I remember being in conversation with a friend of mine who had just started working at a top behavioral economics consultancy right around the time when I started consulting independently.
He said that he felt like he should read all of the original Kahneman and Tversky papers. I proposed a thought experiment:
If you’re working at a consultancy where everybody has read those papers, who would you prefer to work with: someone who can repeat back to you research that you have already read, or somebody who brings novel research and background to the table?
In my opinion, somebody who only spends all their time reading the same research I have read is replaceable in a conversation. I'd rather talk to someone with a unique perspective
My approach, is of course, different. I Follow curiosity unconditionallyFollow curiosity unconditionally
Index pages:: Methods for learning and thinking
This is one of the main benefits that I've found with my decision to consult (see: Why I chose to consult rather than pursue a PhD).
If I furthered my career into academia, then I would be doing a ton of readings, but those readings would have largely come from the prescriptions of professors.
In consulting, I'm still reading many papers and books (even the occasional textbook), but it's determined by my curiosity. I'm allowed to be autodidac... and end up reading beyond any given silo and enjoy myself greatly in the process. I’m familiar with Kahneman and Tversky’s work of course, I studied behavioral economics in college, but I don’t need that level of granularity of having read all of their papers to speak the same language as the others in the room. I can speak with a shared language with behavioral economists, but because I read very broadly, I believe that I have more to contribute.