Previous Next

Afterword

Summary: Afterword: Konrad Kellen

Starting in 1964, the RAND corporation’s Leon Gouré ran a study project for the U.S. government. The goal was to understand the effect the American bombing campaign in Vietnam was having on the enemy, Viet Cong guerillas infiltrating South Vietnam from the north. Gouré’s team conducted many interviews with captured Viet Cong and with defectors. His recommendations to American strategists, however, showed little influence from those interviews and were instead based on a simple force comparison: the United States had an overwhelming numerical advantage in men, money, and matériel (physical assets); therefore, defeating the Viet Cong was just a matter of bombing them into submission over time.

In 1966, RAND management asked another analyst, Konrad Kellen, to take an independent look at Gouré’s findings. A German Jew who had fled his country when Hitler came to power, Kellen had served with the U.S. Army in Berlin after World War II, interviewing German soldiers. He was used to paying close attention to what people said. In the interviews collected by Gouré’s team, Kellen found little evidence that the sufferings the Viet Cong were enduring would cause them to admit defeat. Keller understood that sometimes, too much strength is as bad as too little. He saw past the impressive, Goliath-like appearance of American military might and realized that like David, the Viet Cong were a foe to be reckoned with. America’s war planners, however, listened to Gouré, not Kellen.

Analysis: Afterword

Gladwell ends the book arguing for the importance of being able to see things as they are, not as we would expect or like them to be, and the consequences of doing the latter. Gladwell presents the story of Leon Gouré and continues to question whether severe uses of force, such as those from the military, are effective when battling mismatched opponents, and he uses the U.S. and Vietnam as the example here. On the surface, the U.S. is the Goliath because of its strength. The United States' strength is bolstered by its men, money, and assets. Gouré is important because he fails to think outside of the box when he analyzes the transcripts uncritically. Gladwell contrasts Gouré with Konrad Kellen to illustrate the importance of going against the status quo and established conventions. Kellen is unique because he reads and hears things just as they are and takes appropriate action. Hitler made his feelings about the Jewish people clear, and Kellen listened without bias when many others did not. This brings us to Gladwell’s argument that Kellen was successful because he was a good listener. However, it was not just that Kellen was a good listener, but that he was able to listen without filtering what he was hearing through personal and societal biases. Kellen argued that Gouré’s interpretation of the transcripts was wrong. The Viet Cong would continue to fight because they had nothing to lose. They did not fear death because they believed their cause was worth dying for. Gladwell includes Kellen’s story at the very end of his book to warn that too much of something, whether it is money, power, or bias, is detrimental.

Previous section Chapter 9 Next section Full Book Summary

Take a Study Break