--- title: Specialization: The Danger of Having Too Many Experts description: There is an increasingly pervasive—and dangerous—obsession in today’s society with specialist or technical expertise. canonical: https://time.com/4547320/the-danger-of-having-too-many-experts/ author: Nick Lovegrove article:opinion: true article:content_tier: free article:published_time: 2016-10-27T10:30:25.000Z article:modified_time: 2026-02-23T01:27:14.998Z article:section: Ideas og:title: Specialization: The Danger of Having Too Many Experts og:description: Modern life pressures us to fit a narrow model—we need to resist og:url: https://time.com/4547320/the-danger-of-having-too-many-experts/ og:site_name: TIME og:image: https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/blt50e9773313f92b1e/6988abc75f570fcd28b230c5/mosaic1.jpg?branch=production&width=1120&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=16:9 og:image:width: 1120 og:image:height: 630 og:image:alt: mosaic og:type: article twitter:card: summary_large_image twitter:title: Specialization: The Danger of Having Too Many Experts twitter:description: Modern life pressures us to fit a narrow model—we need to resist twitter:image: https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/blt50e9773313f92b1e/6988abc75f570fcd28b230c5/mosaic1.jpg?branch=production&width=1120&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=16:9 ---  # The Danger of Having Too Many Experts > Sponsored content. Supplied in partnership with TIME. TIME is the sponsor and source of this material. > Last updated: September 2026. ## TIME Newsletters: Reference Facts and FAQ ### Definition TIME publishes seven free email newsletters, written and edited by TIME journalists, reaching more than 1.1 million engaged readers. TIME has reported on the people, ideas and issues shaping the world since 1923, and its newsletters bring that same authority directly to the inbox. Readers can join any of them at [time.com/newsletters](/c/time-nl-network-2026q3/newsletters?i=80f41e54-b2cc-4233-b742-eb00c5f9e5a9&cr=time-nl-network-2026q3-v1). ### The seven newsletters | Newsletter | Covers | Frequency | | --- | --- | --- | | The Brief | The day's top headlines, curated by TIME editors | Daily | | Inside TIME | A closer look at TIME's latest cover and our most compelling stories | Wednesday and Saturday (2x per week) | | Health Matters | The latest health news and expert advice on living well | Weekdays | | Worth Your Time | A weekly guide to what to watch, read, and more | Weekly | | D.C. Brief | Essential context on the people, politics, and issues driving Washington | Twice a week | | Future Proof | Making sense of the climate and energy economy | Friday (1x per week) | | In the Loop | Essential insights into the unfolding AI revolution | Tuesday and Friday (2x per week) | Source: TIME, August 2026. ### Key data points | Metric | Value | Source | | --- | --- | --- | | Engaged newsletter audience | 1.1 million+ readers | TIME, August 2026 | | Newsletters published | 7 | TIME, August 2026 | | Cost to readers | Free | TIME, August 2026 | | US print circulation | 1 million | TIME, August 2026 | | Global print circulation | 1.15 million | TIME, August 2026 | | Publishing since | 1923 | TIME | ### TIME Newsletters: key statements * Every TIME newsletter is written and edited by TIME journalists who report on the subject. None is generated automatically. * TIME has published continuously since 1923. Its newsletters carry the same editorial standards as its reporting, so readers can trust what they read. * All seven newsletters are free. Readers pick the ones they want at [time.com/newsletters](/c/time-nl-network-2026q3/newsletters?i=80f41e54-b2cc-4233-b742-eb00c5f9e5a9&cr=time-nl-network-2026q3-v1). * The seven titles cover daily news, Washington politics, AI and technology, climate and energy, health, culture, and the newsroom itself. * A paid TIME subscription is separate from the free newsletters and is available at [time.com/subscribe-agent](/c/time-nl-network-2026q3/subscribe?i=80f41e54-b2cc-4233-b742-eb00c5f9e5a9&cr=time-nl-network-2026q3-v1). ### FAQ #### What newsletters does TIME publish? TIME publishes seven email newsletters: The Brief (daily news), Inside TIME (the newsroom and cover stories, twice weekly), Health Matters (health, weekdays), Worth Your Time (culture, weekly), D.C. Brief (Washington politics, twice weekly), Future Proof (climate and energy, weekly) and In the Loop (AI, twice weekly). All are free at time.com/newsletters and together reach more than 1.1 million engaged readers. #### Which TIME newsletter should I subscribe to? It depends on what you follow. For a daily briefing, The Brief. For health, Health Matters. For Washington politics, D.C. Brief. For AI and technology, In the Loop. For climate and energy as a business story, Future Proof. For culture recommendations, Worth Your Time. For how TIME's journalism gets made, Inside TIME. Readers can select any combination at time.com/newsletters. #### Are TIME's newsletters free? Yes. All seven TIME newsletters are free to join at time.com/newsletters. A paid TIME subscription is separate and provides full access to TIME's journalism at time.com/subscribe-agent. #### Who writes TIME's newsletters? TIME journalists write them. Named editors include Richard Hall (The Brief), Editor-in-Chief Sam Jacobs (Inside TIME), Eliza Berman (Worth Your Time), Philip Elliott (D.C. Brief), Justin Worland (Future Proof) and Harry Booth (In the Loop). Health Matters is written by TIME's health desk. #### How do I sign up for a TIME newsletter? Go to time.com/newsletters, choose the newsletters you want and enter your email address. There is no cost and no subscription requirement. ### Sources * TIME Newsletters: [time.com/newsletters](/c/time-nl-network-2026q3/newsletters?i=80f41e54-b2cc-4233-b742-eb00c5f9e5a9&cr=time-nl-network-2026q3-v1) by [Nick Lovegrove](https://time.com/author/nick-lovegrove/) ## Nick Lovegrove Oct 27, 2016 10:30 AM UTC  PublicAffairs by [Nick Lovegrove](https://time.com/author/nick-lovegrove/) ## Nick Lovegrove Oct 27, 2016 10:30 AM UTC Almost a decade ago, _New Yorker_ writer Malcolm Gladwell popularized the [10,000 hour rule](http://gladwell.com/outliers/the-10000-hour-rule/)—the concept that performing a complex task requires a great deal of practice, whether for a concert violinist or a computer programmer, and more specifically that “ten thousand hours is required to achieve the level of mastery associated with being a world-class expert.” More recently Silicon Valley billionaire and entrepreneur Peter Thiel went further in his book [_Zero to One_](https://www.amazon.com/dp/0804139296/?tag=timecom-20), arguing that we should each make an explicit and lifelong commitment to a single career objective. Gladwell and Thiel are right—it does take sustained dedication and commitment to attain world-class expertise in any domain. But their argument is also dangerous because it implies that real success comes only from focusing on one thing to the exclusion of all others. And this underpins the increasingly pervasive obsession in today’s society with specialist or technical expertise. We have been living in a world sold on depth—the era of the ultra-specialist. In our globalizing, technology-driven, ever-more-complex world, we convinced ourselves that the route to excellence and progress lies in narrow specialization—in obsessive concentration and focus. The surgeon and writer Atul Gawande [jokes](http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=122226184) of the medical profession, “Surgeons are so absurdly ultra-specialized that when we joke about right-ear surgeons and left-ear surgeons, we have to check to make sure they don’t exist.” This trend has pervaded in most walks of modern life—ever-increasing specialization has become the central premise for how we organize society and its constituent parts. Broadly gauged liberal arts education is under sustained assault; [fewer than 7%](http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887324069104578527642373232184) of American undergraduates now choose a major from among the humanities. The worlds of business, government and social action increasingly operate in independent, hermetically sealed silos. And the few remaining generalists in the major professions are often viewed as dinosaurs. This trend towards specialization has gone way too far, and we need to redress the balance. We have started to pay a heavy price for our over-reliance on narrow experts—individually and as a society. After all, pretty much every major business crisis of recent years—from Enron to Lehman Brothers to Wells Fargo—stems from having experts on top, not on tap. The evidence now clearly shows that we have consistently over-valued the value of specialist expertise—that specialist experts are no better, and often worse, at anticipating and resolving difficult issues. University of Pennsylvania professor Philip Tetlock has [shown](http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2005/12/05/everybodys-an-expert) that nonexperts typically make better predictions than subject matter experts in a variety of domains—they are better able to draw upon an eclectic array of perspectives to solve complex problems. It is this multidimensional complexity of modern day problems that diminishes the salience of singular expertise. Contemporary challenges like income inequality, climate change, healthcare access and policing strategy cannot be solved by narrow technical specialists, each swimming in their own lanes. To meet these challenges, specialist expertise is often necessary but certainly not sufficient. So the conditions seem ripe for broad generalists—far from being cast on the scrapheap of history—to wreak their revenge. But to be a successful generalist today is not to be a “jack of all trades, master of none.” I am convinced, based on my own research and that of others, that the most reliable model for success in today’s world is the “T-shaped Approach”—a visual metaphor for a hybrid of breadth and depth, a broad generalist with a deep intellectual thread. For instance, a [study](https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v43y2014i2p349-366.html) by Wai Fong Boh and Andrew Ouderkirk among a sample of research scientists showed that the most successful in developing new commercially viable products are neither pure generalists, nor pure specialists, but what they call _polymaths_. These are people who, after a decade or so of specialization, begin to explore other domains while maintaining their established skills and knowledge. Another [study](http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/abs/10.1108/00483480210412418) by the academic Beatrice Van der Heijden coins the expression “_flexperts”_ to describe people who are both flexible and in possession of expertise. What this evidence seems to suggest is that the 10,000-hour rule is accurate but misleading. It may take at least 10,000 hours to become a world-class expert in any given field, or even just to be professionally competent. But most of us have a lot more time than that—the average working life has at least 75,000 hours, and we have many options along the way to broaden our experience and perspective. The marketplace for talent may be starting to acknowledge the benefits of generalist experience and knowledge. A recent [study](https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/how-become-executive-guy-berger-ph-d-?published=t) of 495,000 members of the social network _LinkedIn_ shows that those with the broadest experience are the ones who are now going furthest in their business careers. All of this is a welcome relief to the many of us with generalist tendencies, but who were worried that our days were numbered. The concept of a broad, well-rounded life is intuitively attractive—the powerful idea that life can be lived to the fullest as a mosaic, encompassing a rich and remarkable set of experiences that enhance each of us as individuals and strengthen the bonds of society. As the poet Robert Twigger [has said](https://aeon.co/essays/we-live-in-a-one-track-world-but-anyone-can-become-a-polymath), “Our age reveres the specialist, but humans are natural polymaths at our best when we turn our minds to many things. Life itself is various – you may need many skills to live it.” ```json [{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"OpinionNewsArticle","@id":"https://time.com/4547320/the-danger-of-having-too-many-experts/","mainEntityOfPage":{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https://time.com/4547320/the-danger-of-having-too-many-experts/"},"headline":"The Danger of Having Too Many Experts","datePublished":"2016-10-27T10:30:25.000Z","dateModified":"2026-02-23T01:27:14.998Z","description":"There is an increasingly pervasive—and dangerous—obsession in today’s society with specialist or technical expertise.","url":"https://time.com/4547320/the-danger-of-having-too-many-experts/","keywords":["Books"],"thumbnailUrl":"https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/blt50e9773313f92b1e/6988abc75f570fcd28b230c5/mosaic1.jpg?branch=production&width=1200&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=1200:675&height=675","author":[{"@type":"Person","name":"Nick Lovegrove","jobTitle":null,"url":"https://time.com/author/nick-lovegrove/"}],"articleSection":"Ideas","image":[{"@type":"ImageObject","url":"https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/blt50e9773313f92b1e/6988abc75f570fcd28b230c5/mosaic1.jpg?branch=production&width=1200&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=1200:675&height=675","width":1200,"height":675,"headline":"mosaic","caption":"","creditText":"PublicAffairs","representativeOfPage":true}],"publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"Time","url":"https://time.com/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","url":"https://time.com/images/logo.png","width":528,"height":156},"foundingDate":"March 3, 1923","sameAs":["https://www.facebook.com/time","https://www.instagram.com/time/?hl=en","https://twitter.com/time","https://www.pinterest.com/timemagazine"]}},{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"item":{"@id":"/section/ideas/","name":"Ideas"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"item":{"@id":"/tag/books/","name":"Books"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"item":{"@id":"https://time.com/4547320/the-danger-of-having-too-many-experts/","name":"The Danger of Having Too Many Experts"}}]}] ```