Analysis of The Making of an Expert“

Experts are “created,” not “born,” as stated by Ericsson and others in the article “The Making of an Expert.” The idea might be valid, however there are less opportunities for focused practice in other occupations and lifestyles, including fatherhood. For instance, the individual may not be able to engage in the much intentional practice due to the extremely long and demanding work hours in the investment banking employment. Similar to this, a parent of a large family with a working spouse would be unable to engage in intentional practice. Deliberate practice, according to Ericsson, can be applied to gaining business and leadership skills. The claim is not practical since some fundamental behavior in certain jobs would not benefit from deliberate practice. For example, it would be difficult to accurately simulate terrorist scenarios with which anti-terrorist officers can practice on, because terrorists likely shift their strategies based on anti-terrorist responses they face. (M. J. K. Anders Ericsson)

Malcolm Gladwell in the article claims that predicting quarterback performance in the NFL is inherently unpredictable that is, the profession should keep the gates wide open. Quarterback performance in the NFL only seems unpredictable because scouts are applying same criteria to assess college players and are using an unstructured manner for assessment. For example, Dan Shonka, the football scout, watches an edited video of the player’s contest and this could be room for misinterpretation and miss out on important details. In the article, the scout appears only to observe college players leveled in their very high skills and who have the potential to join the NFL. At the same time, the scout is biased for overlooking those who may be less talented and not on most teams’ scouting report. Due to this range restriction, the relationship between college performance and NFL performance is significantly flattened, making it appear that NFL quarterback performance is inherently unpredictable. (Gladwell, Most Likely to Succeed)

I agree with Gladwell’s conclusion that IQ alone cannot explain who succeeds and who does not and that job knowledge also counts above and beyond IQ. However, there are some flaws in his argument. In the process of argumentation, the author exclusively relies on the narration of two super geniuses, rather than relying on rigorous scientific evidence of say, numbers, tables, meta-analyses and presentation of multiple studies, with which the reader can associate. Gladwell also tells a vivid and engaging story, leading the readers to believe his claims are true merely because they apply to the story. I find it odd in the story that Gladwell had to pick two extreme outliers to tell their story which might not apply to an average person with pretty non-extreme IQ. These two super duper individuals presented in the article are an extreme case due to each person’s high IQ and are hard to relate with for average people. (Gladwell, The trouble with geniuses)

Talent mindset does have a direct impact on Enron’s decline. It is evident from the argument that instead of rewarding their hardest workers, Enron top managers highlighted people who had a higher IQ or were better educated. People deemed “talented” were always being pushed into new jobs and given new challenges. This is a typical talent mindset problem “A” brought about by the leadership of Enron “C” (third variable). Enron had fewer evaluations on pure performance since no one stayed in a job long enough to allow such evaluation, and the management believed in people with a high IQ and with better education. Enron’s top management hired and rewarded the very best and the very brightest—and ended in bankruptcy “B” (the decline of Enron). Poaching was encouraged by Enron’s managers, and anyone could apply for any job that he or she wanted without anyone holding them back. These are some of the underlying factors that were the confounding problems of Enron’s decline. (Gladwell, The talent Myth)

Works cited

Gladwell, Malcolm. “Most Likely to Succeed.” Annas of Education (2008): 20.

—. “Most Likely to Succeed.” Annals of Education (2008): 20.

—. “The talent Myth.” Department of Human Resources (2002): 16.

—. “The trouble with geniuses.” (2008): 16.

K. Anders Ericsson, Michael J. Prietula, Edward T. Cokely. “The Making of an Expert.” Havard Business Review (2007): 9.

K. Anders Ericsson, Michael J. Prietula,Edward T. Cokely. “The Making of an Expert.” Havard Business Review (2007): 9.