The Talent Myth
The book Bounce by Matthew Syed had a profound effect on me. In it Syed argues, incredibly convincingly, that 'talent' plays almost no part in peak performance and that, instead, what counts is practice. It's not that I hadn't heard that before - Malcolm Gladwell made popular the evidence that an average of 10,000 hours of practice was what it took to create a true outlier. Syed, like Gladwell, makes the argument that in fact it is a strange series of chance that creates the conditions for genius to emerge. And that what those conditions do is cause specific people to practise specific things that other people simply don't practise. And that once they have practised them they appear to be talented.
The distinction here has huge consequences. Because it is the practice, caused in some ways by chance, that leads to this 'talent'. Syed tells stories of table tennis genius created by playing in a garage too small, creating extraordinary reflexes, or by buying a house on the right side of the road so as to be exposed to one of the best coaches in the country. He also tells an incredibly plausible tale of practise (involving altitude and many other things) to explain Ethiopian success in long distance running - clue, it's not in the genes.
The pernicious tale of talent polluted my learning, undoubtedly. I knew that practise mattered of course, but the key detail here is... How much does it matter?
If it makes the difference between me being bad and a little less bad, then that's not much fun. But if it turns out that the main reason Richard Craven is much better than me at guitar is that he happens to have practised much more, then that's different. Instead of feeling the overwhelming idea of never being as good, I am empowered to practise. I know I can become as good as him if I practise enough, better if I practise more.
Of course, not all practises are equal. Many of us have done 10,000 hours of driving, but we aren't Louis Hamilton. The set of conditions that create what researchers call deliberate practice make a difference. Like Syed, Myles Downey writes about deliberate practise in his book Enabling Genius. And in it, he hypothesises (again, convincingly) that the flow state makes a difference to practise, too.
A part of me feels like the talent myth has proceeded because it feels like a great story. Because it opens possibility - anyone could be born with a god given talent and so we can go from rags to riches if we have that magical gift. But the truth is it closes possibility. If any of us can develop our own unique genius in any task through deliberate practise, then that is real possibility, empowering possibility. Because then we get to choose. Really choose. And our choice matters.
When I first understood this, two thing happened. A sense of regret for what might have been. For how much better I could have been at things, how much more enjoyment I could have had if I hadnt stopped doing things because 'I wasn't good at them'.
And then, of course, possibilty. Because while the best time to plant an apple tree was 20 years ago, the second best time is now.
And now I remember the power of practise, particularly in those moments when I'm afraid to start something. Whether that's a first boxing class or a first time taking my daughter swimming.
If I practise it, I will become better. And I will become more confident. Confidence is a result, remember, not a requirement.
And so the question arises, what will you practise? What will you choose to practise now, so that the you of twenty years from now won't be full of regret, and will be full of 'talent'?
--
This is the latest in a series of articles written using the 12-Minute Method: write for twelve minutes, proof read once with tiny edits and then post online.
The first 12-Minute Method Book - How to Start When You're Stuck - is out now!