Which is a better way to study - a wide extensive approach or a narrow intensive one?
We all come across some common decision making situations. At one time or another, we have to face them and try to make valid options. I call them questions of individual preferences. The above mentioned choice is a perfect example of the same.
This question can obviously have three possible answers.
First, Wide extensive approach is better as it suits more to the ever changing world scenario. One never knows what will be asked in the examination and so some idea of every possible aspect of the subject becomes necessary. Similarly one can always expect life to present unforeseen challenges now and again. An all rounder personality is more likely to emerge successful out of it.
Second, Narrow intensive approach is better. An expert is one who knows more and more about less and less. In today's market scenario every product or service category is being divided into newer and more specific categories. Hence, it is not only the better choice but also the only option available to gain maximum possible expertise in the identified area.
Third, Both are equally good. Which one to apply? This decision depends on availability of time and resources and the output required.
A more serious thinking gives us two very interesting cases.
Let us take the academic scene first. This is a very good example of continuous movement from wide extensive studies to narrow intensive studies. In initial classes, one studies Science as one subject. Then on High School level science divides itself into three subjects: Physics, Chemistry and Biology. When we further move to college level, Chemistry divides itself again into three area : Organic, Inorganic and Physical Chemistry. This process keeps on becoming more and more intensive and focused up to research level. Another similar example can be given of management courses. In all MBA and equivalent courses, the first year is normally devoted to teach 'Something about everything' while the teachings of the second specialisation year can be described as 'Everything about something'. And the final project semester covers a super specialisation. The same direction of becoming more and more focused and intensive continues here.
The corporate career scene is exactly reverse. One begins his or her career with a very specific assignment. This is mostly repetitive in nature. But as the new entrant becomes senior and gets one or two promotions, his job gets enlarged and he gets a higher position now encompassing more responsibilities. The men on the top mostly get a helicopter view of things. (what a good way to express wide extensive approach!)
So can one conclude that student life progresses from wide extensive study to narrow intensive one and the corporate career follows the reverse process?
There is one more aspect to be considered. What about wide intensive approach? Can somebody claim to know everything about everything? Seems very difficult but haven't online tools made this idea possible. With Google taking care of trivia, is it too much to ask for? Can't we expect our best people to have understanding of all subjects?
I would prefer to leave this topic here. I know that i am unable to end this thought process. Readers are requested to try and get some conclusion.
We all come across some common decision making situations. At one time or another, we have to face them and try to make valid options. I call them questions of individual preferences. The above mentioned choice is a perfect example of the same.
This question can obviously have three possible answers.
First, Wide extensive approach is better as it suits more to the ever changing world scenario. One never knows what will be asked in the examination and so some idea of every possible aspect of the subject becomes necessary. Similarly one can always expect life to present unforeseen challenges now and again. An all rounder personality is more likely to emerge successful out of it.
Second, Narrow intensive approach is better. An expert is one who knows more and more about less and less. In today's market scenario every product or service category is being divided into newer and more specific categories. Hence, it is not only the better choice but also the only option available to gain maximum possible expertise in the identified area.
Third, Both are equally good. Which one to apply? This decision depends on availability of time and resources and the output required.
A more serious thinking gives us two very interesting cases.
Let us take the academic scene first. This is a very good example of continuous movement from wide extensive studies to narrow intensive studies. In initial classes, one studies Science as one subject. Then on High School level science divides itself into three subjects: Physics, Chemistry and Biology. When we further move to college level, Chemistry divides itself again into three area : Organic, Inorganic and Physical Chemistry. This process keeps on becoming more and more intensive and focused up to research level. Another similar example can be given of management courses. In all MBA and equivalent courses, the first year is normally devoted to teach 'Something about everything' while the teachings of the second specialisation year can be described as 'Everything about something'. And the final project semester covers a super specialisation. The same direction of becoming more and more focused and intensive continues here.
The corporate career scene is exactly reverse. One begins his or her career with a very specific assignment. This is mostly repetitive in nature. But as the new entrant becomes senior and gets one or two promotions, his job gets enlarged and he gets a higher position now encompassing more responsibilities. The men on the top mostly get a helicopter view of things. (what a good way to express wide extensive approach!)
So can one conclude that student life progresses from wide extensive study to narrow intensive one and the corporate career follows the reverse process?
There is one more aspect to be considered. What about wide intensive approach? Can somebody claim to know everything about everything? Seems very difficult but haven't online tools made this idea possible. With Google taking care of trivia, is it too much to ask for? Can't we expect our best people to have understanding of all subjects?
I would prefer to leave this topic here. I know that i am unable to end this thought process. Readers are requested to try and get some conclusion.
