The+Tipping+Point

Ken Bailey __The Tipping Point__ by Malcolm Gladwell Word Count: 1260

What caused the iPod to beat the Zune? Why is the Wii selling more units on average than the PS3, despite comparable graphics and gameplay? What causes a fad to turn into a behavioral change; and, from there, a way of life? In Malcolm Gladwell’s //The Tipping Point//, an answer to these questions is presented to us from an economist’s point of view. //The Tipping Point// serves as more than the title of the book—according to Gladwell, it’s the abstract point where something catches fire in popularity. The metaphor the book likes to use is that of an epidemic, when a disease stops being a localized infection and evolves into a widespread mass killer. The morbidity of this metaphor, however, is not at all characteristic of the book, which aims to explain much tamer questions, i.e. “Why did Blues Clues get more ratings than Sesame Street, despite the general larger popularity of Sesame Street?” From answering these questions, Gladwell then presents us with methods of applying “The Tipping Point” to seemingly insignificant facets of our daily lives.

There are two factors that make up the terminal calculation of when and what is considered an idea or product’s “tipping point”. The first factor is somewhat ironically named “The Law of the Few”. In essence, an epidemic is not caused by a sudden shift of the entire population to a whole new idea; rather, it gradually works from a smaller part of the population until it spreads exponentially through the population. Such a concept is not new to economics however, as it is already represented in the 80/20 Theorem (the idea that most statistics in society operate according to an 80/20 proportion, i.e. 80% of beer is drunk by 20% of beer drinkers). However, the author is quick to differentiate “The Tipping Point” from that of the 80/20 Theorem by isolating numerous examples, such as Baltimore’s syphilis epidemic, in order to prove that the initial spark for an epidemic is found within the marginal subsections of a population. More often then not, however, these marginal subsections happen to be the most extraordinary individuals of a population, in terms of charisma, talent, and so on. In economics, we might refer to these individuals as entrepreneurs, but such a term is far too narrow in regards to “The Tipping Point” and as such is avoided. What is important, however, are the webs of connection made between these people and others of the population. Using the metaphor of fire, we might label individuals who start these connections as the sparks for the larger wildfire. Think of it as of a group of friends—while you might have met one of them directly, more likely than not you met your other friends through indirect contacts, such as in an organization or through another friend. Eventually these connections multiply and one has an entourage of friends. Similar phenomena, according to Gladwell, are experienced in regards to “The Tipping Point”. The crucial parts of these groups, however, are the “Connectors”, those who are responsible for bringing the group together. They are the individuals who are social, most liked, and are responsible for epidemics. There is another group of people, however, who serve to uphold the Law of the Few. They are referred to Gladwell as Mavens, but in layman’s terms, one would call them information collectors. These people store information and proceed to share it with other people; and, when these people whom information is shared with happen to be Connectors, the conditions for a social epidemic are ideal. The combination of information collectors and individuals in spreading that information are, in Gladwell’s mind, the crucial elements of the Law of the Few and the primary indicator for the likelihood of an epidemic.

But while the Law of the Few is a major guiding letter for the outbreak of social epidemics, one other factor in addition affects the probability of such wildfires catching flame in popularity. The second factor in regards to “The Tipping Point” is seemingly obvious—The Power of Context. Such a name is somewhat self-explanatory; it indicates that an epidemic is only successful if the surrounding conditions are hospitable to its spread. The simplest example is that of disease—colds and flu are less likely to spread in the summer than in the winter because the warmer conditions are more obstructive to the disease’s spread. The same concept applies to social epidemics—Hush Puppies spread because of the cutting-edge community they were resurrected in. Similar logic can be applied to crime epidemics—most emerge primarily due to poor conditions which allow for their spread. Similar phenomena can be experienced when one listens to news broadcasts. Many associate media bias as liberal and radio talk bias as conservative because of the context of those shows—usually hosts are charismatic and control the programming to reflect an either liberal or conservative view, if such a bias is not explicitly stated. Violent individuals turn violent as adults because they were influenced from the context they grew up in—namely, abusive childhoods, authority struggles, and inferiority complexes.

What makes the Power of Context a powerful (no pun intended) factor in determining “The Tipping Point” is that it essentially governs, and in some cases even overrides natural behaviors. Gladwell isolates several psychology studies to prove this point—on average, psychologists have determined that an individual who’s natural behavior is considered “good” can drastically change due to a new environment. (For example, take a well-off, upper class individual and place them into an impoverished neighborhood, and more likely than not such an individual would behave differently in the new environment. What renders this important to “The Tipping Point”, however, is both a condition for epidemics and a theorem for their existence. A epidemic cannot catch fire without the right context, but epidemics also exist only because we as individuals are not programmed with genetically predetermined dispositions on certain aspects of life—put simply, we’re open and adaptable. This fundamental adaptability is what allows things like the Law of the Few to function; otherwise, Connectors and Mavens would be unable to perform their roles. The other component of Context is that it not only makes epidemics possible, but also encourages their spread. Crime will not only exist in neighborhoods that are poor, but will likely increase because such conditions exacerbate the current situation; to “add fuel to the fire” so to speak. Context, in combination with the Law of the Few, is what gives birth to an epidemic in the first place.

The answers to why the Wii has a larger market share than the Playstation 3, why more people listen to iPods than to Zunes, why Toyotas are driven on average more than a Ford, why Furbies became popular and subsequently died, or why we as individuals flock to certain ideas or products as though they were an essential element of our lifel can be answered and explained with Tipping Point theory. The value of understanding such theory goes beyond a self-serving justification, however. It is very easy to look in hindsight and identify Tipping Points, it is a whole other route to try and create the conditions that cause a fad to approach a Tipping Point. It is this futuristic concern of the Tipping Point that makes it a relevant concern to economists, and subsequently derives much of its value to us as students in our economic studies.