Posted on Tue, Dec. 23, 2008

e-mail	print	RSS	reprint
AIM	Digg it	del.icio.us	Facebook

How can successful people be so dumb?

Most of the reviewers of Malcolm Gladwell's latest book take pains to note that one of its two main ideas isn't new at all.

In "Outliers," Gladwell demonstrates that extraordinary success, whether fiscal or physical, is rarely the result of innate talent alone. Accidents of timing, just plain luck and unearned opportunities, among other happenstances, play major roles in determining what our society considers its biggest winners, the "outliers" from most of us.

But then everybody knows and recognizes that, right?

Actually, no, at least judging by the hubris and sense of entitlement radiating from recent headlines.

Gladwell's genius is his ability to look at academic research, particularly in the social sciences, from a slightly rakish view and, with his story-telling wizardry, turn it into entertainment and, sometimes, insight. His "The Tipping Point" and "Blink" were huge sellers, and "Outliers" likely will outstrip both.

But if "everybody knows" that success is not solely the product of one's talent, what is it about success that seems to give so many people who achieve it amnesia on that point?

Why are so many highly successful people rendered so dumb that they begin to believe that their accomplishments are fully embodied in their beings and thus are perpetually within their control?

Historic examples abound -- Julius Caesar, Adolph Hitler, and even Dr. No -- but so do recent ones.

Example: Rod Blagojevich, Illinois' youthful governor, so confident of his native political abilities that, even after being openly under federal investigation for three years, he was caught on wire taps talking about trading Barack Obama's Senate seat for money or other favors. His amnesia was so complete that it never occurred to him that the feds might be tapping his phones.

Example: Long-time clients of Wall Street mega-crook Bernard Madoff (pronounced made-off, as in... with your money) who were so enamored of their financial wizardry that improbably consistent earnings levels reported during years of alternating recessions and booms never raised questions in their minds.

Example: The NFL's corps of egomaniacal millionaire wide receivers ( e.g. Terrell Owens and Plaxico Burris) who conveniently forget that their pass receptions depend upon: a) a well-conceived play, b) called at the right time, c) effective blocking by four or five really big people, d) other potential receivers running precise routes, e) a decent throw by the quarterback, and f) a lapse by a defensive back. They nevertheless preen and prance onfield and complain in the press of too little respect and too few opportunities to demonstrate their natural talent.

Example: Corporate superstar CEOs who claimed billions in annual "performance" bonuses when their companies were crumbling beneath them, a syndrome most glaringly evident in the recent investment banking industry meltdown. If one can do no wrong because of one's natural talent, why should one think it necessary to actually understand the complex financial instruments that provide the golden proof of it?

Perhaps the episodes of carelessness and stupidity that so often seize many outliers occur because the primary way our society keeps score is in dollars, an abundance of which creates the illusion of separation from the normal and inevitable vagaries of life.

We should know better after all these centuries of contrary evidence.

Davis Merritt is a former editor of The Eagle. Reach him at dmerritt9@cox.net.

     Showing: Oldest first Newest first Most-recommended first Least-recommended first

@Nyx.AuthorDisplayName@ wrote on @Nyx.PostedAtTime@:

@Nyx.CommentBody@

@Nyx.Recommender@ @Nyx.AbuseReporter@