Look at any organization and ask yourself
When someone gets promoted, or given more power, what traits do they exhibit?
The first and most obvious is a deep understanding of the organization's inner workings. To promote someone is to recognize their special knowledge - the kind that only comes with time. It's the institutional wisdom that sets them apart. They move faster, because they know where the pitfalls lie. Their experience has taught them what earns praise. Where others lack agency, they excel in knowing which levers to pull, to get things done.
They're usually also great communicators. It's hard to "climb" to the top if they can't convince anyone that they deserve to be there. Sometimes, they communicate with their words, but more often than not, they communicate with their actions. The first to be in the office. The one who practices at "game speed". The kid who reminds the teacher that there was homework due the night before. You get the point. They convince by doing the kinds of things that others would look at as markers that they can lead.
But isn't that thinking flawed?
All conventional wisdom tells us that leaders should be bold visionaries who can be a steady rock when going down otherwise rocky paths. They should be shrewd, objective, and measured in their responses to any catastrophe. If something unexpectedly breaks, they should know how to fix it. But how can the person I've described above ever do that?
The entire system has been setup to have them follow a particular, carefully carved out road to success. So they followed that road better than anyone else around them. When it's their time to lead, how can we expect them to take the road less traveled to make all the difference?
If we were willing to put our money where our metaphorical mouths were, we would be looking for the contrarians. The people who scoff at status quo and reject it at every turn. People who think authority is nothing more than a game where they didn't get to make the rules. People who are hungry to make their own rules where they see fit. That's the kind of thinking required to create new things. The ability to see a target no one else can see, plus the ability to aim at it long enough until you hit it.
So why don't we do that?
Well, there's a couple reasons. The first is that the designers of existing systems of power have an incentive to ensure that things continue to run the way they always have. That's how they keep what they've got. It's also how they predict who will get it next. So the cat and mouse game of "prove yourself" and "be rewarded" is self fulfilling. Those who have, teach, and those who don't learn.
Another reason is that our best followers are ironically our best role models. Following a path, no matter how beaten, can serve as a beacon of light for those coming after you. It gives them hope that they can "trust the process" and things will work out okay. It makes the stories we tell ourselves about what we can do that much more attainable when we see others do it first.
So there's a vested interest in not doing anything about this current setup coupled with an emotional piece that keeps us tied to the myth of meritocracy.
Why is this even worth talking about?
My proposal is that society has a responsibility to nurture latent genius. When I talked about how boring is better I mentioned that we're losing opportunities for boredom to capture the imagination of our best and brightest. Here too, its important to think about how we ensure we're fostering environments that give people the chance to demonstrate that which can't be "proven". 1
Doing so won't come without tradeoffs. Giving power to folks with different mindsets and approaches than most wisdom offers has the potential to lead us down some pretty scary roads. To be unconventional and powerful is a path that leads to destruction and dynamism. Ask any startup.
But the payoffs are well worth it. Literal human progress depends on it. That's part of what excites me so much about the work I do these days. Empowering subject matter experts to scale their impact has the potential to give far more contrarians the tools and access they need to discover new ideas.
So think twice before making that decision to keep things stagnant. Find ways to promote the kind of thinking that goes against organizational tendencies. Make choices that surprise and upend. Most importantly, make "business as usual" an unusual business.