Fun inversion from Thorndike (1921). The normal angle is: "Why are some people so much better at some things? What are the limits of expertise?" He reframes to: "Why do most people remain so mediocre at things they spend their whole lives doing?"
andymatuschak.org/files/papers/T (p. 178)
Conversation
You can tell he's kind of mad about it (particularly see the following page here). I find this a bit odd. In many of the more mundane cases he cites (e.g. handwriting) it probably is sensible to reach some threshold and just stay there!
5
2
19
You’re unable to view this Tweet because this account owner limits who can view their Tweets. Learn more
You’re unable to view this Tweet because this account owner limits who can view their Tweets. Learn more
You’re unable to view this Tweet because this account owner limits who can view their Tweets. Learn more
Thank you, the economics citations are mostly new to me!
1
2
Incidentally, a related claim from Newport's "A World Without Email": Drucker's influential args that knowledge workers must be permitted to work autonomously have largely relegated performance in that sector to individual initiative, "personal productivity" (often ineffective)
4
5
22
I have been thinking about this point a lot.
1
Replying to
Quote Tweet
My favorite part of Cal Newport’s new book is tying together consensus problems with knowledge work.
1
2
Quote Tweet
Replying to @obra
One of Newport’s insights is that Drucker fooled us into think that knowledge workers needed to be too autonomous and uncoordinated. He contends that standardization of workflows and protocols might increase productivity dramatically.
1
1
Show replies