Malcom Gladwell : The Truth behind the 10,000 Hour Rule

1132 Words3 Pages

The road to greatness is a long path filled with struggle and time. Based on research by the best-selling author Malcom Gladwell inside his book Outliers popularized the idea of 10,000 hours of guided practice “the magic number of greatness”(Gladwell, 47). With enough practice he said anyone could achieve any work that of a professional. While some say the 10,000 hour rule is the key to success I believe that success is based on genetics, talent, and time period. It is whether one was born with the talent, achieved it later within life or was born during the wrong time period is what makes a master out of someone. Where the 10,000 hour rule is not a truth. What is the 10,000 hour rule? Malcom Gladwell uses this rule to help explain that success in any field one has to commit to practicing one specific task for a total of 10,000 hours. Gladwell uses such examples as Bill Gates and The Beatles and explains that 20 hours a week for ten years will bring a person to this exalted number. The argument is that practice makes perfect. But one must have dedicated everything to improve that desired skill for it to work. He uses the rule as a basis to explain “innate ability has less to do with success than the combination of early environment exposure and years of practice” (Graydon, 1). Were at the end of his observation it would be a fine, even optimistic, argument. Malcom’s biased measure of 'success' is more or less safely constrained to practiced skills of the musical or hand-eye co-ordination like working with computers in which he explains with Gates and Jobs. He also admits genetics, exposure, practice, and random luck may all play a confounding role and does not emphasize the rule how easily it translates to a business professiona... ... middle of paper ... ...and the whole story that Malcom Gladwell left out. Szalavitz, Maia. "10,000 Hours May Not Make a Master After All | TIME.com." Time. Time, 20 May 2013. Web. 19 Feb. 2014 Maia Szalavitz in the article, 10,000 hours may not make a master after all, argues that 10,000 hours may not be sufficient (05-20-13). Szalavitz supports her argument by demonstrating other researcher’s outcomes. The author’s purpose is to inform others in order to show that there isn’t a thing as “the magic number of greatness”. The author writes in formal tone for many researchers out there. This author is not ordinary author, he is himself is a science/research writer. He has done much research on the topic, what inspired him was the book ‘Outliers’. This is a very credible source because he has many examples, research form other scientists and the whole story that Malcom Gladwell left out.

Open Document