ArticlePDF Available

The making of an expert


Abstract and Figures

Popular lore tells us that genius is born, not made. Scientific research, on the other hand, reveals that true expertise is mainly the product of years of intense practice and dedicated coaching. Ordinary practice is not enough: To reach elite levels of performance, you need to constantly push yourself beyond your abilities and comfort level. Such discipline is the key to becoming an expert in all domains, including management and leadership. Those are the conclusions reached by Ericsson, a professor of psychology at Florida State University; Prietula, a professor at the Goizueta Business School; and Cokely, a research fellow at the Max Planck Institute for Human Development, who together studied data on the behavior of experts, gathered by more than 100 scientists. What consistently distinguished elite surgeons, chess players, writers, athletes, pianists, and other experts was the habit of engaging in "deliberate" practice--a sustained focus on tasks that they couldn't do before. Experts continually analyzed what they did wrong, adjusted their techniques, and worked arduously to correct their errors. Even such traits as charisma can be developed using this technique. Working with a drama school, the authors created a set of acting exercises for managers that remarkably enhanced executives' powers of charm and persuasion. Through deliberate practice, leaders can improve their ability to win over their employees, their peers, or their board of directors. The journey to elite performance is not for the impatient or the faint of heart. It takes at least a decade and requires the guidance of an expert teacher to provide tough, often painful feedback. It also demands would-be experts to develop their "inner coach" and eventually drive their own progress.
No caption available
No caption available
Content may be subject to copyright.
1284 Ericsson.indd 1141284 Ericsson.indd 114 6/7/07 9:26:58 AM6/7/07 9:26:58 AM | July–August 2007 | Harvard Business Review 115
New research
shows that
is the product
of years of
deliberate practice
and coaching,
not of any innate
talent or skill.
by K. Anders Ericsson, Michael J. Prietula, and Edward T. Cokely
THIRTY YEARS AGO, two Hungarian
educators, László and Klara Polgár,
decided to challenge the popu-
lar assumption that women don’t
succeed in areas requiring spatial
thinking, such as chess. They wanted to make a
point about the power of education. The Polgárs
homeschooled their three daughters, and as part
of their education the girls started playing chess
with their parents at a very young age. Their sys-
tematic training and daily practice paid off. By
2000, all three daughters had been ranked in the
top ten female players in the world. The youngest,
Judit, had become a grand master at age 15, break-
ing the previous record for the youngest person to
earn that title, held by Bobby Fischer, by a month.
of an
1284 Ericsson.indd 1151284 Ericsson.indd 115 6/7/07 9:27:07 AM6/7/07 9:27:07 AM
116 Harvard Business Review | July–August 2007 |
MANAGING FOR THE LONG TERM | The Making of an Exper t
Today Judit is one of the world’s top players and has defeated
almost all the best male players.
It’s not only assumptions about gender differences in ex-
pertise that have started to crumble. Back in 1985, Benjamin
Bloom, a professor of education at the University of Chi-
cago, published a landmark book, Developing Talent in Young
People, which examined the critical factors that contribute
to talent. He took a deep retrospective look at the child-
hoods of 120 elite performers who had won international
competitions or awards in fi elds ranging from music and the
arts to mathematics and neurology. Surprisingly, Bloom’s
work found no early indicators that could have predicted
the virtuosos’ success. Subsequent research indicating that
there is no correlation between IQ and expert performance
in fi elds such as chess, music, sports, and medicine has borne
out his fi ndings. The only innate differences that turn out
to be signifi cant – and they matter primarily in sports – are
height and body size.
So what does correlate with success? One thing emerges
very clearly from Bloom’s work: All the superb performers
he investigated had practiced intensively, had studied with
devoted teachers, and had been supported enthusiastically
by their families throughout their developing years. Later
research building on Bloom’s pioneering study revealed that
the amount and quality of practice were key factors in the
level of expertise people achieved. Consistently and over-
whelmingly, the evidence showed that experts are always
made, not born. These conclusions are based on rigorous
research that looked at exceptional performance using sci-
entifi c methods that are verifi able and reproducible. Most
of these studies were compiled in The Cambridge Handbook
of Expertise and Expert Performance, published last year by
Cambridge University Press and edited by K. Anders Ericsson,
one of the authors of this article. The 900-page-plus hand-
book includes contributions from more than 100 leading
scientists who have studied expertise and top performance
in a wide variety of domains: surgery, acting, chess, writing,
computer programming, ballet, music, aviation, fi refi ghting,
and many others.
The journey to truly superior performance is neither for
the faint of heart nor for the impatient. The development
of genuine expertise requires struggle, sacrifi ce, and hon-
est, often painful self-assessment. There are no shortcuts.
It will take you at least a decade to achieve expertise, and
you will need to invest that time wisely, by engaging in “de-
liberate” practice practice that focuses on tasks beyond
your current level of competence and comfort. You will
need a well- informed coach not only to guide you through
deliberate practice but also to help you learn how to coach
yourself. Above all, if you want to achieve top performance
as a manager and a leader, you’ve got to forget the folklore
about genius that makes many people think they cannot
take a scientifi c approach to developing expertise. We are
here to help you explode those myths.
Let’s begin our story with a little wine.
What Is an Expert?
In 1976, a fascinating event referred to as the “Judgment of
Paris” took place. An English-owned wineshop in Paris orga-
nized a blind tasting in which nine French wine experts rated
French and California wines – ten whites and ten reds. The
results shocked the wine world: California wines received
the highest scores from the panel. Even more surprising,
during the tasting the experts often mistook the American
wines for French wines and vice versa.
Two assumptions were challenged that day. The fi rst was
the hitherto unquestioned superiority of French wines over
American ones. But it was the challenge to the second – the
assumption that the judges genuinely possessed elite knowl-
edge of wine – that was more interesting and revolutionary.
The tasting suggested that the alleged wine experts were no
more accurate in distinguishing wines under blind test con-
ditions than regular wine drinkers – a fact later confi rmed by
our laboratory tests.
Current research has revealed many other fi elds where
there is no scientifi c evidence that supposed expertise leads
to superior performance. One study showed that psycho-
therapists with advanced degrees and decades of experi-
ence aren’t reliably more successful in their treatment of
randomly assigned patients than novice therapists with just
three months of training are. There are even examples of
expertise seeming to decline with experience. The longer
physicians have been out of training, for example, the less
K. Anders Ericsson ( is the Conradi Eminent
Scholar of Psychology at Florida State University, in Tallahassee.
Michael J. Prietula ( is a professor at the
Goizueta Business School at Emory University, in Atlanta, and visit-
ing research scholar at the Institute for Human and Machine Cogni-
tion, in Pensacola, Florida. Edward T. Cokely (cokely@mpib-berlin
.m pg .de ) is a pos td octo ral r ese ar ch f ell ow a t t he M ax Pl an ck I nsti tute
for Human Development, in Berlin.
Consistently and overwhelmingly, the evidence showed that
experts are always made, not born.
_g_ /// gg
1284 Ericsson.indd 1161284 Ericsson.indd 116 6/7/07 9:27:16 AM6/7/07 9:27:16 AM | July–August 2007 | Harvard Business Review 117
able they are to identify unusual diseases of the lungs or
heart. Because they encounter these illnesses so rarely, doc-
tors quickly forget their characteristic features and have dif-
culty diagnosing them. Performance picks up only after the
doctors undergo a refresher course.
How, then, can you tell when you’re dealing with a genuine
expert? Real expertise must pass three tests. First, it must lead
to performance that is consistently superior to that of the ex-
pert’s peers. Second, real expertise produces concrete results.
Brain surgeons, for example, not only must be skillful with
their scalpels but also must have successful outcomes with
their patients. A chess player must be able to win matches
in tournaments. Finally, true expertise can be replicated and
measured in the lab. As the British scientist Lord Kelvin stated,
“If you can not measure it, you can not improve it.
Skill in some fi elds, such as sports, is easy to measure. Com-
petitions are standardized so that everyone competes in a
similar environment. All competitors have the same start
and fi nish lines, so that everyone can agree on who came in
rst. That standardization permits comparisons among in-
dividuals over time, and it’s certainly possible in business as
well. In the early days of Wal-Mart, for instance, Sam Walton
arranged competitions among store managers to identify
those whose stores had the highest profi tability. Each store
Individual accounts of
expertise are often unreli-
able. Anecdotes, selective
recall, and one-off events
all can present insuffi cient,
often misleading, examples
of expertise. There is a
huge body of literature
on false memories, self-
serving biases, and recollec-
tions altered as a result
of current beliefs or the
passage of time. Reporting
is not the same thing as
Many people are wrongly
believed to possess exper-
tise. Bear in mind that true
expertise is de monstrated
by measurable, consistently
superior performance.
Some supposed experts
are superior only when it
comes to explaining why
they made errors. After the
1976 Judgment of Paris, for
example, when California
wines bested French wines
in a blind tasting, the French
wine “experts” argued that
the results were an aberra-
tion and that the California
reds in particular would never
age as well as the famous
French reds. (In 2006, the
tasting of the reds was reen-
acted, and California came
out on top again.) Had it not
been for the objective results
from the blind tastings, the
French wine experts may
never have been convinced
of the quality of the Ameri-
can wines.
Intuition can lead you
down the garden path.
The idea that you can
improve your performance
by relaxing and “just trusting
your gut” is popular. While it
may be true that intuition is
valuable in routine or familiar
situations, informed intuition
is the result of deliberate
practice. You cannot consis-
tently improve your ability to
make decisions (or your in-
tuition) without considerable
practice, refl ection, and
You don’t need a different
putter. Many managers
hope that they will suddenly
improve performance by
adopting new and bet-
ter methods – just as golf
players may think that they
can lower their scores with
a new and better club. But
changing to a different putter
may increase the variability
of a golfer’s shot and thus
hinder his or her ability to
play well. In reality, the key
to improving expertise is
consistency and carefully
controlled efforts.
Expertise is not captured
by knowledge manage-
ment systems. Knowledge
management systems
rarely, if ever, deal with what
psychologists call knowl-
edge. They are repositories
of images, documents, and
routines: external data
that people can view and
interpret as they try to
solve a problem or make
a decision. There are no
shortcuts to gaining true
Things to Look Out for
When Judging Expertise
in the Nordstrom clothing chain posts rankings of its sales-
people, based on their sales per hour, for each pay period.
Nonetheless, it often can be diffi cult to measure expert
performance – for example, in projects that take months or
even years to complete and to which dozens of individuals
may contribute. Expert leadership is similarly diffi cult to
assess. Most leadership challenges are highly complex and
specifi c to a given company, which makes it hard to compare
performance across companies and situations. That doesn’t
mean, though, that scientists should throw up their hands
and stop trying to measure performance. One methodology
we use to deal with these challenges is to take a representa-
tive situation and reproduce it in the laboratory. For exam-
ple, we present emergency room nurses with scenarios that
simulate life-threatening situations. Afterward, we compare
the nurses’ responses in the lab with actual outcomes in the
real world. We have found that performance in simulations
in medicine, chess, and sports closely correlates with objec-
tive measurements of expert performance, such as a chess
player’s track record in winning matches.
Testing methodologies can be devised for creative profes-
sions such as art and writing, too. Researchers have studied
differences among individual visual artists, for instance, by
having them produce drawings of the same set of objects.
With the artists’ identities concealed, these drawings were
evaluated by art judges, whose ratings clearly agreed on the
artists’ profi ciency, especially in regard to technical aspects
1284 Ericsson.indd 1171284 Ericsson.indd 117 6/7/07 9:27:22 AM6/7/07 9:27:22 AM
118 Harvard Business Review | July–August 2007 |
MANAGING FOR THE LONG TERM | The Making of an Exper t
of drawing. Other researchers have designed objective tasks
to measure the superior perceptual skills of artists without
the help of judges.
Practice Deliberately
To people who have never reached a national or interna-
tional level of competition, it may appear that excellence is
simply the result of practicing daily for years or even decades.
However, living in a cave does not make you a geologist. Not
all practice makes perfect. You need a particular kind of
practice – deliberate practice to develop expertise. When
most people practice, they focus on the things they already
know how to do. Deliberate practice is different. It entails
considerable, specifi c, and sustained efforts to do something
you can’t do well – or even at all. Research across domains
shows that it is only by working at what you can’t do that you
turn into the expert you want to become.
To illustrate this point, let’s imagine you are learning
to play golf for the fi rst time. In the early phases, you try to
understand the basic strokes and focus on avoiding gross
mistakes (like driving the ball into another player). You prac-
tice on the putting green, hit balls at a driving range, and play
rounds with others who are most likely novices like you. In
a surprisingly short time (perhaps 50 hours), you will de-
velop better control and your game will improve. From then
on, you will work on your skills by driving and putting more
balls and engaging in more games, until your strokes become
automatic: You’ll think less about each shot and play more
from intuition. Your golf game now is a social outing, in
which you occasionally concentrate on your shot. From this
point on, additional time on the course will not substantially
improve your performance, which may remain at the same
level for decades.
Why does this happen? You don’t improve because when
you are playing a game, you get only a single chance to
make a shot from any given location. You don’t get to fi gure
out how you can correct mistakes. If you were allowed to
take fi ve to ten shots from the exact same location on the
course, you would get more feedback on your technique and
start to adjust your playing style to improve your control. In
fact, professionals often take multiple shots from the same
location when they train and when they check out a course
before a tournament.
This kind of deliberate practice can be adapted to develop-
ing business and leadership expertise. The classic example
is the case method taught by many business schools, which
presents students with real-life situations that require ac-
tion. Because the eventual outcomes of those situations are
known, the students can immediately judge the merits of
their proposed solutions. In this way, they can practice mak-
ing decisions ten to 20 times a week. War games serve a
similar training function at military academies. Offi cers can
analyze the trainees’ responses in simulated combat and pro-
vide an instant evaluation. Such mock military operations
sharpen leadership skills with deliberate practice that lets
trainees explore uncharted areas.
Let’s take a closer look at how deliberate practice might
work for leadership. You often hear that a key element of
leadership and management is charisma, which is true. Be-
ing a leader frequently requires standing in front of your em-
ployees, your peers, or your board of directors and attempt-
ing to convince them of one thing or another, especially in
times of crisis. A surprising number of executives believe
that charisma is innate and cannot be learned. Yet if they
were acting in a play with the help of a director and a coach,
most of them would be able to come across as considerably
more charismatic, especially over time. In fact, working with
a leading drama school, we have developed a set of acting
exercises for managers and leaders that are designed to in-
crease their powers of charm and persuasion. Executives
who do these exercises have shown remarkable improve-
ment. So charisma can be learned through deliberate prac-
tice. Bear in mind that even Winston Churchill, one of the
most charismatic fi gures of the twentieth century, practiced
his oratory style in front of a mirror.
Genuine experts not only practice deliberately but also
think deliberately. The golfer Ben Hogan once explained,
“While I am practicing I am also trying to develop my pow-
ers of concentration. I never just walk up and hit the ball.
Hogan would decide in advance where he wanted the ball
to go and how to get it there. We actually track this kind
of thought process in our research. We present expert per-
formers with a scenario and ask them to think aloud as they
work their way through it. Chess players, for example, will
describe how they spend fi ve to ten minutes exploring all the
possibilities for their next move, thinking through the con-
It takes time to become an expert. Even the most gifted performers
need a minimum of ten years of intense training before they win
international competitions.
1284 Ericsson.indd 1181284 Ericsson.indd 118 6/7/07 9:27:31 AM6/7/07 9:27:31 AM | July–August 2007 | Harvard Business Review 119
sequences of each and planning out the sequence of moves
that might follow it. We’ve observed that when a course of
action doesn’t work out as expected, the expert players will
go back to their prior analysis to assess where they went
wrong and how to avoid future errors. They continually work
to eliminate their weaknesses.
Deliberate practice involves two kinds of learning: improv-
ing the skills you already have and extending the reach and
range of your skills. The enormous concentration required
to undertake these twin tasks limits the amount of time you
can spend doing them. The famous violinist Nathan Milstein
wrote: “Practice as much as you feel you can accomplish with
concentration. Once when I became concerned because oth-
ers around me practiced all day long, I asked [my mentor]
Professor Auer how many hours I should practice, and he
said, ‘It really doesn’t matter how long. If you practice with
your fi ngers, no amount is enough. If you practice with your
head, two hours is plenty.’”
It is interesting to note that across a wide range of ex-
perts, including athletes, novelists, and musicians, very
few appear to be able to engage in more than four or
ve hours of high concentration and deliberate practice
at a time. In fact, most expert teachers and scientists set
aside only a couple of hours a day, typically in the morn-
ing, for their most demanding mental activities, such as
writing about new ideas. While this may
seem like a relatively small investment,
it is two hours a day more than most ex-
ecutives and managers devote to build-
ing their skills, since the majority of their
time is consumed by meetings and day-
to-day concerns. This difference adds up
to some 700 hours more a year, or about
7,000 hours more a decade. Think about
what you could accomplish if you devoted
two hours a day to deliberate practice.
It’s very easy to neglect deliberate
practice. Experts who reach a high level
of performance often fi nd themselves re-
sponding automatically to specifi c situa-
tions and may come to rely exclusively on
their intuition. This leads to diffi culties
when they deal with atypical or rare cases,
because they’ve lost the ability to analyze
a situation and work through the right
response. Experts may not recognize this
creeping intuition bias, of course, because
there is no penalty until they encounter
a situation in which a habitual response
fails and maybe even causes damage.
Older professionals with a great deal of
experience are particularly prone to fall-
ing into this trap, but it’s certainly not
inevitable. Research has shown that musicians over 60 years
old who continue deliberate practice for about ten hours a
week can match the speed and technical skills of 20-year-old
expert musicians when tested on their ability to play a piece
of unfamiliar music.
Moving outside your traditional comfort zone of achieve-
ment requires substantial motivation and sacrifi ce, but it’s
a necessary discipline. As the golf champion Sam Snead once
put it, “It is only human nature to want to practice what you
can already do well, since it’s a hell of a lot less work and
a hell of a lot more fun.” Only when you can see that de-
liberate practice is the most effective means to the desired
end – becoming the best in your fi eld – will you commit to
excellence. Snead, who died in 2002, held the record for win-
ning the most PGA Tour events and was famous for having
one of the most beautiful swings in the sport. Deliberate
practice was a key to his success. “Practice puts brains in your
muscles,” he said.
Take the Time You Need
By now it will be clear that it takes time to become an expert.
Our research shows that even the most gifted performers
need a minimum of ten years (or 10,000 hours) of intense
training before they win international competitions. In some
elds the apprenticeship is longer: It now takes most elite
1284 Ericsson.indd 1191284 Ericsson.indd 119 6/7/07 9:27:38 AM6/7/07 9:27:38 AM
120 Har vard Business Review | July–August 2007 |
MANAGING FOR THE LONG TERM | The Making of an Exper t
musicians 15 to 25 years of steady practice, on average, before
they succeed at the international level.
Though there are historical examples of people who at-
tained an international level of expertise at an early age, it’s
also true that, in the nineteenth and early twentieth centu-
ries, people could reach world-class levels more quickly. In
most fi elds, the bar of performance has risen steadily since
that time. For instance, amateur marathon runners and high
school swimmers today frequently better the times of Olym-
pic gold medalists from the early twentieth century. Increas-
ingly stiff competition now makes it almost impossible to
beat the ten-year rule. One notable exception, Bobby Fischer,
did manage to become a chess grand master in just nine
years, but it is likely that he did so by spending more time
practicing each year.
Many people are naive about how long it takes to become
an expert. Leo Tolstoy once observed that people often told
him they didn’t know whether or not they could write a
novel because they hadn’t tried – as if they only had to make
a single attempt to discover their natural ability to write.
Similarly, the authors of many self-help books appear to
assume that their readers are essentially ready for success
and simply need to take a few more easy steps to overcome
great hurdles. Popular lore is full of stories about unknown
athletes, writers, and artists who become famous overnight,
seemingly because of innate talent they’re “naturals,” peo-
ple say. However, when examining the devel-
opmental histories of experts, we unfailingly
discover that they spent a lot of time in train-
ing and preparation. Sam Snead, who’d been
called “the best natural player ever,” told Golf
Digest, “People always said I had a natural
swing. They thought I wasn’t a hard worker.
But when I was young, I’d play and practice
all day, then practice more at night by my car’s
headlights. My hands bled. Nobody worked
harder at golf than I did.
Not only do you have to be prepared to in-
vest time in becoming an expert, but you have
to start early – at least in some fi elds. Your abil-
ity to attain expert performance is clearly con-
strained if you have fewer opportunities to en-
gage in deliberate practice, and this is far from
a trivial constraint. Once, after giving a talk,
K. Anders Ericsson was asked by a member of
the audience whether he or any other person
could win an Olympic medal if he began train-
ing at a mature age. Nowadays, Ericsson replied,
it would be virtually impossible for anyone to
win an individual medal without a training
history comparable with that of today’s elite
performers, nearly all of whom started very
early. Many children simply do not get the op-
portunity, for whatever reason, to work with the best teach-
ers and to engage in the sort of deliberate practice that they
need to reach the Olympic level in a sport.
Find Coaches and Mentors
Arguably the most famous violin teacher of all time, Ivan
Galamian, made the point that budding maestros do not
engage in deliberate practice spontaneously: “If we analyze
the development of the well-known artists, we see that in al-
most every case the success of their entire career was depen-
dent on the quality of their practicing. In practically every
case, the practicing was constantly supervised either by the
teacher or an assistant to the teacher.
Research on world-class performers has confi rmed Galami-
an’s observation. It also has shown that future experts need
different kinds of teachers at different stages of their develop-
ment. In the beginning, most are coached by local teachers,
people who can give generously of their time and praise. Later
on, however, it is essential that performers seek out more-
advanced teachers to keep improving their skills. Eventually,
all top performers work closely with teachers who have them-
selves reached international levels of achievement.
Having expert coaches makes a difference in a variety of
ways. To start with, they can help you accelerate your learning
process. The thirteenth-century philosopher and scientist
Roger Bacon argued that it would be impossible to master
1284 Ericsson.indd 1201284 Ericsson.indd 120 6/7/07 9:27:46 AM6/7/07 9:27:46 AM | July–August 2007 | Harvard Business Review 121
mathematics in less than 30 years. And yet today individu-
als can master frameworks as complex as calculus in their
teens. The difference is that scholars have since organized
the material in such a way that it is much more accessible.
Students of mathematics no longer have to climb Everest by
themselves; they can follow a guide up a well-trodden path.
The development of expertise requires coaches who are
capable of giving constructive, even painful, feedback. Real
experts are extremely motivated students who seek out such
feedback. They’re also skilled at understanding when and if
a coach’s advice doesn’t work for them. The elite performers
we studied knew what they were doing right and concen-
trated on what they were doing wrong. They deliberately
picked unsentimental coaches who would challenge them
and drive them to higher levels of performance. The best
coaches also identify aspects of your performance that will
need to be improved at your next level of skill. If a coach
pushes you too fast, too hard, you will only be frustrated and
may even be tempted to give up trying to improve at all.
Relying on a coach has its limits, however. Statistics show
that radiologists correctly diagnose breast cancer from X-rays
about 70% of the time. Typically, young radiologists learn the
skill of interpreting X-rays by working alongside an “expert.
So it’s hardly surprising that the success rate has stuck at
70% for a long time. Imagine how much better radiology
might get if radiologists practiced instead by making diag-
nostic judgments using X-rays in a library of old verifi ed
cases, where they could immediately determine their ac-
curacy. We’re seeing these kinds of techniques used more
often in training. There is an emerging market in elaborate
simulations that can give professionals, especially in medi-
cine and aviation, a safe way to deliberately practice with
appropriate feedback.
So what happens when you become an Olympic gold
medalist, or an international chess master, or a CEO? Ideally,
as your expertise increased, your coach will have helped you
become more and more independent, so that you are able
to set your own development plans. Like good parents who
encourage their children to leave the nest, good coaches
help their students learn how to rely on an “inner coach.
Self-coaching can be done in any fi eld. Expert surgeons, for
example, are not concerned with a patient’s postoperative
status alone. They will study any unanticipated events that
took place during the surgery, to try to fi gure out how mis-
takes or misjudgments can be avoided in the future.
Benjamin Franklin provides one of the best examples of
motivated self-coaching. When he wanted to learn to write
eloquently and persuasively, he began to study his favorite
articles from a popular British publication, the Spectator.
Days after he’d read an article he particularly enjoyed, he
would try to reconstruct it from memory in his own words.
Then he would compare it with the original, so he could dis-
cover and correct his faults. He also worked to improve his
sense of language by translating the articles into rhyming
verse and then from verse back into prose. Similarly, famous
painters sometimes attempt to reproduce the paintings of
other masters.
Anyone can apply these same methods on the job. Say
you have someone in your company who is a masterly com-
municator, and you learn that he is going to give a talk to a
unit that will be laying off workers. Sit down and write your
own speech, and then compare his actual speech with what
you wrote. Observe the reactions to his talk and imagine
what the reactions would be to yours. Each time you can
generate by yourself decisions, interactions, or speeches that
match those of people who excel, you move one step closer
to reaching the level of an expert performer.
• • •
Before practice, opportunity, and luck can combine to cre-
ate expertise, the would-be expert needs to demythologize
the achievement of top-level performance, because the no-
tion that genius is born, not made, is deeply ingrained. It’s
perhaps most perfectly exemplifi ed in the person of Wolf-
gang Amadeus Mozart, who is typically presented as a child
prodigy with exceptional innate musical genius. Nobody
questions that Mozart’s achievements were extraordinary
compared with those of his contemporaries. What’s often
forgotten, however, is that his development was equally ex-
ceptional for his time. His musical tutelage started before
he was four years old, and his father, also a skilled composer,
was a famous music teacher and had written one of the fi rst
books on violin instruction. Like other world-class performers,
Mozart was not born an expert – he became one.
Reprint R0707J
To order, see page 195.
Real experts seek out constructive, even painful feedback. They’re
also skilled at understanding when and if a coach’s advice doesn’t
work for them.
1284 Ericsson.indd 1211284 Ericsson.indd 121 6/7/07 9:27:57 AM6/7/07 9:27:57 AM
... Similar results have been found in other protocol analyses, eye-tracking studies, and memory analyses used to examine some medical and economic judgments and decisions (Barton et al., 2009;Woller-Carter et al., 2012). Protocol analysis also suggests that, during move selection in chess, the systematic use of more deliberation tends to be associated with large performance advantages for both novices and experts (Moxley, Ericsson, Charness, & Krampe, 2012; see also Ericsson, Prietula, & Cokely, 2007). ...
... Transfer requires shared elements (Thorndick & Woodworth, 1901; see also Blume, Ford, Baldwin, Huang, 2010). Many skills are highly domainspecific and so they are unrelated to performance outside a narrow band of expertise (e.g., surgical skill is not related to managerial decision making; Ericsson, Charness, Feltovich, & Hoffman, 2006;Ericsson et al., 2007). Numeracy is different. ...
Full-text available
We investigated the relations between numeracy and superior judgment and decision making in two large community outreach studies in Holland ( n =5408). In these very highly educated samples (e.g., 30–50% held graduate degrees), the Berlin Numeracy Test was a robust predictor of financial, medical, and metacognitive task performance (i.e., lotteries, intertemporal choice, denominator neglect, and confidence judgments), independent of education, gender, age, and another numeracy assessment. Metacognitive processes partially mediated the link between numeracy and superior performance. More numerate participants performed better because they deliberated more during decision making and more accurately evaluated their judgments (e.g., less overconfidence). Results suggest that well-designed numeracy tests tend to be robust predictors of superior judgment and decision making because they simultaneously assess (1) mathematical competency and (2) metacognitive and self-regulated learning skills.
... De acuerdo a Ericsson (44) , el mejor camino para alcanzar el más alto nivel de habilidades se trata de prácticas dirigidas a necesidades específicas para cada individuo, identificadas por un mentor; así como la retroalimentación inmediata. (44) Así mismo Gauger et al, (45) Korndorffer et al, (20) han demostrado que la capacidad de los cirujanos en alcanzar la competencia mejora considerablemente al establecer un sistema de retroalimentación y al establecer metas, lo cual pudiera incluso conducir a una disminución en la curva de aprendizaje. ...
... De acuerdo a Ericsson (44) , el mejor camino para alcanzar el más alto nivel de habilidades se trata de prácticas dirigidas a necesidades específicas para cada individuo, identificadas por un mentor; así como la retroalimentación inmediata. (44) Así mismo Gauger et al, (45) Korndorffer et al, (20) han demostrado que la capacidad de los cirujanos en alcanzar la competencia mejora considerablemente al establecer un sistema de retroalimentación y al establecer metas, lo cual pudiera incluso conducir a una disminución en la curva de aprendizaje. (46) La incorporación de un sistema objetivo de evaluación durante el entrenamiento es una necesidad para establecer un sistema de enseñanza realmente efectivo. ...
Full-text available
La cirugía laparoscópica ha sido uno de los grandes adelantos de la medicina moderna, sin embargo, la incorporación de esta tecnología a la práctica quirúrgica trajo consigo implicaciones en la enseñanza de la cirugía. La cirugía laparoscópica es una técnica más difícil de dominar que la cirugía abierta, en la cual se realizan procedimientos y maniobras particulares que requieren de la adquisición de habilidades específicas. La tendencia en la enseñanza de nuevas técnicas o procedimientos se ha enfocado en el uso de la simulación como una herramienta que permite adquirir las destrezas necesarias en un ambiente seguro, sin comprometer la seguridad y eficacia de los procedimientos. Por otro lado, decidir el momento en el cual el cirujano en entrenamiento ha alcanzado las destrezas necesarias para incorporarse a cirugías in vivo, requiere de objetivos métodos de evaluación. En la búsqueda de alternativas de mayor objetividad, la tendencia mundial durante los últimos años ha sido dirigir la atención hacia el estudio de patrones de movimientos al momento de realizar determinada tarea o procedimiento.
... Identification of talent in this approach includes testing their above-average competencies, i.e., knowledge, skills, and experience that create significant value for the organizations (Meyers et al., 2013). Ericsson, Prietula, and Cokely (2007) argued that experts across all domains, such as sports, dance, chess, medicine, etc., are always made through training and development. Under this approach the criteria for identifying talented people include the assessment of their ambitions, skills, and willingness to learn. ...
Although talent is considered imperative for gaining a competitive advantage, talent management programs’ effectiveness is unknown. It is believed that consensus on a strong theoretical underpinning for identifying talent and its general definition is yet to be achieved among academia and practitioners. This lack of integration and agreement on a single definition among scholars lead to more confusion which inhibits the advancement of talent management scholarship. The notion also requires renewed attention in the post-pandemic era because everything may not go back to normal as pre-pandemic. This study addresses the gap and focuses on reviewing the existing scholarship on talent definitions and its conceptualization in one place. The study also aims to present the potential implications of talent definition on talent management practices. Among the various implications discussed, it is argued that a single approach to talent definition makes the company vulnerable as it is not using the full potential of talent management. Finally, based on this in-depth review, the study will highlight potential critical research areas towards which the scholarship of talent may be extended.
... The theoretical framework for the current commentary was developed by a working group of experts [17] with at least 10,000 h of professional experience in education and scientific research (R.Z.-P., F.B., C.L., and D.D.) and in clinical osteopathic practice (R.Z.-P., F.B., and C.L.). More specifically, the framework was the result of a brainstorming process based on clinical observation and the best available evidence. ...
Full-text available
Historical osteopathic principles and practices (OPP)—considering the patient as a dynamic interaction of the body, mind, and spirit and incorporating the body’s self-healing ability into care—are inherited from traditional/complementary and alternative (CAM) principles. Both concepts are familiar to contemporary osteopathic practitioners, but their incorporation into healthcare for evidence-informed, patient-centered care (PCC) remains unclear. Further, a polarity exists in the osteopathic profession between a ‘traditional-minded’ group following historical OPP despite evidence against those models and an ‘evidence-minded’ group following the current available evidence for common patient complaints. By shifting professional practices towards evidence-based practices for manual therapy in line with the Western dominant biomedical paradigm, the latter group is challenging the osteopathic professional identity. To alleviate this polarity, we would like to refocus on patient values and expectations, highlighting cultural diversity from an anthropological perspective. Increasing an awareness of diverse sociocultural health assumptions may foster culturally sensitive PCC, especially when including non-Western sociocultural belief systems of health into that person-centered care. Therefore, the current medical anthropological perspective on the legacy of traditional/CAM principles in historical OPP is offered to advance the osteopathic profession by promoting ethical, culturally sensitive, and evidence-informed PCC in a Western secular environment. Such inclusive approaches are likely to meet patients’ values and expectations, whether informed by Western or non-Western sociocultural beliefs, and improve their satisfaction and clinical outcomes.
... In every situation where debriefing is applied, significant skill is needed to navigate conversations and focus on learning objectives. Faculty development, support, and feedback are needed to mature debriefing skills to best adapt to different situations [6,7,30,31]. A cognitive aid that can both support and foster the learning of debriefing could hasten the acquisition of such an important skill. ...
Full-text available
Background The Promoting Excellence and Reflective Learning in Simulation (PEARLS) Healthcare Debriefing Tool is a cognitive aid designed to deploy debriefing in a structured way. The tool has the potential to increase the facilitator’s ability to acquire debriefing skills, by breaking down the complexity of debriefing and thereby improving the quality of a novice facilitator’s debrief. In this pilot study, we aimed to evaluate the impact of the tool on facilitators’ cognitive load, workload, and debriefing quality. Methods Fourteen fellows from the New York City Health + Hospitals Simulation Fellowship, novice to the PEARLS Healthcare Debriefing Tool, were randomized to two groups of 7. The intervention group was equipped with the cognitive aid while the control group did not use the tool. Both groups had undergone an 8-h debriefing course. The two groups performed debriefings of 3 videoed simulated events and rated the cognitive load and workload of their experience using the Paas-Merriënboer scale and the raw National Aeronautics and Space Administration task load index (NASA-TLX), respectively. The debriefing performances were then rated using the Debriefing Assessment for Simulation in Healthcare (DASH) for debriefing quality. Measures of cognitive load were measured as Paas-Merriënboer scale and compared using Wilcoxon rank-sum tests. Measures of workload and debriefing quality were analyzed using mixed-effect linear regression models. Results Those who used the tool had significantly lower median scores in cognitive load in 2 out of the 3 debriefings (median score with tool vs no tool: scenario A 6 vs 6, p =0.1331; scenario B: 5 vs 6, p =0.043; and scenario C: 5 vs 7, p =0.031). No difference was detected in the tool effectiveness in decreasing composite score of workload demands (mean difference in average NASA-TLX −4.5, 95%CI −16.5 to 7.0, p =0.456) or improving composite scores of debriefing qualities (mean difference in DASH 2.4, 95%CI −3.4 to 8.1, p =0.436). Conclusions The PEARLS Healthcare Debriefing Tool may serve as an educational adjunct for debriefing skill acquisition. The use of a debriefing cognitive aid may decrease the cognitive load of debriefing but did not suggest an impact on the workload or quality of debriefing in novice debriefers. Further research is recommended to study the efficacy of the cognitive aid beyond this pilot; however, the design of this research may serve as a model for future exploration of the quality of debriefing.
... Udviklingen af faglig ekspertise går som regel gennem anstrengelse og frustration og kraever mange fravalg til fordel for fokus på traening og udvikling af specifikke kompetencer. Hertil er vejen praeget af en direkte, aerlig og ofte pinagtig selvrefleksion og evalueringsproces (Ericsson, Prietula & Cokely, 2007). ...
Mindfulness-based clinical interventions have become popular and broadly implemented within several university clinics and hospitals. The efficacy of mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) and mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) is supported by evidence from numerous clinical trials and meta-analyses. However, with the increase inpopularity and greater demand, the central risk is that the quality and integrity of MBSR and MBCT could be lost, in particular if these evidence-based interventions are not delivered as intended. In this article, an overall model of quality and integrity is presented with an emphasis on professional training, standards of good practice, teaching competencies,ethics, and insights of contemplative traditions. It is suggested that professional training requires a longer time frame in order to develop, integrate, implement, and evaluate the basic competencies needed to effectively teach MBSR and MBCT. It is also argued that teachers of MBSR and MBCT need to be engage in the personal work ofintegrating mindfulness into their own lives.
... Children come differently prepared for their study, but all have their strengths and weaknesses [6]. It is therefore very important to map their position right at the beginning of the reading program and provide them with appropriate training and challenges, what Ericsson calls 'deliberate practice' [7]. Ericsson's theory emphasizes the importance of systematic training over time with well-defined specific goals. ...
Full-text available
The aim of this article was to present an important perspective on reading skill development. The perspective ‘READ’ builds on the phonics approach which has been found to be most important in relation to reading achievement i.e., to teach children to break the reading code. In addition, READ builds on theories within learning and skill development. The Ericsson concept of ‘deliberate practice’ refer to baseline measurements that provide a basis for follow-up and deliberate practice. The concept of ‘flow’ is also of great importance where challenges are always in relation to the skills. It means that each child will be able to experience ‘flow’ where mastery is the key word, feeling I CAN! When mastery is experienced, the dopamine hormone gives the feeling of reward. Stimuli, experience, and repetition is also a key word in the ‘training hour’ where children get the possibility to strengthen the neural network that is used for specific skills which are trained. In this respect, the letter-sound knowledge is trained until the child has broken the reading code. The results from the first year in the school in Vestmannaeyjar in Iceland indicates that all the children were able to break the reading code or read simple words. In addition, 96% of the children were able to read sentences, and 88% where able to read text. These promising results are discussed in relation to Ericsson’s and Csikszentmihalyi’s important theories.
We introduce the Berlin Numeracy Test, a new psychometrically sound instrument that quickly assesses statistical numeracy and risk literacy. We present 21 studies ( n =5336) showing robust psychometric discriminability across 15 countries (e.g., Germany, Pakistan, Japan, USA) and diverse samples (e.g., medical professionals, general populations, Mechanical Turk web panels). Analyses demonstrate desirable patterns of convergent validity (e.g., numeracy, general cognitive abilities), discriminant validity (e.g., personality, motivation), and criterion validity (e.g., numerical and non-numerical questions about risk). The Berlin Numeracy Test was found to be the strongest predictor of comprehension of everyday risks (e.g., evaluating claims about products and treatments; interpreting forecasts), doubling the predictive power of other numeracy instruments and accounting for unique variance beyond other cognitive tests (e.g., cognitive reflection, working memory, intelligence). The Berlin Numeracy Test typically takes about three minutes to complete and is available in multiple languages and formats, including a computer adaptive test that automatically scores and reports data to researchers ( ). The online forum also provides interactive content for public outreach and education, and offers a recommendation system for test format selection. Discussion centers on construct validity of numeracy for risk literacy, underlying cognitive mechanisms, and applications in adaptive decision support.
This chapter discusses the principles of deliberate practice (DP) and mastery learning (ML) in today's powerful medical education context. It presents four examples that illustrates the use of these technologies for medical education and for education of patients and their caregivers. The chapter talks about a deliberate practice and mastery learning research agenda and advice about programme implementation and maintenance. Medical educators are responsible for creating the conditions where learners can undergo the DP needed to acquire and maintain essential clinical skills, judgement and professionalism‐core objectives of medical education. In medical education, ML has been used primarily for acquisition and maintenance of clinical procedural skills, such as advanced cardiac life support, paracentesis and central venous catheter insertion. Medical education research programmes that are thematic, sustained and cumulative will boost the skill and knowledge base needed for continued advancement.
The Einstellung effect was first described by Abraham Luchins in his doctoral thesis published in 1942. The effect occurs when a repeated solution to old problems is applied to a new problem even though a more appropriate response is available. In Luchins’ so-called water jar task, participants had to measure a specific amount of water using three jars of different capacities. Luchins found that subjects kept using methods they had applied in previous trials, even if a more efficient solution for the current trial was available: an Einstellung effect. Moreover, Luchins studied the different conditions that could possibly mediate this effect, including telling participants to pay more attention, changing the number of tasks, alternating between different types of tasks, as well as putting participants under time pressure. In the current work, we reconstruct and reanalyze the data of the various experimental conditions published in Luchins’ thesis. We furthermore show that a model of resource-rational decision-making can explain all of the observed effects. This model assumes that people transform prior preferences into a posterior policy to maximize rewards under time constraints. Taken together, our reconstructive and modeling results put the Einstellung effect under the lens of modern-day psychology and show how resource-rational models can explain effects that have historically been seen as deficiencies of human problem-solving.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.