At its heart, it has two themes: 1 That success depends not just on talent but opportunity, and 2 that success and failure also depend on the cultural legacies we inherit from our forebears. Luck matters. Hockey players who happened to be born between January and March were disproport Malcolm Gladwell's new book reads like a series of cocktail-party anecdotes. Hockey players who happened to be born between January and March were disproportionately represented in professional hockey leagues.
From an early age, these players were the oldest in their age bracket, and therefore bigger and more coordinated. Coaches selected them for better training and playing opportunities, and overtime, success bred success. Likewise, students who happened to be older for their class scored higher on math and science tests than their younger classmates, and were more likely to be picked for "gifted" and other advanced programs.
Even smart people need 10, hours of practice before they master a skill. Those that can get those 10, hours during childhood are a step ahead. Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, and The Beatles all had unique opportunities to have lots and lots of practice in their specialties at an early age before becoming successful. After , increases in IQ are less important than creativity and "practical intelligence" -- knowing what to say to whom, knowing when to say it, and knowing how to say it for maximum effect.
A lifelong study of geniuses showed they were no more successful than the average population. These herdsmen warriors brought with them a willingness to fight in response to the smallest slight. This led to a pattern of bloody and violent feuds between families across the Appalachian states. Think Hatfields vs. Korean Airlines had an unusually high rate of plane crashes because of the Korean culture's extreme deference to superiors.
Junior pilots were reluctant to directly contradict their Captain on a flight, even in the face of grave error. This explains, for instance, the Korean Air Flight crash in Guam in When the airline hired a specialist from Delta to retrain the pilots to speak more transparently, their safety record went up dramatically.
Asians are good at math and science because their ancestors planted rice paddies. Rice farming was more labor intensive than Western agriculture. Asians have inherited this stick-with-it-ness that allows them to excel in math and science, where perseverance is mandatory. Unlike rice paddies, wheat or corn fields need to be left fallow every few years. Early American educators adopted this principle toward schooling - that students must not be exhausted.
Hence, the long summer vacation, a distinctly American legacy. But this legacy is counterproductive, because kids tend to forget things over the summer. Kids who go to schools with shorter summer breaks tend to have higher test scores. View all 10 comments. Dec 19, Eric rated it liked it. I can save you the trouble of reading the book: smart people don't automatically become successful, they do so because they got lucky. This rule applies to everyone including the likes of Bill Gates and Robert Oppenheimer.
That's it. That's what the whole book is about. Gladwell looks at case after case of this: Canadian hockey players, Korean airline pilots, poor kids in the Bronx, Jewish lawyers, etc Even with all this evidence it feels like he's pulling in examples that fit his theory and I can save you the trouble of reading the book: smart people don't automatically become successful, they do so because they got lucky.
Even with all this evidence it feels like he's pulling in examples that fit his theory and ignoring others. Thus while we look at many examples of geniuses who got lucky we do not look at Einstein which seems strange as he's the best known genius of the 20th century.
While the book can be summarized in one sentence, the individual chapters are interesting such as the chapter that discusses a plane crash that happened in New York because the pilots were too subservient to make it clear to the air traffic controllers that they were almost out of gas. In short, the parts of this book were more interesting then the whole. View all 22 comments. It's a book about forests. I originally thought this to be a self-improvement kind of book, but quickly figured that's not the case, then may be some sort of a business development one, which also fell apart quickly.
I cannot round off this any closer than to some kind of a sociology - psycholo "This is not a book about tall trees. I cannot round off this any closer than to some kind of a sociology - psychology combo. I liked that book a lot, and out of nowhere, Thiel attacks Gladwell in his book for being a negative influence on readers.
But after reading the entire book now, I'm don't believe Thiel's criticisms are fully justified. Being said that, some of the concepts in outliers like 10, hour rule, though explained in a very clear and attractive manner, still seems a little bit out there.
It's true that we are naturally reluctant to accept that certain unchangeable parameters in life to have any significant meaning towards our successes and failures in life, such as the birth month. It's kind of confusing how that kind of information suppose to help a person, unless of course the reader is purely interested in understanding such limitations and just accept them. This could indeed create a negative spiral of events, if someone embraces these limitations and give up on everything.
If this is the first non-fiction or self-help book someone reads, it's easy to imagine that reader becoming a lifetime fan of Gladwell, for everything is laid out perfectly, in that unique Gladwell style. But read it with an open mind, and a tiny bit of skepticism, and you will come across some interesting interpretations of certain events.
And finally, as to the concepts of outliers itself: obviously the environmental factors - both positive and negative - are going to impact any persons success or failures. It's interesting to see if there are any relationships or patterns in these factors, but, personally, I think it is a bit of a stretch.
We should not let things like that affect the way we want to organize our lives. It might even go as far as to show you some hidden opportunities around you, how they managed to overcome their difficulties and how to utilize whatever resources available, and to provide some motivation. But that is not the point of the book is it Dec 30, Adam rated it it was amazing. People are criticizing this book because it is not a journal article.
Well guess what: we're not all sociologists. I have read plenty of journal articles in my own field law. I'm in no position to read journal articles in fields outside my own.
Having a well-written piece of mass-market writing is just the thing I need to access this information. Another criticism of the book is that Gladwell is the "master of the anecdote. Every survey even a methodologically perfect one is necessarily un-abstract and anecdotal: it is based on survey research from particular people, and there's no way to derive abstract rules governing society from that like math.
This notion of how Gladwell is all anecdotal bothers me. So what? If a good anecdote gets you to look at a situation in a new way or makes a powerful point, that's excellent! View 2 comments. Sep 10, David rated it did not like it. Malcolm Gladwell writes very interesting and entertaining books.
Tolkein writes very interesting and entertaining books as well. However, after reading Tolkein, I did not venture out into the world in search of hobbits, dwarves and elves to be my new friends, or worry about being attacked by trolls. Tolkein's books, while entertaining, have little connection to reality. Unfortunately, the same can be said about Gladwell. However, their connection with reality is highly, highly dubious.
This book is a big disappointment after "The Tipping Point" and "Blink", both interesting books that don't have the reader arguing with the author the entire way through. One main problem is that there isn't really an identifiable thesis in the book. It seems like Gladwell wants to say that the myth of the "self-made" person is not true, since every successful person has had help and lucky breaks along the way. Well, duh! But then he goes on to say that successful people spend 10, hours on their chosen area of success.
Do they get any credit for that? Does working on something for 10, hours when you could be goofing off make you a bit "self-made"? In my book it certainly does. Take Bill Gates. Yes, he came from a rich family, had some breaks and some unique opportunities. But what about his former classmates who are now meth addicts or bitter failures who had similar opportunities, but didn't sieze them? Or those who simply were too lazy to put in 10, hours in front of the computer? Is Gates "lucky" that he had the drive to do that?
So either the main thesis falls apart -- that if you are privileged and lucky you will be successful, or it becomes something completely prosaic, such as "Gates worked hard, but he had some unique breaks".
Again, duh! That's life. Every person can identify positives and negatives in their own lives. It is the choice to overcome the negatives and to capitalize on the positives that makes the difference. If Gates hadn't found the computer lab Gladwell discusses, would he have just given up, or would he have kept on looking? I think that he would have kept looking until he found a similar opportunity. The science is also incredibly flimsy. He asserts - "Successful hockey players are almost all born in January - March".
Well, wouldn't that apply to all athletes? Wouldn't somebody before Gladwell have figured that out? It really is an example of inductive reasoning, not good science. Maybe so, but Gladwell needs more data to prove his point. Another assertion is: "Asians are good at math because their ancestors were rice farmers - They come from a patient, hard-working culture". But perhaps there are other reasons that could explain the same thing: religious traditions, government, how education is structured.
Hey, maybe Asians have a high tolerance for their own body odor and can spend more hours in the field than Europeans! I'm not seriously arguing that, but it is an example of Gladwell making a connection between two things that is far from proven. The book is best read as a series of colorful essays on some interesting topics. However, as a guide or explanation of success, it is an example of truly sloppy science and shoddy reasoning. True, successful people don't get there on their own.
But everyone can review their lives and identify lucky breaks as well as unfair disadvantages. In the end, Gladwell doesn't explain success at all in a convincing fashion, and risks leaving the reader with the impression that fatalism is the only attitude to have towards their own success.
Nothing could be further from the truth. Oct 01, Michael Perkins rated it it was ok Shelves: overrated. The term I've coined for books such as these is "the illusion of erudition. In a paper in the British Jou The term I've coined for books such as these is "the illusion of erudition. In a paper in the British Journal of Sports Medicine, the lead author of the original study about the practice time of elite violinists, K. Ericsson himself never used the number 10, or the term "rule.
Ericsson extended his study to sports. Author David Espstein reports on the results next four paragraphs In fact, in absolutely every single study of sports expertise, there is a tremendous range of hours of practice logged by athletes who reach the same level, and very rarely do elite performers log 10, hours of sport-specific practice prior to reaching the top competitive plane, often competing in a number of other sports— and acquiring a range of other athletic skills— before zeroing in on one.
Studies of athletes have tended to find that the top competitors require far less than 10, hours of deliberate practice to reach elite status. According to the scientific literature, the average sport-specific practice hours to reach the international levels in basketball, field hockey, and wrestling are closer to 2,, 4,, and 6,, respectively. In a sample of Australian women competing in netball sort of like basketball but without dribbling or backboards , arguably the best player in the world at the time, Vicki Wilson, had compiled only hours of practice when she made the national team.
Even in this age of hyperspecialization in sports, some rare individuals become world-class athletes, and even world champions, in sports from running to rowing with less than a year or two of training. As with studies of chess players, in all sports and skills, the only real rule is that there is a tremendous natural range. I've coached enough youth sports to know there needs to be some base talent to build on for a young person to excel.
I've also seen many year olds who were stars at that age, but who faded by age 16, no matter how many hours they put in. I've coached youth sports for years.
I've seen this over and over. I asked him about "the 10, rule. There is a threshold, he writes, above which more does not really matter. Above an IQ of —which already eliminates most of humanity—he argues, one is already smart enough to consider the most difficult intellectual problems, and more IQ does not translate into real-world success.
But past a certain point, height stops mattering so much. Apparently not. He can't be trusted. I guess he has some readers think they're geniuses if they have an IQ of And uses anecdotes that supposedly prove his points. I saw a couple of minutes of the most famous such preacher in the U. He began with: "God is faithful. That promotion you've been waiting for: it's just around the corner.
That lifetime soulmate you've always been looking for is on the way to you right now. The bonus money you need to take a vacation: you'll get that check by Christmas. And throw in a couple of contemporary anecdotes. The dark side is that you get blamed. Somehow you've incurred God's displeasure. So you got cut from the team? It must be because you only put in 9, hours of practice instead of 10, Hotly debated zoning-board topics include building codes for at-home squash courts and storm-drainage plans to mitigate runoff from private ice rinks.
View all 19 comments. Dec 26, Henry Mishkoff rated it it was ok. Well, it's official: Malcolm Gladwell has run out of things to say. His prose is still lively and entertaining, and he maintains his famous I-look-at-things-differently-than-anyone-else attitude, but "Outliers" has so little meat that it would have more appropriately been published as a magazine article.
I think that the main value of reading Gladwell is that he plants a seed in your brain that encourages you to seek unconventional explanations for familiar phenomena. That's a very healthy thing, Well, it's official: Malcolm Gladwell has run out of things to say. That's a very healthy thing, and I'm not trying to disparage its significance. But if you're looking for a book that provides meaningful insights, "Outliers" isn't it.
View all 6 comments. Dec 05, Jonathan rated it liked it Shelves: non-fiction. Here's what I wrote earlier.
I have to admit to the more I think and talk about the book, the less I think of it. It all seems too superficial.
A pretty interesting book, albeit with not quite as many "knock me over with a feather" moments as Blink. It starts off with a bang, as he discusses amateur hockey teams and how it was noticed that virtually all the players on an Under hockey team came from the first three months of the year.
Turns out the age cutoff is January 1 in Canada, so the olde Here's what I wrote earlier. Turns out the age cutoff is January 1 in Canada, so the older players those born early in the year advanced further due to their slight maturity advantage which continued to multiply, as they got better training, put on better teams etc. This subject hits close to home, as I am a soccer coach and heavily involved in my daughter's soccer league.
My oldest has a birthday at the worst possible time, just a few weeks before the cutoff date, while the younger one has a birthday the month after the cutoff date. So far, it hasn't seemed to slow the older one's progress, but it is something I will certainly keep an eye on.
Gladwell's suggestion is to have multiple cutoff dates, so other ages can play against others of the same age. Doesn't seem likely though. He also explores how the timing of your interests can really change things.
Something as simple as how available computer time was to early pioneers like Bill Gates and Bill Joy. Certainly, in the late 60s and early 70s, the amount of keyboard time these guys had pales in comparison to what would be available just a few years before that.
He also talks about a major law firm in New York that benefited from getting the kinds of financial cases the other law firms wouldn't deal with, only to explode in popularity as the money days of the 80s and 90s struck. I thought the book felt like it suffered from data mining, in that there didn't seem to be enough exploration of other equally successful groups that may not have had the same advantages.
But still a fascinating look at what kinds of thing influence success, whether we think about them or not. View all 3 comments.
Oct 07, Amir Tesla rated it liked it Shelves: productivity , success. Recommend to: If you like exploring phenomenon beyond their appearance and if you enjoy story-telling writings about factual subjects, here: success What this book is about: Here, the famous columnist, Malcolm Gladwell deeply investigates the topic of success and people or nations with far beyond average achievements whom he calls " outliers " to figure out what has contributed to their accomplishments.
Pros The way Gladwell observes and concludes is so enticing and far different from what you might Recommend to: If you like exploring phenomenon beyond their appearance and if you enjoy story-telling writings about factual subjects, here: success What this book is about: Here, the famous columnist, Malcolm Gladwell deeply investigates the topic of success and people or nations with far beyond average achievements whom he calls " outliers " to figure out what has contributed to their accomplishments.
Pros The way Gladwell observes and concludes is so enticing and far different from what you might think about why a phenomenon has happened. For example, see how these arguments might sound: 1. Chinese are good at math because of their way of sowing and reaping rice in the fields.
The flight number X crashed, because the co-pilot was Colombian. And any other Colombian in his place might have led to the very same outcome. Yes, is seems so, and Malcolm nicely shows how these seemingly unrelated events are tightly bound.
So from the point of the way he see's things differently and actually tries to find real reasons behind events you'll find the book amusing and thought provoking. Cons There are two major problems I have with this book. Things like the date of birth which opens up opportunities for practice in cases he studies etc. But it would have been much nicer had he provided vivid guidelines on now that we can't choose the roots, how we can provide the opportunities and the environment caused by the roots.
The other problem with some of his observations is that they can be potentially badly flawed or be results of what scientists say clustering. Namely, you look at a particular area with particular trends and specifications and you extend the qualities to the whole group in other areas.
Or in situations I think, despite his keen observation and uncovering an aspect of an event, fails to see other dimensions as well.
Now my argument: Haven't the Americans been smart to build such advanced machineries? The book's message though I think is noble, really noble, which tries to tell that communities and societies are responsible for provisioning an environment in which members can fulfill their potentials.
Oh by the way, the famous hours rule for mastery is the result of the Swedish psychologist Anders Ericsson studies and was merely popularized, by Malcolm Gladwell. View all 12 comments. Sep 28, Kevin rated it did not like it Shelves: z-propaganda-liberalism. The Banality of Neoliberalism 1 Sloppy methodology: --Let's take a gentle start. Even a lottery has real people winning it. If your methodology is to only examine the winners and bypass the structure of the lottery system , then you can surely come up with some highly entertaining and biased results!
In fact, Goldacre has a couple words on Gladwell: On my left shoulder there is an angel. She says it's risky to extrapolate from rarefied laboratory conditions to the real world. She says that publication bias in this field [psychology] is extensive, so whenever researches get negative findings, they're probably left unpublished in a desk drawer. And she says it's uncommon to see a genuinely systematic review of the literature on these topics, so you rarely get to see all the conflicting research in one place.
My angel has read the books of Malcolm Gladwell, and she finds them to be silly and overstated. The key assumption here is an apolitical i. The question is to what degree competition and meritocracy exist not to mention the perverse consequences that often results, let alone alternatives.
Next, there's the assumption of a certain class, thus skimming off the un-deserving peoples. Many poor countries are perfectly embedded into global capitalism, open for business with transnational corporations extracting their oil, minerals, forests, cash crops, labor, etc. Hence, " global Trumpism " Mark Blyth is on the rise. View all 8 comments. Jun 02, Anirudh rated it really liked it.
Ever wondered why Bill Gates is so rich? Or why the Beatles is considered to be a "once in a millennium" band? An enthralling psychology novel by Malcolm Gladwell , "Outliers" reveals the secrets behind the success of some of the most famous people in the world. The book, with its sublime delivery and almost fantastical though real Ever wondered why Bill Gates is so rich? The book, with its sublime delivery and almost fantastical though real anecdotes has the capacity of enamouring even pure fiction lovers.
As it is said, "life is stranger than fiction. Outliers: The Story of Success leaves audience with knowledge of how to entice some of that success into their own lives. If nothing else, at least you will be able to figure out why those particularly irksome people in your network behave so, lmao upon extrapolating information gleaned from a part of the book.
I skimmed this book instead of reading it. Although the author makes some interesting points, I find some of the correlations he tries to draw a little silly. Like the fact that success breeds success, opportunity is key, practice pays off, etc. Regardless, this was my first experience skimming.
View all 25 comments. Apr 09, seak rated it really liked it Shelves: audio , Or as it should be called, "Outliers don't exist. It starts with a story about a town whose inhabitants only ever die from old age i.
For some reason the best hockey players are born in January through March and rarely any time after. The reason - it's all because of the date of the cut-off for playing hoc Outliers. The reason - it's all because of the date of the cut-off for playing hockey in the junior leagues I use that meaning "for little guys first playing" not because it is in any way accurate as to the actual name. Because the cut-off date for kids joining the hockey league is January 1, those born right after have to wait about a year to join.
What happens when one kids plays against another who is a year older? They get slaughtered in only a sports sense I hope. That year makes a difference to the little guys and girls and so they get to play on the advanced team, they get to be an all-star and therefore, they get more and more playing time.
What starts out as an arbitrary date, turns into something real since those who get more playing time actually become better and end up making up the majority of the professionals.
This strikes a particular cord with me, being a December birthday. Luckily I've never had the desire to become a professional hockey player Anyway, this book is filled with stories like this, making the point that when it seems like someone is a unique and even a prodigy, it usually is because of way more factors than just they worked hard and they are smart.
From Mozart to Bill Gates and even geniuses who never made a mark on society. To airplane copilots who rather than speak up about a problem, lead the plane directly into a mountain. To the fact that there really isn't a magical type of person who becomes great, but someone who can put in the right amount of practice to do so 10, hours to be exact. But then again, you have to be blessed with the ability to have those hours of practice rather than being forced to survival.
His main point is that societies and culture and even timing like birth make up a lot of who people are and why they become "outliers.
A good portion of the richest people throughout history were born within 9 years of each other, just in time to take advantage of the industrial revolution. This is an extremely eye-opening book that comes highly recommended. I couldn't stop thinking about it or talking about it and I already have another of his books, Blink, ready in the queue. The only criticism I can make is that as with most arguments, those that aren't as advantageous to his claims are left in the background a bit.
He says that the timing of birth is a factor and I certainly think so, but it's also because of one or two of those people born that the next big shift in society happens and I don't think that can be ruled out.
However, that's not even mentioned. Anyway, it got me thinking and you can too! The audiobook is read by the author and he reads his own words well. Jan 12, Siddharth rated it really liked it. He shook his head sadly. I'd have made a champion swimmer His voice trailed off. What the hell am I supposed to do about it now? The only thing I have hours practice is of scrunching my nose when my wife farts. And even that is more due to habit now. You get used to the smell pretty quickly. She loves them too much.
If I had been, I would not have just stood there and nodded meekly when my boss told me that I was the love child of a donkey and a pigeon.
I would have given him one - right in the kisser. Right in the kisser, I tell you boy. Would have run the prison library and made it famous, like that guy in Shawshank. Life dealt me the wrong hand. I wouldn't have felt sad at my failures. I would have regarded them as inevitable. I would have waved the book at everyone who looked at me as a loser. I would have Blake, why couldn't you have bought the book 35 years ago when it came out?
This wasn't fair. He shook his head and sighed prodigiously. My boss gave me this book on my 30th birthday. But I hated him so much, I threw it away in the dustbin. Jan 19, Claudia rated it really liked it Recommends it for: all non-fiction fans.
Shelves: nonfiction. Gladwell looks closely at success, and those who seem to have waltzed into incredible success Canadian hockey players, who just happened to have been born in the right month of the year; Bill Gates, who just happened to go to a school where the PTA moms bought a "Outliers" those wildly successful people, for whom 'normal rules don't apply.
Canadian hockey players, who just happened to have been born in the right month of the year; Bill Gates, who just happened to go to a school where the PTA moms bought a new-fangled computer system. Mozart, who didn't hit his stride until ten years after he began composing Their sound was born of the 10, hours of performing in Hamburg -- more than other groups could amass in years of playing. Success is timing, and hard work It's luck -- having the right family, having the right opportunities -- Gladwell's description: "a combination of ability, opportunity, and utterly arbitrary advantage We go with him anywhere When Bill Gates admits he was very lucky, Gladwell hammers home that point.
But to me, the , hour rule is what I'll take with me. Do you want to be the best? Put in the effort! Talent and opportunity can help, but success is hard work. Jan 09, Julie rated it it was amazing Shelves: book-club , favorite-non-fiction. In just one week, this book transformed a relatively normal woman into someone who's been saying, "Well, in this book I'm reading. Yeah, there's this section on. You should read this chapter. No, no, just wait here and let me read these 3 pages out loud for you.
Have you read it? Oh, you haven't? Let me just show you this one page, it'll just take a minute! Apr 28, ScienceOfSuccess rated it really liked it Shelves: favorites.
Here is my animated review! View all 5 comments. I don't know about Malcolm Gladwell. I've read 3 of his books. All of them fine, but nothing special. All of them fairly superficial with nothing original or innovative. I think his books are very pop culture and should be read in the time frame say within a year that they are published. Too long after that and they become stale, not prolific or prescient.
Gladwell is a very good and interesting writer, but I don't think his books have much depth or staying power. Almost 3. Dec 07, Hamad rated it liked it Shelves: e-books , non-fiction , reads. It is amusing how different authors interpreted success; some see it as the power of believing in something and it will happen as in the law of attraction. Some think you have to work but that you need to have some unfair advantages and Gladwell in this book also makes his own arguments and at the end of the day we just have to remember that all of these are arguments and we should make our own opinions and beliefs and that we are not obliged to take each and every word for granted!
This book has more than half a million ratings and an average rating of 4. Just as he did in Blink, Gladwell overturns many of our conventional notions and creates an entirely new model for seeing the world. Brilliant and entertaining, this is a landmark work that will simultaneously delight and illuminate.
Nota de la solapa Malcolm Gladwell shows why the story of success is far more surprising, and more fascinating, than we could ever imagineWhy are people successful? Brilliant and entertaining, this is a landmark work that will simultaneously delight and illuminate Contraportada Malcolm Gladwell shows why the story of success is far more surprising, and more fascinating, than we could ever imagineWhy are people successful?
He was named one of the most influential people byTime magazine and one of the Foreign Policy's Top Global Thinkers. Previously, he was a reporter with the Washington Post, where he covered business and science, and then served as the newspaper's New York City bureau chief. He graduated from the University of Toronto, Trinity College, with a degree in history.
Gladwell was born in England and grew up in rural Ontario.
0コメント