Welcome to the Deep Dive. We're here to really
get under the skin of important ideas, and today
we're tackling something huge, something that
shapes almost everything, but we barely question
it. The whole idea of average, what if, and this
is the big question, what if our obsession with
averages, with these statistical norms, is actually
stopping us, stopping us from seeing real talent,
from creating real opportunities? It's a really
powerful question. And for this deep dive, we're
exploring the insights from Todd Rose's book,
The End of Average, you know, how we succeed
in a world that values sameness. And his core
argument, really, is that valuing your weakness
isn't just like a nice fuzzy idea, it's absolutely
essential. For individuals, sure, but also for
organizations, for society as a whole, it's about
success. Yeah. And the real world examples are
just, they can be pretty surprising. They really
flip how you think about potential. So to kick
us off, let's talk about something kind of dramatic.
Military pilots. Trashing planes. And the solution
wasn't what anyone expected. Think about it,
how often do you maybe rely on average data?
Maybe for work decisions, health stuff? This
story really makes you question that. So the
story Rose starts with is pretty incredible.
You had these military pilots, right? And they
kept having these unexplained crashes. And the
first reaction, naturally, was, well, it must
be the pilots. Pilot error. Exactly. That was
the assumption. But what they found, and this
is really astonishing, it wasn't about the pilot
skills at all. It was the cockpits, the actual
physical space they're in. It turns out these
cockpits were designed for an average pilot.
But average based on measurements from way back
in 1926. 1926, wow. Yeah, way back. And here's
the kicker. They measured over 4 ,000 pilots
later on. And not one single pilot, not one,
actually matched all the dimensions of the so
-called average. Nobody was average. Nobody fit
all the average dimensions. Maybe they had average
arm length, but not leg length or average height,
but not torso length, you know. So the problem
wasn't the pilots being bad. It was this fundamental
mismatch. Their unique bodies just didn't fit
the rigid one size fits all machine. Right. And
the fix. Well, it seems so obvious now, but apparently
it wasn't then. It was simple. Build adjustable
seats, adjustable controls, make the cockpit
fit the pilot. Not the other way around, but
manufacturers pushed back, right? Said it's too
expensive. They did. There was resistance. But
they eventually did it. And the result? Immediate.
The crashes stopped. Just like that. That's incredible.
Such a clear powerful example. It just proves
how adapting to, you know, individual variation
can solve huge problems, life and death problems
even. And that story, that pilot story, it's
the perfect way into what Rose calls the jagged
principle. It's really the core idea from the
book. It says that talent, or honestly any quality
we try to measure in people, it's not one single
thing. It's not a straight line. Okay, so not
one dimensional. Exactly. Think of it more like
a mountain range on a graph. You know, some peaks
are high, some are low. Your profile across different
abilities or traits is always going to be, well,
jagged, not some smooth average line. That makes
a lot of sense when you put it like that, like
intuitively. Yeah. But our systems, schools,
workplaces, they often don't work that way, do
they? So what happens then? What are the consequences
when we try to treat people who are naturally
jagged as if they're supposed to fit this flat
average mold. Well, the main consequence is we
just miss so much. We miss the richness, the
variation that actually describes someone's real
abilities, their real strengths. We end up with
this really incomplete picture. Often it's totally
misleading. Take something like aggression, for
example. We might label someone aggressive, right?
Right. And expect them to be aggressive all the
time, everywhere. Yeah, look, it's a fixed trait.
Exactly. But the research actually shows that
behavior is often super dependent on context.
You might have a child who acts aggressively
at school, but maybe only toward the bullies
who are picking on others. And that same child
might be totally fine, not aggressive at all
with other classmates or with adults. So this
really challenges that old idea that we have
these fixed essential traits that define us in
every situation. We're more complex than that.
Our traits are, well, jagged. And, you know,
this whole intense focus we have on averages,
on ranking against an average, it didn't just
appear out of nowhere. Rose traces the history.
A lot of it goes back to people like Frederick
Taylor, early 20th century. Taylor was all about
factory efficiency, scientific management, breaking
tasks down, standardizing everything for the
average worker to boost output. OK, manufacturing
efficiency. Makes sense there, maybe. Well, yeah,
for making widgets, maybe. But then that same
thinking, that focus on standardization and averages,
got applied to education. The idea was to create
a system that would churn out workers for that
industrial economy, standardized students for
standardized jobs. And it also ties into some
older psychological ideas, these assumptions
that people have unchanging sort of essential
traits like we were just saying with aggression.
So we inherited this mindset from like optimizing
factories and old psych theories. Yeah. Okay,
here's where I think it gets really critical
for us today. What are the actual tangible downsides
now? for businesses, for schools, for individuals
when we still operate with this average mindset.
Oh, the downsides are huge. I mean, fundamentally,
a massive amount of talent just gets overlooked.
It goes completely unrecognized and worse, unused.
It's like imagine prospecting for gold, but you
only include the nuggets that are exactly the
average size and shape. You'd throw away a fortune,
right? Yeah, absolutely. So it genuinely creates
this lose lose situation. Organizations, businesses,
they suffer. They're less efficient, less innovative
because they're not actually using the full range
of skills and perspectives that people have,
they're leaving talent on the table. And for
individuals, it's just missed opportunities,
opportunities to grow, to develop their unique
strengths, to actually contribute in ways they're
capable of. It can be really stifling. OK, so
that paints a pretty clear picture of. The problem
is the tyranny of the average stifles potential.
So if that's the problem, what's the solution?
What's the path forward? The book lands on this
really powerful idea. Fit creates opportunity.
What does that actually mean? For you listening,
in your job or your life, how do we apply that
beyond just adjusting a pilot seat? Right. It's
about scaling that principle. It means that instead
of forcing people to bend themselves to fit rigid
systems, The systems themselves need to become
flexible. They need to adjust to the unique individual.
We're talking classrooms, work environments,
team structures, even how learning materials
or tools are designed. They need to account for
that jaggedness we talked about. That's a total
flip in perspective, isn't it? It really is,
from one size fits all to tailoring the fit.
And when a system does that, when an employer
or a school or even just a process is designed
with that flexibility, The message it sends is
huge. It basically says, hey, you're unique.
We see that. And it's actually our job, our responsibility
to help you figure out that uniqueness and find
ways for you to use it so we both benefit. Imagine
hearing that. Exactly. That message, that whole
approach is just fundamentally incompatible with
holding up. sameness or the average as the ideal,
as the goal. You simply can't get there if average
is your guiding value, which raises a really
important question for all of us, doesn't it?
What actually happens? What possibilities open
up when we stop trying to smooth out variation
and instead actively embrace it when we value
uniqueness? Wow. What a journey we've taken just
unpacking that one core idea, moving beyond this
idea of the average and really leaning into uniqueness.
It feels like it's not just about being you know,
fairer or nicer, it's actually about unlocking
so much potential. Potential that's just sitting
there, untapped, and individuals and teams and
whole organizations. It absolutely is. So maybe
the thought to leave you with is this. Take a
moment and think, where in your own life or maybe
in your workplace or your community, where might
you be applying an average mindset without even
realizing it? Judging things against a norm?
Expecting people to fit a mold? And then ask
yourself. What opportunities, what potential
might you unlock if you challenge that assumption,
if you started looking for and creating individual
fit instead? Yeah, really think about that. Seeing
people, seeing systems, not as these uniform
averages, but as these vibrant, complex, jagged
individuals, everyone with their own unique profile
of strengths, needs, and ways of seeing the world,
adopting that perspective feels like it could
genuinely change how you approach almost everything.