Malcolm Gladwell’s Canadian Babes
The author of several bestsellers saw the forest but overlooked the trees.
“When the facts change, I change my mind.
What do you do, sir?” — John Maynard Keynes
In my line of work, there is an alluring temptation to fit people into predefined properties like a roll of the dice in Monopoly. She is to become the utility owner, while he looks like a slum lord. This one is destined to be wealthy, while the other has to go to jail and will not collect $200. That approach sells books, millions of them. However, it fails to make a dent in our understanding of the human experience.
In the field of Successology, no star shines brighter than Malcolm Gladwell’s. In his best-selling Outliers — The Story of Success, he goes to great lengths to point out that the good life often happens by accident — of birthdate, for instance. “It is those who are successful who are most likely to be given special opportunities that lead to further success. It’s the rich who get the most significant tax breaks. The best students get the best teaching and the most attention. And the biggest nine- and ten-year-olds (hockey players) get the most coaching and practice.
Canadian hockey is Gladwell’s success lab. He makes the point that most hockey programs bracket young boys from an early age. It means players fortunate enough to be born in January through March tend to be bigger, stronger, more mature, and perform better than their end-of-year counterparts. Thus they get better coaching, and to Gladwell, the formula for success is bigger babies have a better chance of playing professional hockey.
The rich get richer.
That made a lot of sense to us. But on second thought, maybe it made too much sense. So we looked under the Gladwellian hood to see if some parts were missing.
When we reduce complex individuals to stick figures, the nuances that make life surprising and occasionally frustrating get lost in the shuffle. People are multidimensional. Rather than succumbing to the temptation of easy categorization, let us be curious and willing to engage with the complexities beneath the surface.
Our study of astonishingly successful people challenges the ideas presented by Gladwell. He says when you see success, it’s the forest and not the trees that matter. In making this claim, Gladwell posits that a rigged, patriarchal and biased (some would add racist) ecosystem gives its bounty to some and not to others. And that explains why he failed to count the most important factor of all. You see, the forest isn’t responsible for the great big trees.
It’s the dirt where the trees are planted.
Gladwell is a serious debate opponent, and his thesis makes sense on paper. However, upon closer examination, it becomes evident that his argument is inherently flawed by a stereotype that suggests success is nothing more than a rigged game. That our destinies are predetermined, and our efforts may be futile in the face of a system that selects the chosen few.
It paints a bleak picture of a world where meritocracy is a mere illusion and hard work counts for naught. Such a perspective not only disregards the countless stories of individuals who have defied the odds and achieved greatness against all odds, but it also diminishes the agency and responsibility we have in shaping our own destinies.
Because success is a lumpy ecosystem, and depending on your mood, you can attribute it to parentage, the community you grew up in, your alma mater, or the month you were born, as Gladwell does. “All of the above” is the correct answer depending on your angle. While it is true that systemic factors and structural inequalities can create barriers, it is essential to recognize they can be overcome.
History is filled with examples of individuals who have risen from humble beginnings to achieve extraordinary feats through determination and perseverance. To label success as a rigged game is misleading to people who genuinely want to succeed because it isn’t about birthdates or alma maters any more than it is about self-help books and life coaches.
Gladwell leans heavily on The Matthew Effect (a biblical passage that suggests that the rich get richer) because it conveniently explains the discrepancy in outcomes — and gives him some biblical cover. But the truth, like so many things in this world, is that success is labyrinthine. It has hidden twists and turns that are unpredictable. It causes us to see patterns where they don’t exist. Even Gladwell’s reading of the passage from the Book of Matthew is taken out of context. As you’ll find in our discussion, nothing about success is simple.
Big Babes
Men and women who reach the pinnacle of achievement are often shrouded in illusion because we tend to focus on the pinnacle, not the climb. Winston Churchill won the Second World War, but we neglect to mention that he was drummed out of the Admiralty after the disaster at Gallipoli (for which he was unfairly blamed) during World War I, which gave him the fortitude to withstand criticism. As a result, he developed the courage to be the outspoken proponent of British rearmament. No Gallipoli and English school kids might be speaking German today. The rich weren’t going to get richer.
The climb to the top of any profession is often treacherous, filled with obstacles and pitfalls that threaten to bring the aspirant crashing down. That is why to succeed, numerous factors need to be examined. Birthdates are one of many.
According to sports blogger Joel Prosser, over half of the NHL players are born in Canada. Even players born in the United States and Europe increasingly play junior hockey in Canada to improve their chances of being drafted. Gladwell didn’t dwell on this fact while he was formulating his big babe thesis, That is how he concluded that success came down to the sensational assumption that being born in January made the difference.
Prosser looked took the list of hockey greats starting from the 1980s. He purposely chose 1980 to the present, picking an All-Canadian team of 12 forwards, six defensemen, and two goalies. The list includes Wayne Gretzky, Mario Lemieux, and Martin Brodeur.
Prosser limited the field beginning in 1980 as that was the start of the modern era of hockey. Players started training harder and being more professional, and the money was getting better—some players from the early ’80s played against players who were still playing by 2011.
Top 20 Canadian Hockey Players (1980 to Present)
Happy Birthdate
Gladwell says when it comes to making it into the hockey big league, boys born in the first quarter have an advantage because they are bigger at the time junior league hockey starts recruiting. It gives them as much as an eleven-month headstart on the younger tykes at yearend.
Yet, in the case of actual hockey success, the Gladwellians — those born in Q1 — end up in last place. This compares to the babies born in Q4, a list that includes Mario Lemieux and six others who dominate the top 20.
If you want your son to play pro hockey, it turns out that October is the best month to be born.
Here are the birthdate distributions of the top 20 hockey players since 1980:
- January — March — 4 players
- April — June — 4 players
- July — September — 5 players
- October — December — 7 players
So what is going on?
Canada is hockey. No matter when you are born, as long as you learn to play hockey in Canada, things start to even up after a while. Young men are inspired to play by the examples of teammates and opponents. The coaching is better, naturally, and the fans are more avid. That elevates the success quotient. The thing that makes hockey players successful once you factor in all the variables, is Canada.
It is the terroir of hockey.
We found in our work that no single isolated factor ever determined success. It was always a complex interplay of forces, some within our control, others not, which may include birthdate but also upbringing, education, mentorship, luck, and let’s not forget love of the sport. That was unique about Canada and hockey. There is no one-size-fits-all formula. Except for this. Take all the great hockey players and remove Canada from their life story and what do you get? Great athletes but not great hockey players.
The bottom line is that everything matters when it comes to a life played on the highest level but the most critical factor is the place where things happen.
John Maynard Keynes famously said, “When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do?” When looking for the key to success, take self-help books with a huge dollop of salt. Better to start with the proper foundation — we call it terroir — that grounds your life and maintains a course heading and gives you every opportunity to strut your stuff. Then if that terroir doesn’t work, find a new one.
What would you do?
