[rating:4.0]
(New York: Little, Brown and Company, 2013)
305 pgs
Malcolm Gladwell has a knack for making his readers think. His previous books, The Tipping Point, Blink, and Outliers have all examined common life experiences from a fresh perspective. He continues that tradition in this book.
Gladwell is a staff writer for The New Yorker. He was born in England and grew up in rural Canada.
Gladwell begins this book by re-examining the biblical story of David and Goliath. The miracle of the story is that an idealistic teenager is able to defeat in mortal combat a fully armed giant named Goliath. It’s one of the most unequal contests in history.
Yet Gladwell points out that David was not nearly as disadvantaged as we generally think. Goliath may well have been suffering from acromegaly, a tumor that causes an overproduction of the human growth hormone. This would account for his immense size. But the side effect was that he had blurred vision. He could not see his enemy when he was far away. Thus he angrily demanded that David come close so they could fight at close range. David, however, used his speed and firepower to his advantage. Rather than assuming he had to play to Goliath’s strengths, David took what appeared to be a weakness, his youth, speed and agility, and used it to win a victory over a much larger opponent. One commentator concluded: “Goliath had as much chance against David . . . as any bronze age warrior with a sword would have had against an [opponent] armed with a .45 automatic pistol” (12).
Gladwell’s point is that we often have misconceptions about what is an advantage and what is a disadvantage. He cites various studies that demonstrate that, “When an underdog fought like David, he usually won. But most of the time, underdogs didn’t fight like David” (31). He claims this is because “underdog strategies are hard” (32).
Throughout the remainder of the book, Gladwell cites studies and examples of people who used their perceived weakness to actually be a strength. He does not argue that weaknesses automatically are strengths. It all depends on how you use them and grow from them.
Gladwell cites Vivek Ranadive, who coached his daughter’s basketball team, even though he had never played basketball himself. The girls on his team were far less talented than those on other teams. But as he studied what was happening, he realized that by playing a full court press the entire game, he could neutralize most of the other team’s advantage in skill. His team began winning. Any team can play the full court press, but because it is so exhausting to implement, few do. His team had to embrace the reality that they did not have as much skill as other teams, before they were desperate enough to sacrifice what was required to be successful. Gladwell’s point is that, even though people do have certain limitations, they prefer to do things just like everyone else, rather than using their disadvantage, to their advantage.
As is customary of Gladwel books, there are plenty of interesting stories and statistics that highlight his point. Some will certainly be controversial. For example, he cites the belief that smaller classroom sizes enhance better learning (40). He claims that no profession has had more money thrown toward it by well meaning politicians than teachers. Yet he claims that studies do not substantiate the claim that smaller classroom sizes lead to better education (42). Gladwell shows that, to a certain degree, smaller class sizes is beneficial. But, at a certain point, the benefit ceases, and, in fact, education can be harmed by classes that are too small. As always, Gladwell is challenging conventional thinking.
Gladwell also demonstrates that larger household incomes do not necessarily lead to greater contentment in life. In fact, he suggests that $75,000 per year in household income is optimum (49). After that amount, there is a law of diminishing returns. He also shows how suicide rates are actually higher in countries where citizens are generally happy and content with life, versus countries where people generally have difficult lives. This is because people compare themselves with those immediately around them. If you feel depressed in a country filled with happy people, you suffer more, knowing that in a land filled with happy people, you are unhappy. He also demonstrates, statistically, why enrolling in an Ivy League school may not be best for certain college students. He demonstrates that being at the top of an average school may lead to greater success than being in the middle of a highly ranked institution (87). This is because people compare themselves to their immediate context. An average student at MIT or Harvard may feel that they are not very smart (compared to their fellow classmates), yet they may be far brighter than many of the top students in lesser-ranked universities. It is called the Big Fish Little Pond Theory (80). Well meaning parents generally desire to send their child to the best university possible. Yet they may be inadvertently harming their child’s career possibilities rather than helping them. As Gladwell repeatedly argues, what we assume is an advantage may in fact, be a disadvantage (93).
Gladwell then embarks on a discussion of perceived disadvantages that, in some cases, can actually be an advantage. He labels this section, The Theory of Desireable Difficulty. He looks at case studies of people with Dyslexia. He shows that, depending on how people dealt with it, it could actually propel people to great success (99).
He also discusses the theory of the “remote miss” (130). This was experienced during the bombing of London in World War Two. Experts assumed that the citizens of London would be demoralized by incessant German bombing. But the opposite happened. Because the people survived the bombing, they came to believe they were invincible and that even the most horrific human suffering was survivable and therefore not as bad as it was made out to be. Gladwell cites British studies that demonstrate that a high percentage of successful people as well as political leaders suffered the loss of a parent at an early age (141). As these children suffered this terrible loss, they learned they could survive, and even thrive. By learning at an early age that they could overcome difficulty, they gained confidence that enabled them to thrive, even when facing adversity. He notes: “Courage is what you learn when you’ve been through the tough times and you discover they aren’t so tough after all” (149).
Gladwell cites additional examples from Northern Ireland and from Vichy France to demonstrate that adversity can actually motivate people to rise to acts of greatness. He also challenges the theory that tougher laws reduce crime. He cites the example of the murder of Wilma Derksen in California and the “Three Strikes Law” that resulted from it (232). Though California passed some of the toughest laws in the country, the success of such laws has been challenged.
I don’t agree with all of Gladwell’s conclusions, but I do enjoy the way he challenges me to think. He is a great storyteller and he cites interesting scientific studies to back up his theories. In the case of this book, he is not saying that all adversity is good or that all conventional thinking is bad. What he is arguing is that, certain situations that we would normally assume to be bad, might actually, result in much good. Likewise, what we would normally assume was good, might in fact, be harmful. We are all compelled, therefore, to think deeply about what we are doing to determine its true benefit.
Certainly for those who are leaders, it is not enough to let conventional thinking or popular opinion do our thinking for us. And, if we currently are experiencing difficulty, we might not be too quick to assume that no good can come from it. The key is how we adapt our thinking to the situation. As long as David assumed his only alternative in fighting Goliath was hand-to-hand combat at close range, he was a dead man. But when he thought about his problem differently, he became resoundingly successful. In our day, as we face so many difficult challenges, this may well be a timely word for us all.
by Richard Blackaby