• Choose a category
• All
• Classic-Fiction

Should every interaction with the IRS be a freestyle improvisation?

Probably not.

Organizations that are centralized, monopolistic, static, safe, cost-sensitive, and far-flung

should hire drones, as cheaply as possible.

Commodity producers in highly competitive businesses should do the same. If you're

producing tires for Hyundai or light-bulb filaments for Sylvania, most of the people in

your company need to be inexpensive first, reliable second, and present, third.

Hire cheap drones that you can scale, replace, and disrespect.

I have no issue at all with this as a business strategy. But I don't expect that it will lead to

growth or significant customer loyalty, particularly in times of change.

More important, if you're looking for a job, I have no idea why you'd want to work in a

company like this. Let someone else have that job. You deserve better.

Depth of Knowledge Alone Is Not Enough

Wikipedia and the shared knowledge of the Internet make domain knowledge on its own

worth significantly less than it used to be. Today, if all you have to offer is that you know

a lot of reference book information, you lose, because the Internet knows more than you

do.

Depth of knowledge combined with good judgment is worth a lot. Depth of knowledge

combined with diagnostic skills or nuanced insight is worth a lot, too. Knowledge alone,

though, I'd rather get faster and cheaper from an expert I find online. If I need a great

direct mail letter, it's far cheaper and faster to hire a great direct mail writer to write me a

letter than it is to hire someone and have him on staff for the one letter I need every

month, right?

Depth of knowledge is rarely sufficient, all by itself, to turn someone into a linchpin.

There are three situations where an organization will reward and embrace someone with

extraordinary depth of knowledge:

1. When the knowledge is needed on a moment's notice and bringing in an outside source

is too risky or time consuming.

2. When the knowledge is needed on a constant basis and the cost of bringing in an

outside source is too high.

3. When depth of knowledge is also involved in decision making, and internal credibility

and organizational knowledge go hand in hand with knowing the right answer.

It's easy for an outside source to be seen, in artist Julian Schnabel's words, as a "tourist."

A tourist may have significant technical skill, but if she doesn't know the territory--your

territory--then the skill isn't worthwhile.

On the other hand, as we have seen in the divergent paths of Rick Wagoner, the insider

with domain knowledge who bankrupted General Motors, and Alan Mulally, the outsider

with only clear vision, leadership skills, and a good posture who saved Ford, depth of

knowledge alone is enough to get you into serious trouble.

A few years before Detroit's meltdown, Bill Ford knew his company was in jeopardy, so

he went outside to hire a new CEO.

His biggest concern? "Ford is a place where they wait for the leader to tell them what to

do."

Perhaps the biggest shift Alan Mulally made when he arrived from Boeing was changing

that. Instead of hiring someone with deep domain knowledge who knew exactly what to

do, Bill Ford hired someone who knew how to train people to live without a map.

Rick Wagoner lost his job at GM because he told everyone what to do (and he was

wrong). Far better to build a team that figures out what to do instead.

The Best Reason to Be an Expert in Your Field

Expertise gives you enough insight to reinvent what everyone else assumes is the truth.

Sure, it's possible to randomly challenge the conventions of your field and luckily find a

breakthrough. It's far more likely, though, that you will design a great Web site or direct a

powerful movie or lead a breakthrough product development if you understand the status

quo better than anyone else.

Beginner's luck is dramatically overrated.

Emotional Labor and Making Maps

"Emotional labor" was a term first coined