[AndrewKemendo]

As someone who would probably best fit this description, I don't think the advice to embrace this pattern is particularly good.

At the end of the day, you are valued (and paid) for what you actually contribute to a larger goal. That's not restricted to mechanical types of activities either, personality based activities like sales and marketing take specificity and deep experience to be really good at.

Being shallow and wide means you will always be out-competed by someone deep and narrow.

The only place where a "scanner" might be a valuable trait is as an executive - but I don't think there is enough data to even prove that is right.

...and yes I am aware that there are a handful of jobs around the world for people like this, for example David Shing [1]. However it's what, maybe a few hundred jobs worldwide.

[1]http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/nov/11/who-is-shi...

[sustainablepace]

I understand your point. However the book has some advice that includes the concept of a "good enough job" that pays for your wider interests that can't be monetized equally well. I think the truth is neither black nor white.

[chimericray]

I enjoyed the article, thanks for the link. It appears to me that the author writes the book placing value of life fulfilment over traditional career success (where extreme focus pays greater dividends). I'm definitely a scanner and have considered it a negative but the author seems to have a positive and potentially useful view on it, I'll probably take a look at the book.