Early in my career, I thought the path to success was to be super smart. Pretty soon I realized that the majority of my peers were smarter than me, so that plan went out the window. What saved me was a realization that I'll call the Liam Neeson principle.
I realized I had a particular combination of skills that most others didn't, even if I wasn't the best at any of those skills. It meant I could solve certain kinds of problems as well as or better than anyone. Once I found my precise niche, I was able to thrive in it.
Once I hit upon this strategy, I gradually started to add to my skillset so that I could expand the niche in which I could be successful. What I like about this approach to career success is that it can work for everyone — it's not a competition.
Nope, it's literally true. I'm smart, but not smarter than my peers. I remember the moment I realized it: in 2006, when I was at Microsoft Research in Mountain View, CA, a lab filled with giants of computer science (which MS later atrociously shut down).
P. S. there are a couple of popular books that talk about related ideas. "Range: Why Generalists Triumph in a Specialized World" by David Epstein and Superforecasting by Phil Tetlock en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Range:_Wh…
npr.org/2018/04/30/606…
Figuring out my strengths was surprisingly hard, especially non-standard skills that might not even have a name! One strategy is to reflect on your successes. Here's one example (from an upcoming paper in which I discuss my research and draw some lessons).
Share this Scrolly Tale with your friends.
A Scrolly Tale is a new way to read Twitter threads with a more visually immersive experience.
Discover more beautiful Scrolly Tales like this.