Similar to how charisma is often ascribed to leaders only after their organizations succeed, we tend to label people as geniuses after a major achievement. This creates a narrative fallacy where we assume innate genius caused the success, rather than success causing the attribution of genius.
Relying on previously successful solutions without deeply analyzing the new problem's context is a cognitive trap. Ron Johnson's attempt to apply Apple's retail strategy to JCPenney failed because he overlooked fundamental differences in their customer bases, demonstrating the danger of surface-level analogical reasoning.
The stereotype of the brilliant but socially awkward tech founder is misleading. Horowitz argues that the most successful CEOs like Mark Zuckerberg, Larry Page, and Elon Musk are actually "very smart about people." Those who truly lack the ability to understand others don't reach that level of success.
Child prodigies excel at mastering existing knowledge, like playing a perfect Mozart sonata. To succeed as adults, they must transition to creation—writing their own sonata. This fundamental shift from rote skill to original thinking is where many prodigies falter because the standards for success change completely.
Successful individuals earn 'idiosyncrasy credit,' allowing them to deviate from social norms. However, observers often make the mistake of assuming these eccentricities were necessary for success. In reality, these behaviors are often tolerated or hidden until success provides the freedom to express them.
People surrounding a so-called genius, like Picasso's friends or employees at cult-like startups, often tolerate terrible behavior. They rationalize the unpleasantness by telling themselves they are part of an extraordinary, history-making experience, which creates a toxic enabling environment.
The narrative that vast tech fortunes are built on individual grit alone ignores the critical role of luck, timing, and systemic tailwinds. Recognizing fortune is key to humility and social responsibility, contrasting with the "obnoxious" belief of being purely self-made and entitled to the winnings.
A common cognitive bias leads us to attribute our shortcomings (e.g., anxiety, perfectionism) to our upbringing, while claiming our strengths (e.g., ambition, discipline) as our own achievements. This skewed accounting externalizes blame for the bad while internalizing credit for the good, ignoring that both may stem from the same parental pressures.
Founders often start with strong intuition but lose it after achieving success. This occurs because long-held societal conditioning, which teaches individuals to distrust themselves and outsource authority to experts, resurfaces and mutes their inner voice.
Labeling individuals like Einstein as geniuses helps commodify their legacy, turning them into brands that can sell products from toys to technology. This branding mechanism benefits heirs and marketers but may not actually foster more world-changing work or reflect the reality of their contributions.
The self-doubt often felt by high-achievers isn't a debilitating flaw. It can motivate leaders to over-prepare, seek diverse expert opinions, and ultimately make more informed decisions, turning a perceived weakness into a strength.