Specialization is overrated
"Specialization is for insects." When I first read this quote by Naval 3 years back, it really resonated with me. And I thought, why not?
Life is short - we only get about 80 Diwalis. It's tough to admit, but more than a quarter of them are already gone. It would be a shame to spend this life learning and doing just one thing.
But here's the catch: most people who try this will do it wrong.
Not specializing doesn't mean jumping from one thing to another every day without getting good at anything. In my opinion, you're "good" at something when you've either:
- Spent at least 1,000 hours doing it
- Put in 2-3 years of hard work
- Have people happily paying you more than others for your skills
Once you've reached one of these points, great! You're "good". But now it's time to start over as a beginner. Spend a fourth of your day learning something new, and again aim for those same goals.
Keep doing this while you're in your 20s because later on, life's duties might not let you do this for 15-20 years.
It's not just me and Naval who think this way. In his "Guide to Career," Marc Andreessen also talks about Scott Adams' "Career Advice," which suggests two paths to success:
- Become the very best at one thing
- Become really good (top 25%) at two or more things
The second path is great, not because it's easy, but because it's rare.
It's not hard to find a good writer (top 25%), but can you find a great writer who also knows how to code well? That's much harder.
Or even better, can you find a great writer who can code and also does stand-up comedy? It's almost impossible.
And that's what you're here on earth to do. If your genes are one-of-a-kind, why not use this life to become one-of-a-kind too? Why join the crowd of thousands of good writers?
What do you think about this approach? Are you ready to embrace the power of being a beginner?