a manager, or a project manager or similar. I like programming and was quite good at it. In fact, people bugged me to start a company based on a website I'd built until I gave in. 13 years later I've been a "manager" for all this time, still rather bad at managing people, but successful enough for 7-figure dividends. I can't say I regret trying it and not focusing on my strengths instead (I'd probably be a somewhat highly-paid employee in tech somewhere if I had done so). Also, I can still program every day and enjoy it.

jotm 13y ago

Yet you won't know what you're really good at until you've tried it. And that takes time - basically, the 42 year old just had more time to figure out what he's good at.