Being an “Insider-Outsider” and its Impact on Innovation and Creativity

In this article I want to discuss how being an “insider-outsider” will foster everyone’s innovative and creative abilities.

When most of us are introduced to a new environment, trend, group or phenomenon, we usually behave in one of two ways. We either decide to join, to embrace and conform to it, thereby becoming an insider or we dismiss and criticize it, thereby becoming an outsider.

It is basically the choice of being a participant or a critical observer of a phenomenon.

But it is by far more advantageous to become an “insider-outsider” and thereby become a participant and a critical observer at the same time.

Some of the most innovative people in history, including Nicola Tesla, Ludwig Wittgenstein, Albert Einstein, Ludwig van Beethoven, Pablo Picasso, Salvador Dali, Elon Musk, Steve Jobs, Walt Disney, displayed this type of behavior. It is also interesting that with the exception of Jobs and Disney all the others were immigrants in their country of residence.

So why is being an “insider-outsider” more advantageous to innovation?

When we are an insider in a phenomenon and participate in it, we are more likely to notice details about it, understand it on a deeper level and experience how it feels (basically getting the inside scoop). But at the same time we are less likely to see the bigger picture, capture the broader dynamics and notice collective flaws. Also we are less likely to view it critically, because as an insider we are guided more by impulse.

On the other hand, when we are outside a phenomenon, we are more likely to observe the overall dynamics. We can see how they evolve with time and develop a holistic picture of what is happening, thereby also noticing collective flaws. We are also more likely to critically analyze every component of it. But we will miss the inside details and not know what it feels like to be inside. So we will not develop a deep understanding of the phenomenon.

It is like observing someone surf a big wave. It looks really interesting and exciting, and we can see everything at once, including the big wave and the surfer in it. But there is no way to tell how difficult it is or what it really feels like. But at the same time a surfer can get so involved in surfing, by focusing on the moment, that he may miss surrounding dangers. The surfer is also more likely to forget that it is just a fun past-time and that there is a lot more out there.

Being an “insider-outsider” gives us both perspectives and a more complete understanding of a phenomenon. It is best to become part of an environment, participate and deeply connect with it, but still maintain a certain critical distance to it. That way one can submerge into it and develop intuition for it, but also observe and analyze it critically by seeing the bigger picture. Being an “insider-outsider” also gives one a close up, inside look and the opportunity to critically analyze it from the inside. Consequently one can develop a deep understanding, yet capture the inside flaws and maintain an ability to think differently.

An “insider-outsider”, in addition to being able to capture flaws in the phenomenon, also has enough distance, to go against the group and drastically innovate away from the current direction of the phenomenon. For a full insider it is much more difficult to drastically innovate, because the person is fully submerged into the flow.

Some of the biggest innovators were “insider-outsiders” and while being part of a field or industry, still maintained enough distance, so they could drastically innovate away from the set direction.

• Albert Einstein, as a trained physicist with ties to the physics world, while living in Zurich/Bern was far enough from Berlin, so he could disagree with the leading physicists of the time period (including a physicist as prominent as Max Plank).
• Ludwig Wittgenstein, although a Cambridge philosophy professor, maintained enough distance by spending most of his time away in Austria and Norway, that he could disagree with his mentor Bertrand Russell and the other faculty at Cambridge.
• Pablo Picasso, although an artist in Paris, maintained enough distance to the mainstream art scene, so he could blaze his own direction with cubism.
• Salvador Dali, best known as a leading figure of surrealist painting, was for many years part of the surrealist movement. But he never fully identified himself with the movement, and later in life left the movement. Similarly, he never fully identified himself with painters, so he could also innovate in many other areas of artistic expression.
• Walt Disney, as part of Hollywood, maintained enough distance to Hollywood, so he could create full-length animations, in which animals and humans could talk to each other.
• Elon Musk, an entrepreneur with a presence in Silicon Valley, also keeps his distance from it by living in LA, so if needed he can take a different approach to entrepreneurship.

Being an “insider-outsider” is more conducive to innovation!

The problem is that most of us prefer to be either insiders or outsiders of an environment, because it is much easier to do. Choosing just one option is also a common way of defining our identity.

• Most artists identify with standard artists and dress and behave like artists.
• Most surfers identify with standard surfers and dress and behave like surfers.
• Most entrepreneurs identify with standard entrepreneurs and dress and behave like entrepreneurs.
• Most bankers identify with standard bankers and dress and behave like bankers.
• Most engineers identify with standard engineers and dress and behave like engineers.
• Most scientists identify with standard scientists and dress and behave like scientists.

This is because we are a lot more comfortable choosing a complete personality, since that gives us a feeling of belonging, which we all crave.

We want to be part of a group and be accepted by it.

In many cases if one does not completely conform to all group dynamics, the group looks at it as rebellion and ostracizes that type of behavior. If one is an artist and doesn’t behave as a standard artist, the artists will look down on one. If one is a banker and does not behave as a standard banker, the bankers will look down on one. This is the case for any sociological group.

The philosopher Martin Heidegger coined the term ontological alienation, which describes the fact that most of us, instead of developing an authentic personality, only choose to become a copy from a limited number of standard personality types available. This is partially an innate human tendency to imitate our surrounding and also an outcome of group ostracizing for not fully conforming.

People like Picasso, Einstein, Tesla, Beethoven or Musk showed more courage by choosing to be “insider-outsiders”. They all had to experience this group ostracizing, until they became so successful that it stopped.

It takes a lot more courage to develop an authentic personality that is not a copy of standard types. Being an “insider-outsider” is along the lines of an authentic personality.

It is much easier to be either an insider or an outsider to a phenomenon and thereby go with a single flow. However, being an “insider-outsider” is more conducive to innovation and creativity.

Another advantage of being an “insider-outsider” is that one can participate in many different groups or phenomena, which on the surface could seem contradictory to each other.

So if we do not define ourselves unilaterally, it gives us the advantage of a broader exposure to society. This provides us many different perspectives, which is also a contributor to creativity. Another article discusses how a multi-dimensional perspective in addition to aiding creativity, also contributes to a more accurate understanding of the world.

I alluded above that most of these “insider-outsiders” and innovators were immigrants in their country of residence.

This I think is because immigrants have more practice with “insider-outsider” behavior. After arriving in a new country, immigrants are already going through an identity transformation. Usually when immigrants arrive in a new country they start as outsiders to everything. They start observing a new society to try to understand it. Over time some adopt the local customs, become integrated and start participating in many areas, just as the locals do. During this process their identity gets transformed by local customs and views.

Also during this process immigrants are naturally more likely (but not necessarily) to continue an “insider-outsider” behavior in terms of the new society. Consequently, this gives immigrants an edge when it comes to innovation and entrepreneurship. They have enough insight to understand the society dynamics, but enough distance to critically analyze and come up with something innovative.

So next time, independent if you are an immigrant or not, when you get introduced to a new environment, group, phenomenon, city, country try to show enough courage and become an “insider-outsider”. Spend time interacting, fully submerging into it and understanding it, but do not blindly conform to it completely and maintain a certain critical distance.

This approach will help you understand your surrounding much better and at the same time will help you innovate and create something drastically new.

Disclaimer:

Since I am a dyslexic, I am prone to spelling and grammar mistakes. Hopefully it does not distract from the substance of the article.

Thank you for reading this article