<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: &#8216;Natural Talent Is Over-rated&#8217;	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://vivekvsp.com/2009/05/natural-talent-is-over-rated/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://vivekvsp.com/2009/05/natural-talent-is-over-rated/</link>
	<description>The Events in Human Resources and Employee Relations space, and in My World through my eyes.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 Apr 2020 15:59:21 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>
		By: saswat		</title>
		<link>https://vivekvsp.com/2009/05/natural-talent-is-over-rated/#comment-3871</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[saswat]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Sep 2010 11:04:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://vivekvsp.com/2009/05/natural-talent-is-over-rated/#comment-3871</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Nice article Sir.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Even I read the 10,000 hour rule and I really like it.&lt;br /&gt;But for the sake of discussion I would like to ask you some questions:&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Isn&#039;t research frequently self-contradicting?&lt;br /&gt;e.g. I have read various articles which have co-related the IQ of a person to success.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Also, if we agree with Pfeffer and Sutton, wouldn&#039;t it be better to inlcude people with avgerage IQ in an organisation and retain them for longer periods of time so that they perform well? &lt;br /&gt;And if so what would be its implications to the organisation - financially and in forming innovative practices?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nice article Sir.</p>
<p>Even I read the 10,000 hour rule and I really like it.<br />But for the sake of discussion I would like to ask you some questions:</p>
<p>Isn&#39;t research frequently self-contradicting?<br />e.g. I have read various articles which have co-related the IQ of a person to success.</p>
<p>Also, if we agree with Pfeffer and Sutton, wouldn&#39;t it be better to inlcude people with avgerage IQ in an organisation and retain them for longer periods of time so that they perform well? <br />And if so what would be its implications to the organisation &#8211; financially and in forming innovative practices?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Aditya		</title>
		<link>https://vivekvsp.com/2009/05/natural-talent-is-over-rated/#comment-3985</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Aditya]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 31 Aug 2009 17:57:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://vivekvsp.com/2009/05/natural-talent-is-over-rated/#comment-3985</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Sir, The book &#039;Differentiated workforce&#039; argues the exact opposite and it is interesting to note that two schools of thought approach the same question in exactly opposite ways and have success stories as examples to point at. ( GE&#039;s A players and B players and Toyota&#039;s systems and processes ) Is it contextual in the sense as to what is the inherent culture/dna of an organisation works for it ?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sir, The book &#39;Differentiated workforce&#39; argues the exact opposite and it is interesting to note that two schools of thought approach the same question in exactly opposite ways and have success stories as examples to point at. ( GE&#39;s A players and B players and Toyota&#39;s systems and processes ) Is it contextual in the sense as to what is the inherent culture/dna of an organisation works for it ?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Kavi		</title>
		<link>https://vivekvsp.com/2009/05/natural-talent-is-over-rated/#comment-3993</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Kavi]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 24 May 2009 17:56:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://vivekvsp.com/2009/05/natural-talent-is-over-rated/#comment-3993</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Wonderful piece. Sets the context of where organisations are falling into and what perhaps needs to be factored in. What seems so simple yet what needs to be done ! &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Many a time such books are taken for gospel truth. To look incisively and beyond requires...yes..talent ! :)]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wonderful piece. Sets the context of where organisations are falling into and what perhaps needs to be factored in. What seems so simple yet what needs to be done ! </p>
<p>Many a time such books are taken for gospel truth. To look incisively and beyond requires&#8230;yes..talent ! 🙂</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Ugich Konitari		</title>
		<link>https://vivekvsp.com/2009/05/natural-talent-is-over-rated/#comment-3994</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ugich Konitari]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 24 May 2009 04:19:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://vivekvsp.com/2009/05/natural-talent-is-over-rated/#comment-3994</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[All these authors seem to be emphasizing something, that holds true in our lives as well. You may be vastly superior individually, but what counts is whether you can raise the confidence, standards, and performance of those around you, in tangible ways. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Which is why, I suppose, in , say, a family of a brilliant, star father, the less brilliant (as perceived), mother who inspires their children to excel, with their feet on the ground, actually counts  for more....&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Pfeffor and Sutton, are actually writing about what our parents showed us....]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>All these authors seem to be emphasizing something, that holds true in our lives as well. You may be vastly superior individually, but what counts is whether you can raise the confidence, standards, and performance of those around you, in tangible ways. </p>
<p>Which is why, I suppose, in , say, a family of a brilliant, star father, the less brilliant (as perceived), mother who inspires their children to excel, with their feet on the ground, actually counts  for more&#8230;.</p>
<p>Pfeffor and Sutton, are actually writing about what our parents showed us&#8230;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
