The trick about this concept, and this strategy, is that you have to consider just what exactly you are practicing. I took a peek at his MySpace (http://www.myspace.com/sickabodsane) and honestly, he is not the most technically adept rapper. His rhymes and rhyme schemes are usually fairly simple and his topics aren't particularly striking. He has good cadence and breath control, he is easy to follow, and his stuff is catchy though.
I would argue that in this process his key outcome was not improving his rapping ability. He learnt about stage presence, handling a microphone, interacting with a crowd, picking suitable topics to entertain that crowd, and probably more. As a result of consistently performing and being in this place he has likely built a network of people doing similar things and of fans. For someone who wants to succeed in a rap career these are all important things, but my question is did his rapping actually improve?
It's all a question of metrics and of knowing exactly what you want to get out of your project.
Unfortunate name – it reminds me of the pyramid scheme, under which the vast majority of people lose more than they gain. Perhaps a clearer name would be the Single-Benchmark Method, though that doesn’t sound as interesting.
I think of it as getting in a feedback loop, which people often call iterating. Practicing is also close. The idea of iterating is simple and can be seen in anything from education to genetics to investing.
The challenge often is getting over the personal hangups which prevent one from facing honest feedback. There is a general narrative where a person's will to achieve a particular goal finally overcomes the fears related to identity and the outcome, and progress accelerates.
I like the focus on having a solid, measurable, _objective_ benchmark. Everyone knows that it takes hundreds of hours to get very good at something, but this essay is a great reminder that simply putting hundreds of hours of practice is still no guarantee of progress if you do not have a way to measure it.
This relates to an issue that I personally struggle with. The issue is that I am interested in a number of different fields, mainly business, software, and writing (and politics, somewhat). I find the most inspiring achievement is that of the polymath and I aspire to someday be worthy of that label.
The issue is that in a world of six billion people and innumerable domains of knowledge, it is difficult to achieve true expertise in even a single field. Laser-like focus on a single skill, as described in the Pyramid Method, offers the potential of becoming amazing at that skill to the likely exclusion of any others.
My dilemma is therefore whether or not I ought to try to become an exceptional software developer or businessperson or writer, or whether it's okay to just be pretty good at all of those things and never achieve major recognition for any of them.
How possible is it to actually become a Renaissance Man these days?
Stop caring about labels, titles and recognition; then your struggle will end.
We all want to lead a life of significance, but don't fool yourself into thinking that the only way to find significance is to "achieve major recognition" in the eyes of others. In fact, you'd probably agree that chasing the esteem of others is probably the least significant thing anyone can do with their life.
Just wanted to thank you for writing this comment. Since reading it I've really, genuinely re-evaluated a lot of things in my life, and I'm continuing to do so. Thank you - I needed it.
This reminds me of what Steve Martin did in his early career. He played the same comedy clubs over and over again, keeping the routines that worked and ruthlessly dropping the ones that didn't, until he became the most famous comedian in the world.
As he put it: "I did stand-up comedy for eighteen years. Ten of those years were spent learning, four years were spent refining, and four were spent in wild success."
P.S. Born Standing Up, his memoir, is deservedly praised.
I liked the story, and I think the points are solid, but I must ask the question: Did Chris eventually have a good career as a rapper? Is he a name we would recognize?
I think the OP is onto something. Focused attention is good if you don't get tunnel vision. In addition to finding a relevant venue you would want relevant mentors and colleagues too. Hopefully some of them are in that same venue.
This is great advice for participants in the budding northeast hackathon scene. I've never done a startup, but from what I can gather, doing a hackathon isn't that far off. You code furiously and you try to win. You pivot if it's not working out. You make awesome shit, and fast. Hackathons are just a bit a shorter. I figure if I can win a hackathon, I'd a) be better prepared to win in startupland, and b) get noticed by the people who pull the strings. So far, it's working out well, and I'd recommend any budding programmer (read: student) to go to as many hackathons as possible.
So essentially this is a niche to win strategy? Become the dominant player in your microcosm then continue to expand once dominance is achieved. I won't argue with this, it's not applicable to every pursuit, but solid advice on the whole.
If I understand you, I don't think that's the advice at all. I believe Newport's key point is NOT "win in a niche, use that as your base, leverage that to a wider context".
I believe the essence is this:
You're gonna hafta practice a ton anyway. So one way to decide how to focus your practice is to pick a microcosm with clear feedback, and go hard on that one type of practice. It's not about the (microcosmic) prize, it's about the focus that having a prize gives you in your preparation for the real fight, which you can get to in a few years. Thrashing during practice is as much a problem as thrashing during the fight for the thing itself.
While I think it's interesting advice, my thought is that for every opinion piece advocating laser focus, there's another opinion piece advocating dilettantism and adaptability and opportunism. It's hard to know how to add that up.
Try to tease out parts of the project that you can actually complete and get some feedback on. Feedback is one of the most important requirements for getting better, and the feedback on a completed sub-project is always going to be better than that on a project that is still being worked on. Not to mention that clearly finishing even parts of the project is helpful to morale.
A/B testing with measurable, objective conversion metrics? Other than that, sites like dribbble.com display the number of likes an image gets. Your metrics there are how many follow you and what the average rating per image is.
I have set a professional goal for myself to become more active in the Rails community and to begin contributing patches to Rails and other open source projects I use. With the eventual goal of getting the super awesome Rails job that I one day want as opposed to the okay-to-good Rails job I currently have. This article gave me a lot to think about in relation to my goal.
Similarly, I have set myself the goal of becoming an awesome mobile app developer. My goal is to first become one of the most valued developers at my current workplace, and then to move on to a better job.
I would appreciate any suggestions for how one can apply this 'Pyramid method' to the field of programming. What should be the pyramid here - Github? StackOverflow?
The best mobile app developers I know are equivalent or even better graphic designers than they are programmers. If you truly want to become a better mobile developer, focus on improving your ability to design the visual side. When a user sees your mobile application, they are interacting with and see only the tip of the iceberg, your UI. They don't see the underlying iceberg of code.
As far as a specific tip for the Pyramid method, get involved in your local mobile development SIG. For iOS, it is Cocoaheads (weird name, I know but Cocoa programmers are an interesting bunch). Once you get involved (or better yet, start one up), start presenting topics. By presenting, you will be pushed out of your comfort zone. Don't know AVFoundation? Volunteer to present on this topic and then build your first AVFoundation based app. As another comment in this thread pointed out, hackathons are a great way to meet other developers and improve your coding production. Seek out the good developers in your local area, nothing beats buying someone a beer or coffee and listening to their experience and advice. Do a pro-bono project, ideally one with a deadline (and one that would be difficult to back out of - e.g.one with personal commitment)
StackOverflow is a good practice area. If you have free time, go find some questions you don't know how to answer and answer them.
One last thing, buy a lot of apps. Use them, try to reverse engineer them (not from object code but from the app itself). Money well spent.
I would argue that in this process his key outcome was not improving his rapping ability. He learnt about stage presence, handling a microphone, interacting with a crowd, picking suitable topics to entertain that crowd, and probably more. As a result of consistently performing and being in this place he has likely built a network of people doing similar things and of fans. For someone who wants to succeed in a rap career these are all important things, but my question is did his rapping actually improve?
It's all a question of metrics and of knowing exactly what you want to get out of your project.