The Polymath: Unlocking the Power of Human Versatility

by Waqas Ahmed

  With this in mind, one must be creative in their approach to professional life and ‘work’ in general. It must be designed in a way that allows for autonomy, contribution and personal growth. We must remain mindful of, and stay true to, the values, methods and outlook developed during the education phase.

  For the budding polymath, then, there are three possible routes in modern professional life that correspond: successive career changes, simultaneous (portfolio) careers and polymathic professions.

  Career changes

  Harvard psychologist Dan Gilbert insists that all of us are under the illusion that our personal history has just come to an end, that we’ve recently become the people we’re always meant to be for the rest of our lives. ‘People underestimate change in their lives’ he says reminding us that the one constant in our life is, in fact, change. ‘Human beings are works in progress that mistakenly think they’re finished.’

  Our opinions, mindsets, priorities and objectives, no matter how viscous, are necessarily fluid. Being in a constant state of flux, they are dynamic and evolutionary by their nature — they inevitably change. As Gilbert puts it, ‘time is a powerful force, it transforms our preferences, it reshapes our values, it alters our personalities.’ From this, we can deduce that we are most probably going to want different things at different stages in our life. Whether it’s related to love, spirituality, sports, family, sex, technology, material possessions, animals, travel or food, our priorities and preferences change with age and according to circumstances. This is primarily down to the intrinsic plasticity of our brains. With this in mind, people should, at least in theory, be at liberty to pursue the thing(s) that mean the most to them at any given period of their lives.

  This makes life interesting and diverse, but also exposes a potent reality: that polymathy is always a possibility. Regular career changes therefore ought not to be a surprising thing, neither should they be frowned upon. Given that innate talents and interests are awoken as a reaction to certain knowledge and experiences, we can never know what will captivate us at what time or what skills or knowledge will be unlocked or acquired when. Albert Schweitzer began to study medicine in his 30s, Takeshi Kitano made his first feature film in his 40s, Rabindranath Tagore discovered his flair for painting in his 60s and Paul Newman became a racing champion in his 70s. For the polymath, age truly is just a number.

  The idea of a serial career change is certainly not new. In the nineteenth century, William Pember Reeves, from the first generation of whites born and educated in New Zealand, started off as an athlete, then became a lawyer, then diplomat (High Commissioner to London), then banker (Chairman of the New Zealand Central Bank), then journalist (Editor of the Canterbury Times), then poet (published acclaimed poems such as The Passing of the Forest and A Colonist in his Garden) and historian (wrote the History of New Zealand) before entering politics to serve as Minister of Labour, Education and Justice concurrently.

  Today, in our hyper-specialised workplaces, there is an increasing appetite for career changes. In the U.K. today, for example, approximately 1 in 10 people in the U.K. have the intention to change their career, suggesting that roughly 2.5 million people might consider doing so. Fifty-one percent of 20-somethings already regret their career choice and would choose a different one. Moreover, 45 percent of the U.K. workforce was considering major career change. Although this study was done just as a recession was looming, realities such as recessions are not infrequent in working life. Given the chance to alter one thing, 25 percent of adults would choose a new job above anything else.

  But while major career changes have indeed become a reality in most people’s lives, it should be noted that having two ‘successful,’ unrelated careers is not the same as being a polymath; ‘poly’ linguistically implies more than two, and very few people have had three or more successful careers in markedly separate fields. Moreover, career changes are difficult to record statistics for. The American Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), for example, has never attempted to estimate the number of times people change careers in the course of their working lives because it’s difficult to ascertain exactly what constitutes a ‘career change.’ A career change for a polymath is a change of field as well as a change in job.

  Some career changes are common, and although sometimes they may consist of leaps into markedly different fields, the changes often make common sense. Soldiers become diplomats and then politicians; fashion models become actors and then filmmakers, athletes become coaches and then commentators. Other career change trends include the fact that many professions — such as that of an athlete, a singer, an actor and a musician — warrant an early start (and more often than not, an early finish), which naturally spurs a career change. But while ‘child stars’ or prodigies are likely to have accomplished a great deal at a young age, very few actually sustain their careers well into adulthood (as found by former prodigy Alison Quark in her book Hothouse Kids: The Dilemma of the Gifted Child).

  Typically short careers such as those in sport, entertainment and the military are usually followed by other careers, which in the majority of cases are closely related — a footballer becomes a coach or commentator, a soldier becomes a military adviser or spy, a film director becomes a producer or screenwriter.

  Another common tendency: after having developed an accomplished career in a particular field, many people start a business related to that field; so a doctor or a lawyer or an engineer or a journalist, subsequently becomes a businessman too, which of course requires a completely different skillset. This is because people in general prefer to remain in familiar territory, or that even when they do wish for a career change, opportunities are most realistically abundant within their own field.

  It is why ‘inter-field’ polymaths — those who demonstrate versatility within their broad field, such as science, sport, or art — are probably the most common type. Athletes such as J.P.R. Williams, Sócrates (the twentieth-century Brazilian footballer!), Imran Khan and George Foreman are anomalies; they take a fresh start and use the opportunity to pursue a completely unrelated interest, either consciously or because of a life-shifting experience or trigger event (such as death or disease, a spiritual awakening, a social or political cause).

  Being successful in one particular field can be both a curse and a blessing for the aspiring polymath. On the one hand the success causes the stigmatisation or pigeonholing of an individual, making it almost impossible for them to be given a chance in another field. They are also blocked out by ‘occupational closure’ — a barrier to entry caused by fences raised to protect each ‘profession’ from outsiders perceived as amateurs by ‘insiders.’ On the other hand, the money, contacts, expertise and opportunities in general which come from success in one field can open up doors to numerous other possibilities that would otherwise not be available.

  Success in one field, that is, can provide a virtuous circle of perpetual success in multiple other fields. A bodybuilder or martial artist can suddenly become an A-list Hollywood actor. The same actor could then suddenly be offered a lucrative business opportunity. The money made from business and popularity gained as a Hollywood star can then allow him to run a strong campaign for political office. This phenomenon, known as ‘accumulative advantage’ or the Matthew Effect, is why successful businessmen will become notable philanthropists and hobbyists, celebrity singers will get prominent acting roles and their ‘brand’ would allow them to start their own successful fashion range.

  Oprah Winfrey, who is regarded as one of the most influential women in the world today, initially achieved success as a talk show host, which led to her becoming an actress, which led to film production, which led to other business ventures, which led to numerous other charitable ventures, which led to social activism (and which may well ultimately lead to the presidency) and so on. Simply because of his fame and public profile (not to mention his obvious talents), Stephen Fry is probably getting an untold number of proposals ranging from pr
oduct endorsements, guest editing, TV presenting, public speaking, business start-ups and all sorts of other projects totally unrelated to his experience. As Juli Crockett, the American boxer-turned-musician-turned-playwright-turned-academic admits, ‘everything feeds everything else.’

  For the individual this is wonderful but for a society or community the Matthew effect is actually one of the main causes of socioeconomic inequality — a vicious circle of elite networks which keeps success and accomplishment confined to a small, select group of people because they each end up supporting and facilitating one another’s careers. It is not surprising therefore that the majority of polymaths in world history — some opportunistic, others dragged involuntarily into the system — were from (or eventually joined) the elite class.

  It is true that most find the prospect of an ‘extreme’ career change (one that changes the field of work entirely) to be both daunting and risky. There is a fear of the unknown rather than a sense of curiosity. This fear exists at least partly because of the common assumption that as we grow older, our productivity, intelligence and creativity diminishes. This leads to the loss of confidence in one’s ability to learn something afresh. While correct if based on the premise that the individual has one linear, lifelong career or specialisation, this assumption does not hold for those who diversify.

  Cognitive scientists used to think that as we age, our brains lost their ability to adapt to change. Now neuroscientists have discovered that the brain retains some plasticity throughout life, and can learn to work around deficits at any age. Psychologist Keith Simonton found that while creative output does decline in old age (resulting from diminishing returns through linear progression in one career), for individuals who change their field of work entirely, this trend can be eliminated or even reversed. For the middle-aged specialist, eager but reluctant to explore the other sides of his being, this is a promising fact.

  In fact, according to Yuval Noah Harari, author of Homo Deus and 21 Lessons for the 21st Century, redefining yourself every few years will not be choice, but a necessity:

  ‘In order to keep up with the world of 2050, you will need not merely to invent new ideas and products — you will above all need to reinvent yourself again and again.’

  The inevitability of physical, cognitive and circumstantial change means that the fact that people may exhibit their talents and interests at different times of their lives ought not to be surprising. Such a shift could have been a result of an inward or outward experience, a response to circumstances or just pure impulse. That a lawyer suddenly develops a passion for the history of art at the peak of her career should not be seen as curious. That a musician enrols on a mathematics programme at age 50 or a mechanical apprenticeship at 60 ought to be accepted as a natural possibility. Malcolm Gladwell had some interesting advice to give in his interview with Entrepreneur Magazine:

  The most important thing is never to make a decision about yourself that limits your options. Self-conceptions are powerfully limiting. In the act of defining yourself, you start to close off opportunities for change, and that strikes me as being a very foolish thing to do if you’re not 85 years old.

  Portfolio careers

  Our working identity is not a hidden treasure, waiting to be discovered at the very core of our being — rather it is made up of many possibilities . . . we are many selves.

  — Herminia Ibarra

  While undergoing multiple career changes sequentially is one path to unleashing your inner polymath, the other is to pursue multiple careers simultaneously. Today this latter path is often referred to as a ‘portfolio career’; a system of having a portfolio of ‘projects’ or jobs at any given time. As simultaneous jobs in the same field are seldom possible due to factors such as non-competition clauses, portfolio careerists often operate across various seemingly unrelated domains that correspond with their interests, abilities and qualifications. It is a fashionable trend among the working middle class in the West but has actually been a life of necessity for strugglers around the world for years.

  To make ends meet, particularly in the developing world, people have had to become remarkably resourceful and creative. This is why there is a strong tendency for the average individual (male or female) living in developing world cities to have multiple jobs simultaneously. It is not uncommon to meet a taxi-driving, jewellery-selling hotel receptionist in Addis Ababa, or a street-busking, tennis-coaching lifeguard in Colombo.

  People on the poverty line are forced to become entrepreneurial — they are compelled to ‘hustle’; monetise any talents they might have, whether it be playing drums with kitchen utensils to entertain street crowds or using their interpersonal and trading abilities to sell anything they can get their hands on. Because of the insufficiency or instability associated with such jobs, they have little choice but to pursue many of them simultaneously in the hope that a half-reasonable income might be achieved.

  Only recently in the developed world, particularly among the working middle classes, are people beginning to realise the benefits of such occupational diversification. Daniel Pink, in his book Free Agent Nation, noted that America’s career landscape was changing and would soon be dominated by freelancers or portfolio careerists. Bill Bridges’ book Jobshift argued along similar lines, Marci Alboher’s One Person/Multiple Careers highlighted this growing trend among normal people in the United States and more recently Emilie Wapnick’s How to be Everything and Emma Gannon’s The Multi-Hyphen Method have responded to a growing demand from millennials for a portfolio career design. It being the twenty-first century, the potential sources of revenue have multiplied. For some, the ‘gig economy’ can imply economic insecurity. For others, it’s an opportunity.

  Societies or systems that encourage portfolio careers are sometimes referred to pejoratively as ‘gig economies’ and associated with job insecurity and employer exploitation. This is often true, which is why such a career route ought to be available as a choice rather than a necessity or norm.

  World-leading management thinker Charles Handy, however, insists that being a ‘portfolio worker’ is a smart survival strategy in hard economic times as it reduces the risks of unemployment. Barrie Hopson, co-author of 10 Steps to Creating a Portfolio Career, confirms that a lifestyle of several jobs allows for a financial and professional safety net. He found that most of the portfolio careerists in his study earned more within two years of their portfolio career than they ever did as a full-time employee and that only one of the 46 portfolio careerists in the sample returned to a single-track career in the past two years. Importantly, all of his participants claimed that they were happier with such a career lifestyle as it offered a much more fulfilling work-life blend. Indeed, as demonstrated above, personal fulfilment can be as equally (and for some, more) important to survival as financial gain.

  This is not surprising. Our innate multifacetedness yearns for a right to be exercised. In his book How to Find Fulfilling Work, cultural thinker Roman Kznaric insisted that ‘pursuing several careers at the same time is a way of thriving and being true to our multiple selves.’ Fulfilment is especially undermined when people experience diminishing returns by spending too much time in a particular field. Alboher concluded that in addition to satisfying the innate desire for variety, multiple careers provide multiple income streams and serve as ‘a tonic against the burnout so common in those who pursue one income endeavour exclusively.’

  Portfolio careers are adopted in different ways by different segments of society. Celebrities (particularly those in the world of arts and entertainment), for instance, often have portfolio careers — sometimes to pursue interests as privileged dilettantes, but mostly as a means of survival in a cut-throat, turbulent industry. American popular culture, for example, is currently dominated by versatile artists such as Lenny Kravitz, Will-i-am, Jamie Foxx, Madonna, Jennifer Lopez, Donald Glover and Pharrell Williams, who have each had success in music, film, fashion and business.

  They d
iversify their activities not necessarily because they have the luxury of doing whatever tickles their fancy (although this is sometimes the case), but because they recognise that the glamour and riches of the entertainment industry are too often short-lived, and so to be creative, entrepreneurial and diverse is the surest way of enduring (and sustaining the lifestyle). Indeed, many of them focus on building a ‘brand’ which can then be applied to a wide range of commercial initiatives — whatever degree their personal involvement in those initiatives might be. In fact, according to co-founder of Wired Kevin Kelly, a creator doesn’t even have to be famous to build a profitable business around their own brand — they need just 1,000 true fans who will buy almost anything that they produce because they are loyal to the person rather than a particular product. So a polymath can potentially sell her paintings, books, music, perfume and fashion to the same fan base and make a good living.

  So is a portfolio career for you? It depends on whether you can adopt a particular mentality with regards to work. Portfolio careerists have a different psyche to conventional careerists. They do not perceive their work as ‘careers’ or ‘professions’ in the traditional sense — they will instead refer to their various activities as ‘pursuits,’ ‘projects,’ ‘opportunities,’ ‘ventures,’ or ‘initiatives.’ Indeed the word ‘job’ itself before the industrial age simply meant a particular ‘task’ or ‘undertaking’ and only recently has come to be synonymous with a long-term (or lifelong) role in an organisation or an exclusive dedication to a particular field.

  In implying that each ‘undertaking’ is significantly shorter than a lifelong career, this leaves the timescale open. It also means that each project may not consume the entire day, week, month or year. This is why Luke Johnson the serial entrepreneur whose life consists of TV production, the pizza business, financial advisory and management writing likes to call himself a ‘projector.’ Just as a freelance journalist, consultant, artist or sports coach is in charge of generating multiple projects simultaneously to ensure full-time occupation, a portfolio worker does the same, but instead of all projects being linked to one career or specialism, the projects are each related to a different talent or interest in a different field.