Brad Wardell's views about technology, politics, religion, world affairs, and all sorts of politically incorrect topics.
The perils of dabbling
Published on November 17, 2005 By Draginol In Business

I am talentless. It's true.  I have no natural talents.  I have interests though. Lots of them. And that's part of my problem.  My obsessive compulsive nature tends to allow me to focus on becoming decent at a lot of things but never attain any masterhood.  Not that I could anyway because -- like I said -- I have no natural talents and to become a master at anything, you really need to have a talent in that area.

Just looking around where I work I see it all the time.  I can do graphics design for instance.  I've been using Corel Draw, Photoshop, Photo Paint, and countless other graphic tools since the early 90s.  But I'm a padawan compared to Mormegil who sits only a few feet from me.  He started using Corel Draw at about the same time as I do, but he's actually got talent and has focused on getting better and better.  So even though I know how to do some of this stuff, my output is so much poorer in quality that my skill  may not as well exist.

I also know how to write. I type 120 words per minute roughly. And so I can crank stuff out.  I actually enjoy writing.  But I don't write anywhere near as well as Cordellia whose office is a stone's throw away from where I sit.  In fact, she tops me in a number of areas.  I considered myself a pretty decent video and sound editor too but again, my skills are eclipsed by hers.

I can also do web design. I webmaster Stardock.com and have since the beginning.  I know HTML reasonable well. But I can't hold a candle to Darkstar who sits not that far away from me.  He's much better and besides, if he's busy, there's MikeB who can crank it out better anyway.

Then there's software development.  I know C, C++, C#, some VB, but beyond computer AI and some algorithm design, that's better off being done by other people.   10 years ago, I did all the art, programming, documentation, and more for our software (or at least most of our products).  Now I'm relegated to computer AI and game play coding because -- wait for it -- there's others that are so much better at it that my skills might as well not exist.

My job also involves a great deal of financial analysis, budgeting, etc.  But I'm no accountant.  And I'm not sure I'd want to be one.  So while I may have some natural talent at financial modeling and projections, it's not an area I really want to explore.

This scattershot nature shows up here on JoeUser too.  I want to be a "big time" blogger. Yet I can't quite dedicate the time and energy to do what it takes to do that.  And besides that, there's writers who are so much better.  Guys like Steven Den Beste have more blogging talent in their finger than I do all over and he's given it up. 

Anyway, it's not a pity party I'm throwing here but rather a warning to others.  I happen to be very fortunate that I can get away with being semi-skilled in a whole lot of areas but talented in none because I'm surrounded by supremely talented people who make up for my myriad of short-comings.  Perhaps it's time to outsource myself.

It is important to focus on what you enjoy and are good at. Stick to something if you can to develop your skills.  Otherwise, one day you'll wake up and realize that your varied interests have made you "jack of all trades but a master of none".


Comments (Page 1)
2 Pages1 2 
on Nov 17, 2005
I read a book once about this subject. Can't remember the name of it because it was so long ago and a required read in college.

Basically it said people like Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Payne were exactly as you describe yourself, "a jack of all trades."

Have you ever met someone who is a master at a certain subject? I mean a true Master of their field? What do they talk about? Yup, it tends to be about the subject they love so much, which is great, but gets a little boring. Especially if you have just a very basic concept of their subject or no interest at all.

You sound well rounded. I'd rather know a lot of things about my world, than all the things about one part of my world. Unless of course there is a skill you REALLY feel is lacking that you want to learn.

Of course you may not have found that one thing you are so passionate about you are willing to forgo just about everything else in your pursuit of it.

I don't think dabbling is a bad thing. I think it makes you interesting. Just think, you can do something a lot of people can't do right here on JU. You can write about programming (Greek to me) and talk about that with programmers. You can do general personal blogs and chat with others about it.

I think your problem is comparing yourself to others, not dabbling. It's not a competition. When something strikes your fancy you will go after it and then people around you will be saying...Draginol has such a grasp of such and such.

But until then, keeping yourself rounded out is a good thing imo.
on Nov 17, 2005
That is true.

I have some natural talent for a few things, but my field of expertise has nothing to do with them. And while I have the urge to try and leave my field of expertise by doing more to nurture my talents, I am too lazy for it.

(I am doing well, so that's not a problem.)

I also realised that my field of expertise now is what I was interested in in school. With some work I was good in that area but I was never very good in the areas where I now see my talents lie. I had some very bad teachers too, and some very good ones. The good ones just happened to be those supporting my future field rather than my talents.

(Guess what my field of expertise is and where my talents lie.)

I also noticed that I am really lacking in talent when it comes to parts of my work. But my work mostly doesn't require talent, luckily. It only requires the reading of boring books and other documentation.

At least I have some talents. And I am _slowly_ doing something about them.
on Nov 17, 2005
The frood Draginol mentions, Steven Den Beste, now he really is a Jack-of-all-trades. Some have said he knows everything. He is often close to being indistinguishable from someone who really does know everything.

on Nov 17, 2005
I was thinking the same thing as Tova before I read her comment. Really I was reading your mind. I agree dabblers are more interesting people who can talk to a lot of people on a variety or topics.
on Nov 17, 2005
Really I was reading your mind.


AAHA!! So THAT was what was in there. ~jiggles ear trying to get Loco out of there~
on Nov 17, 2005
Wow...when I see your name, I immediately associate you with beingTechnologically Gifted...so, that sounds like a Talent to Me...You may not feel as gifted as your peers, but you have shown great technological abilities nevertheless...hey, you got this place up and running, right.
on Nov 17, 2005
There is such a thing as talent for recognizing talent, and bringing it all together to create something as a unit. Somehow, I doubt a talentless person would find themselves where you are when so many "talented" people sit and do very little. I think it would take a fairly talented person to be able to have gleaned the skills you have, have the family you have, and have accomplished what you have accomplished. Sitting where I am, talent doesn't mean that much.
on Nov 17, 2005
Details, details. Others are so consumed by details. You may not have a name for that at which you excel (visionary-evangelist, manager-catalyst, intellect-wrangler, or seer-of-the-big-picture perhaps?) That may just be a reflection of the uniqueness of that which you do. From my perspective, you do it well. You have done no less than launch yourself from a precipice and build an airplane on the way down to soften your landing. It is only your competitive nature that causes you to compare yourself to the specialists around you. What a joy it must be to be surrounded by and possessed of such excellence. Congratulations. As in the parable, you have used your talents well.
on Nov 17, 2005
Don't be ridiculous; of course you're talented. You're talented at leading, and presenting ideas. Not all talents are as easily itemized as, say, image editing.

And besides, AI coding is the funnest part anyway.

Dan
on Nov 17, 2005
Ditto on the above compliments and observations!

on Nov 17, 2005
Wow, I really know how you feel. I feel like that all the time. I can do so many things, some of them pretty well, but there's always someone that is so much better than me that it makes me feel like I can't even do it right anymore. Very few things am I more than just "decent" at. PHP's the only thing I have over anyone else.

Anyways, great article. I felt like you were talking right to me the whole time.

-michael
on Nov 18, 2005
I saw a program once about a director of a large scale movie. He had an enormous amount of responsibilities in overseeing a giant production. There were so many things to take care of on a day to day schedule, and was involved in so many separate departments' management in order to function correctly. I was awed by the enormity of it, and the fact that he pulled off such an endeavor consistently.
I definitely thought that only talented people can handle a job like that.
Sounds like you, in a way.
on Nov 18, 2005
I understand the sentiment, but someone who can put things together from a variety of different sources to create a product has to be a jack-of-all-trades (JOAT).

Sometimes a master can produce incredible work, but runs the risk of narrowing the breadth of his or her output. The JOAT is often the person who applies the master work in ways not envisioned by a master.

Okay, there was Da Vinci, a master of many things and a JOAT, but people like that are one in a million. The ideal renaissance man was one who had great skills in many areas, not just one.

Sure, it's great to be a master-craftsmen, intense and focused on only one thing. But it is also great to be able to be competent in many things and so have enough variety of experience to see how different fields can interlink.

Personally, if were to be stranded on a desert island and my choice was a JOAT or a MC, without knowing what skills either had, I'd chose the JOAT. More chance that the JOAT would have a greater variety of skills for survival. Obviously, an extreme example and not so realistic, but I think there's a reason the world has more JOATs than MCs.


Also, I have a question. Why do people (myself included at times) have this idea that to be worth anything, we must be a master at something?The pursuit of mastery is certainly worthwhile, but isn't the journey of attaining it more important than "getting there?" If one subscribes to the idea that one is always a student and always learning and therefore, never a master, then having to BE a master to BE someone seems like the cause for terminal unhappiness.

I remember browsing through a book about management myths and how they are perpetuated in our culture to get us to work harder....Dang... I knew I should have bought that book. I have tried to find it on Amazon but can't... Is this the book Tova referred to?

Dabble on, dude!

Maybe there is such a thing as a JOAT Master!!!!

Hmmmm.... sounds very Star Wars. Feel the force of the JOAT surround you! Surrender to the JOAT to be one with the universe!
on Nov 18, 2005
And just look where your dabbling have gotten you! I do agree with you though. It's much better to be master of whatever you do rather than jack of all trades. Although I do think being jack of all trades does make you a very "rounded" person. It's absolutely necessary for younger folks who haven't identified their niche yet to find it and stick with it. That will make life a lot easier for them in the long run. Good blog!
on Nov 18, 2005
Hmmmm.... sounds very Star Wars. Feel the force of the JOAT surround you! Surrender to the JOAT to be one with the universe!




Love that! I will use it in the future and attribute it to you when I do!
2 Pages1 2