Expert or Pretender?

I judge the value of expertise on the web by looking for other instances of work from the same author, as well as checking on credentials online. However, I also find the term 'expertise' to be a bit subjective.

In our exploration of Pro-am throughout this course, we've seen that experts don't necessarily come with traditional credentials, such as degrees or certifications. In some of the open source communities I frequent, the 'experts' are people brave enough to try something and fail often. Would most people consider someone who fails 9 of 10 times an expert? Well, it depends on the context.

I try to define expert using the context in which I am researching. Once I have defined expert for myself, then I look for articles or writings which match that definition. In an open forum, where I can ask questions, I do that too. Often, asking a question will also prove valuable in determining the real skill of an author.

In person, I ask a lot of questions, but the basics of the the process are still the same. Expertise is always determined in the context of the search for knowledge. For example, if I'm consulting, it would seem most prudent for me to go to senior leadership for expertise on the business. I prefer, instead, to go to where the action is and ask the employees. Even though society would tell us that expertise is how managers rise through the ranks, I know that senior leaders lose touch with the process, often leaving the employees with the real expertise.