Summary of Generalise, Don’t Specialise

David J. Epstein

Looking for the article?
We have the summary! Get the key insights in just 5 minutes.

Editorial Rating

The rating – what does it mean?

At getAbstract, we summarize books* that help people understand the world and make it better. Whatever we select for our library has to excel in one or the other of these two core criteria:

Enlightening – You’ll learn things that will inform and improve your decisions.

Helpful – You’ll take-away practical advice that will help you get better at what you do.

We rate each piece of content on a scale of 1–10 with regard to these two core criteria. Our rating helps you sort the titles on your reading list from solid (5) to brilliant (10). Books we rate below 5 won’t be summarized. Here's what the ratings mean:

10 – Brilliant. A helpful and/or enlightening book that, in addition to meeting the highest standards in all pertinent aspects, stands out even among the best. Often an instant classic and must-read for everyone.
9 – Superb. A helpful and/or enlightening book that is extremely well rounded, has many strengths and no shortcomings worth mentioning.
8 – Very good. A helpful and/or enlightening book that has a substantial number of outstanding qualities without excelling across the board, e.g. presents the latest findings in a topical field and is written by a renowned expert but lacks a bit in style.
7 – Good. A helpful and/or enlightening book that combines two or more noteworthy strengths, e.g. contains uncommonly novel ideas and presents them in an engaging manner.
6 – Notable. A helpful and/or enlightening book that stands out by at least one aspect, e.g. is particularly well structured.
5 – Solid. A helpful and/or enlightening book, in spite of its obvious shortcomings. For instance, it may offer decent advice in some areas while being repetitive or unremarkable in others.

*getAbstract is summarizing much more than books. We look at every kind of content that may matter to our audience: books, but also articles, reports, videos and podcasts. What we say here about books applies to all formats we cover.

Recommendation

As children, we were told that practice makes perfect, but sportswriter David Epstein turns on its head the popular idea that specializing early on in one field leads to greater success. Epstein delved into studies on the development of elite professionals, observing that dabbling isn’t the hindrance many believe it to be. In this fascinating article, he outlines a convincing case that – in an increasingly complex and interconnected world – the world needs more “people with range.”

About the Author

Award-winning writer David Epstein is the New York Times best-selling author of The Sports Gene: Talent, Practice and the Truth About Success. This article is adapted from his number one New York Times bestseller, Range: Why Generalists Triumph in a Specialized World.

Summary

It’s a myth that having a head start in one field makes you more successful.

One of the greatest golfers in history, Tiger Woods was a child prodigy who swung his first golf club at 10 months old, and beat his father when he was eight years old. Tennis champion Roger Federer famously sampled many sports, including soccer, squash, basketball and swimming, before choosing tennis in his late teens. The contrast between them – one who undertook intense “deliberate practice” epitomizing the concept of the 10,000-hour rule and the other with development unhindered by a late start – finds echoes in the world of sport, science, technology, business, music and the arts. The 10,000-hour rule has become mainstream, but there are just as many examples echoing Federer’s story.

The myth of starting and focusing early is part of a “well-meaning marketing machine,” but there are many instances of athletes who subvert it, including Czech athlete Ester Ledecká, who won gold medals in two different sports...

Read on