Omar Usman – 3 Things I Learned from Zero to One Peter Thiel

Omar Usman
Share Page

AI: Summary ©

The founder of PayPal and other companies emphasized the importance of finding the best practices and building upon what is already there in order to find the best answers to the contrarian question. The most powerful pattern in finding the right answers is identifying the true cause of motivation and building monopolies, rather than just money and gains. The importance of competition and empowerment is emphasized, as technology is seen as vital in a globalized world and companies need to blend the human and technology elements.

AI: Summary ©

00:00:00 --> 00:00:02
			In this video, I'm sharing 3 things I
		
00:00:02 --> 00:00:04
			learned from the book 0 to 1 by
		
00:00:04 --> 00:00:07
			Peter Thiel. Peter Thiel was the famous billionaire
		
00:00:07 --> 00:00:09
			founder of PayPal and other of other companies.
		
00:00:10 --> 00:00:11
			And the book 0 to 1 is a
		
00:00:11 --> 00:00:13
			book about innovation. It's a book about how
		
00:00:13 --> 00:00:15
			to think about the future. And the title
		
00:00:15 --> 00:00:16
			to me was really interesting.
		
00:00:16 --> 00:00:18
			He says, we normally think about going from
		
00:00:18 --> 00:00:21
			1 to n, meaning one to any other
		
00:00:21 --> 00:00:22
			variable.
		
00:00:22 --> 00:00:24
			And when we go from 1 to any
		
00:00:24 --> 00:00:27
			other variable, meaning innovating, iterating, getting to, you
		
00:00:27 --> 00:00:28
			know, a higher level,
		
00:00:29 --> 00:00:31
			What we're doing is we're building upon what's
		
00:00:31 --> 00:00:33
			already there. We're looking for best practices.
		
00:00:33 --> 00:00:35
			He says best practices lead to dead ends,
		
00:00:35 --> 00:00:37
			but the best pads are those that are
		
00:00:37 --> 00:00:39
			untried. Hence, the title 0 to 1. Because
		
00:00:39 --> 00:00:42
			when you go from 0 to 1, you're
		
00:00:42 --> 00:00:44
			building something completely brand new. Ace says that
		
00:00:44 --> 00:00:46
			the most powerful pattern that he's found in
		
00:00:46 --> 00:00:47
			successful people
		
00:00:48 --> 00:00:51
			is their ability to find and extract value
		
00:00:51 --> 00:00:54
			from places that was completely unexpected. And the
		
00:00:54 --> 00:00:55
			way that they're able to do this is
		
00:00:55 --> 00:00:57
			by approaching things from a principle based perspective
		
00:00:57 --> 00:01:00
			instead of formulaic perspective. You know, a formula
		
00:01:00 --> 00:01:02
			is the best practice. A formula is here's
		
00:01:02 --> 00:01:05
			how things have always been done. But the
		
00:01:05 --> 00:01:07
			other way, the zero to one way is
		
00:01:07 --> 00:01:09
			looking for looking for things that haven't maybe
		
00:01:09 --> 00:01:11
			been tried, they haven't been tested, and being
		
00:01:11 --> 00:01:12
			the one that kind of unearths
		
00:01:12 --> 00:01:14
			that. So the first thing that I learned
		
00:01:14 --> 00:01:16
			was it was a it's a really a
		
00:01:16 --> 00:01:19
			reflective question that is, what is my answer
		
00:01:19 --> 00:01:20
			to the contrarian question?
		
00:01:21 --> 00:01:23
			Peter Thiel says that in job interviews, he
		
00:01:23 --> 00:01:25
			always asks people, what's your answer to the
		
00:01:25 --> 00:01:27
			contrarian question?
		
00:01:27 --> 00:01:30
			Meaning, what are you convinced of so strongly
		
00:01:30 --> 00:01:32
			that other people think is not true? Or
		
00:01:32 --> 00:01:34
			what are most people convinced of as true
		
00:01:34 --> 00:01:36
			that you think is not true? He says
		
00:01:36 --> 00:01:38
			a lot of people give answers like, well,
		
00:01:38 --> 00:01:40
			I think the educational system is completely messed
		
00:01:40 --> 00:01:41
			up. It needs to be overhauled. And he
		
00:01:41 --> 00:01:43
			says, okay. Well, that might be
		
00:01:44 --> 00:01:46
			somewhat of a minority opinion maybe, but it's
		
00:01:46 --> 00:01:48
			something that a lot of people say. So
		
00:01:48 --> 00:01:50
			it's it's not that out of the realm
		
00:01:50 --> 00:01:50
			of normalcy.
		
00:01:51 --> 00:01:53
			And what he is looking for is someone
		
00:01:53 --> 00:01:55
			that's really going out on a limb on
		
00:01:55 --> 00:01:57
			putting a stake in their own beliefs and
		
00:01:57 --> 00:01:58
			in their own conviction.
		
00:01:59 --> 00:02:02
			Because to articulate something that's relatively accepted doesn't
		
00:02:02 --> 00:02:03
			take any courage.
		
00:02:03 --> 00:02:05
			There's a lot of brilliant people but they
		
00:02:05 --> 00:02:07
			don't have the courage to speak up.
		
00:02:07 --> 00:02:09
			The answer if you have a strong answer
		
00:02:09 --> 00:02:11
			to the contrarian question,
		
00:02:11 --> 00:02:13
			what it's displaying is both a level of
		
00:02:13 --> 00:02:14
			brilliance and intelligence,
		
00:02:14 --> 00:02:17
			but also a level of courage that most
		
00:02:17 --> 00:02:19
			other brilliant people might not have.
		
00:02:19 --> 00:02:21
			A great example of an answer to the
		
00:02:21 --> 00:02:23
			contrarian question is out of Dan Pink in
		
00:02:23 --> 00:02:25
			his TED Talk on motivation, which I'll link
		
00:02:25 --> 00:02:26
			to in the description below.
		
00:02:26 --> 00:02:28
			But Dan Pink says that we you know,
		
00:02:28 --> 00:02:29
			we're normally convinced
		
00:02:30 --> 00:02:33
			that employees are motivated by money and by
		
00:02:33 --> 00:02:36
			material gains, but that actually the true cause
		
00:02:36 --> 00:02:38
			of motivation, the true cause of motivation in
		
00:02:38 --> 00:02:39
			the workplace
		
00:02:39 --> 00:02:42
			is autonomy, mastery, and purpose,
		
00:02:42 --> 00:02:44
			and things that aren't necessarily tied to finances.
		
00:02:45 --> 00:02:46
			And so he's saying that here's what most
		
00:02:46 --> 00:02:49
			people believe, but here's what I believe instead.
		
00:02:49 --> 00:02:51
			The reason that this is important
		
00:02:51 --> 00:02:52
			is because
		
00:02:53 --> 00:02:55
			to understand the future, we have to understand
		
00:02:55 --> 00:02:57
			the past. The reason that the Contrarian Question
		
00:02:57 --> 00:02:59
			is important is it is because it gives
		
00:02:59 --> 00:03:02
			us a different way of assessing the present
		
00:03:02 --> 00:03:03
			and the past.
		
00:03:03 --> 00:03:05
			And that helps to shape the future. You
		
00:03:05 --> 00:03:06
			know, if we if we go back and
		
00:03:06 --> 00:03:08
			we say, well, what are the conventional beliefs
		
00:03:08 --> 00:03:09
			that might need to be challenged? We can
		
00:03:09 --> 00:03:11
			always look back at things that were popular.
		
00:03:11 --> 00:03:12
			For example,
		
00:03:13 --> 00:03:15
			the dotcom bust of the late nineties. We
		
00:03:15 --> 00:03:17
			know what the conventional thinking was, but we
		
00:03:17 --> 00:03:19
			see later that it was a bubble. And
		
00:03:19 --> 00:03:21
			it's always easy to identify the bubble in
		
00:03:21 --> 00:03:21
			hindsight.
		
00:03:22 --> 00:03:23
			The contrarian is the one who's able to
		
00:03:23 --> 00:03:26
			identify that at the time that it's actually
		
00:03:26 --> 00:03:28
			happening, and that's something that's really valuable.
		
00:03:28 --> 00:03:30
			The trick though is making sure that you're
		
00:03:30 --> 00:03:31
			not just looking for, well, let me find
		
00:03:31 --> 00:03:34
			what everyone thinks is true, and just automatically
		
00:03:34 --> 00:03:36
			take a contrarian approach for the sake of
		
00:03:36 --> 00:03:36
			being contrarian.
		
00:03:37 --> 00:03:39
			The true goal, he says, is to actually
		
00:03:39 --> 00:03:42
			it's not that type of thought, but it's
		
00:03:42 --> 00:03:45
			developing your own independent thought of everybody else.
		
00:03:45 --> 00:03:48
			The second lesson I learned was that competition
		
00:03:48 --> 00:03:49
			is an ideology.
		
00:03:49 --> 00:03:52
			Look for look for building monopolies instead. Now
		
00:03:52 --> 00:03:55
			when you understand competition is an ideology, see
		
00:03:55 --> 00:03:57
			competition is assumed to be the way that
		
00:03:57 --> 00:03:58
			we do things. So we we talk in
		
00:03:58 --> 00:04:00
			these war metaphors all the time. We have
		
00:04:00 --> 00:04:02
			headhunters, and we're gonna, you know, make a
		
00:04:02 --> 00:04:04
			killing on this, and there's competition and that.
		
00:04:04 --> 00:04:06
			And he says it's ingrained in us from
		
00:04:06 --> 00:04:08
			an early age. So for example, in school
		
00:04:08 --> 00:04:11
			we're competing with one another over our class
		
00:04:11 --> 00:04:13
			ranking and our grades, and you know, who's
		
00:04:13 --> 00:04:14
			smarter than who, and who gets into what
		
00:04:14 --> 00:04:16
			college. Then when we get into higher education,
		
00:04:16 --> 00:04:19
			it's smart people competing with other smart people
		
00:04:19 --> 00:04:19
			very fiercely
		
00:04:20 --> 00:04:22
			over getting into traditional jobs like investment banking
		
00:04:22 --> 00:04:25
			or management consulting or something else. And we
		
00:04:25 --> 00:04:26
			we end up going through a lot of
		
00:04:26 --> 00:04:27
			energy, a lot of money, and a lot
		
00:04:27 --> 00:04:28
			of effort
		
00:04:28 --> 00:04:31
			to basically in the long run become conformist
		
00:04:31 --> 00:04:32
			as he says. He says a different way
		
00:04:32 --> 00:04:35
			of looking at it is that of creating
		
00:04:35 --> 00:04:35
			a monopoly.
		
00:04:36 --> 00:04:37
			And that might sound really strange because a
		
00:04:37 --> 00:04:40
			monopoly has like a very negative undertone to
		
00:04:40 --> 00:04:42
			it. But really what he's talking about is
		
00:04:42 --> 00:04:44
			something that we find discussed in the book
		
00:04:44 --> 00:04:46
			Blue Ocean Strategy if you're familiar with that.
		
00:04:46 --> 00:04:47
			And the idea of the book is this,
		
00:04:47 --> 00:04:49
			is that we should stop, you know, competing
		
00:04:49 --> 00:04:51
			for market share over the same thing
		
00:04:51 --> 00:04:54
			and instead create, you know, the red ocean.
		
00:04:54 --> 00:04:56
			We should instead create a blue ocean where
		
00:04:56 --> 00:04:58
			we're the only thing we dominate or create
		
00:04:58 --> 00:05:00
			a new market that's not already there. If
		
00:05:00 --> 00:05:02
			you want an example, think about when Gatorade
		
00:05:02 --> 00:05:04
			first came out onto the market. There were
		
00:05:04 --> 00:05:06
			no other sports drinks, there was no category,
		
00:05:06 --> 00:05:07
			they created the category,
		
00:05:08 --> 00:05:10
			and therefore they were able to dominate it.
		
00:05:10 --> 00:05:11
			He gives an example of why this
		
00:05:12 --> 00:05:14
			type of competition, or that red ocean competition
		
00:05:14 --> 00:05:15
			is a bad thing.
		
00:05:16 --> 00:05:17
			And he says he gives an example of
		
00:05:17 --> 00:05:19
			his 3 year span in in the, you
		
00:05:19 --> 00:05:22
			know, from 2010 to 2013 or somewhere in
		
00:05:22 --> 00:05:24
			there. And he says at the beginning,
		
00:05:24 --> 00:05:25
			Google and Microsoft
		
00:05:26 --> 00:05:28
			each individually had a higher market cap than
		
00:05:28 --> 00:05:30
			Apple did, But what they were doing is
		
00:05:30 --> 00:05:32
			they weren't engrossed in competition with one another.
		
00:05:32 --> 00:05:34
			So it's Chrome OS versus Windows OS. The
		
00:05:34 --> 00:05:38
			Chrome Browser versus Internet Explorer. Microsoft Office versus
		
00:05:38 --> 00:05:40
			Google Docs and on and on and on.
		
00:05:40 --> 00:05:42
			And in that 3 year time frame where
		
00:05:42 --> 00:05:43
			they're basically just creating
		
00:05:44 --> 00:05:46
			and knocking off one another's products, Google search,
		
00:05:46 --> 00:05:48
			Bing you know, Bing search, so on and
		
00:05:48 --> 00:05:48
			so forth,
		
00:05:49 --> 00:05:51
			Apple ended up having at the end of
		
00:05:51 --> 00:05:54
			3 years a higher market cap than Google
		
00:05:54 --> 00:05:55
			and Microsoft combined.
		
00:05:55 --> 00:05:57
			And one of the reasons for that is
		
00:05:57 --> 00:05:59
			what he calls the last mover advantage.
		
00:05:59 --> 00:06:01
			And the last mover advantage goes like this.
		
00:06:01 --> 00:06:03
			He gives the example of Steve Jobs. He
		
00:06:03 --> 00:06:05
			says when the Ipod came out,
		
00:06:05 --> 00:06:08
			everyone said, oh, that's cute. That's a nice
		
00:06:08 --> 00:06:10
			accessory for Macintosh users.
		
00:06:10 --> 00:06:12
			But what they weren't seeing was that this
		
00:06:12 --> 00:06:13
			was his foray
		
00:06:14 --> 00:06:14
			into portable
		
00:06:15 --> 00:06:18
			devices in a post PC world. And when
		
00:06:18 --> 00:06:20
			you look at it from that perspective and
		
00:06:20 --> 00:06:20
			you see the
		
00:06:21 --> 00:06:23
			the product line that Apple's released and the
		
00:06:23 --> 00:06:25
			trajectory that they've gone down since then, it
		
00:06:25 --> 00:06:28
			becomes very clear. And because they're the last
		
00:06:28 --> 00:06:30
			mover in that category, they dominate the market.
		
00:06:30 --> 00:06:32
			I mean if they they created that category,
		
00:06:32 --> 00:06:34
			they're the last ones standing because they are
		
00:06:34 --> 00:06:37
			so much better than everybody else. And that's
		
00:06:37 --> 00:06:38
			what lets them dominate,
		
00:06:39 --> 00:06:41
			that's what's better than just being in a
		
00:06:41 --> 00:06:44
			competition fighting over percentage points with somebody else.
		
00:06:44 --> 00:06:46
			The third lesson that I learned was the
		
00:06:46 --> 00:06:48
			importance of empowering people and not making them
		
00:06:48 --> 00:06:50
			obsolete. And this is perhaps an answer as
		
00:06:50 --> 00:06:52
			well to the contrarian question.
		
00:06:52 --> 00:06:55
			Peter Thiel says that technology is not going
		
00:06:55 --> 00:06:56
			to make people obsolete.
		
00:06:57 --> 00:06:58
			He says technology is actually something that's very
		
00:06:58 --> 00:07:01
			vital in a globalizing world because without technology
		
00:07:01 --> 00:07:04
			we won't have sustainable resources and things of
		
00:07:04 --> 00:07:06
			that nature, but people's fear always is that
		
00:07:06 --> 00:07:08
			technology is going to displace people and he
		
00:07:08 --> 00:07:10
			says that that's not the case. There There's
		
00:07:10 --> 00:07:12
			certain things that a computer can do better
		
00:07:12 --> 00:07:14
			than a human can do. So a computer
		
00:07:14 --> 00:07:16
			might be able to identify patterns
		
00:07:16 --> 00:07:18
			in a set of data better than a
		
00:07:18 --> 00:07:21
			human being might, but it takes a human
		
00:07:21 --> 00:07:23
			being to be able to compare that pattern
		
00:07:23 --> 00:07:25
			to other patterns, and to be able to
		
00:07:25 --> 00:07:27
			look and figure out a big picture or
		
00:07:27 --> 00:07:30
			look for different insights in that data. There's
		
00:07:30 --> 00:07:32
			still gonna be human element to doing that.
		
00:07:32 --> 00:07:33
			He says the path forward
		
00:07:34 --> 00:07:36
			is understanding how technology and humans complement one
		
00:07:36 --> 00:07:39
			another, and he gives the example of LinkedIn.
		
00:07:39 --> 00:07:42
			See what LinkedIn did, it didn't replace recruiters.
		
00:07:42 --> 00:07:44
			It didn't replace human resources,
		
00:07:44 --> 00:07:46
			but what it did was it gave them
		
00:07:46 --> 00:07:48
			a better way of doing their job. So
		
00:07:48 --> 00:07:49
			now a recruiter is able to go through,
		
00:07:49 --> 00:07:52
			they're able to search and filter candidates by
		
00:07:52 --> 00:07:54
			keywords, by the amount of experience, and it
		
00:07:54 --> 00:07:56
			also gives job seekers or employees
		
00:07:56 --> 00:07:59
			a way of managing their personal brand online
		
00:07:59 --> 00:08:01
			in a much more effective way than maybe,
		
00:08:01 --> 00:08:03
			you know, sending out resumes to 100 of
		
00:08:03 --> 00:08:06
			different companies at one time. But it's it's
		
00:08:06 --> 00:08:09
			combining the human element along with the technology
		
00:08:09 --> 00:08:11
			that gives us the best thing. If they
		
00:08:11 --> 00:08:12
			had come in and tried to just replace
		
00:08:12 --> 00:08:15
			recruiters or replace that HR process,
		
00:08:15 --> 00:08:17
			it probably would have failed as a product.
		
00:08:17 --> 00:08:19
			But it succeeds because it's found a way
		
00:08:19 --> 00:08:21
			to blend the 2 together. That's 3 things
		
00:08:21 --> 00:08:23
			I learned from the book 0 to 1
		
00:08:23 --> 00:08:25
			by Peter Thiel. If you like the video,
		
00:08:25 --> 00:08:26
			please make sure you hit the thumbs up.
		
00:08:26 --> 00:08:29
			Hit the subscribe button. If there's a book
		
00:08:29 --> 00:08:30
			that you want me to do in this
		
00:08:30 --> 00:08:32
			format, the 3 things I learned, please leave
		
00:08:32 --> 00:08:34
			a comment below. Otherwise, I'll try to see
		
00:08:34 --> 00:08:35
			you next week. Thanks.