Originals: How Non-Conformists Move the World

Adam Grant opens Originals with an anecdote about four students who “set out to revolutionize an industry” (20). Their company was pitched to Grant in 2009, and he declined—this became his biggest financial regret. Dissatisfied with the high cost of eyewear, these students sought to imitate shoe and clothing retailer Zappos’s business model by selling glasses online for a fraction of their usual price. Each purchase would include a donated pair to someone in a developing country. Other parties told the students that their idea was unrealistic. Despite the four students’ lack of background in retail, fashion, and technology, they sold out in the span of a month. Positive media attention poured in, and the new company, Warby Parker, moved to the top of the “world’s most innovative companies” list (20)—with previous list-toppers including Apple and Nike. By the end of its first year, the company donated over 1 million pairs of glasses and garnered “over $1 billion” in value (20). Grant’s desire to understand his mistake in declining to invest in Warby Parker is what drives the book.

Grant defines “original” as both adjective and noun: It is the “source of something,” or something “of singular or unique character [...] [with] fresh initiative or inventive capacity” (21). There are two possible paths to achievement: conformity and originality. Conformity is a conventional, well-known path that maintains the status quo; on the other hand, originality involves pursuing an unusual idea that is likely to improve a specific domain. Grant does not believe in true originality, stating that everything is either borrowed or influenced by something. However, with creativity, people can invent new concepts and adapt old ones. Furthermore, “originals are people who take the initiative to make their visions a reality” (21)—and can hail from anywhere.

Grant expands upon originality with a story: Economist Michael Housman discovered that employees (among various banks, airlines, and cellular companies) who prefer Firefox or Google Chrome over Safari or Internet Explorer perform better overall. Housman determined that the main reason for this was these employees’ tendency to seek better, more productive options. Both Firefox and Google Chrome require a user to actively download them, rather than simply accept a default option. This small decision speaks to a desire to improve. Employees who partake in such decisions are more productive because they constantly look for strategies to improve their own experience and that of clients. They mold any given job to fit them, rather than the other way around.

These people are “the exception, not the rule,” as most “accept the defaults in [their] lives” (23). Grant points to a study by psychologist John Jost, who found that disadvantaged people are the most likely to accept and even defend the status quo—“even if it goes directly against their interests” (23). Jost refers to this phenomenon as “system justification” (23), an emotional defense against the world’s many injustices—one that robs people of their creative spirit and moral outrage. Grant insists that at its heart, originality is about “rejecting the default and exploring whether a better option exists” (24).

Questioning the default is the seed that grows into original ideas. Defaults are born of manmade social norms and systems—but by “gain[ing] new insights into old problems” (24), people can achieve great success in anything they do. In Warby Parker’s case, one of the cofounders observed that massive corporation Luxottica owned 85% of all eyewear licensing, production, and distribution—including those of some competing brands. For this reason, Luxottica was able to charge 20 times more than its glasses’ production cost. Warby Parker succeeded because its founders dared to go against the grain. Grant argues that it is the most creative, not necessarily the most gifted, who enact change in their chosen domain. While most accept the status quo and fall in line, those willing to face potential risks and failures can change the world. Grant cites Martin Luther King Jr., Rosa Parks, Bill Gates, Michelangelo, and the United States itself as examples of this phenomenon. Grant notes that most of these great leaders had moments of doubt and held themselves back. For example, Copernicus of the Renaissance refused to publish his discovery that the Earth revolved around the Sun for 26 years—his writings only being published once a disciple got hold of them. This hesitation often holds back originals from acting on their potential.

An original is someone who takes risks in one area of life while maintaining balance and stability in every other. This is counterintuitive to what most people believe, but the founders of Warby Parker managed to stay in school and had jobs to fall back on in case their company failed. Grant explains that “entrepreneurs who kept their day jobs had 33 percent lower odds of failure than those who quit” (33); having a safety net is beneficial. Being original in one area of life requires a hold on others, to “take the risk out of risk-taking” (35). In other words, balance gives entrepreneurs the time and resources needed to pursue an original idea and slowly remove risk from it. Grant argues that successful entrepreneurs take calculated, but not dangerous, risks. Originality is not an innate trait, it is something people choose to be and do.