Thoughts on Malcolm Gladwell's Outliers
I was caught in the middle of a friendly debate regarding Outliers a while ago; it went something like this:
EM: Outliers is a great book!
ST: Ya, but what practical good is it?
EM: Well it explains how...
ST: Okay, what's its thesis in a nutshell?
EM: (gives articulate answer) but it's not that kind of book.
ST: I don't get it...
EM: read the book...
Anyhow, I'd been wanting to read the book, so I borrowed it from EM. I told him I'd tell him what I thought, so here it goes:
What jumps out at me -- in direct response to the question "what good is it?" -- is the notion that there are no rags-to-riches, self-made success stories. Behind every huge success (like Bill Gates) there is opportunity, hard-work, community and legacy (cultural background). Most of those things don't answer the question above because they're out of the individual's control. The one thing that is not is "Community".
As a teacher/parent/fellow human being, that, for me, is the playing field that we can level. We can create a caring, nurturing, culture full of equal opportunities in schools, churches, and so on. The example Gladwell gives is of "failed" genius Christopher Landgen who never amounted to much because, in the writer's opinion, he never had a supportive community. My point is that in church, school and other communities, we need to advocate for those individuals -- sheep # 100, as it were -- and create opportunities for them.
Also, regarding legacy, it's all about recognizing the good and the bad in our cultural backgrounds so that we can deal with the bad and add the good; the powerful example here is of the Korean airline that recognized its attitudes toward authority -- IE. extreme deference -- made for ineffective relationships between captains and co-pilots. When co-pilots don't communicate directly and forcefully in emergencies, bad things happen. Planes crash. So they re-culturized their airlines.
Here are some cool quotes that jumped out at me:
"... three things -- autonomy, complexity, and a connection between effort and reward -- are, most people agree, the three qualities that work has to have if it is to be satisfying."
"Cultural legacies matter... but [they are not] an indelible part of who we are."
"Success is a function of persistence and doggedness and a willingness to work hard..."
"Poor kids may out-learn rich kids during the school year. But during the summer, they fall far behind."
"...cultures can be usefully distinguished according to how much they expect individuals to look after themselves."
In the US kids go to school on avg 180 days a year; In Japan -- 243 days a year!
"To build a better world we need to replace the patchwork of lucky break and arbitrary advantaged that today determine success -- the fortunate birth dates and the happy accidents of history -- with a society that provides opportunities for all."
Okay, EM, so here it is: I thought that the book was a useful read -- well-written and well-researched. It laid a ground-work for understanding the principle of the outlier's success. To answer ST's question, the So What? question, I think the answer lies in the last quote. If we think of how huge successes are made, then the audience for this book is fairly limited in practical scope; however, if we consider success in a broader context -- "opportunities for all" -- then the sky's the limit!
EM: Outliers is a great book!
ST: Ya, but what practical good is it?
EM: Well it explains how...
ST: Okay, what's its thesis in a nutshell?
EM: (gives articulate answer) but it's not that kind of book.
ST: I don't get it...
EM: read the book...
Anyhow, I'd been wanting to read the book, so I borrowed it from EM. I told him I'd tell him what I thought, so here it goes:
What jumps out at me -- in direct response to the question "what good is it?" -- is the notion that there are no rags-to-riches, self-made success stories. Behind every huge success (like Bill Gates) there is opportunity, hard-work, community and legacy (cultural background). Most of those things don't answer the question above because they're out of the individual's control. The one thing that is not is "Community".
As a teacher/parent/fellow human being, that, for me, is the playing field that we can level. We can create a caring, nurturing, culture full of equal opportunities in schools, churches, and so on. The example Gladwell gives is of "failed" genius Christopher Landgen who never amounted to much because, in the writer's opinion, he never had a supportive community. My point is that in church, school and other communities, we need to advocate for those individuals -- sheep # 100, as it were -- and create opportunities for them.
Also, regarding legacy, it's all about recognizing the good and the bad in our cultural backgrounds so that we can deal with the bad and add the good; the powerful example here is of the Korean airline that recognized its attitudes toward authority -- IE. extreme deference -- made for ineffective relationships between captains and co-pilots. When co-pilots don't communicate directly and forcefully in emergencies, bad things happen. Planes crash. So they re-culturized their airlines.
Here are some cool quotes that jumped out at me:
"... three things -- autonomy, complexity, and a connection between effort and reward -- are, most people agree, the three qualities that work has to have if it is to be satisfying."
"Cultural legacies matter... but [they are not] an indelible part of who we are."
"Success is a function of persistence and doggedness and a willingness to work hard..."
"Poor kids may out-learn rich kids during the school year. But during the summer, they fall far behind."
"...cultures can be usefully distinguished according to how much they expect individuals to look after themselves."
In the US kids go to school on avg 180 days a year; In Japan -- 243 days a year!
"To build a better world we need to replace the patchwork of lucky break and arbitrary advantaged that today determine success -- the fortunate birth dates and the happy accidents of history -- with a society that provides opportunities for all."
Okay, EM, so here it is: I thought that the book was a useful read -- well-written and well-researched. It laid a ground-work for understanding the principle of the outlier's success. To answer ST's question, the So What? question, I think the answer lies in the last quote. If we think of how huge successes are made, then the audience for this book is fairly limited in practical scope; however, if we consider success in a broader context -- "opportunities for all" -- then the sky's the limit!
Comments
Post a Comment