|
Outliers: The Story of Success | 
| Author: Malcolm Gladwell
Publisher: Little, Brown and Company
Category: Book
List Price: $27.99
Buy New: $15.39
You Save: $12.60 (45%)
Rating:  213 reviews
Sales Rank: 8
Media: Hardcover
Number Of Items: 1
Pages: 320
Shipping Weight (lbs): 0.9
Dimensions (in): 7.9 x 5.5 x 1.2
ISBN: 0316017922
Dewey Decimal Number: 302
EAN: 9780316017923
Publication Date: November 18, 2008
Availability: Usually ships in 24 hours
|
| Similar Items:
|
| Editorial Reviews:
Amazon.com Review
Amazon Best of the Month, November 2008: Now that he's gotten us talking about the viral life of ideas and the power of gut reactions, Malcolm Gladwell poses a more provocative question in Outliers: why do some people succeed, living remarkably productive and impactful lives, while so many more never reach their potential? Challenging our cherished belief of the "self-made man," he makes the democratic assertion that superstars don't arise out of nowhere, propelled by genius and talent: "they are invariably the beneficiaries of hidden advantages and extraordinary opportunities and cultural legacies that allow them to learn and work hard and make sense of the world in ways others cannot." Examining the lives of outliers from Mozart to Bill Gates, he builds a convincing case for how successful people rise on a tide of advantages, "some deserved, some not, some earned, some just plain lucky."
Outliers can be enjoyed for its bits of trivia, like why most pro hockey players were born in January, how many hours of practice it takes to master a skill, why the descendents of Jewish immigrant garment workers became the most powerful lawyers in New York, how a pilots' culture impacts their crash record, how a centuries-old culture of rice farming helps Asian kids master math. But there's more to it than that. Throughout all of these examples--and in more that delve into the social benefits of lighter skin color, and the reasons for school achievement gaps--Gladwell invites conversations about the complex ways privilege manifests in our culture. He leaves us pondering the gifts of our own history, and how the world could benefit if more of our kids were granted the opportunities to fulfill their remarkable potential. --Mari Malcolm
Product Description
In this stunning new book, Malcolm Gladwell takes us on an intellectual journey through the world of "outliers"--the best and the brightest, the most famous and the most successful. He asks the question: what makes high-achievers different? His answer is that we pay too much attention to what successful people are like, and too little attention to where they are from: that is, their culture, their family, their generation, and the idiosyncratic experiences of their upbringing. Along the way he explains the secrets of software billionaires, what it takes to be a great soccer player, why Asians are good at math, and what made the Beatles the greatest rock band.
Brilliant and entertaining, OUTLIERS is a landmark work that will simultaneously delight and illuminate.
|
| Customer Reviews: Read 208 more reviews...
 Not Even a "Book" November 21, 2008
834 out of 1077 found this review helpful
I know this is likely to be a minority position, but I think this "book" just isn't very good. I was disappointed after reading it. So even if you think that Gladwell's brand of books is the bee's knees, read this review if you want an alternative take on this particular work. Although I agree that much of people's success is due to privilege, this McDonaldized salmagundi of information is itself is an inadequate account of the thesis proffered by Gladwell. Keep in mind of course that this review is my own reasoned assessment, and that I understand that many do not share this position.
I suppose that if you were looking for a light, fluffy reading with "truthy" statements, however, then Gladwell's book will suffice. Also, if you aren't familiar with some of the main ideas or topics, then it might be a good introduction, or starting point. However, if you are expecting something a bit more substantial and you read non-fiction books regularly, then take a pass on this one.
A short summary: Gladwell's basic thesis is that, in order to be successful in life (i.e. an "outlier" beyond the norm), being lucky and being privileged matter. However, anyone looking for any self-help should go somewhere else, notwithstanding the highly misleading subtitle, "the story of success." (Unless perhaps you are a Korean airline pilot, then Gladwell might be able to help you, since there is a lengthy excursus on pilot error). Oh, also being very talented does indeed matter, but not as much as we think, and practicing a lot matters, but it is probably too late since you had to start young enough to put in 10,000 hours. There you have it.
There are a lot of problems with his "book". In general, unlike some other critical reviewers, I actually think that this "book's" premise has elements of truth to it. Actually, a lot. My main issues with this "book" are its 1) poor presentation, 2) poor citation list, 3) lack of careful consideration of counter arguments, and 4) the simple fact that there are other treatments that tell the same thesis in a much better manner.
In fact I put "book" in quotes because it doesn't read at all like a veritable book to me. Think of it more as a collated series of "musings", "anecdotes" and "wikipedia" citations, because those are a shockingly large section of the thing, whatever you wish to call it. Let me list the ways, if you are not convinced that this is a book not worth buying.
1) Poor Presentation; disorganized and disjointed. This is a short book (about 48,000 words, with 180 pages of text, according to my estimate), like the others by Gladwell, so your dollars per page are quite high. Also, the concept of outliers is mentioned in the beginning somewhat superficially, and then it is mentioned at the end, but rarely within the book itself. (An "outlier" is a statistically rare occurrence, such as being really tall or short. It is not synonymous with success, as Gladwell mistakenly implies. It can also mean extreme failure, but this is not addressed at all). Beyond being incorrect, this is a superficial treatment of the term. What is its history, in statistical theory, in the social sciences, in modern society? When did the concept of the outlier arise? Conversely, when and how did the concept of "normalcy" arrive? How does such a concept shape our thinking or understanding of the world? Instead of an interesting treatment of this general concept, the book reads like a few slightly connected but really disjointed essays on a sundry assortment of topics. It is almost as if Gladwell wandered in the social science section of Border's bookstore, picked up ten books at random, skimmed them and wrote a book review of each one. Then smack on one word "outliers", and there we have another bestseller! It consists more of concatenating wikipedia entries and other, superior works into a dime store novel, or a Mcbook. Now on to wikipedia....
2) Thin and dubious citation list. Nearly all of the graphs and tables in the book are from wikipedia! I laughed when I saw this. I know, it is a popular internet source, but to flip in the bibliography and see a morass of urls looks and seems very lazy. This isn't bad per se, but the bibliography reveals the superficiality of the full analysis. Also, many of the news sources are just online slate articles, etc., and no one topic consists more than one citation. In other words, I'm not sure if I believe much of what I read. It appears a few interviews were conducted for the book, but these are not cited or sourced, and in fact the interviews add very, very little to the book's actual content. For example, he interviews the "smartest man in the world," Chris Langan, but the interview consists of quips that appear identical to youtube clips of Langan. Gladwell also interviews Bill Gates, but the actual content mentioned in the book is treated much better in a biography of Gates that Gladwell cites. Ditto with Gladwell's discussions of the Beatles, Oppenheimer, etc. Read those biographies if you want something good, or read the Amazon book reviews, since Gladwell's treatment of them is far more superficial, covering a few pages on each topic before he breezes on to the next.
I would guess that a full 80 percent of the book's contents come from available online content (google scholar abstracts, newspapers, book reviews, wikipedia). The rest of the material really just comes from one nice book, Annette Lareau's "Unequal Childhoods," a far superior book if you want a deep look at social inequality (Unfortunately, I still can't understand why it isn't a national bestseller. I heard that Lareau's latest book has sold only about 10,000 copies). Then there are about three economics articles that are examined in detail in the first half of the book: articles looking at 1) age and educational attainment, 2) age and sports, and 3) summer school inequalities. Google scholar will provide just as much detail, or perhaps a wikipedia article on the achievement gaps in schooling.
In short, the research is superficial and it betrays a writer who isn't really willing or able to dig deep into the material to provide us with something new or informative. Sometimes these citations are very far removed. For example, Gladwell cites as if it were a first hand source an article written wholly in French and published 32 years ago, and this French article was seemingly derived entirely from another book that quoted and translated for Gladwell. It appears that Gladwell simply took the pre-made quote of the scientific study and mentioned that. It is Gladwell's lack of knowledge of any of these subjects that makes me doubtful that he really knows what he is telling us. He is a science writer with little ability to read or evaluate science. Behind the patina of words the empirical foundation is quicksand. It feels more "truthy" than "true."
3) This book does not consider ANY exceptions, and it involves almost no critical thinking on the part of the author himself. So not only is there no original contribution on the research front, there is no critical examination of the ideas and findings of others. Instead, scientific findings from a few, isolated papers are uncritically taken as gospel. This is dangerous and it constitutes bad social science. Knowledge is a SYNTHESIS of many, many studies, since statistical correlations can exist by accident, and since no one study is conclusive. I think the main reason for this is that Gladwell does not appear to be motivated by any question or curiosity. There is no careful weighing of the evidence or comparison of different viewpoints. Instead, he appears to have made his conclusion before looking at the evidence; no investigation was ever involved. There never really was an over-arching story to understand. Instead, informational tidbits are snatched randomly to support his pre-conceived ideas.
Beyond this, some of the arguments don't make very much sense. This is particularly true when considering the "cultural legacy" arguments on Asian kids and ability (spoiler alert: skip next paragraph if you want). But this is one example of many.
Somehow, Gladwell has a disquisition on rice paddies and we are supposed to conclude that this is why Asians are good at math. (Let's trot out the stereotypes, shall we?) He also claims Asians are good at math because numbers are easier to pronounce in Chinese. Huh, come again? If that's the case, then why do Asian Americans who never speak Chinese do well in school? Here Gladwell cites Richard Nesbitt's uber-broad psychological research, which itself it a little suspect. But back to rice paddies. If a "work ethic" determines Asian success, then why didn't the Industrial Revolution start in China? Why is the "rice patty work ethic" a larger determinant of mathematical ability than the "Protestant work ethic"? Each point that Gladwell makes leads to unanswered questions like this, unfolding ad infinitim. (Other quick examples. Is it REALLY true that 10,000 hours is needed for success? Why is this viewed by Gladwell as such a "hard" number? Why is success seemingly defined as making lots of money? Why is an IQ of 120 "good enough" for success, and not 100? Why do cultural legacies matter for some individuals but not for others?) For a better account of "cultural legacies" and nations read Jared Diamond's books, which brings me to the fourth point.
4) There are many books that address similar issues in a much better fashion. I.e., there's nothing in this book that hasn't been said elsewhere. My advice: go to a bookstore, look at a few of the books Gladwell cites, and then buy those books instead. Gladwell's book is more useful if you think of it as an annotated bibliography. The most direct "lift" appears to be from Colvin's book "Talent is Overated," where that author makes the similar claim that it takes 10 years to become good at something. Colvin's book is also more journalistic; he wants to find out what it takes to be extraordinarily successful. In fact these two books are so similar in spirit that I wonder if Gladwell wasn't "inspired" by Colvin's work.
But Gladwell skitters all over the social inequality literature. But there are still much better works. For example, read Johnathan Kozol's "Savage Inequalities." Read Lareau's book "Unequal Childhoods," which Gladwell himself states in the bibliography is a wonderful book. Read Jared Diamond's "Guns, Germs, and Steel." On the opposite of "Outliers" read Kevin O'Keefe's interesting book, "The Average American." On randomness in our lives, read "Black Swan." Or the best book on randomness, "The Drunkard's Walk." There is an impressive list of better books.
What do these other books have in common? They include a) original research (archival, history, or journalistic data), b) deeper analysis, and c) engagement of other writers on the topic. They are books! And many of them were written by experts because, hey, maybe writing a non-fiction book requires a lot of work (10,000 hours perhaps?). Gladwell, in this company is neither a social scientist, a journalist, or a deep thinker.
So what is Gladwell, and what are to make of his Mcbook? If you have to read it, check it out from the library, or beter yet, sit in the bookstore for about 20 minutes and read the intro and skim the rest. Yes, it is very skimmable. Or read the online reviews; they basically reveal the totality of this Lilliputian text. I would read the chapter on IQ, since I found Langan to be very interesting, but I've heard of him before from television. In toto, though, Gladwell's account is an odd sundry collection of musings, flitting from one unrelated topic to another, and which consists of a few factoids that, after a moment's thought, I would doubt are true. There is no underlying "thread," and the themes he addresses aren't clearly illustrated or well argued. His promise of a book on "success" remains unfulfilled as well.
In my view, Gladwell gets paid WAY too much to do what he does. If I had to characterize his vocation based on my reading of this book, I would say that he is like the Matt Drudge of book writing: he collates from a series of assorted articles (from the internet?) to which he contributes little save a flashy title page and the empty space to look at it all at once. The bold letters, the wild exclamations appear to be novel, but after reading this book you will likely feel more like one of the visitors to P.T. Barnum's museums. The sign exclaiming that an exotic "Egress" is around the corner is merely a door out, and at the end of the journey you realize that you had only yourself to blame for making mistake. Similarly, the title to Gladwell's "anecdotology" is nothing more than an empty dictionary definition slapped haphazardly on a random collection of citations and quotes from superior works. There is nothing more than that absurd title, and after reading the manuscript you might feel a little shortchanged if you were expecting something substantial.
I should say that Malcolm Gladwell is one lucky man to pull off getting this book published and sold. I suspect that marketing has a great deal to do with it. Gladwell is making millions, so why should he care? He is the quintessential post-modern anti-writer of the non-book, cobbling together pieces and ideas without the ability to edit, cohere, and critically examine the findings. The Mcbook is an outlier for sure; unfortunately, its quality is on the far left side of the curve, while it sales record is pushing much too far to the right.
Give your money to the numerous other writers producing much more substantial work. Of course that is my opinion, and as I said in the beginning, I realize that this is likely a minority position. You may very well enjoy it, and many of you probably will. But for the disappointed, don't say that you weren't warned.
 An interesting look at what gets success November 18, 2008
242 out of 290 found this review helpful
In this wide-ranging third installment of Malcolm Gladwell's exploration of how people and social phenomena work, the New Yorker journalist takes a close look at what constitutes high levels of success. That is, what makes people at the top of their respective fields get there? As we've come to expect from Gladwell's previous books, the answer to the question is a bit complicated.
He says that upbringing, culture and even random luck have something to with success, but there is another important quality that anyone can control. Two chapters are dedicated to the "revelation" that IQ is only a baseline quality and success has little to nothing to do with having a high IQ or a low IQ. Rather, success is substantially a product of cultivating a high degree of what Robert Sternberg calls "practical intelligence" or what most refer to as "emotional intelligence."
Gladwell uses the example of Nobel laureates coming from unknown schools as often as ivy league schools. At this level of mastery IQ is no longer a factor. Success has little to do with where you were educated and everything to do with your level of practical/emotional intelligence and willingness to put in the 10,000 hours of practice required to reach mastery of your field.
All in all, it's an interesting read that isn't too heady and goes by pretty quickly, as the interesting anecdotes are what you would expect from Gladwell.
Another book on the topic that I strongly recommend because it has been really helpful to me in actually applying what Gladwell teaches in my own life (for my own success!) is The Emotional Intelligence Quick Book.
 4 stars for fun, but 2 stars for originality November 21, 2008
237 out of 293 found this review helpful
Gladwell has done it again...sort of. I would have categorized this book as a 4 or 5 star read like his previous two installments--Blink and The Tipping Point, except he lost a few originality points this time around.
Gladwell's knack for making a reader say "huh, interesting..." is something for other writers to marvel at. I'm convinced that he could pen a book called "Green: It's the color of grass," and he would write it in such a way that would inspire most of us to say "huh...who knew?!?"
But in the case of Outliers the "huh..." factor has little to do with the ideas found in the book, and are almost exclusively the result of Gladwell's keen sense of how to make the ordinary and mundane sound exciting and new. This is especially true in the two chapters devoted to debunking the myth that intelligence is the key to success. Unfortunately, Dan Goleman beat him to the punch way back in 1995 with his book "Emotional Intelligence: Why it matters more than IQ." With a quick sleight of hand, Gladwell cites Robert Sternberg's label of "practical intelligence," instead of calling it emotional intelligence. But let's be honest, here, the only difference is Goleman says "tem-ay-toe," and Gladwell says "tem-ah-toe."
The other flaw is that nothing in it is terribly useful for practical application. It's no secret to anyone in the business of hiring that most selection techniques are abysmal predictors of on-the-job success. What we are left with as a takeaway from Outliers is that factors of chance like the ability to practice a skill for 10,000 hours--mostly during childhood--is the key to predicting future success. Get your kids started today...as long as you know when the next Industrial Revolution or Internet Age is going to occur. Aside from emotional intelligence (aka "practical intelligence") most of these are factors that we just can't do much about. Unfortunately, we already knew that.
Alas, however, Malcolm Gladwell is a professional writer, and not a professional researcher. If readers keep that in mind, they won't be too disappointed by the methods or originality of the research. His job is to weave together an interesting story, which is something Gladwell does exceedingly well. If all you want is some good entertainment and fodder for cocktail party discussions, Outliers might make a nice addition to your bookshelves.
Nick Tasler is the author of The Impulse Factor: Why Some of Us Play It Safe and Others Risk It All
Worthless! November 20, 2008
65 out of 100 found this review helpful
The usual story about highly successful people focuses on intelligence and ambition. Gladwell argues that instead we should look at things around them - family, birthplace, even birth date.
"Outliers" opens with information about Roseto, Pa, where inhabitants had minimal heart disease. Gladwell posits this is because of their sense of community. A statistical perspective, however, tells us that outliers are expected and may or may not signify anything. Credibility for Gladwell's assertion requires careful comparison of communities with and without a high sense of community, with other variables randomized.
Gladwell then moves to Canadian hockey and observes that 40% of the best (league) players were born between Jan-March, 30% between April-June, 20% July-Sept., and 10% between Oct-Dec., a phenomena related to youth-league age cutoffs and their impact on practice. Gladwell then slides over what he calls the absence of similar findings in the U.S. as due to not as dramatic a selection process. Problem - American youth baseball and football have similar age cutoffs as Canadian hockey. Thus, his thesis is contradicted.
On to computers. Gladwell reports on a University of Michigan freshman that became addicted to computers late in his freshman year, and concludes that his later success was due to increased amount of practice obtained programming. But what about those who started school ahead of him? What about new computer trainees that quickly surpass their more experienced peers?
Gladwell sees Bill Gates' success as further proof of some sort of "practice makes perfect" explanation of his and Microsoft's success. Reality, however, is that Gates' and Microsoft's success are much more attributable to Gates' innate business talent than skills he learned practicing programming. Specifically, Gates' decision to BUY DOS from another firm, rename it MS-DOS, and LICENSE it to IBM - thereby becoming the industry standard and handicapping IBM's ability to compete with Microsoft. (Microsoft is known for buggy, cumbersome programming; its "vaporware" business strategy - new product promises made without reality, have also played a bigger role in the firm's success as users would rather wait for Microsoft than take the chance of changing vendors and incurring incompatibility problems.
Readers have no means on knowing how, or if, Gladwell cherry-picked his "evidence." Academic experts, using a highly structured approach, have repeatedly concluded that intellectual performance (a component of success) is 70-80% hereditary, again with random outliers. Gladwell should read their works.
A few interesting observations, but mostly badly researched, unoriginal and unscientific November 30, 2008
51 out of 64 found this review helpful
I have read all of Gladwell's previous offerings and I must say this is by far his worst thus far. This book is unscientific, unoriginal and badly researched.
Let me start with the non-science. Especially the title. The use of a term like "Outliers" would suggest that Gladwell has understood the meaning of that word in the statistical context. Instead, he bandied the word like any lay person would and classified anyone worth billions such as Rockefeller and Bill Gates as an "outlier" in the human population. Statistical probability does not preclude the existence of someone like Rockefeller or Gates. In fact, it is almost certain that given a sufficiently large population, you will have people like that. The only condition is that the bulk would fall in the middle of the distribution and a great minority should fall in either end. Gates is therefore not an outlier as such, but rather the expected result from chance. To be fair, Gladwell did note that the fortunes of such people have more to do with luck than innate ability. I would have no problem had Gladwell titled his book "Luck". Instead, he attempted to imbibe some false scientific credibility using a scientific term. Even the introductory definition of an outlier is incomplete. In any case, there are precious few scientific concepts in this book.
As for originality, the book comprises mostly of bits and pieces that are well-known in the public domain. I give Gladwell credit for bringing them together in a nice easy-to-read form for the general population. However, none of the things he shared are really new.
Last but not least, there are a lot of suppositions which are not well-backed by proper research or at least not properly stated as suppositions. In particular, I found it laughable that he classified Singapore as a centuries-old "rice paddy" country (neither the centuries-old part nor the rice-paddy part is true). Also, the justification of language as a rationale for mathematical ability is tenuous at best. It is far harder to write the Chinese characters for the numbers than the English versions. As far as I know, all countries use the arabic numeral system nowadays. Also, some of the "math-whiz" countries actually teach mathematics in English (e.g. Singapore).
In conclusion, if you are looking for a book which tells you that while innate smarts have some effect, how far you get ahead depends on your circumstances, your culture, hard work and a good dose of luck, this is the book for you. But I have yet to meet anyone who doesn't know that already.
|
|
|
|
Copyright 2008 BetterEditor.net
| |
