What do you think?
Rate this book
Adapt: Why Success Always Starts with Failure
In this groundbreaking book, Tim Harford, the Undercover Economist, shows us a new and inspiring approach to solving the most pressing problems in our lives. When faced with complex situations, we have all become accustomed to looking to our leaders to set out a plan of action and blaze a path to success. Harford argues that today's challenges simply cannot be tackled with ready-made solutions and expert opinion; the world has become far too unpredictable and profoundly complex. Instead, we must adapt.
Deftly weaving together psychology, evolutionary biology, anthropology, physics, and economics, along with the compelling story of hard-won lessons learned in the field, Harford makes a passionate case for the importance of adaptive trial and error in tackling issues such as climate change, poverty, and financial crises—as well as in fostering innovation and creativity in our business and personal lives.
Taking us from corporate boardrooms to the deserts of Iraq, Adapt clearly explains the necessary ingredients for turning failure into success. It is a breakthrough handbook for surviving—and prospering— in our complex and ever-shifting world.
Deftly weaving together psychology, evolutionary biology, anthropology, physics, and economics, along with the compelling story of hard-won lessons learned in the field, Harford makes a passionate case for the importance of adaptive trial and error in tackling issues such as climate change, poverty, and financial crises—as well as in fostering innovation and creativity in our business and personal lives.
Taking us from corporate boardrooms to the deserts of Iraq, Adapt clearly explains the necessary ingredients for turning failure into success. It is a breakthrough handbook for surviving—and prospering— in our complex and ever-shifting world.
321 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 1, 2011
About the author
Tim Harford
51 books1,897 followersTim Harford is a member of the Financial Times editorial board. His column, “The Undercover Economist”, which reveals the economic ideas behind everyday experiences, is published in the Financial Times and syndicated around the world. He is also the only economist in the world to run a problem page, “Dear Economist”, in which FT readers’ personal problems are answered tongue-in-cheek with the latest economic theory.
--from the author's website
--from the author's website
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 329 reviews
December 24, 2020
Adapt or die - a well-popularised advice. This one goes a far beyond the pure adaptation apologetics.
A lot of case studies on how things go right or wrong when people mess up thingys. And how and why and what for. A great read. Quite a lot of sectors covered: military, business, history, science. And everywhere the take is interesting, while a bit too simplistic for my taste.
A lot of case studies on how things go right or wrong when people mess up thingys. And how and why and what for. A great read. Quite a lot of sectors covered: military, business, history, science. And everywhere the take is interesting, while a bit too simplistic for my taste.
May 30, 2011
"Adapt: Why Success Always Starts with Failure" by Tim Harford should never have developed into a book. Entertaining and inevitably true, success does and always starts with failure, but to continuously argue the point for 275 pages become cumbersome and tedious. To credit Harford's book, I did enjoy the first 100 pages, which should of stopped there. "Adapt: Why Success Always Starts with Failure" is a much more applicable essay/thesis than a book.
January 12, 2024
"A statisztika olyan mint a bikini: csak a lényeget takarja el."
Harford szerint ez egy hülye vicc. És tökre nem is igaz. Persze nem tagadja ő sem: a statisztika alkalmatlan vagy rossz szándékú kezekben a félretájékoztatás eszköze lehet, de hát ezen az alapon bizalmatlanságunkat kiterjeszteni a statisztika tudományának egészére olyan, mintha soha többet nem fürdenénk, csak mert vannak, akik vízbe fulladtak. Ha ugyanis lemondunk a statisztikáról, akkor tulajdonképpen a megismerésének vágyáról mondunk le. Hisz a világ hatalmas, és nyomasztó mennyiségű információ cirkulál benne, aminek csak mikroszkopikus részét tudjuk a saját szemünkkel vizsgálni - ellenben a statisztika képes arra, hogy a nyomasztó mennyiségű információt rendszerezze és értelmezhető módon tárja elénk. Ami elengedhetetlen ahhoz, hogy saját tapasztalatunkat, ezt a békaperspektívát kiegészítsük egy tágabb kontextussal - a sas látószögével.
Persze a számok képében megnyilvánuló adatokat sokan méla undorral fogadják, ami Harfordnak nyilván fáj - ezért feccölt ennyi időt egy efféle ismeretterjesztő könyv megírására. Abból indul ki, hogy a statisztikával szembeni bizalmat úgy lehet felépíteni, ha ad a kezünkbe egy módszert, amivel el tudjuk választani a rossz és a jó statisztikát - erre szolgál tíz "ökölszabálya". Pörgősen és szemrevaló példákkal elegyítve adja elő, mi torzíthat úgy el egy nyers adathalmazt, hogy az végül már hazugságszámba megy. No most ezek közül a torzító hatásoknak csak egy része kapcsolatos magával a statisztikával, például az adatok önkényes szelektálásával vagy a potenciális kormányzati nyomással a statisztikai intézetek felé. Jelentős százalékuk kívül áll a konkrét vizsgált tárgyon - ez a torzító hatás ugyanis mi magunk vagyunk. Azon vágyunk, hogy az elénk tárt információkat a saját szánk íze szerint értelmezzük, ha tetszik, kritika nélkül elfogadjuk, ha pedig nem tetszik, elvessük. Harfordnál az egész folyamat azzal kezdődik, hogy amikor ránézünk egy táblázatra, kérdezzük meg magunktól, mit érzünk. Aztán kérdezzük meg magunktól azt is, miért érezzük ezt.
Kifejezetten hasznos könyvecskének tartom. Már csak azért is, mert a szerző egészen konkrétan megmondja, mi az a csodaszer, aminek birtokában nagy baj nem eshet velünk. Ez pedig a kíváncsiság. Az ember ugyanis azáltal válik megtéveszthetővé, hogy azt hiszi, nincs különbség aközött, amit tud, és aközött, amit tudni akar. Ő nem kíván az adatok mögé nézni, mert úgy véli, tudja, mit találna ott: azt, amit szerinte találnia kell. A kíváncsi ember viszont tisztában van az ún. "információs rés" létével, azzal a lyukkal, ami a tudott és a tudni akart között tátong. De nem fél ettől a lyuktól, nem tagadja le a létét - sőt, szeret belenézni.
Harford szerint ez egy hülye vicc. És tökre nem is igaz. Persze nem tagadja ő sem: a statisztika alkalmatlan vagy rossz szándékú kezekben a félretájékoztatás eszköze lehet, de hát ezen az alapon bizalmatlanságunkat kiterjeszteni a statisztika tudományának egészére olyan, mintha soha többet nem fürdenénk, csak mert vannak, akik vízbe fulladtak. Ha ugyanis lemondunk a statisztikáról, akkor tulajdonképpen a megismerésének vágyáról mondunk le. Hisz a világ hatalmas, és nyomasztó mennyiségű információ cirkulál benne, aminek csak mikroszkopikus részét tudjuk a saját szemünkkel vizsgálni - ellenben a statisztika képes arra, hogy a nyomasztó mennyiségű információt rendszerezze és értelmezhető módon tárja elénk. Ami elengedhetetlen ahhoz, hogy saját tapasztalatunkat, ezt a békaperspektívát kiegészítsük egy tágabb kontextussal - a sas látószögével.
Persze a számok képében megnyilvánuló adatokat sokan méla undorral fogadják, ami Harfordnak nyilván fáj - ezért feccölt ennyi időt egy efféle ismeretterjesztő könyv megírására. Abból indul ki, hogy a statisztikával szembeni bizalmat úgy lehet felépíteni, ha ad a kezünkbe egy módszert, amivel el tudjuk választani a rossz és a jó statisztikát - erre szolgál tíz "ökölszabálya". Pörgősen és szemrevaló példákkal elegyítve adja elő, mi torzíthat úgy el egy nyers adathalmazt, hogy az végül már hazugságszámba megy. No most ezek közül a torzító hatásoknak csak egy része kapcsolatos magával a statisztikával, például az adatok önkényes szelektálásával vagy a potenciális kormányzati nyomással a statisztikai intézetek felé. Jelentős százalékuk kívül áll a konkrét vizsgált tárgyon - ez a torzító hatás ugyanis mi magunk vagyunk. Azon vágyunk, hogy az elénk tárt információkat a saját szánk íze szerint értelmezzük, ha tetszik, kritika nélkül elfogadjuk, ha pedig nem tetszik, elvessük. Harfordnál az egész folyamat azzal kezdődik, hogy amikor ránézünk egy táblázatra, kérdezzük meg magunktól, mit érzünk. Aztán kérdezzük meg magunktól azt is, miért érezzük ezt.
Kifejezetten hasznos könyvecskének tartom. Már csak azért is, mert a szerző egészen konkrétan megmondja, mi az a csodaszer, aminek birtokában nagy baj nem eshet velünk. Ez pedig a kíváncsiság. Az ember ugyanis azáltal válik megtéveszthetővé, hogy azt hiszi, nincs különbség aközött, amit tud, és aközött, amit tudni akar. Ő nem kíván az adatok mögé nézni, mert úgy véli, tudja, mit találna ott: azt, amit szerinte találnia kell. A kíváncsi ember viszont tisztában van az ún. "információs rés" létével, azzal a lyukkal, ami a tudott és a tudni akart között tátong. De nem fél ettől a lyuktól, nem tagadja le a létét - sőt, szeret belenézni.
August 27, 2011
Some reviewers have admonished Tim Harford for repeating the same thesis over and over again & effectively turning a whole bunch of blog posts into a book. I disagree - the parameters of adaption change with context - frequency & diversity of variation, consequences of failure, cultural appetite for experimentation, etc. - so the book doesn't so much repeat but investigate the contextual nuances of a (not particularly groundbreaking but fascinating nonetheless) initial idea. And I think it does so excellently. Besides, turning blog posts into a book seems like a pretty sensible way of converting convenience into value to me...
June 23, 2025
Another book that's really hard to review. As with all non-fiction books, I read this slowly with several fiction books on the go at the same time. The premis is a good one, but the initial military based chapters didn't do much for me, although the author very much glorified and, very obviously, hero worshipped the military. Whilst it's clearly written and obviously well researched, I found reading it hard going. for me. in summary, there are 3 points to the book. 1. Variation, look for a variety of new ideas (innovation) 2. Survive, when trying g something new, make sure you are able to come out of it and 3. Select, learn, and adapt (hence the title of the book) seek feedback and try not to spiral into denial. It was interesting enough that I finished the book, but reading it in bite sized pieces was the way i managed to do this. The last 2 chapters were the quickest and most interesting first me.
March 4, 2023
This book was tedious and a snoozefest to finish. Honestly, I'd rather watch paint dry than read it again.
With all of that said, there's a couple of useful tidbits of information - and it's clear the author spent a lot of time writing this book.
3 stars.
With all of that said, there's a couple of useful tidbits of information - and it's clear the author spent a lot of time writing this book.
3 stars.
December 21, 2011
Adapt has a clear and compelling thesis, and is strikingly well-written -- the two traits I seek most from non-fiction works.
My summary of the thesis: success in anything is best achieved through lightweight experimentation, copious failure (and the learning that goes with it), and a rigorous selection algorithm.
Stated this way, it sounds obvious, but this is the opposite of how most for-profit companies, governments, and individuals behave in their own pursuits: big investments in centralized attempts at innovation, unwillingness to change course in the face of failure, unwillingness to embrace the chaos of free experimentation.
Though the top-level concept is abstract, Harford uses copious concrete examples, including historical anecdotes and studies from psychology and economics. The story of the Spitfire (an experimental air-to-air combat plane that may have been the key weapon that allowed Britain to defend itself from German invasion during World War II) illustrates how unexpected innovation can come from wild experiments, in this case funded by prize money very similar to today's X-Prize.
This could easily be a book on business, as it explores the success of companies with internal cultures of experimentation (such as Google, Whole Foods, and Gor-Tex), and touches on the innovator's dilemma. It also could be a book on military strategy, as it explores how lack of pluralism and dissenting opinion led to the disaster in Iraq, and how experimentation not approved by top-ranking officers eventually turned the situation around.
It could be a book on governance, as it explores failures of centralization in socialist and democratic economies, including the US banking catastrophe of 2008. It could be a book on social policy, as it devotes a chapter to trying to solve environmental issues through free market mechanics. It could even be a self-help book, as the final chapter explores how to experiment with one's own identity and personal pursuits, and the importance of friends and family who can be supportive and yet provide crucial constructive criticism.
My only complaint would be that in a few places it seemed to over-simplify slightly, and in those cases the writing style had a tendency to come across as slightly smug. But it's a minor quibble in an otherwise very solid work.
My summary of the thesis: success in anything is best achieved through lightweight experimentation, copious failure (and the learning that goes with it), and a rigorous selection algorithm.
Stated this way, it sounds obvious, but this is the opposite of how most for-profit companies, governments, and individuals behave in their own pursuits: big investments in centralized attempts at innovation, unwillingness to change course in the face of failure, unwillingness to embrace the chaos of free experimentation.
Though the top-level concept is abstract, Harford uses copious concrete examples, including historical anecdotes and studies from psychology and economics. The story of the Spitfire (an experimental air-to-air combat plane that may have been the key weapon that allowed Britain to defend itself from German invasion during World War II) illustrates how unexpected innovation can come from wild experiments, in this case funded by prize money very similar to today's X-Prize.
This could easily be a book on business, as it explores the success of companies with internal cultures of experimentation (such as Google, Whole Foods, and Gor-Tex), and touches on the innovator's dilemma. It also could be a book on military strategy, as it explores how lack of pluralism and dissenting opinion led to the disaster in Iraq, and how experimentation not approved by top-ranking officers eventually turned the situation around.
It could be a book on governance, as it explores failures of centralization in socialist and democratic economies, including the US banking catastrophe of 2008. It could be a book on social policy, as it devotes a chapter to trying to solve environmental issues through free market mechanics. It could even be a self-help book, as the final chapter explores how to experiment with one's own identity and personal pursuits, and the importance of friends and family who can be supportive and yet provide crucial constructive criticism.
My only complaint would be that in a few places it seemed to over-simplify slightly, and in those cases the writing style had a tendency to come across as slightly smug. But it's a minor quibble in an otherwise very solid work.
January 15, 2017
Interesting book by The Undercover Economist. The style is a little unusual, Hartford draws on lots of examples but goes into them in a lot of detail (including clearly having interviewed many of the protagonists) so that at times the individual chapters seem more about the examples/interviewees than the actual theme.
The book’s central theme is that an adaptive/evolutionary approach which embraces safe failure is the only real way to achieve lasting success. Specifically Hartford argues against the standard view of a successful organisation: a charismatic/powerful leader with a strong big picture overview (perhaps using technology to achieve this); a supportive team with (his) shared vision surrounding him; clear reporting lines – with information following the top to be analysed with instructions coming back down. He argues that in many cases this leads to group think and to genuine feedback being suppressed or even if it gets through being out of date and context. Instead he argues that what is needed: a decentralised organisation with the ability (ideally even the imperative) to try new things/experiment; for failure to be survivable – this implies creating safe spaces to experiment, big enough to make a difference but small enough to not bring down the whole enterprise – he also explores the concept of decoupling (and how lack of this caused Piper Alpha, the LMX Spiral and the Financial crisis); a mechanism to identify success and failure – he emphasises the “worm’s eye view” feedback which is immediate, local and in context as well as mechanisms which allow e.g. market forces to determine success (he argues strongly that a carbon tax is a lot better way of dealing with climate change than top down planning).
The book’s central theme is that an adaptive/evolutionary approach which embraces safe failure is the only real way to achieve lasting success. Specifically Hartford argues against the standard view of a successful organisation: a charismatic/powerful leader with a strong big picture overview (perhaps using technology to achieve this); a supportive team with (his) shared vision surrounding him; clear reporting lines – with information following the top to be analysed with instructions coming back down. He argues that in many cases this leads to group think and to genuine feedback being suppressed or even if it gets through being out of date and context. Instead he argues that what is needed: a decentralised organisation with the ability (ideally even the imperative) to try new things/experiment; for failure to be survivable – this implies creating safe spaces to experiment, big enough to make a difference but small enough to not bring down the whole enterprise – he also explores the concept of decoupling (and how lack of this caused Piper Alpha, the LMX Spiral and the Financial crisis); a mechanism to identify success and failure – he emphasises the “worm’s eye view” feedback which is immediate, local and in context as well as mechanisms which allow e.g. market forces to determine success (he argues strongly that a carbon tax is a lot better way of dealing with climate change than top down planning).
June 25, 2011
An amalgam of Origin of Wealth: Evolution, Complexity, and the Radical Remaking of Economics and The Innovator's Dilemma: The Revolutionary Book that Will Change the Way You Do Business (and probably a couple other books) in a much more accessible format. His basic theory is that individuals and organizations should not be afraid to fail, and in order to adapt, should 'try new things, in the expectations that some will fail; to make failure survivable, because it will be common; and to make sure that you know when you’ve failed.' He perhaps oversimplifies things and relies too much on anecdotes and case studies, but I give him a pass because I already read up on the underlying theory and his entertaining writing style makes it really easy to read and understand.
January 16, 2024
I don't even know how this ended up on my shelf. It's not bad, full of case studies about success and failure and how to improve and learn from mistakes, on a personal and business level. Only two stars because too long and too boring and only about men. In Harford's life it seems women don't exist. And in many cases when he asked how x and y could have happened I wanted to suggest asking/ involving a woman. So overall Not a recommendation.
March 29, 2016
Similar to Freakanomics, with late 20th century pop culture and historical accounts, and indirectly allude to learning from failure. I prefer Freakonimics (content and style) but enjoyed pieces of this book.
Some things I learned:
- ' A person who has not made peace with his losses is likely to accept gambles that would be unacceptable to him otherwise.'
This certainly explains some downward spirals/mid-life crises. A good friend, or reconnecting with common sense to cut losses is beneficial. The tv show "Deal or No Deal," shows this in action, as people decline deals that are statistically sound to settle on, only to have most people continue on their losing streak to walk away with next to, or literally, nothing.
- Well-meanings advice can be fatal, and should always be cross-checked with other resources and judgement
The example presented was Spock's "Baby and Child Care," (1956) advising parents against putting children to sleep on their backs. This faulty advice resulted in about 60k deaths 1970-88, when new evidence revealed the opposite was best.
- Experiment and accept feedback in preparation of the big show; have a validation squad'
"Movin' Out" was a play that was destined for Broadway- stellar writers and actors, only to earn atrocious reviews. Instead of settling with embarrassment and her ego, the playwright Tharp revised the play, taking feedback into account. By the time that it debuted on Broadway, the reviews had shifted to public acclaim. The key here was to fail (somewhat) privately first, then dazzle in the bigger leagues.
Some things I learned:
- ' A person who has not made peace with his losses is likely to accept gambles that would be unacceptable to him otherwise.'
This certainly explains some downward spirals/mid-life crises. A good friend, or reconnecting with common sense to cut losses is beneficial. The tv show "Deal or No Deal," shows this in action, as people decline deals that are statistically sound to settle on, only to have most people continue on their losing streak to walk away with next to, or literally, nothing.
- Well-meanings advice can be fatal, and should always be cross-checked with other resources and judgement
The example presented was Spock's "Baby and Child Care," (1956) advising parents against putting children to sleep on their backs. This faulty advice resulted in about 60k deaths 1970-88, when new evidence revealed the opposite was best.
- Experiment and accept feedback in preparation of the big show; have a validation squad'
"Movin' Out" was a play that was destined for Broadway- stellar writers and actors, only to earn atrocious reviews. Instead of settling with embarrassment and her ego, the playwright Tharp revised the play, taking feedback into account. By the time that it debuted on Broadway, the reviews had shifted to public acclaim. The key here was to fail (somewhat) privately first, then dazzle in the bigger leagues.
June 6, 2018
Maybe I had a different experience with this book because of the audiobook edition that I listened to (rather than reading it). As other reviewers have said, a relatively basic, powerful and useful thesis is in play here, with a variety of different angles and things to consider...all very loosely tied to the thesis through the *heavy* use of too-diverse anecdote which is expected to be self-evident and stand on its own without being explicitly tied back to the thesis.
Additionally, new concepts are introduced willy-nilly...you never know if you're getting a return to a relatively bedrock "Palchinski principle" concepts or the sudden (and never to be reiterated) introduction of a new sub-topic or concept on how to improve efficiencies in the narrow context of specific industries.
This is a 10 hour audiobook. New concepts for viewing the core principles in pretty substantially different lights were being introduced 6 minutes before the end of the book, far into the final chapter. The conclusion that summarized the overall concepts began 3 minutes before the end of the book. There's good stuff here. The thesis is solid and useful. The anecdotes are entertaining. The book is too long for being as loosely tied together and imprecisely argued as it is.
Additionally, new concepts are introduced willy-nilly...you never know if you're getting a return to a relatively bedrock "Palchinski principle" concepts or the sudden (and never to be reiterated) introduction of a new sub-topic or concept on how to improve efficiencies in the narrow context of specific industries.
This is a 10 hour audiobook. New concepts for viewing the core principles in pretty substantially different lights were being introduced 6 minutes before the end of the book, far into the final chapter. The conclusion that summarized the overall concepts began 3 minutes before the end of the book. There's good stuff here. The thesis is solid and useful. The anecdotes are entertaining. The book is too long for being as loosely tied together and imprecisely argued as it is.
December 10, 2012
While this book is written primarily for businesses to think about their decision making, his examples come from every aspect of life. The ideas he suggests can help in every part of life. It is somewhat like a Malcolm Gladwell book and keeps your interest.
May 22, 2022
Good early tim harford, v much worth reading
July 10, 2017
I appreciate this book. I found it to be profound in the way it presented failure. I am currently reading whatever books I can on failure, and find that in this particular approach by the Harford, the frame that provides an understanding to mitigate failure is the best articulated, in terms of general process.
If you accept that "failure is not an option" is an oddity of thought given how failure itself has led to so many new and exciting developments, then the question turns on what is failure? Defining failure I find is incredibly tricky, and Harford approaches this not with definitive answers, but rather by side stepping the whole project. Instead, he jumps into the subject of 'failure' from the associated explanation of why 'something may fail' - complexity.
I found this odd, and maybe if readers were approaching the subject like me, would be turned off by the approach; quite possibly even dismiss the book. However, this being the fifth book I have picked up on the subject, I found the presentation novel, and a bit refreshing. Failure is not a black and white environment, and when dealing with human nature and psychology, it becomes quickly complicated.
What I appreciate about Harford is his framing of how to deal with complexity, without completely failing- whatever your choice of definition for this may be (remember all humans eventually 'fail' as well, we all die, so failure could be defined as death, as Danner and Coopersmith put forward in 'The Other F word"). The framework, Palchinsky principles, requires that one embrace risk by trying new things and seeking out new ideas; second, but do this on a scale where failure (mistake making possibly) is survivable; and finally, figure out a feedback loop to learn from those mistakes along the way. Harford spends a good amount of time debunking the "common sense" response a reader may have with a healthy amount of, and incredibly some jaw-droppingly unbelievable, examples of how humans, on all levels, do not act or live in that "common sense" perspective.
Finally, I was especially appreciative of the final chapter in applying the Palchinsky principles inwardly. Harford took care to present some practical advice on what an inward process of Palchinsky principles may look like, what features one may need to sustain the process, and make it possible to realize a healthy relationship with failure. If I could convince you to read the book, it would be simply because of this aspect, however, the book is filled with wonderful features that speak to a wide breadth of interests and challenges. The content itself sits in a place of intersectionality that lends itself well to cross over to interests and challenges not mentioned or discussed by Harford.
If you accept that "failure is not an option" is an oddity of thought given how failure itself has led to so many new and exciting developments, then the question turns on what is failure? Defining failure I find is incredibly tricky, and Harford approaches this not with definitive answers, but rather by side stepping the whole project. Instead, he jumps into the subject of 'failure' from the associated explanation of why 'something may fail' - complexity.
I found this odd, and maybe if readers were approaching the subject like me, would be turned off by the approach; quite possibly even dismiss the book. However, this being the fifth book I have picked up on the subject, I found the presentation novel, and a bit refreshing. Failure is not a black and white environment, and when dealing with human nature and psychology, it becomes quickly complicated.
What I appreciate about Harford is his framing of how to deal with complexity, without completely failing- whatever your choice of definition for this may be (remember all humans eventually 'fail' as well, we all die, so failure could be defined as death, as Danner and Coopersmith put forward in 'The Other F word"). The framework, Palchinsky principles, requires that one embrace risk by trying new things and seeking out new ideas; second, but do this on a scale where failure (mistake making possibly) is survivable; and finally, figure out a feedback loop to learn from those mistakes along the way. Harford spends a good amount of time debunking the "common sense" response a reader may have with a healthy amount of, and incredibly some jaw-droppingly unbelievable, examples of how humans, on all levels, do not act or live in that "common sense" perspective.
Finally, I was especially appreciative of the final chapter in applying the Palchinsky principles inwardly. Harford took care to present some practical advice on what an inward process of Palchinsky principles may look like, what features one may need to sustain the process, and make it possible to realize a healthy relationship with failure. If I could convince you to read the book, it would be simply because of this aspect, however, the book is filled with wonderful features that speak to a wide breadth of interests and challenges. The content itself sits in a place of intersectionality that lends itself well to cross over to interests and challenges not mentioned or discussed by Harford.
September 7, 2018
Harford’s Adapt is all about making a product, process, or person better by trial and error. I took a class in user interface design at UCLA led by former Apple designers that demonstrated the power of starting with a quick, rough prototype then refining it based on user tests to gather feedback. This book illustrates this adaption technique with many interesting examples. If you haven’t read Harford’s prior book, The Undercover Economist, I’d recommend reading that first although these books are independent.
October 4, 2017
An interesting collection of anecdotal evidence to try to key on what brings long term success. It's definitely biased towards the author's thinking/exposure, but it is really interesting and I think Tim Harford has something here. Definitely a fun read about applied data science.
July 18, 2022
Acho que estava à espera de uma vertente mais psicológica e não tanto de casos reais de fracasso que conseguiram chegar ao sucesso. No entanto, interessante para ganhar algum conhecimento de cultura geral.
October 10, 2019
Great book for young adults just starting careers.
January 5, 2020
This book is fascinating. The author mixes his deep knowledge of economics, psychology, history and social sciences to deliver counter-intuitive insights on how the modern world works and how we could possibly fit into this. Not to be confused with any 'build-your-success' junk literature, this is inspiring read into the complex mechanics of markets, evolution and our minds backed by most recent science.
Really loved it even more than highly respected Undercover Economic.
Really loved it even more than highly respected Undercover Economic.
June 28, 2022
Книга по подбору стратегии под оьстоятельства, в противовес попыткам прменить полюбившуюся страиегию. Достаточно скучные и не всегда подходящие многословные примеры для иллюстрации авторских тезисов
March 29, 2022
Good overall point, but i bet if you put an experiment with 2 groups with same starting points, where 1st would be of people who read an email describing most important points of this book and 2nd of people who read the whole book; and evaluated their knowledge on the topics of the book - there would be no statistically proven differences. This book is an email and more then 400 pages of random stories with so many unnecessary and boring details.
December 11, 2022
Adapt: Why Success Always Starts with Failure (Paperback) by Tim Harford- In brief, this book three ways to move forward in life (1) seek out new ideas and try new things, (2) when trying something new, do it on a scale where failure is survivable, (3) seek out feedback and learn from your mistakes as you go along. First example (a) The Toaster Project was when one man tried to build a toaster from scratch and realized the insane levels of complexity required. A person needs proper training and experience to start a new project. (b) Our world is stunningly complex. We should not take any idea for granted until it is tested. (c) views of the leader may be his own. We must view the problems and face the challenge. (d) we must develop expertise and keep updating knowledge. (e) we must not be afraid of failure. (f) a company relies on many factors beyond its control which brings difficulties. When those factors change, so does your incredible success. (g) good ideas take off and less successful ones die out. It is like evolution for economics. (h) view all the failures that led to the eventual success, (i) The process of evolution strikes a balance between discovering the new and exploiting the familiar. (j) The evolutionary mix of small steps and occasional wild gambles is the best possible way to search for solutions. (k) Evolution produces ongoing “works for now” solutions and then builds upon those ideas. (l) most real-world problems are more complex than we think. (m) seek out new ideas and try new things. (n) when trying something new, do it on a scale where failure is survivable. (o) seek out feedback and learn from your mistakes as you go along. (p) we should struggle to improve because no other person would test new ideas. (q) there is a limit to how much honest feedback most leaders want to hear. (r ) accepting trial and error means accepting error and human brains do not seem to be very good at doing that. (s) a person who has not made peace with his losses is likely to accept gambles that would be unacceptable to him otherwise. (t) enterpreneurs must make sure you know the reason why you have failed. We must measure our progress, (u) measurement can come in many forms. (v) in a company where your peers decide who stays around, there is no room for people who do not pull their weight. (w) Success is the number of experiments that can be crammed into 24 hours. (x) trial and error method is one of the w ay forward, (y) all products grow and appeal to a few users. New ideas get sabotaged within organizations, business models catch on they often require people with new skills and that means any big wig in the current business will lose status. Enterpreneurs must be constantly willing to reinvent yourself. (z1) You need a relatively safe space to fail. (z2) the three obstacles that prevent us from learning from our mistakes are (i) denial, (ii) self-destructive behavior, (iii) remembering past mistakes as triumphs. (z3) Our response to failure should be, “I am not a failure, but I have made a mistake.” This is a motivating book for readers of all age groups.
January 14, 2013
Harford asserts that the modern world is complicated, and gives birth to complicated problems. Complicated problems are difficult to solve and require unconventional approaches.
In business, everyday life, and scientific exploration, the attempts to solve problems, succeed, or just survive, are fraught with failure. Harford asserts that failure is necessary for growth and learning; that for every successful evolutionary leap, whole generations of experiments have failed. His theory is that failure as an absolute necessity for problem solving.
He puts forward three principles for educational experimentation:
1. You must be willing to experiment.
2. You must be able to survive the failure of those experiments.
3. You must be able to differentiate success from failure and willing to learn from it.
Harford discusses the importance of dissent and decentralized experimentation and discourages rigidity and totalitarianism. In the first third of the book, he illustrates how Donald Rumsfeld and his cabal of yes-men helped fumble the invasion of Iraq on every level, likening it to Johnson's mis-management of the Vietnam war. He spends time explaining how Whole Foods is not just another high-end grocery store, but a series of self-motivated small teams, loosely directed by its parent company, which emphasizes integrity and thinking outside the box to solve problems. His tone is occasionally snide, but the historical and commercial evidence to support his theory is compelling.
In the last chapters of the book, he illustrates how to use his theory in your own business and personal life--by being willing to fail, by continuing to experiment in spite of past failures, and by surrounding yourself with honest, high-integrity people who both want you to succeed and are willing to help you acknowledge, process, and overcome failure.
Harford's writing is clear and neat. There are other reviews that take him to task for creating a book out of what the reviewers thought should be an essay, but I disagree. The book is solid, well-formed, and easy to digest.
I picked up this book out of interest in the subject matter and out of a desire for self-improvement, and was very satisfied in both regards. I will almost certainly re-read it in the future.
In business, everyday life, and scientific exploration, the attempts to solve problems, succeed, or just survive, are fraught with failure. Harford asserts that failure is necessary for growth and learning; that for every successful evolutionary leap, whole generations of experiments have failed. His theory is that failure as an absolute necessity for problem solving.
He puts forward three principles for educational experimentation:
1. You must be willing to experiment.
2. You must be able to survive the failure of those experiments.
3. You must be able to differentiate success from failure and willing to learn from it.
Harford discusses the importance of dissent and decentralized experimentation and discourages rigidity and totalitarianism. In the first third of the book, he illustrates how Donald Rumsfeld and his cabal of yes-men helped fumble the invasion of Iraq on every level, likening it to Johnson's mis-management of the Vietnam war. He spends time explaining how Whole Foods is not just another high-end grocery store, but a series of self-motivated small teams, loosely directed by its parent company, which emphasizes integrity and thinking outside the box to solve problems. His tone is occasionally snide, but the historical and commercial evidence to support his theory is compelling.
In the last chapters of the book, he illustrates how to use his theory in your own business and personal life--by being willing to fail, by continuing to experiment in spite of past failures, and by surrounding yourself with honest, high-integrity people who both want you to succeed and are willing to help you acknowledge, process, and overcome failure.
Harford's writing is clear and neat. There are other reviews that take him to task for creating a book out of what the reviewers thought should be an essay, but I disagree. The book is solid, well-formed, and easy to digest.
I picked up this book out of interest in the subject matter and out of a desire for self-improvement, and was very satisfied in both regards. I will almost certainly re-read it in the future.
March 19, 2023
Although published in 2011, this book still holds up. While some of the lessons may have been reiterated in subsequent books such as "Lean Startup" and "Horizontal," Agile contains some new examples (and dates ones) The book is an interesting, enjoyable, and easy read.
May 15, 2022
The book urges you to seek out new ideas and try new things. When trying something new, do it on a scale where failure is survivable. Seek out feedback and learn from your mistakes as you go along.
The book says:
1. Our world is stunningly complex, but we are so engulfed in this complexity that we take it for granted. We are blind to it.
2. We overestimate the impact any one person or leader can have because we fail to see how complex the problems are that current leaders face.
3. The system we live in is far too complex for any one person to understand. Even developing expertise in a particular area isn't as useful as you would expect because of the interrelatedness of things with my areas you know nothing about.
4. Failure is everywhere. Ten percent of American companies disappear every year.
Perhaps the reason companies don't stay at the top is simply because the only way to go is down. 5. It's really hard to stay at the top and perhaps being a Fortune 100 company relies on many factors outside your control and not simply running a good company. When those factors change, so does your incredible success.
6. The market fumbles its way to success. The good ideas take off and less successful ones die out. It's like evolution for economics.
7. Avoid survivorship bias. Don't just see success. See all the failures that led to the eventual success.
8. The process of evolution strikes a balance between discovering the new and exploiting the familiar.
9. The evolutionary mix of small steps and occasional wild gambles is the best possible way to search for solutions.
10. Google's 20 percent time is an example of peer monitoring because good side projects will gain the interest of peers. In a company where your peers decide who stays around, there is no room for people who don't pull their weight. 80 percent of Google's projects will fail, but that doesn't matter. People only remember the 20 percent that succeed
The book says:
1. Our world is stunningly complex, but we are so engulfed in this complexity that we take it for granted. We are blind to it.
2. We overestimate the impact any one person or leader can have because we fail to see how complex the problems are that current leaders face.
3. The system we live in is far too complex for any one person to understand. Even developing expertise in a particular area isn't as useful as you would expect because of the interrelatedness of things with my areas you know nothing about.
4. Failure is everywhere. Ten percent of American companies disappear every year.
Perhaps the reason companies don't stay at the top is simply because the only way to go is down. 5. It's really hard to stay at the top and perhaps being a Fortune 100 company relies on many factors outside your control and not simply running a good company. When those factors change, so does your incredible success.
6. The market fumbles its way to success. The good ideas take off and less successful ones die out. It's like evolution for economics.
7. Avoid survivorship bias. Don't just see success. See all the failures that led to the eventual success.
8. The process of evolution strikes a balance between discovering the new and exploiting the familiar.
9. The evolutionary mix of small steps and occasional wild gambles is the best possible way to search for solutions.
10. Google's 20 percent time is an example of peer monitoring because good side projects will gain the interest of peers. In a company where your peers decide who stays around, there is no room for people who don't pull their weight. 80 percent of Google's projects will fail, but that doesn't matter. People only remember the 20 percent that succeed
May 17, 2014
«We all need a critic, and for most of us the inner critic is not nearly frank enough. We need someone who can help us hold those two jostling thoughts at the same time: 'I am not a failure - but I have made a mistake'.»
Well, ask any scientist (and especially evolutionary biologists) how they feel about failure and adapting to it and you will see why this is yet another case of preaching to the choir. All in all, this book is a long essay on why you should not only accept failure but embrace it. The main thesis: our world is by far to complex to come up with only one valid plan that will lead to success. Instead you will have to try lots of different plans and in the end hopefully one will work. And you shouldn't sweat too much about it, because most of the time failure is pretty cheap, especially compared to the outcomes of successful 'experiments'.
It gives lots of nice examples of how small, bottom-up projects – which are allowed to fail – ultimately not only drive adaption but also can lead to great breakthroughs, from engineering the Spitfire over Randomized Controlled Trials and military strategy over to foreign aid and much more. If I remember correctly it was The Geek Manifesto which argued much in the same direction: RCTs and critically checking outcomes is something that would improve many areas of live, especially policy making. Adapt will give you pretty good idea why failure, combined with feedback loops, is a thing you should try.
Though the evolutionary biologist in me now really wants to read a book based on the Neutral Theory of Molecular Evolution, explaining why most of the decisions you make don't matter that much and why you're not so important after all.
Recommended for: those who feel depressed about their failures.
Well, ask any scientist (and especially evolutionary biologists) how they feel about failure and adapting to it and you will see why this is yet another case of preaching to the choir. All in all, this book is a long essay on why you should not only accept failure but embrace it. The main thesis: our world is by far to complex to come up with only one valid plan that will lead to success. Instead you will have to try lots of different plans and in the end hopefully one will work. And you shouldn't sweat too much about it, because most of the time failure is pretty cheap, especially compared to the outcomes of successful 'experiments'.
It gives lots of nice examples of how small, bottom-up projects – which are allowed to fail – ultimately not only drive adaption but also can lead to great breakthroughs, from engineering the Spitfire over Randomized Controlled Trials and military strategy over to foreign aid and much more. If I remember correctly it was The Geek Manifesto which argued much in the same direction: RCTs and critically checking outcomes is something that would improve many areas of live, especially policy making. Adapt will give you pretty good idea why failure, combined with feedback loops, is a thing you should try.
Though the evolutionary biologist in me now really wants to read a book based on the Neutral Theory of Molecular Evolution, explaining why most of the decisions you make don't matter that much and why you're not so important after all.
Recommended for: those who feel depressed about their failures.
September 7, 2011
the general message of Adapt (and I hope this doesn't count as a SPOILER or anything - hey it is non-fiction right??) Is that in order to really succeed there needs to be some space for failure - the ability to correct mistakes, and a plan to fail safely.
Harford's theory is essentially that just as in the biological world, the financial, military and personal realms need to undergo their own evolution to succeed.
Throughout the novel, Harford examines the financial collapse of 08, the BP oil spill, and lame attempts to recreate a simple toaster from scratch.
If you're willing to plough through the detail, the insight provided by this book is awesome.
My only criticism of this piece is the rather abrupt last chapter where Harford discusses personal failure and success. Harford leaps into sexual crimes, back-door abortions and attempts to link these to the global sized thesis he has already presented. I'm not so much criticising his idea just that rather than fulling fleshing it out, he throws some shocking concepts together and concludes the book.
But its only a short last chapter in a killer book that'll pump that brain muscle to the max.
Harford's theory is essentially that just as in the biological world, the financial, military and personal realms need to undergo their own evolution to succeed.
Throughout the novel, Harford examines the financial collapse of 08, the BP oil spill, and lame attempts to recreate a simple toaster from scratch.
If you're willing to plough through the detail, the insight provided by this book is awesome.
My only criticism of this piece is the rather abrupt last chapter where Harford discusses personal failure and success. Harford leaps into sexual crimes, back-door abortions and attempts to link these to the global sized thesis he has already presented. I'm not so much criticising his idea just that rather than fulling fleshing it out, he throws some shocking concepts together and concludes the book.
But its only a short last chapter in a killer book that'll pump that brain muscle to the max.
December 28, 2012
Adapt is an easy read, with plenty of entertaining anecdotes and stories to illustrate Mr Harford’s central thesis. This makes it a bit slower for readers who just want the core ideas, but doesn't detract from the worth of those core ideas: the world is changeable and hard to predict, and in such a world strategies that focus on decentralised adaptation and experimentation are more successful.
While this central thesis is easy to state, and is largely outlined in the first few chapters, the book does explore the nuances quite thoroughly. What are the implications for complex highly connected systems (like global finance) or for systems where there is a high cost of failure (like nuclear power stations)? What stops people and organisations from recognising when things are going wrong?
Adapt is as much about systems theory and behavioural psychology as it is about economics, but it is not an academic book. It's aim is to bring ideas from those disciplines into a central framework, and show the reader how those ideas can be seen in action in the real world. In this it succeeds admirably.
While this central thesis is easy to state, and is largely outlined in the first few chapters, the book does explore the nuances quite thoroughly. What are the implications for complex highly connected systems (like global finance) or for systems where there is a high cost of failure (like nuclear power stations)? What stops people and organisations from recognising when things are going wrong?
Adapt is as much about systems theory and behavioural psychology as it is about economics, but it is not an academic book. It's aim is to bring ideas from those disciplines into a central framework, and show the reader how those ideas can be seen in action in the real world. In this it succeeds admirably.
February 14, 2015
One of my favourite radio programmes is the BBC's More or Less, presented by Tim Harford. In this book Harford goes more deeply into 'how things work' with a blizzard of anecdotal case studies.
Essentially, he argues, success grows out of a process akin to Natural Selection. This leads away from seeing progress as top-down to innovation being rather wild 'in the field' (Cf. divine creation vs Darwinian evolution.)
Largely he is not thinking of individual success but something larger scale: military strategy, aircraft design, climate change mitigation, musical production. He is not concerned about individual survival, but that of ideas and policy within society.
His key points are:
1. try new things, in the expectation that some will fail
2. make failure survivable, because it will be common
3. make sure you know when you have failed
In my view the main message is slightly overwhelmed with stories and over-elaboration. But there are good points well made in this book, not least the challenge to experiment, embrace risk, and deal well with failure.
Essentially, he argues, success grows out of a process akin to Natural Selection. This leads away from seeing progress as top-down to innovation being rather wild 'in the field' (Cf. divine creation vs Darwinian evolution.)
Largely he is not thinking of individual success but something larger scale: military strategy, aircraft design, climate change mitigation, musical production. He is not concerned about individual survival, but that of ideas and policy within society.
His key points are:
1. try new things, in the expectation that some will fail
2. make failure survivable, because it will be common
3. make sure you know when you have failed
In my view the main message is slightly overwhelmed with stories and over-elaboration. But there are good points well made in this book, not least the challenge to experiment, embrace risk, and deal well with failure.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 329 reviews