If You’re so Smart, Why Aren’t You Rich? Turns Out it’s Just Chance
The
most successful people are not the most talented, just the luckiest, a new MIT computer
model of wealth creation confirms. Taking that into account can maximize return
on many kinds of investment
The
distribution of wealth follows a well-known pattern sometimes called an 80:20 rule:
80 percent of the wealth is owned by 20 percent of the people. Indeed, a report
last year concluded that just eight men had a total wealth equivalent to that
of the world’s poorest 3.8 billion people.
This
seems to occur in all societies at all scales. It is a well-studied pattern
called a power law that crops up in a wide range of social phenomena. But the
distribution of wealth is among the most controversial because of the issues it
raises about fairness and merit. Why should so few people have so much wealth?
The
conventional answer is that we live in a meritocracy in which people are
rewarded for their talent, intelligence, effort, and so on. Over time, many
people think, this translates into the wealth distribution that we observe,
although a healthy dose of luck can play a role.
But
there is a problem with this idea: while wealth distribution follows a power
law, the distribution of human skills generally follows a normal distribution
that is symmetric about an average value. For example, intelligence, as
measured by IQ tests, follows this pattern. Average IQ is 100, but nobody has
an IQ of 1,000 or 10,000.
The
same is true of effort, as measured by hours worked. Some people work more
hours than average and some work less, but nobody works a billion times more
hours than anybody else.
And
yet when it comes to the rewards for this work, some people do have billions of
times more wealth than other people. What’s more, numerous studies have shown
that the wealthiest people are generally not the most talented by other
measures.
What factors, then, determine how individuals become wealthy? Could it be that chance plays a bigger role than anybody expected? And how can these factors, whatever they are, be exploited to make the world a better and fairer place?
Today
we get an answer thanks to the work of researchers at the University of Catania
in Italy and a couple of colleagues. These guys have created a computer model
of human talent and the way people use it to exploit opportunities in life. The
model allows the team to study the role of chance in this process.
The
results are something of an eye-opener. Their simulations accurately reproduce
the wealth distribution in the real world. But the wealthiest individuals are
not the most talented (although they must have a certain level of talent). They
are the luckiest. And this has significant implications for the way societies
can optimize the returns they get for investments in everything from business
to science.
Researchers
model is straightforward. It consists of N people, each with a certain
level of talent (skill, intelligence, ability, and so on). This talent is
distributed normally around some average level, with some standard deviation.
So some people are more talented than average and some are less so, but nobody
is orders of magnitude more talented than anybody else.
This
is the same kind of distribution seen for various human skills, or even
characteristics like height or weight. Some people are taller or smaller than
average, but nobody is the size of an ant or a skyscraper. Indeed, we are all
quite similar.
The computer model charts each individual through a working life of 40 years. During this time, the individuals experience lucky events that they can exploit to increase their wealth if they are talented enough.
However,
they also experience unlucky events that reduce their wealth. These events
occur at random.
At the
end of the 40 years, researchers rank the individuals by wealth and study the
characteristics of the most successful. They also calculate the wealth
distribution. They then repeat the simulation many times to check the
robustness of the outcome.
When
the team rank individuals by wealth, the distribution is exactly like that seen
in real-world societies. “The ‘80–20’ rule is respected, since 80 percent of
the population owns only 20 percent of the total capital, while the remaining
20 percent owns 80 percent of the same capital,” report researchers
That
may not be surprising or unfair if the wealthiest 20 percent turn out to be the
most talented. But that isn’t what happens. The wealthiest individuals are
typically not the most talented or anywhere near it. “The maximum success never
coincides with the maximum talent, and vice-versa,” say the researchers.
No comments:
Post a Comment