Today, I invite you to explore the fascinating world of success dynamics in an insightful paper titled Talent vs Luck – The Role of Randomness in Success and Failure by Alessandro Pluchino, Andrea Rapisarda, and Alessio Biondo. This work will have us reconsider our understanding of success and its drivers, especially within the creative and artistic world.
The trio of researchers designed a compelling computational model that aims to simulate real-life dynamics of success. This model navigates the complex relationship between talent (an inherent quality of individuals, enhancing their ability to execute tasks) and luck (random events that can be beneficial or harmful).
At the heart of their model lies the landscape of talent, where individuals are assigned varying degrees of talent, following a normal distribution—where most individuals are of average talent, with a smaller number of exceptionally talented or untalented individuals.
The researchers simulated a 40-year career for each individual, during which they encountered fortunate (lucky) or unfortunate (unlucky) events at random times. These events, despite being entirely random, were influenced by an individual’s talent—more talented individuals had a slightly higher probability of benefiting from lucky events and a slightly lower probability of being thwarted by unlucky ones.
Here’s where the findings become intriguing: the most successful individuals were not always the most talented ones. Rather, these individuals often experienced a greater number of lucky events in their careers. What’s more, even a modest inclination towards beneficial events could substantially boost an individual’s level of success, leading moderately talented individuals to outperform their more talented peers.
This led to the discovery of the “paradox of talent”—highly talented individuals often achieved less success than their moderately talented but luckier counterparts, resulting in an asymmetric distribution of success. The research showed that the most successful 20% of the population possessed about 44% of the total talent but accumulated almost 80% of the total success, showing a power-law.
Power-law distributions are a common feature in a variety of complex systems, including those in physics, biology, and socio-economics. I previously wrote about music and power laws here. The economist Pareto was the first to demonstrate the occurrence of power-law distributions in the wealth of countries and individuals. This highlights a significant inequality in our society: a small percentage of people hold the same wealth as the remainder of the world’s population.
The ‘paradox of talent’—where moderately talented individuals often outperform their more talented peers—extends beyond the realms of the arts and music. In various sectors such as sports, business, and academia, we can witness this paradox playing out.
Take the field of sports, for instance. While an athlete’s talent, dedication, and physical capabilities are essential, an unexpected injury, a fortuitous meeting with a top-notch coach, or an unexpected opportunity to perform can make a significant difference in their career trajectory. Similar scenarios can occur in business and academia, where being at the right place at the right time, an unexpected partnership, or stumbling upon a groundbreaking research idea can skyrocket a moderately talented individual’s success.
In understanding these dynamics, it is vital to avoid falling into a victim mindset—wherein we attribute all our failures or successes solely to external factors like luck. Recognizing the role of luck should not strip us of our agency or our ability to grow, learn, and adapt.
This understanding of luck is not about surrendering control to fate but about acknowledging the unpredictability of life’s circumstances. It underlines the need to develop resilience and adaptability, attributes that empower us to shape our response to these circumstances. Indeed, our reactions to both lucky and unlucky events can significantly influence our journey towards success.
Consider the story of the Beatles. They were rejected by Decca Records, which famously said, “Guitar groups are on the way out” and “The Beatles have no future in show business.” However, a chance encounter with Brian Epstein, who was impressed with their talent and charisma, led to him managing the group and propelling them to worldwide fame. This example underlines the randomness that can catapult talent to extraordinary success.
This research critically examines the prevalent paradigm of ‘naive meritocracy,’ where rewards and resources are often directed towards those who have already achieved a high level of success, which is mistakenly considered as a measure of competence or talent. This approach, as the researchers found, tends to overlook the vital role of luck, causing a potential disincentive and resulting in a lack of opportunities for the truly talented.
The paper, therefore, advocates for more efficient strategies that counterbalance the unpredictable role of luck and provide more opportunities to those with high talent levels. This is not only fairer, but it is also shown to be more beneficial for society at large. By promoting varying ideas and perspectives, particularly in fields like music and art, we foster diversity, acceptance and familiarity of who we are as a society.
What are my key takeaways from this paper:
A) While talent is vital, it doesn’t guarantee success. Being open to this understanding can make artists more resilient to the inevitable highs and lows of their careers, helping them persist in the face of setbacks and stay ready for when luck strikes.
B) While we can’t control luck, we can increase its odds. We should strive for exposure—performing at gigs, participating in competitions, releasing music online, and networking within the industry. The more you put your music out there, the higher the chances of it being discovered by the right person at the right time.
Unbias is building an AI product with marketing capabilities. Join our waitlist here to get early access.
