Last updated on December 15, 2024
When we think about experts in any field—whether in music, sports, or medicine—it’s easy to assume they were born with extraordinary talent. As discussed in the Harvard Business Review article “The Making of an Expert” by K. Anders Ericsson, Michael J. Prietula, and Edward T. Cokely, this belief is likely a myth. Experts, at least in part, are made, not born. The research reveals that outstanding performance is not the result of innate talent, but rather the product of years of deliberate practice and coaching.
This blog post will dive into the findings from this significant research, exploring how individuals reach the highest levels of performance through specific, intentional efforts and structured feedback, while dispelling common misconceptions about talent and genius.
The Talent Myth
Thirty years ago, Hungarian educators László and Klara Polgár decided to challenge the assumption that women don’t succeed in fields requiring spatial thinking, like chess. They trained their daughters at home, focusing on systematic practice. As a result, all three daughters became elite chess players, with the youngest, Judit Polgár, earning the title of grandmaster at just 15, breaking Bobby Fischer’s previous record. This story highlights a critical insight: success correlates more with practice and support than with innate ability.
Benjamin Bloom’s landmark study of elite performers, published in 1985,1 also downplays the idea of innate talent. Bloom’s research showed that there were no early indicators predicting the future success of the 120 elite performers he studied. Whether in music, math, or neurology, the performers’ success came not from their IQs or natural gifts, and instead from the amount and quality of practice they undertook, alongside guidance from dedicated teachers and enthusiastic family support.
One of the most important conclusions from this research is that “experts are always made, not born.” While certain physical traits such as height and body size might matter in sports, there is no significant correlation between IQ and expert performance in domains like chess, music, or medicine. Instead, the consistent factor across fields is the commitment to intense practice over many years.
Deliberate Practice: The Key to Mastery
Deliberate practice is central to the development of expertise. It’s not enough to simply repeat tasks you already know how to do. Deliberate practice involves focused, specific, and sustained efforts to push beyond your current level of competence. Whether you’re learning to play chess or becoming a brain surgeon, the path to superior performance requires tackling tasks that are just beyond your comfort zone.
The article emphasizes that it will take at least 10 years of deliberate practice to achieve expertise in most fields. There are no shortcuts. The most gifted individuals still need 10,000 hours or more of deliberate practice to reach elite levels. This is particularly true today, as the bar for world-class performance has risen over time, making it harder for anyone to become an expert quickly.
Coaching plays an essential role in this process. A well-informed coach helps guide you through deliberate practice and teaches you to coach yourself. Coaches provide the critical feedback needed to adjust and improve performance. Without this external guidance, it’s easy to stagnate, even after thousands of hours of practice.
What is Expertise, and How Can We Measure It?
True expertise must pass 3 tests: (1) it must lead to consistently superior performance compared to peers; (2) it must produce concrete results; and (3) it must be replicable and measurable in a lab. The British scientist Lord Kelvin said, “If you cannot measure it, you cannot improve it,” emphasizing that expertise must be quantifiable.
In sports, expertise is relatively easy to measure through standardized competitions, where individuals can be compared based on who crosses the finish line first. In business, similar comparisons can be made. Sam Walton, the founder of Wal-Mart, ranked store managers based on profitability, while Nordstrom ranked its salespeople on sales per hour.
In fields where standardized measurements are harder to apply—like leadership—scientists still work to create lab-based simulations to measure expert performance. Emergency room nurses can be tested in life-threatening scenarios in a lab, where their responses can be compared to real-world outcomes. This kind of testing allows researchers to draw correlations between lab performance and expertise in actual practice.
Lessons from the Judgment of Paris
One of the most intriguing stories discussed in the article involves the 1976 “Judgment of Paris,” a blind wine-tasting event in which 9 French wine experts compared French and California wines. The result shocked the world: California wines won the highest scores, and the “experts” often mistook American wines for French ones and vice versa.
This event challenged the assumption that the judges had genuine expertise. Subsequent research confirmed that the wine experts’ performance under blind testing was no better than regular wine drinkers. This example shows that supposed expertise isn’t always reliable. True expertise must be demonstrable through consistent, measurable results.
Similar findings occur in other fields. By way of example, experienced psychotherapists do not consistently achieve better outcomes than novice therapists, and the longer physicians have been out of training, the worse they become at identifying rare diseases. This happens because intuition and habit replace deliberate practice, leading to performance decline over time. To counteract this, professionals need regular refresher courses and deliberate practice to maintain high performance levels.
The Power of Thinking and Self-Coaching
Another critical aspect of expert performance is the ability to think deliberately. It’s not enough to just practice—experts analyze their decisions and refine their approach over time. The article cites the example of golfers like Ben Hogan, who concentrated intensely while practicing, always visualizing where the ball should go and how to achieve it.
This process of reflection and self-coaching helps experts continuously improve. For instance, chess players often spend five to ten minutes contemplating all possible moves before making their next move. If the move doesn’t work as expected, they go back to analyze where they went wrong and adjust their strategy for the future.
Time, Sacrifice, and the Reality of Expertise
To become an expert, you must be prepared for a long and challenging journey. Even those with the most talent require at least 10 years of intense training to win international competitions. The path to expertise requires struggle, sacrifice, and often painful self-assessment. Moreover, the bar for success has risen over the years. Today’s amateur marathon runners, for example, frequently outperform the times of early 20th-century Olympic gold medalists.
Many people underestimate the time and effort required to achieve mastery. The myth of overnight success stories leads people to believe that greatness comes quickly. When experts’ developmental histories are examined, there is always a consistent pattern of long-term effort and preparation. For instance, golf legend Sam Snead, often described as a “natural,” practiced relentlessly, even when his hands bled from holding the club.
Insights and Takeaways
The research discussed in “The Making of an Expert” shows us that mastery is not something you’re born with—it’s something you build. Through deliberate practice, consistent feedback, and long-term dedication, anyone can achieve world-class performance in their field.
Key insights from the article include:
- Success requires struggle and sacrifice.
Becoming an expert means enduring discomfort, pushing beyond your current abilities, and accepting that the journey will be long and challenging.
- Coaching is critical.
No one becomes an expert alone. Having a skilled coach to guide you through deliberate practice is essential, especially in the early stages.
- Experience doesn’t always lead to expertise.
Without continuous deliberate practice, performance can actually decline over time, as seen in fields like medicine and psychotherapy.
- Innate talent is less important than structured practice.
While some physical traits might help in specific sports, the research shows that the amount and quality of practice determine success, not IQ or natural ability.
The Bottom Line
True expertise is attainable for just about anyone willing to commit to deliberate practice. Whether in business, sports, or creative fields, the key to excellence lies in structured, intentional efforts to improve.
1 Developing Talent in Young People by Benjamin Bloom (1985). (The book may be found here.)
The article discussed in this post is The Making of an Expert. (2007, July 1). Harvard Business Review.
The article can be found here.
Comments