I always love asking people “If you could wake up tomorrow being an expert in one area, what would it be?” I get a lot of answers - a lot of dreams to master a musical instrument, a foreign language, blackjack, or some form of athleticism. While it’s fun to dream about waking up one day and perfectly singing an opera or doing a triple-axle on ice-skates, the root of this question is really “what do you wish you could be good at without practicing”.
We have all heard the phrase “practice makes perfect”… but what does practice actually entail? It is actual repetition (think of the guys that can make a bernaise sauce perfect *every time*) or is it doing something slightly varied each time, over time (think of a chess player or a sports coach)?
To get more insight, I looked at two different perspectives. Check them out and let me know YOUR thoughts in the comments below. Or, for fun, comment on what skill YOU would like to have upon waking up tomorrow morning?!
The Dreyfus’s : Time + Varied Experience = Expertise
Dreyfus, H.L., & Dreyfus, S.E. (2005). Expertise in real world contexts. Organizational Studies, 26(5), 779-792
The Dreyfus’s assert that developing expertise in a field largely relies on experience, which itself relies heavily on time spent in a certain field. Dreyfus’s position is that once baseline instructions are consumed by the learner, then it is just a matter of time and living through different examples and situations before one will gain competence, proficiency, and then ultimately mastery. They outline 5 steps in which the learner passes through - Novice, Advanced Beginner, Competent, Proficient, and finally Expert. In short, follow the rules exactly and you’ll become an expert. What I was reminded about was the concept of variations on a theme – if one does 'it' or some variation of ‘it' enough times, your skill level will increase and you will eventually master it and become an expert. What really made me understand this sentiment was Dreyfus’s statement “learning is discriminating on thousands of special cases.”[2]
I found myself challenging Dreyfus and Dreyfus in my reflection mainly due to the rigidity of their model. I wonder about aspects of attitude, motivation and interest and how they fit into this model of learning and developing expertise. We all know the anecdotes in some workplaces such as “s/he is dialing it in” or “s/he is just coasting”. These sayings, and the people they represent, make me think about plateaus of learning and how some people may reach a point where they are not challenged anymore – there is no further intrinsic motivation – and their expertise may go to the wayside, especially given the extraordinarily fast-changing work environments we tend to live in today. How might an expert remain an expert in a changing environment? How might s/he remain relevant in their area of expertise, given the ever-changing workplace demands and advancements?
Ericsson. Deliberate Practice = Consistent Reproduction Of A Skill = Expertise
Ericsson, K. A. (2006). The influence of experience and deliberate practices on the development of superior performance. In K. A. Ericsson, N. Charness, P.J. Feltovich, & R. R. Hoffman (eds.), The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Anders Ericsson, on the other hand, believes that expertise is not just based on experience and time. Rather, deliberate practice – consistently reproducing a superior skill set in a specific field – will garner mastery of skills and thus expertise. He does take care to explain that this deliberate practice must be rigid in schedule and frequent: adhered to almost like a full time job. It can (and probably should) be grueling, lonely, or likely both. In short, it means going to excruciating lengths and failing a lot. Does this mean anyone can do anything with deliberate practice? Well, no - there are limits. For example, no matter how much I practice, I will never excel to the status of LeBron James in basketball, because my genetic truths such as height (among many others!).
This really hit home for me and I immediately thought of my cooking skills. I am a pretty advanced home cook and while I explore all different types of cooking, there are a few dishes I have deliberately practiced and (in my opinion) have mastered. I can make them in my sleep, almost in a meditative state without active thought whilst engaging in the activity itself. Reflecting on Ericsson’s rule of thumb of ten years of practice, I can say I made a few really good dishes that I have reproduced consistently at a superior level over the past ten years or so. Now, as far as other dishes that I have not mastered, I now know I can accelerate my learning and mastery by repeating and practicing deliberately until an expert skill set is formed. Fortunately for my friends, coworkers, and family, this may mean hundreds of test trials of cookies, cakes, sauces, and other goodies for them to devour as my deliberate practice continues!
//////
Curious about more? Check out this podcast from Freakonomics: How to Become Great at Just About Anything
