tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8951904624959546499.post9088197281790189567..comments2009-11-08T07:42:04.596-05:00Eric Jacobsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08216361684596485033noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8951904624959546499.post-69196751025065182282009-11-08T03:36:57.979-05:002009-11-08T03:36:57.979-05:00MG is probably my favourite author though I hadn&#39;t tried to map to testing. I think the point Adam Goucher makes about a fresh look makes sense - most testers intuitively know that when we are forced to get someone new involved they will find some new bugs (and waste lots of time with dumb questions ;-).<br /><br />Long time since I read blink, but I recall him showing that in some circumstances quick intuitive judgements were awesome, but in other cases such as heart disease simple heuristics were actually more accurate than considered expert opinion. Insurance companies I think know this. I am reminded of talk of test heuristics and test sheets which I must say I think are extremely useful and important, especially as they help capture the practical lessons you talk about Erik.<br /><br />I&#39;ve just read his latest - Outliers, which is great. The key things I got out of that were:<br /><br />1) the 10,000 hours principle - that solid experience is the absolute prerequisite for genius whether you are Bill Gates or the Beatles <br />2) background and circumstance are critical. It probably isn&#39;t true that we can be or do anything we want. However it probably is true that if we leverage our unique background and experience and are willing to put in the hard yards (10,000 hours) we can achieve genius or at least the appearance of it, in those fields ;-)<br /><br />cheers,<br /> John Lockhart - john@webtest.co.nz / www.webtest.co.nzJohnLockharthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14099446792617075563noreply@blogger.com