Innate talent may be a prerequisite for creative work, but it's seldom sufficient without putting the time and effort in.
You'd be surprised at how much creative progress is due to steady effort rather than some brilliant epiphany. Just because its intellectual work doesn't mean it can’t be solved by grinding it out.
``Knowledge and productivity are like compound interest.'' Given two people of approximately the same ability and one person who works ten percent more than the other, the latter will more than twice outproduce the former. The more you know, the more you learn; the more you learn, the more you can do; the more you can do, the more the opportunity - it is very much like compound interest. I don't want to give you a rate, but it is a very high rate. Given two people with exactly the same ability, the one person who manages day in and day out to get in one more hour of thinking will be tremendously more productive over a lifetime. I took Bode's remark to heart; I spent a good deal more of my time for some years trying to work a bit harder and I found, in fact, I could get more work done. I don't like to say it in front of my wife, but I did sort of neglect her sometimes; I needed to study. You have to neglect things if you intend to get what you want done. There's no question about this.
[1]http://ftp.iza.org/dp8129.pdf
The Productivity of Working Hours, John Pencavel
[2]https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/abb5/02a8b01b50790a44cf5438...
Creative productivity: A predictive and explanatory model of career trajectories and landmarks.
Dean Keith Simonton
For a popular audience