5-Minute Read
“As technology spins the world into vaster webs of interconnected systems in which each individual only sees a small part, we need people who start broad and embrace diverse experiences and perspectives while they progress. People with Range.” – David Epstein
As a financial planner, I’m fortunate to help families navigate the college planning process for their children. While I aim to provide valuable guidance and resources, I usually don’t get involved in the specific college majors their kids choose. There are practical reasons for this, but I’ve realized there may be other ways to be involved in this important area.
When approaching college age, 17 or 18-year-olds must make choices that will shape their life’s direction in ways they may hardly anticipate. As someone who initially pursued a career as an engineer and later made a significant career change, I deeply respect and value these early major decisions.
Parents often worry that if children do not pick the right major, they will fall too far behind their classmates and never catch up. While some economic data supports this concern, we might see that these fears are exaggerated if we look at the issue from a different angle.
After reading David Epstein’s book Range, I gained a better appreciation of what I might call the specialization dilemma. Essentially, Epstein explores how to leverage and develop the power of broad knowledge, diverse experiences, and interdisciplinary exploration. He also discusses the challenge of pursuing these within systems that increasingly require hyperspecialization, often forcing you to decide what to do before you fully understand who you are.
When it comes to applying our knowledge and talents, life often feels like a continuous struggle between breadth and depth. I like to explore this idea using the analogy of the fox versus the hedgehog. This concept seems to originate from an ancient Greek proverb: “The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing.” In today’s world, this analogy offers a way to view two different decision-making styles:
Foxes have broad knowledge and adapt easily to different situations. They tend to be incremental thinkers, consider probabilities, and use multiple frameworks to understand the world. As a result, they often make better predictions. However, they can also be seen as disorganized or less focused.
Hedgehogs tend to be more focused and even more stubborn. They develop a deep understanding of one thing, often driven by a single ideology. They can internalize and apply complex information. Although they may be less reliable at forecasting and incremental thinking, hedgehogs often make better business leaders because they can rally people around their cause.
Now you might be wondering how you (or your kids) fit into these two categories. There’s a good chance you don’t fit perfectly into either one, or you might lean toward one now, but that could change over time.
I believe the world needs both hedgehogs and foxes. However, if you’re open to the “Range” way of thinking, perhaps you don’t need to rush to become hedgehogs in a rapidly changing and increasingly uncertain world.
There’s no doubt that specializing is important, and you probably should aim to specialize in one or more areas… eventually. But this can be balanced with being an experimenter in your life. Should you explore broadly before focusing deeply? If so, what would that look like for a college-bound student? Here are two (radical) ideas:
Seek range from the start. I’m interested to see if more college students focus on interdisciplinary studies, which could arguably help them become better thinkers before choosing a specific path to specialize in. For example, Epstein described a route that included taking classes in philosophy, history, epistemology, logic, ethics, statistics, communication, and leadership.
Or take a step back before moving forward. Perhaps the most radical idea here is taking a gap year between high school graduation and starting college. This concept even makes me a little nervous, and I might hesitate to recommend it to my own daughter. But ultimately, it’s a matter of weighing costs and benefits. How is the time used during a gap year? There could be great value in spending time reading, journaling, taking odd jobs, and getting to know yourself and your deep interests. How much time is available for such introspection during high school, especially in the busy junior and senior years?
Granted, the broader foxlike path isn’t suitable for everyone. Some families face constraints that require a quicker return on their college investment, especially if financial aid is limited. College is likely one of the biggest investments you’ll ever make, so it makes sense to consider the actual return on investment.
Pursuing range requires some courage. Many economic indicators suggest that those in more specialized fields often start with higher salaries. For a moment, ignore the fact that some specialties may cost more or require more years in school to reach this level. What’s often missed, because it’s hard to estimate, is the expected earnings growth over a 30- or 40-year career.
Another important factor is whether the career you start to specialize in now will keep your interest and match your talents for years to come. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the average American worker has about 12 jobs between ages 18 and 54. Although it’s not tracked directly, they estimate an average of 3 to 7 career changes during their working life.
While many nuances exist in statistics like these, the main point is that making the right career choice at a young age is difficult. Factors such as outsourcing, offshoring, and the impact of artificial intelligence will likely make job and career mobility even more crucial in the future.
Specializing too early can have other nuanced impacts. I like the story Epstein shares about the question posed to physicians and medical students back in 2013.
If a test to detect a disease with a prevalence of 1 in 1,000 has a false positive rate of 5%, what is the chance that a person who receives a positive result actually has the disease, assuming you know nothing about the person’s symptoms or signs?
The correct answer is that there’s about a 2 percent chance (details in footnotes3). However, only a quarter of the physicians and trainees got it right. The most common answer was 95 percent. This demonstrated that even specialists may not be trained in the underlying logic of their tools.
We can conclude from my perspective as a mid-career professional. As an independent financial planner, I have access to many resources, including trade associations, product providers, technology providers, marketing firms, and consultants. The common mantra is that one must specialize or find their “niche.”
I actually agree with the advice if the niche genuinely involves a technical skill that helps people in need. My hesitation is when the niche is used solely for marketing purposes. If someone says, “I’m a financial planner for bird watchers,” I’ll be skeptical that there’s a real need being addressed.
Financial planning, like most professions, requires continuous learning. Yet, depending on how you define it, I haven’t identified a niche yet. We’ll see how this develops in the coming years. I have some ideas for specialization, but there’s a process involved, including gathering market feedback. I like to hear suggestions from my clients about the areas that are most important to them, and those priorities can change over time. At least with the niche decision, I’m being quite fox-like, and I’m comfortable with that.
After reading all this, you might think I’ve become a little skeptical about specialization. I don’t believe that’s the case. Among other things, specialization requires the ability to focus, an attribute I care deeply about. I even recently wrote a piece on how to Reclaim Your Focus and Attention.
Ultimately, I believe it’s more about the order of operations. How much time should you dedicate to experimentation and self-reflection before selecting your specialty? If your answer is that it takes longer than others are spending, you might be on the right track, even if it doesn’t feel that way.
If you have comments or questions on this piece, please drop me a line at: [email protected]
References/Footnotes
- https://davidepstein.com/range/
- https://krishnawealth.com/how-to-play-the-college-financial-aid-game/
- https://www.bls.gov/nls/questions-and-answers.htm
- https://krishnawealth.com/reclaim-your-focus-and-attention/
- In a sample of 10,000 people, 10 have the disease and get a true positive result. 5 percent, or 500, will get a false positive. Out of the 510 people who test positive, only 10, or 1.96 percent, are actually sick.
The information on this site is provided “AS IS” and without warranties of any kind either express or implied. To the fullest extent permissible pursuant to applicable laws, Krishna Wealth Planning LLC (referred to as “KWP”) disclaims all warranties, express or implied, including, but not limited to, implied warranties of merchantability, non-infringement, and suitability for a particular purpose.
KWP does not warrant that the information will be free from error. None of the information provided on this website is intended as investment, tax, accounting or legal advice, as an offer or solicitation of an offer to buy or sell, or as an endorsement of any company, security, fund, or other securities or non-securities offering. The information should not be relied upon for purposes of transacting securities or other investments. Your use of the information is at your sole risk. Under no circumstances shall KWP be liable for any direct, indirect, special or consequential damages that result from the use of, or the inability to use, the materials in this site, even if KWP or a KWP authorized representative has been advised of the possibility of such damages.
In no event shall KWP have any liability to you for damages, losses, and causes of action for accessing this site. Information on this website should not be considered a solicitation to buy, an offer to sell, or a recommendation of any security in any jurisdiction where such offer, solicitation, or recommendation would be unlawful or unauthorized.
