Becoming a master at anything is usually one’s goal. Master of Art, Master Chef, Master Body Builder, Master Singer. Whatever skill it is one is trying to be the best they can at. To be called one of the greats – to have your name remembered – famous or not. To reach a level of greatness that’s only achievable by few. It’s a goal most of us have. In his book Outliers: The Story of Success, Malcolm Gladwell’s stresses a theory that it takes 10,000 hours of practice to achieve the level of success seen in those who have mastered their craft.
I recently read an article by Rob Nightingale titled “The 10,000 Hour Rule is Wrong: How to Really Master a Skill.” To summarize, to article went on to talk about how – in their own opinion – the Gladwell Theory of spending 10,000 minimum required hours to become a master at anything is incorrect. This intrigued me.
With my curiosity peaked, I decided to look into this thought myself. I am eager to challenge both Gladwell and Nightingale’s perspective on 10,000 hours being the “Tipping Point” of any kind of greatness as well as quality over quantity.
Which do you feel is more important? Or do you think they are both the same? Care to challenge your own premeditated answer and check out Malcolm Gladwell’s Outliers in from the Hoboken Public Library or as an ebook or digital audiobook from eLibraryNJ or eBCCLS.
Let’s see if your answer changes after reading the book.
If interested in other books of similar topic, check out Gladwell’s other titles such as Blink, The Tipping Point, or David and Goliath.
Written by:
Sherissa Salas
Adult Programming Assistant
Hoboken Library Staff Picks 
Leave a Reply