preview

Malcolm Gladwell's Outliers

Decent Essays

Malcolm Gladwell, the author of Outliers, believes that working at something for 10,000 hours is required to achieve mastery and become a world class expert at anything. While this is a nice way of making it seem like anyone can be successful, it is simply not true. Some people will never achieve proficiency in a domain, no matter how much practice they put into it. There are a variety of factors that play into expertise besides practice and certain domains require much less practice than the magical 10,000 hour threshold that Gladwell established. First off, it seems like 10,000 hours is just a nice, round number Gladwell pulled out of his head for achieving expert status in a craft. It seems a little too good to be true. In Outliers, Malcolm …show more content…

That’s simply not true. According to Anders Ericsson, the very person who performed the study Gladwell based his 10,000 hour claim on, this is not what the study showed. Many people achieved expert status in much less than 10,000 hours in the study, and many people achieved expert status in a much greater amount of time. 10,000 hours was simply the average of the time spent practicing by each of the people in the study. Therefore, Gladwell’s whole point that 10,000 hours is when mastery is achieved is put into question. It seems like Gladwell purposely misinterpreted the information so that he could come up with a magic number that people could relate too. In reality, the number has no merit. Some people with superior natural talent need far less than 10,000 hours of practice and some people with less need far more, as shown in the real study before Gladwell misinterpreted this. Furthermore, Gladwell stated in Outliers that the study done by Ericsson couldn’t find any “naturals”, or people that practiced for a fraction of the time as their peers. According to Ericsson himself, many people in the study that practice far less

Get Access