Range: Why Generalists Triumph in a Specialized World

Frances Hesselbein grew up in Pennsylvania and began attending the University of Pittsburg Junior College. When her father died, however, she dropped out and took a job working in a department store to support her family. She married her husband, John, who worked as a photographer and then opened a film studio. Frances helped John out in various ways with the photography and film work, but for many years she did not have a regular job. Frances and John were both politically engaged and dedicated to issues like fighting racism.

Local leaders recognized Hesselbein’s talents for organization and asked her to lead a local Girl Scout troop. Though initially skeptical of the role, Frances accepted. Over time, her involvement with Girl Scouts increased, and she also took on additional roles, such as chairing the local United Way. At age 54, she took on her first professional role when she joined to board of United Way. Despite opposition, she continued to transform the Girl Scouts, making a number of reforms to make it more inclusive and modern. Later, Hesselbein became an executive at Mutual of America. Now over 100, Hesselbein continues to work, and focuses on sharing her leadership approach with others.

Hesselbein got a late start in her professional career, Epstein writes, but this did not stop her from going on to be a very influential high-achiever. He draws on research by neuroscientists and psychologists, such as Ogi Ogas and Todd Rose, to show that a meandering path like Hesselbein’s is quite ordinary. Other famous examples of individuals who did not hyperspecialize early include cofounder of Nike Phil Knight, evolutionary biologist Charles Darwin, and author Michael Crichton.

The famous “marshmallow test” experiment supposedly shows that those who can delay gratification are more likely to achieve success. More restrained personalities, it suggests, are more likely to have the stamina needed for achievement. However, the so-called “context principle” shows that people’s personalities actually change depending on context. To explain this model, Epstein leans on two contrasting models of development. The test-and-learn model expresses the idea that focused, sustained work toward a defined and known long-term goal is the best way to achieve a desired outcome. The plan-and-implement model suggests that reacting to and learning from experiences and using insights to form short-term plans can be equally advantageous or even superior. The plan-and-implement model describes the development of Hesselbein as well as the artists Michelangelo, Jackson Pollok, and Howard Finster, the writer Haruki Murakami, and many other successful individuals. 

Alph Bingham was a chemist working for the company Eli Lilly, which worked on a variety of industrial innovations. Some of Eli Lilly’s research and development reached apparent dead-ends in problems even the company’s highly experienced and knowledgeable scientists could not solve. Bingham made the controversial proposal to share these intractable problems publicly and to ask the public for help solving them. Bingham’s colleagues at Eli Lilly were wary of publicly sharing information about the projects they were working on and skeptical that the general public could come up with solutions the experts could not. However, Bingham was convinced the tactic was worth a try. To Eli Lilly’s surprise, respondents from the public assisted with complex problems in fields like molecular synthesis.

“Outside-in thinking” like that which Bingham spearheaded at Eli Lilly, Epstein argues, shows that innovative solutions can be found when problems are framed in unusual terms. Believing an outside view gives fresh perspectives on difficult problems, Bingham founded InnoCentive, an innovation company that finds crowdsourced solutions to problems companies and organizations face. For instance, the chemist John Davis came up with a solution for cleaning up spilled oil that involves vibrating the oil to make suctioning it up easier. Davis came up with this idea not because of his chemical knowledge but because he recalled seeing cement mixers vibrating the cement to keep it from hardening before it could be used.

Epstein points to other examples that show the power of outside-in thinking. Don Swanson was a computer engineer who became Dean of the Graduate Library School at the University of Chicago. He had a strong interest in information science and pointed out that researchers missed many potential ideas simply because they did not read and cite other researchers who were outside their narrow fields of specialization. He showed that research papers that cited others outside of their authors’ immediate fields were more likely to have long-term impact. As a result, he created an approach called Swanson linking, which helped researchers see potential connections between information that does not seem immediately related.

In another example, Epstein tells the story of Jill Viles, a woman with muscular dystrophy, and Olympic track-and-fielder Priscilla Lopes-Schliep. Though Viles has no medical training, she noticed that she and Lopes-Schliep had similar distinctive physical features. This led Viles to believe that Lopes-Schliep had muscular dystrophy or a related disorder despite skepticism that this would be the case for an Olympic athlete. Viles persisted and was eventually able to arrange a meeting with Lopes-Schliep. This meeting led to Lopes-Schliep receiving genetic testing that concluded she did indeed have a genetic mutation. For Epstein, Vile’s ability to point out something scientists could not previously see again shows the value of outside-in thinking.