I am reading the book “Outliers” by Malcom Gladwell and would like to comment on one of the concepts in the book that has led me to change some of my opinions about managing and hiring. (Side note: There are a number of interesting concepts in the book and I recommend it. Like most business books, it has a bit too much “fluff” and takes a bit of an extreme view in some areas, but it is a very worthwhile read). Chapter 2 is called “The 10,000 hour rule” which states that it takes about 10,000 hours of practice to become an expert. I won’t go into all the details and caveats but as a general rule, there is a lot of evidence presented in the book, from sports to computer programming, that 10,000 hours is required to really be world class at any activity. Of course, you need some natural ability and training, but even if you have these, you will not reach the top without this practice. An important point is that this is a tremendous amount of time! If you are practicing your chosen area 40 hours a week (hardly realistic since there are many times you will be doing work that is peripheral to the skills you are trying to develop), it will take you 5 years to become an expert. I would contend that less than half of your time will be spent practicing even if you really work at it and, if you do not focus and are spread too thin in your job, less than 25% of your time will be available for this practice. So somewhere between 5 and 20 years of practice will be needed to make you an expert!
So what does this have to do with an engineering management student or an engineering manager? Expectations. Let’s not worry about the specific number of hours or needing to be a world expert. The point is just that it takes significant time to become knowledgeable in an area and truly contribute to your organization. Often I see students who have taken a couple of classes on a topic and feel that a company should view them as experts (or at least very valuable) in the area. This 10,000 hour rule should help you reorient your thinking about this. And it should help you to value the time you are given by an employer to practice your area of interest; whether that is writing software, doing market research, or developing products. (Side note: The book used computer programming by Bill Gates and Bill Joy as examples of the 10,000 hour rule. If these brilliant minds need 10,000 hours, perhaps it is a very conservative estimate for the mere mortals among us! Similarly for some of our greatest sports heroes). So I simply urge you to think about every hour you are able to practice your area of interest as an important opportunity and necessary step toward becoming a valued member of an organization in that area. Contrary to holding you back, it may be allowing you to build up an expertise.
This concept really resonates with my own observations even though I did not realize it before now. In fact, it has caused me to modify a couple of management concepts I have lived by in the past. The first I will call: “Hire the smartest people, they can learn what they need to know on the job.” This is actually still true but it needs to be tempered with the idea that although they can learn what they need, the organization needs to understand how long it will take them to be an expert – someone whose judgment they can truly rely on in the area of expertise. This is one reason start-ups are generally so dogmatic about hiring someone with the right experience. They cannot afford the time for the person to gain the necessary expertise. The second area I will call “The defocus trap”. Getting spread too thin is a problem for many managers. There is too much to do and not enough time to do it. But many times these managers are already experts in their areas (the stem of the “T” in the T-Shaped Individual – https://jtglass.wordpress.com/2009/01/12/t-shaped-individuals/) and they are now managing across a wide variety of areas. But for early career individuals who are contributing in a specific functional area rather than managing across several areas and have not yet proven themselves or developed a true expertise, this spreading too thin or defocusing can be very detrimental as you are trying to prove your value and developing your expertise. Thus, focus becomes important for both the individual and the organization as it tries to develop the depth of expertise that is needed.
In summary, take the opportunity to “practice” for many, many hours as you develop your expertise. Of course, strive for new assignments and new positions but be sure you are working long enough in an area that you have logged in the time to be knowledgeable enough that you can significantly impact your organization.
"Engineering Management Thought of the Week" Jeff Glass 
On the topic of managing expectations. I’d like to get your thoughts on achieving expert status and on what the ‘right level of expertise’ is.
I’ve spent about 3 years trying really hard to become an expert in the PC consumer security industry and have found that there is just SO much to learn and not nearly enough time to learn everything. 🙂
I’ve come to the conclusion that it is not realistic to be an expert on everything or in fact most things you’re aiming for in the short term. Another revelation I had was, is it really necessary to be known as an expert? I am not being rewarded for being an expert, rather I am rewarded for if/how I achieve my goals for the fiscal year.
Also, WHY am I even trying to be an expert? Does that not narrow down my choices in the future?
After a while, I discovered that this was my misguided attempt at being good at my job TODAY as opposed to being an expert in a profession (Currently Product Management), which would (arguably) serve me better in the future.
How would you recommend we understand what the ‘right level of expertise’ is and when is the right time to consider learning something else?
Good question and several good points! In fact, we are having our Board of Visitors meeting today at Duke’s Pratt School of Engineering and this same topic came up. I think the question is really about how we define “expertise” AND what “area” do we define it in. Here are my thoughts on this:
1) Expertise in this context does not mean the same thing as expertise in the academic world. Maybe a better term is “experience” but without some level of knowledge and skill that provides value, you are not very secure in your career or with your organization.
2) The level of expertise/experience may not need to be such that you are a world expert BUT it needs to allow you to make good judgments in your area. And different people have different capacities for this so some of us may need to narrow the area of expertise to a niche to be effective whereas othere may be able to devlop an expertise in a broader range of areas.
3) The way you described your expertise is very valid – “expert in a profession (Currently Product Management)” – this is not expertise in a specific technology or industry but it is still a very valid “expertise” in Product Management (a process). So for example, if you worked in product management one year and manufacturing operations management the next, you would have a difficult time making good judgments in either area and having credibility with your colleagues.
4) Regarding when is it time to develop a new expertise, I think this is an evolving activity rather than a step function OR it is when you obatin a new challenging assignment on short notice because your company feels you can handle it. Preparing a new expertise for an upcoming area of interest is always good. But it is like a strategic change in direction for companies. Move your expertise in a single dimension at a time. Apply your technology expertise to a new application area or apply your product management expertise to a new technology area for example, so you are evolving a new expertise while still relying on your former expertise. Don’t try to change everything at once if possible.
So I think the bottom line for me is that you need to define your area of expertise/experience in a way that allows you to make high quaility judgements, provides credibility with your colleagues and enables you to be a resource for the particular area within the company. When you see opportunities, move your expertise in a stepwise (not step function) manner so you are providing value while developing a new specialty/expertise.
[…] the Masters in Engineering Management program at Duke University had this to say in his post titled 10,000 Hours. I would contend that less than half of your time will be spent practicing even if you really work […]