No Excuses: Leadership in the Age of Unlimited Learning Resources

Last week, I gathered my development team for what became an uncomfortable but necessary conversation. As we examined our collective capabilities, a sobering reality emerged: despite most of them confidently placing themselves in the "top 30%" of developers in their field, I knew—and eventually they acknowledged—we weren't even close.

This isn't an indictment of my team. It's a recognition of a fundamental leadership challenge in today's environment: how do we push talented people beyond comfortable competence when AI is rapidly making comfortable competence obsolete?
‍

The False Security of Technical Knowledge

There's a peculiar dynamic happening in technical fields. As knowledge becomes increasingly accessible, the bar for what constitutes excellence keeps rising exponentially. Many professionals mistake having more knowledge than they did yesterday for having enough knowledge to succeed tomorrow.

When I asked my team to rank themselves against their peers, most placed themselves confidently in the top 50%, with several claiming top 10% status. The reality? None were in the top 30% of their field.

This isn't because they lack talent or dedication. It's because the knowledge gap between "good" and "excellent" has widened dramatically while our perception of what constitutes "excellent" hasn't kept pace.

How can I blame them for this misperception when I held the same view about myself for years? I once believed technical competence would be enough to sustain a company. The market disabused me of this notion quickly and painfully.
‍

The Democratization of Learning

What makes our current moment unique is not just the acceleration of change but the unprecedented democratization of learning resources. The asymmetry of the past—where knowledge was gatekept by institutions, credentials, and geography—has collapsed.

Today, a developer with internet access and curiosity can learn directly from the architects of modern systems, absorb cutting-edge techniques through free tutorials, and practice implementation through no-cost platforms. The barriers to knowledge acquisition have never been lower.

Yet this abundance creates a paradox: when learning resources are unlimited, the constraint becomes not access but mindset.

I told my team something that made them uncomfortable: "I asked them to elect a champion to represent their knowledge so that I could crush them infront of their eyes" I meant it, and it happened. This is not because I know things that they don't, but because I am the most aware of what we don't know.

In previous eras, we could attribute knowledge gaps to structural barriers. Today, the primary barrier is internal resistance to discomfort. The willingness to feel temporarily incompetent in pursuit of new capabilities is the differentiating factor between those who will thrive and those who will be replaced.
‍

The Responsibility of Leadership

As leaders, we face an uncomfortable truth: pushing our teams beyond their comfort zones isn't just advantageous—it's a moral imperative.

When I first realized the gap between where my team was and where they needed to be, my instinct was to shelter them from this reality. I told myself I was being kind by not disrupting their confidence. In retrospect, this wasn't kindness but avoidance.

True leadership means having conversations that temporarily deflate confidence in service of building lasting capabilities. It means creating environments where people understand that their future employability depends not on what they know today but on their capacity to continuously reinvent themselves.

I've made my expectations explicit: when I identify a learning opportunity and flag it as important, I expect an immediate "knee-jerk" reaction—not casual interest or when-I-have-time engagement. This isn't arbitrary urgency; it's recognition that the window for capitalizing on new knowledge closes quickly in today's environment.

Is this pushing too hard? Perhaps. But I've concluded that the greater cruelty would be allowing my team to believe that comfortable competence will sustain them when I know it won't.
‍

From Execution to Solution Design

The most profound insight I've shared with my team is that execution is rapidly becoming commoditized. Within months, if not weeks, AI systems will execute technical tasks more efficiently than human developers.

What can't be commoditized—at least not yet—is solution design. The ability to envision architectures, understand how systems should interact, and design processes that solve real problems will remain valuable even as implementation becomes automated.

I'm pushing my team to transition from executors to architects. This requires them to understand not just how to build but why we build certain ways. It requires them to think about problems from first principles rather than pattern-matching against known solutions.

This transition is uncomfortable because it demands a different form of thinking. It's no longer sufficient to ask "how do I implement this requirement?" The new question must be "what would the ideal solution to this problem look like?"
‍

A Culture of Vicious Curiosity

What I'm trying to build isn't just a more technically capable team but a culture of what I call "vicious curiosity"—the relentless pursuit of knowledge as if your professional survival depends on it, because it does.

When I see an opportunity to learn something new, I "viciously attack" it. I don't wait for convenient timing or perfect conditions. I recognize that in today's environment, the cost of not knowing something is typically higher than the cost of learning it.

I expect the same from my team. When I share a learning opportunity, I expect them to approach it with the same urgency I would—not because I demand compliance, but because I know this approach is what will keep them relevant.
‍

Balancing Push and Support

As I reflect on my leadership approach, I recognize the need for balance. Pushing without supporting creates anxiety without growth. Supporting without pushing creates comfort without progress.

I'm still learning this balance. There are days when I wonder if I'm pushing too hard, expecting too much, setting standards that are unrealistic. Then I look at the pace of change in our industry and realize that what feels like "too much" today may be the minimum threshold for relevance tomorrow.

The solution isn't to ease the pressure but to improve the support structures. Creating more learning resources, providing clearer guidance, celebrating progress more visibly, and modeling the behavior I expect.
‍

The Path Forward

For leaders navigating this landscape, the path forward requires a delicate balance:

1. Brutal honesty about current capabilities. We can't improve what we don't accurately assess.
2. Clear articulation of the gap between current state and required future state. Teams need to understand not just that they need to improve, but specifically how and why.
3. Urgent expectation setting around learning. Learning can't be something teams do when convenient—it must be treated with the same urgency as client deliverables.
4. Supportive infrastructure for growth. Teams need resources, time, and frameworks that make continuous learning possible.
5. Visible modeling of the expected behavior. Leaders must demonstrate the learning mindset they expect from their teams.

As leaders, we don't have the luxury of allowing our teams to remain comfortable in their current capabilities. The kindest thing we can do is push them toward discomfort in service of growth.

In the age of unlimited learning resources, there are no excuses for stagnation—not for our teams, and certainly not for us as leaders. Our responsibility is to build organizations where aggressive curiosity is the norm, not the exception.

The future belongs to those who learn fastest. Our job is to make sure our teams are among them, whether they initially thank us for it or not.

‍