What Drives Success,
Hard Work
or Luck?
A new book debunks the myth of meritocracy and
offers recommendations for creating a more equitable society.
My husband is a successful lawyer at a
national law firm and works on cases he feels passionate about, mainly toxic
tort and consumer protection lawsuits. He is definitely a hard worker and a
very smart, talented person. But, as he will readily admit, much of how he got
to where he is has to do with luck, too—being in the right place at the right
time and connecting with someone who believed in him.
This random path to success is the subject of a new
book, Success and
Luck: Good Fortune and the Myth of Meritocracy, by economist Robert Frank of Cornell University. (Princeton
University Press, 2016, 208 pages)
Though we Americans tend to think that we are
the masters of our own destiny and that hard work pays off, we are only partly
right: Many of us succeed at work and in life because of luck, too.
Frank gives plenty of examples from his own
life to illustrate how luck made a difference. We learn of his own two
near-death experiences and how, by luck, he survived, as well as how
happenstance put him in touch with his birth mother in his 30s. We also hear
from many educators, inventors, actors, and businesspeople who happened upon
the right idea or opportunity through accidental encounters or events that
propelled them down their current path.
All of this makes for entertaining reading.
But why is it important for us to consider beyond that? Frank believes that not
seeing the role that luck plays in our lives makes us less sympathetic to why
others fail and blinds us to their disadvantages.
While the American Dream suggests all that’s
needed is talent and perseverance to get ahead, this is false thinking, says
Frank. The family we are born into (and even birth order), the opportunities
available in our neighborhood, the schools we attend, and whether or not we
have positive adult mentors—all of which are beyond our individual control—also
play an important role. If we ignore this—if we perpetuate the myth that only
the deserving succeed—we will not be able to create the social change needed to
better our lives.
“If being born in a good environment is one
of the luckiest things that can happen to anyone, it is failure to appreciate
luck’s importance that has done the most to undermine our collective stock of
good fortune,” writes Frank.
Frank argues that the reason we are blind to
luck is that we are unaware of the many psychological biases we hold that
create the illusion of personal merit. For example, there’s the halo effect, in which we will ascribe positive qualities to people
who are successful or who receive a positive review in some way. There’s hindsight bias, where, after an event has occurred, we tend to believe
it was predictable, even though there’s no evidence for that. And there’s the
good old attribution bias, where we tend to see environmental circumstances
creating our own failures, while attributing others’ failures to their
character.
Here’s how these biases might translate: If
I’m the head of a successful company, I (and others) will tend to believe it’s
because of my good character and because of my business smarts—when, in fact,
it may have had more to do with benefits I received from my parents, the school
I attended, chance meetings with people who could further my career, or
unpredictable changes in the marketplace.
Does this mean that hard work or talent don’t matter
at all? No, says Frank. Hard work and smarts do matter, just not as
much as we may think. And, by clinging too much to these explanations,
believing we deserve our fortune, we are less likely to treat others with empathy or fairness.
As an illustration, Frank recalls a study by
the Greater Good Science Center’s Dacher Keltner, in which three students were
put into a lab and one student was randomly assigned to be the group leader
while they all worked on a task together. Thirty minutes into the experiment,
four chocolate chip cookies were brought in on a plate and put in the center of
the table. In most cases, the assigned “leader” took the extra cookie and ate
it (often noisily and greedily), as if he or she deserved it. This study
demonstrates how easy it is for us to lose sight of luck and randomness, and
how power can corrupt our self-perception and relationships with others. Other
studies support the theory that when we are in a power position, we tend to not
treat others with consideration…or even to see their needs.
Luckily Frank has some solutions, one of
which is cultivating gratitude. In an experiment by his research assistant, Yuezhou
Huo, subjects were asked to recall a good thing that happened to them recently
and then to list either 1) external factors beyond their control, 2) personal
qualities they possessed or actions they took, or, as a control, 3) simply
“reasons” that explained why the event occurred.
Those who were asked to list external reasons
for their good fortune gave 25 percent more to charities than the group that
had listed personal qualities, while the control group gave a percentage
somewhere between the two extremes. In other words, gratitude for what we’ve
been given in life (and have little control over) may contribute to generosity
toward others.
Frank also suggests significant tax increases
for the very wealthy based on a “progressive consumption tax”—a tax based on
the difference between income and savings rather than income levels alone.
Sounds like simple liberal politics at first; but Frank backs up his suggestion
with economic theory and psychological research that shows why this would work.
For one thing, relative purchase
power remains unchanged when taxes on the very wealthy are increased, so that
individuals would not be hurt by these changes while redistributing wealth
would help everyone (including the wealthy). Although people don’t like to pay
taxes, in part because of a phenomenon known as loss aversion, Frank insists that taxes are an important investment in
the future of society and the means for fixing our crumbling infrastructure,
environmental challenges, and educational system.
A progressive consumption tax also makes
sense psychologically, Frank writes. He explains how scientists have shown our
nearby frames of reference matter a lot in understanding how we see ourselves
and how happy we are. When the super wealthy spend extravagantly on themselves,
it affects spending down the income ladder, pushing those with less to stretch
their financial limits in order to keep up. And people can’t simply recognize
this tendency and opt out, because not keeping up with relative spending can
have real social consequences, including not being able to get your kids into
good schools.
While many of the wealthy might have trouble
seeing the upside for them, Frank insists that this kind of taxation would not
decrease their standing in society and would increase
their well-being. Research has shown that, beyond a certain
limit, spending more on yourself doesn’t make you any happier. In fact, the key
to happiness for everyone is spending more on
other people and living in a more
equitable society.
“If all mansions were a little smaller, all
cars a little less expensive, all diamonds a little more modest, and all
celebrations a little less costly, the standards that define ‘special’ in each case
would adjust accordingly, leaving successful people just as happy as before,”
he writes.
And, of course, the costs of not doing
something to decrease wealth inequality are high. As Robert Putnam
wrote about eloquently in his book, Our Kids, wealth inequality is creating larger and larger gaps in
opportunity. In one eye-opening Department of Education study Frank recalls in
his book, children from poor families who scored high in math aptitude in 8th
grade were less likely to finish college than children from wealthy families
who scored in the lowest percentiles in math. This is clearly a problem.
Frank’s book gives a compelling argument for
why we should consider our collective needs more when we look to change society
for the better. Not only does it make economic and political sense, it is based
on the social reality of our lives and our needs for greater cooperation and
trust. Frank is optimistic that convincing the wealthy to eschew runaway
spending on themselves and to equalize the wealth in society through changes in
tax policies will lead to a much happier, healthier state. And, it won’t cost the
wealthy in any real substantial way, while providing real benefits to our
fellow citizens.
“There simply is no conflict between morality
and self-interest,” he writes.
By Jill Suttie
http://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/success_hard_work_luck?utm_source=GG+Newsletter+April+20+2016&utm_campaign=GG+Newsletter+April+20+2016+&utm_medium=email
No comments:
Post a Comment