Previous Next

In Chapter 1 of Think Again, Grant invites readers to adopt a scientist’s mindset in their everyday lives. Rethinkers by profession, scientists routinely update their views based on new data. Most of us, though, operate as preachers, prosecutors, and politicians. In preacher mode, people defend their beliefs even without evidence. Those in prosecutor mode try to prove others wrong. And politicians work on persuading others to support their views. Only in scientist mode are people willing to rethink by remaining curious and testing hypotheses. To demonstrate that even visionary thinkers are likely to fail if they can’t rethink, Grant relates the story of Mike Lazaridis, inventor of the BlackBerry. This smartphone was wildly successful for a few years in the late 2000s and early 2010s before suddenly fading into obscurity. Lazaridis was so resistant to the idea of a touchscreen that he would not rethink his product. Steve Jobs, co-founder of Apple, by contrast, was saved from a similar fate by his team’s ability to rethink. Jobs initially resisted putting a phone into Apple’s top product, the iPod, but his team urged him to reconsider his own convictions. The iPhone was the result of Jobs’s ability to rethink his pet product, something Lazaridis was unable to do.

Read more about Main Idea #1: How individuals benefit from rethinking.

In Chapters 2 and 3, Grant explores the surprisingly detrimental role played by confidence and invites readers to find joy in being wrong. Grant argues that many people struggle to understand what they cannot see about themselves. Indeed, research shows that overconfidence is most common in those who lack competence. This contradiction, known as the Dunning-Kruger effect, is why armchair quarterbacks usually know little about football. Somewhere between impostor syndrome (feeling like a fraud despite one’s positive achievements) and armchair quarterback syndrome lies a sweet spot that Grant calls confident humility. Those with confident humility trust their own strengths while being aware of their weaknesses. Grant suggests that if people base their identity on their values rather than their opinions, they are more likely to remain open-minded enough to embrace being wrong. This is important because it offers an opportunity to learn. Grant advises readers to treat challenges to their opinions as opportunities to evolve. The faster someone recognizes when they are wrong, Grant argues, the faster they can move toward getting it right.

In Chapter 4, Grant asserts that while conflict in relationships is generally unproductive, so-called task conflict can be beneficial to performance. Task conflict involves clashes about ideas and opinions rather than personal animosity. According to Grant, multiple studies have linked task conflict to higher creativity and smarter choices. He uses the example of the squabbling Wright brothers to show task conflict at its most productive. Disagreeable people force others to question and rethink, and are therefore ideal members of a challenge network, which is often more useful than a support network. Grant notes that too many leaders shield themselves from task conflict by surrounding themselves with yes men. Those who engage with their critics become stronger leaders, he believes. Grant contends that task conflicts are “good fights” because the tension is intellectual rather than emotional. However, when task conflict spills over into relationship conflict it stops being productive. To avoid this, Grant suggests framing a dispute as a debate rather than a disagreement. In a good fight, he concludes, one’s adversary is not a foil, but a propeller. With twin propellers spinning in different directions, ideas can take flight.

Read an important quote about the importance of being open to different opinions and ideas.

Previous section Prologue Next section Part 2: Chapters 5-7

Take a Study Break