The psychologist Anders Ericsson is famous for studying so-called “expert performers.” From decades of research into how these masters of games, craft, music, athletics and so on, Ericsson hypothesizes that the secret to their success is deliberate practice. I’ve written about deliberate practice obliquely before, as it has much in common with flow. The basic idea is that when learning a new skill, you can pick up the basics pretty quickly, but if you want to really see improvement, you need to be a bit more intentional and systematic about how you practice. For example, if you are taking piano lessons, you would do well to commit to a regimen of rehearsal. The results will be vastly different if your practice involves repeating an exercise or a tune for a set amount of time without regard to how well you do it as compared to if your goal with practicing was to be able to play your piece at the correct speed, three times in a row without a mistake. Ericsson refers to the former method as naïve practice and the latter as deliberate practice.
Read moreIntellectual Work as Spiritual Work: or, Liturgies for Living
Last week, I wrote about finding flow at work in 2020. Really, I spent a lot of last year thinking about work and my career trajectory. A lot happened—between finishing my dissertation, “going on the market” without an affiliation, and beginning to explore a career outside of academia—and it all gave me plenty to reflect on.
One of the reasons I had sought more flow in work was because I felt like was somehow necessary to developing expertise, something I felt lacking in my life. On the one hand, I recognized the importance of being an expert on something that matters to career advancement in academia; on the other, I was frustrated with my first attempt to really become an expert in something. It didn’t really go how I was expecting it to and has not led me to the kind of place that I wanted to be. So, naturally, I sought solace and guidance to address this conundrum where I often do: in essays and books.
Read moreFinding Flow at Work
Last week, I wrote about the autotelic self. I found the idea of the autotelic self compelling because Csikszentmihalyi suggests by engaging in flow activities—i.e., getting “in the zone” in the course of some hobby, game, or practice—for no other reason than because they are enjoyable, that we can increase control of our consciousness. His specific argument is that by pursuing flow, we are better able to direct our attention at will, tune out distractions, and focus for as long as it takes to achieve some kind of goal.
One of the reasons I was struck by this was because I had long been interested in improving my performance at work. What I discovered in 2020—and am now refining in 2021—is that I had all the tools I needed, already at my disposal. I had already begun to develop an autotelic personality at work, but I had stalled out hard during the final stages of writing my dissertation. So It was good to be reminded of all the little mental tricks that I had used in the past—but I was still in deep trouble.
Read more