Being an expert no longer guarantees that you’ll be listened to with respect by non-experts. And yet most of us still have experts in our lives whom we trust and rely on.

What sets those specialists apart?

In my experience, the most valuable experts, the ones who earn our trust, have learned to combine two complementary sets of skills: general problem-solving and specialized subject-matter knowledge.

Most of us don’t turn to an expert because we want their opinion; we go because we want our problem solved. We are more likely to get that outcome from someone who can look beyond the limits of their deep domain expertise and see all the possible options.

Developing expertise usually means narrowing your focus and going deep. But most of the problems we deal with are part of a complex interdependent system. So “expertise” can easily be perceived as narrow-minded.

General problem-solving skills help the deep expert to compensate for that.

Let me share one of my favorite stories of what great expertise looks like. I had always struggled with foot and ankle issues, but they got much worse when I was pregnant with my daughter. I went to different doctors trying to diagnose the problem and find a solution.

This led me to a podiatrist. She commented “I think the problem is coming from above where I’m allowed to diagnose. But I can send you to physical therapy, and they can help you either way.”

I love this story because she clearly recognized and explained what she was an expert at, and what she wasn’t. She also used her general problem-solving skills and experience to identify a good path forward. She knew which experts to send me to next, and they quickly solved my problems.

There are several common failure modes as an expert. The one experts usually worry most about is not knowing something relevant to their area of expertise. In my opinion, there are other failure modes which are much more problematic to the people relying on the expert.

In my journey to get my ankle issues resolved, I saw my primary care physician first. She interpreted my concern as a complaint, something I should just endure, rather than a problem to be solved. I was stuck for months as my issues got worse, but I had been told by an expert that it was just how things were going to be. I see this as a failure from the expert to understand that the novice might not describe things in expert-terms. So when I asked about my foot, my doctor didn’t think to ask if the problem might be coming from somewhere else.

Experts also sometimes forget there are other people they can refer you to. My podiatrist was a perfect example of not making this mistake. She knew I didn’t come to her to get a podiatrist’s opinion, I came to her to fix my problem.

Now that I’ve had good physical therapists, they would be my first choice of expert for a lot of physical problems.

Occasionally I’ve worked with an expert whose support felt flat. I’d ask them for guidance, and the response was missing some secret sauce that was hard to pin down.

I think in hindsight what they were missing was the general problem-solving skills I highlighted in my last post. They’d seen a lot of situations and knew a lot of facts. But they hadn’t practiced the kind of pattern recognition I described that allowed them to expertly navigate new situations.

We all know how to extrapolate from what we know for sure, to what we know less about. Part of being comfortable with the unknown is being willing to be wrong sometimes. It’s often better for the expert to risk being wrong than to leave it entirely up to the novice to take a wild guess.

General problem-solving skills are largely about recognizing what really matters. The more relevant examples you have, the better you’ll be at picking that out. But being an expert in problem-solving includes being able to recognize what you don’t know, and whether it’s important to the issue at hand.

Reigniting respect for expertise

An expert who lacks general problem-solving skills isn’t really an expert, they’re just a person who knows a lot of facts.

I was motivated to write this piece because while I think we have undersold the idea of “general problem-solving skills,” expertise has been taking a beating in public opinion for years.

My sense is that as AI tools have improved, experts are seen as biased and fallible compared to LLMs (ironic, I know). If you mostly have experience with experts who’s problem-solving skills are weak, you’re going to find a chat with an AI tool that explains it’s “thinking” refreshing.

Experts who have earned that title in full bring important judgement, context, and nuance to their problem-solving work. We need to get that point across to the general public.

How can we experts reignite trust in science and expertise? How can we tell our stories better so people understand when they need an expert, and when they don’t?

I welcome your suggestions, comments and messages.