PDF Summary:Outliers, by Malcolm Gladwell

We love tales of geniuses and underdogs who rise to success through extraordinary talent and hard work—but this isn’t the whole story. In Outliers, Malcolm Gladwell argues that these stories of supposedly self-made men and women mislead us into thinking that success is an individual achievement. But in reality, every successful person had circumstances that contributed to their success.

In this guide, we’ll explain why uncontrollable factors like when you’re born, how you’re raised, and the culture you grow up in impact your success just as much as personal attributes. We’ve also included commentary that adds context to the case studies, provides nuance to the principles, and offers alternative explanations for Gladwell’s conclusions.

(continued)...

Gladwell asserts that practical intelligence is cultivated through a parenting style that’s typical of middle- and upper-class families. He cites a study by sociologist Annette Lareau, who defined two distinct parenting philosophies that correlate with social class: Middle- and upper-class parents take a hands-on approach, which Lareau dubs concerted cultivation. These parents nurture their children’s interests, explain their decisions rather than making commands, expect their children to have opinions and negotiate, and model how to respectfully stand up to authority figures. As a result, children develop practical intelligence.

(Shortform note: Concerted cultivation has come to be categorized as a form of “intensive parenting,” which has evolved to encompass “helicopter parenting” (incessantly hovering over children), “snowplow parenting” (clearing obstacles from children’s path), and “drone parenting” (technology-assisted helicopter parenting). Paradoxically, in contrast to concerted cultivation, which pushes children to take an active role in their own self-advocacy, research shows that these more-intensive variants actually produce children who are less competent, confident, mature, independent, and responsible than their peers.)

By contrast, Gladwell writes, Lareau asserts that working-class parents take a hands-off approach, which she calls accomplishment of natural growth. These parents consider their children’s interests to be facets of their personality rather than sources of potential talent, command rather than explain, discourage children from disagreeing with adults, and are passive around authority figures. As a result, children are typically more creative and independent, but less adept at negotiation and self-advocacy, which are key to outlier-level success in adulthood.

(Shortform note: Since Lareau published her findings, some aspects of the accomplishment of natural growth strategy—and their associated benefits—have declined in practice. First, some experts suggest that intensive parenting (closely related to concerted cultivation) is increasingly becoming the norm at every socioeconomic level. Second, the broader availability of technology means that most children (especially low-income kids and teens) are spending more time in front of screens and less time outside, where they traditionally developed independence and creativity during unstructured play.)

Opportunity #3: Hardship

So far, we’ve looked at the opportunities provided by privilege and good fortune. But Gladwell argues that difficult circumstances can also bring unexpected opportunities. He illustrates this point by examining the life of Joe Flom, a lawyer who grew up in poverty during the Great Depression to become a partner at one of the largest and most powerful law firms in the world.

Although Gladwell frames Flom as an outlier, he clarifies that Flom is representative of an inordinate number of highly successful lawyers who had the same hidden opportunities: being Jewish, the child of garment workers, and born in the 1930s.

Hidden Opportunity #1: Being Jewish

Gladwell writes that when Flom entered the job market, he faced discrimination for being Jewish. Not only was he excluded from elite firms, but also from the type of law they practiced: handling taxes and legal work for corporate stocks and bonds. Flom could only find work at less-distinguished firms doing litigation cases (lawsuits) and proxy fights, the legal side of a hostile takeover. This area of law was considered low-class, and it was not in high demand at the time.

However, in the 1970s, corporate takeovers increased dramatically. Suddenly, everyone needed litigation lawyers, and Jewish lawyers had already accumulated their 10,000 hours of litigation and proxy-fight practice. Thanks to his initial disadvantage, Flom became one of the few experts in a sought-after specialization and achieved great success.

(Shortform note: Although Gladwell argues that the hiring discrimination that Flom faced turned out to be an advantage in his career, workplace prejudice overwhelmingly harms its targets. Directly, it causes minority groups to have higher rates of unemployment and poverty than majority groups. Indirectly, workplace discrimination and economic instability also negatively affect health.)

Hidden Opportunity #2: Being the Child of Garment Workers

Flom’s parents worked in the garment industry, working long hours in poor conditions for little pay. However, Gladwell argues that the work had three components that not only provided lessons that they taught their children but also made the work meaningful, which showed their children that even difficult work could be joyful if it had meaning. Those three components were:

1. Autonomy—Unlike other trades, you could start a garment business fairly easily and independently. The overhead cost was relatively low—all you needed was a sewing machine, some fabric, and the ability to sew. Jewish garment workers highly valued this autonomy.

(Shortform note: In Drive, Daniel H. Pink emphasizes that autonomy is critical for enduring motivation, job satisfaction, high performance, and psychological health at work.)

2. Complexity—Garment workers had to learn every aspect of the industry, from manufacturing to market research. They passed their business knowledge on to their children.

(Shortform note: Flom’s story is an exception to Gladwell’s argument that middle- and upper-class children typically benefit from their parents’ business skills. Because of the particular industry his parents worked in, Flom learned these skills despite being poor.)

3. A relationship between effort and reward—If garment workers stayed up late sewing more dresses, they’d make more money the next day. The correlation between increased effort and increased reward was clear and tangible, instilling Flom with a belief in the value of hard work.

(Shortform note: This type of contingent reward—similar to commissions for salespeople—is motivating in “algorithmic” tasks, such as assembly-line work or sewing dresses. However, research shows that contingent rewards are less effective in complex or creative “heuristic” work, such as innovating or solving novel problems.)

Hidden Opportunity #3: Being Born During the Depression

Flom was born in the 1930s, which was a “demographic trough,” or small generation, due to the fact that many families couldn’t afford to have more children during the Depression. Although being a child in the Great Depression brought certain challenges, Gladwell writes that being born in a demographic trough has its advantages. Children of this generation benefited from small class sizes, excellent teachers who would have been professors if not for the Great Depression, low university tuition (presumably to attract more students), and little competition for jobs.

(Shortform note: Flom’s generation, the Silent Generation, was one of the smallest in the US, with about 50 million births. In stark contrast, about 75 million babies were born in the years that followed, during the Baby Boomer Generation. On one hand, Boomers faced fiercer competition in college and in the workforce, which one sociologist argues has made Boomers consistently less happy than other generations. On the other hand, because of the generation’s size, Boomers had a strong impact on national culture, especially with the rise of activism and counterculture during the 1960s and ‘70s.)

Part 2: The Influence of Our Cultural Legacy

In addition to the opportunities you have during your own lifetime, Gladwell posits that the culture of your ancestors (even the aspects you no longer practice or ascribe to) influence your present-day behaviors in ways that impact your trajectory. In Part 2, Gladwell explores how such cultural legacies promote or impede our success by examining three distinct cultures:

1. The culture of honor
2. The culture of deference
3. The culture of diligence

Each example shows that, to be successful, it matters where you’re from—not only geographically but also culturally.

Culture #1: Honor

The first culture Gladwell describes is what sociologists call the culture of honor, in which your self-worth is based on your reputation. In this culture, you’re more likely to fight someone who challenges you and, therefore, jeopardizes your reputation. These cultural norms impact how you respond in certain situations, which can affect your life trajectory.

Gladwell explains that honor cultures developed out of herding lifestyles: Animals can be stolen, so herders had to demonstrate aggression and strength to protect themselves and their livelihoods. People who descend from herdsmen tend to carry on these cultural norms, even if they aren’t herders.

As an example, Gladwell cites evidence that in the American South, murders occur more frequently than in the rest of the country and tend to involve two people who know each other and are involved in a personal conflict (presumably involving honor, respect, or reputation). He points out that many southerners are descendants of immigrants from rocky, harsh terrains in Scotland, England, and Ireland, where the culture of honor is fierce.

The Culture of Honor Protects Status

The culture of honor is also prevalent in urban, low-income neighborhoods—but not necessarily because residents are descended from herders. Instead, experts say that this culture developed in response to stigmatization based on factors like income, social class, race, and education. Stigma takes a toll on people’s psychological safety, and thus they can develop hyper-vigilant responses (often including violence) to threats to their honor and sense of worth.

Social stigma may also be a factor in the rise of a culture of honor among herders, who generally occupied a lower, poorer class within society. Some experts argue that herders’ aggression was intended not only to protect their livelihoods but also to defend their status.

Culture #2: Deference

The second type of culture that Gladwell examines is the culture of deference, or cultures with a higher Power Distance Index (PDI), which measures how hierarchical a country is and how its citizens value authority. In high PDI countries, employees are often afraid to express disagreement with managers, power in organizations is not equally distributed, and people in power hold special privileges.

(Shortform note: In the US, a relatively low PDI country, successful business people are often those who challenge authority—both directly and figuratively, in terms of challenging the status quo.)

Gladwell explains that people in high PDI cultures use mitigated speech to avoid making direct statements to their superiors as a show of deference. For example, “Let’s turn right” is mitigated speech because it’s phrased as a suggestion; in contrast, “Turn right” is not mitigated speech because it’s a command.

(Shortform note: Gladwell notes that communication in high PDI cultures is receiver-oriented, meaning that it’s the listener’s responsibility to interpret a message. In The Culture Map, Erin Meyer describes this as a feature of high-context cultures, where people communicate not just through words, but also through shared cultural understanding, etiquette, and norms. By contrast, in low-context (or transmitter-oriented) cultures, it’s the speaker’s responsibility to explicitly state all relevant information.)

Gladwell points out that a high PDI can be problematic—even dangerous—when mitigated speech downplays the importance and urgency of a message in serious situations. As an example, he highlights Korean Air’s high rate of plane crashes between 1988 and 1998, largely because copilots and crew members used mitigated speech instead of pointing out dangers or disagreeing with pilots in emergency situations.

However, Gladwell describes how the airline turned this around by acknowledging the influence of the culture of deference and making English the language of their flight communications. In the Korean language, there are six levels of conversational address of varying degrees of intimacy and deference, and copilots used more deferential levels of address when speaking to the captain. English removed this obstacle, allowing copilots to speak to their superiors in a direct way without feeling disrespectful. In essence, this gave flight crew members permission to adopt a new culture, if only for the time they were in the air.

(Shortform note: Even before making the cultural shift in flight communications, Korean Air took another dramatic step and brought in foreigners to advise on flight safety and hold senior staff positions—a decision that ran counter to a cultural tendency toward self-reliance.)

With this example, Gladwell argues that your culture is not your destiny, and that being aware of your cultural limitations is the first step to overcoming them.

(Shortform note: Whereas Korean Air had to acknowledge the limitations of its internal culture of deference, international companies have to understand the differences between their internal culture and the cultures of the countries into which they expand. In No Rules Rules, Reed Hastings describes how Netflix accommodated employees from high PDI cultures by adapting its approach to candid feedback, a pillar of the company’s culture. Hastings created opportunities for formal feedback, which was more comfortable than delivering impromptu feedback, and employees from low PDI cultures learned to somewhat mitigate their speech when giving feedback to colleagues from high PDI cultures.)

Culture #3: Diligence

The third culture Gladwell explores is the culture of diligence and hard work that’s prominent in many Asian countries. Whereas the culture of honor stems from herding ancestors, he asserts that a culture of diligence is a legacy of rice farming.

Gladwell explains that rice farmers historically possessed neither the money nor the space for big plots and machinery, so they depended on their skills and long, hard hours (averaging 3,000 hours per year). This differs from Western farming, which typically involves larger plots of land, large equipment, and long stretches of idleness during the winter (averaging 1,200 working hours per year).

Furthermore, like the garment workers we discussed earlier, rice farmers saw the clear relationship between increased effort and increased wealth because landlords often allowed them to keep or sell whatever they produced above what was required as rent. This also cultivated their diligence.

(Shortform note: In addition to diligence, some theorize that rice farming also fosters a culture of cooperation that persists among their non-farming descendants. Earlier in the book, Gladwell describes this correlation among farmers more generally, contrasting agriculture’s culture of cooperation with herding’s culture of honor. It’s reasonable to extend that logic and assume that farming rice, which requires elaborate irrigation systems that demand more coordination than other crops, would create a higher level of cultural cooperation.)

Gladwell posits that this culture of diligence partially explains why Asian students score in the 98th percentile in math on international comparison tests. He writes that students who excel at math are those who have the diligence to spend a lot of time figuring out how to solve a problem.

(Shortform note: Experts offer several other possible explanations for Asian students’ high performance in math. One is that Chinese teachers use the traditional “chalk-and-talk” approach, in which they instruct while students listen. While schools in many English-speaking countries have moved toward more collaborative and student-led learning, research shows that students benefit more from teachers’ explicit instruction and problem intervention in chalk-and-talk classrooms. Another hypothesis is that Confucian values that are prominent in Asian cultures emphasize effort and practice, which seems to overlap with Gladwell’s culture of diligence.)

Conclusion

Gladwell writes that understanding the external factors that influence success allows us to create circumstances that give more people opportunities to use and develop their gifts. Such changes could create a world where outliers—the extraordinarily successful—cease to be outliers at all.

(Shortform note: The business world is increasingly taking concrete steps to provide more equal opportunities to diverse job candidates and employees. Their strategies include training recruiters and hiring managers to pull from diverse candidate pools, training employees and managers to spot and report discrimination, pairing underrepresented employees with mentors, and ensuring that the board of directors is diverse.)