by Conor Friedersdorf
The New Yorker correspondent writes:
The piece proceeds to examine cocksure decision-makers, asserting similarities in the folks at 2008 financial firms and British military planners during the ill-fated invasion of Gallipoli. Both groups were overconfident to disastrous effect, Mr. Gladwell argues.
Perhaps so. But that hardly justifies his argument that the financial crisis is owed to psychological rather than structural failures!
Financial firms that systematically hires hubristic assholes are plagued by a structural failure in personnel. When a perfectly predictable, eminently human failing like overconfidence is enough to throw a whole financial regime into crisis, that is a structural flaw — a system that only works absent the very human failings most prevalent in the industry it governs is rather worthless.
Or take the British invasion of Gallipoli. In Mr. Gladwell's telling:
A properly structured military planning regime always draws up a formal plan of operations — it's built into the system! Yes, failing to do so was a psychological failure, perhaps perpetrated by irrationally overconfident commanders. But we design structures partly to guard against, mitigate and prevent psychological failures.
Mr. Gladwell wants to argue that "the roots of Wall Street’s crisis were not structural or cognitive so much as they were psychological." But these things aren't mutually exclusive explanations — they are mutually reinforcing.