Hidden potential: the science of achieving greater things by Adam Grant

/March 2025/ I found this book an easy read with the multiple stories and understandable analogies used to illustrate the author’s points. Of the analogies, I especially liked the one on a compass vs a map (having a mere direction vs an entire plan), and pulling oneself up by each other’s bootstrap (being the one others could count on). The stories on the Golden Thirteen (first black officers in the US Navy) was blockbuster worthy as was Astraunaut Jose’s story of resilience and persistence, one which moved me to tears. However, I did find some sections to be slightly repetitive as the author tries to emphasise his point. I also felt there could also be more balance in his arguments.

The author championed character skills (being proactive, prosocial, determined and disciplined) as the drivers for growth and growth as the measure of success and potential. He advocated assessing an individual by the distance travelled (growth) rather than merely on the objective state of where they were. To fuel growth, he suggested actively seeking discomfort, absorbing like a sponge, and become an imperfectionist. To quote, “if you want to get it right, it has to first feel wrong”. Indeed, more often than not we are afraid of making mistakes, failing, and looking stupid, that we stay in our comfort zones which is stifling our growth & potential.

He then wrote about Scaffolding as the next pillar for achieving one’s potential. Methods under this pillar include deliberate play, harmonious passion, and coaching others. He made good points on being proactive about rest and recovery as well as pointing out that the path to success is often a roundabout one requiring backing up or detours. Languishing, a term he identified with whilst writing the book, is the feeling of being stuck and not making progress. We have all been there. His suggestion? Turning to side gigs, as well as reaching out to multiple “guides”. Rather than seeking advice, he recommended asking them to retrace their routes and identifying their turning points, skills they sought out, changes they made, and advice they took or ignored. I found this empowering as it acknowledges that we are all unique in our pursuits/struggles/quests and the agency lie in ourselves. It is up to ourselves to distill the information we seek out and use it to charter our own paths. To quote, “No one shares the same strength & weaknesses, their hills and valleys are not yours … no one knows your exact journey”.

The last pillar was systems of opportunity, shifting the emphasis from individuals to systems and institutions. He drew on the case study on Finland’s education system and identified key takeaways including (i) dont waste a brain (ii) loop students with the same teacher (iii) freedom for individual interests (iv) qualified teachers. When I read the section on not wasting a brain, I reflected upon my time in Junior College as a struggling student who was at times in the bottom 20% of the cohort. My Math tutor, also the head of the department, had dedicated time with myself and two other classmates to work on tutorials during breaks. It felt like a chore and somewhat a shame back then, being the only three in the class who required additional attention. But looking back, I am grateful for her going the extra mile and for not giving up on us. In the end, my grade for the GCE A levels Math was still less than stellar, but that is besides the point. Singapore’s former Education Minister Heng Swee Keat introduced the phrase “Every school, a good school” in 2011 (generally viewed with skepticism by the public). And I wonder if every school is indeed a good school in Finland? Are resources similar across the schools? Do parents have preferences due to perceived or actual difference between schools? Do some schools help acheive a child’s potential more than others? Or is the culture of elitism in Singapore to blame?

On the workplace, he identified ways to facilitate collective intelligence in teams - (i) shared responsibility (ii) prosocial leader (iii) brainwriting (independent idea generation) over brainstorming and then discussing the ideas in a group (iv) lattice system (having channels across levels and between teams - multiple paths for an idea to hatch). I was intrigued by the point on shared responsibility - the knowledge that we need one another to succeed in a common goal and being evaluated on a common outcome. As the author puts it, often we are just “colleagues who share a boss and a water cooler and not much else”. I found that to be so true in my past workplaces. Everyone was evaluated individually in their performance reviews, we slog on our own projects/tasks in our roles, and we share the water cooler. Will it change anything if we were reviewed the same in our performance reviews based on the common outcome? Thinking about past experiences in university group projects and the omnipresent freeloaders, I guess the required assumption is the team has intrinsic motivation and vested interest in the work (and not just the outcome). The task should also be huge/significant enough to warrant each and everyone’s efforts to succeed.

Finally, he wrote about discovering uncut gems in interviews and job applications and redefining success (where the most meaningful form of performance is progress). This was the section which I am the most unsure/hesitant about. There is always limited supply and way higher demand in sought after roles/positions/places and finite resources in a world of scarcity. How do you quantify potential? Is this a positive discrimination towards adversity and negative discrimination towards privelege (of not facing adversity)? I find it difficult to envision a world where progress is prized over other objective form of performance metrics. On job application and interviews, I’d understand why companies will choose false negatives over false positives, erring on the side of caution to choose someone who has 80% chance of performing average than bet on someone who has 20% chance of performing exceptionally well.

Quotes/other pointers from the book:

• “…embrace the discomfort of getting lost…”
• “…performance suffers as new methods are being invented tested rejected or accepted…” –trial and error to find the right method
• “When you’re stuck its usually because your heading in the wrong direction, taking the wrong path, or running out of fuel…Gaining momentum often involve backing uo and navigating own a different road even if its not the one you initially intended to travel. It might be unfamiliar, winding, and bumpy.”
• “Beating yourself up doesnt make you stronger - it leaves you bruised. Being kind to yourself isn’t ignoring your weaknesses. its about giving yourself permission to learn from your disappointments. we grow by embracing our shortcomings not punishing them.”
• confidence vs competency, certainty vs credibility, quantity vs quality