There’s a good chance that you will spend a large portion of your life constantly worrying about what to do next. What career should I pursue? What will bring me the most money? Am I smart enough to do this? And most importantly: how do I get there?

To avoid contemplating on all of these questions, we naturally resort to focusing on grades, colleges, and perfecting each of our talents. That is simply what the hard-work culture in America has taught us. However, there is an essential factor in success that a lot of us overlook.

In 1921, Lewis Terman began his experiment of grouping together children with the highest IQ scores, who he named his “Termites”, to examine what they ended up doing with their lives. Misjudging, Terman believed the smarter the person, the more successful they will become. However, his experiment left him very underwhelmed. By the time the Termites reached adulthood, most of them had ordinary careers and lives. None ended up becoming innovators or Nobel Prize winners. In fact, two students he rejected because of their scores became Nobel laureates.

Terman’s misconception is one that many of us tend to make. America’s education system has shaped us to believe that having higher grades makes us more likely to achieve great success. Falling into this trap, many students have difficulty understanding that academic success does not make us stand out amongst everyone else in the real world. In fact, the way we are cultivated by the world around us is far more accurate in determining our success.

In Malcom Gladwell’s “Outliers”, he explains this further by using real stories of two men that were put in similar situations for their own good but couldn’t have been more different in the way they handled them.

Throughout his life, Christopher Langan was very intelligent. He had a perfect GPA, the highest grades in all of his classes, and the ability to calculate almost any math equation in his head within a split second. He even proved to be American television show “1 vs 100″‘s smartest contestant.  He is an example of what we as students believe to be “perfect”.

Right now, Langan is living on a farm in Missouri as a horse rancher. He is not leading any academic conferences or graduate seminars. Langan’s intellectual ability did not hand him success in his life. This raises the question: why isn’t he doing anything exceptional with his tremendous talent?

Langan was given many opportunities during his early adulthood with his abilities. While trying to do ordinary college student tasks such as switching classes, he gets shut down by professors and does not make any attempts to negotiate with them for his needs. This can be explained by examining his background.

Langan was born into a very poor household. He grew up in an environment where the people around him did not have a degree, and most importantly, did not give him a suitable environment that allowed him to nurture and develop his gifts. He experienced many financial difficulties during college, which is very common for the regular American student. However, he was never taught how to negotiate with authority figures or effectively communicate with administrators to solve his issues. Thus, after all of his difficulties, he dropped out leaving him with only one and a half years’ worth of college and no degree.

This is seen regularly throughout lower-class households. Struggling parents tend to consider their child’s talents as hobbies, something that is separate from the adult world and should remain independent to them. They are looked at as traits, not futures or careers. In addition, lower class families are more intimidated by authority. Langan adapted these mindsets from his family. Because they thought like this, so did he. There Langan was, left with only his incredible analytical knowledge and nowhere to take it.

On the other hand, there is Robert Oppenheimer. He was not as intelligent as Langan but ended up being a successful scientist who invented the atomic bomb. When he was younger; he tried to kill his tutor, was affiliated with communists, did not have administrative expertise, and was seen as an impractical guy. Despite unfortunate circumstances, he had the charm to lure all of his authorities to give him a chance.

Oppenheimer has what psychologists call “practical intelligence”. He was born in fortunate conditions where he was taught to pursue his individual preferences by actively managing each interaction he makes and effectively handling each challenge he faces. His higher-class family taught him to shift the balance of power in every situation to himself and prove himself to every person he meets. The ability to do these are what truly distinguish the outliers from the rest.

This is all to say that the true root of success is not having genius abilities but how one manages to maneuver situations in their favor. Although a big part of Gladwell’s writing is that there is a common pattern of this happening in more fortunate families, everyone has the ability to find higher success. However, it is important to understand that background determines attitudes. And that is to say, attitudes determine success.

People should become aware of how the environment around them affects their traits in order to  recognize why they are falling behind everyone else. When they realize a need to improve their practical intelligence by practicing communication skills, they will notice more progress in achieving their goals. However, when we keep on focusing solely on our grades and relying on intelligence, we will continue to fall into America’s trap and ask the same questions to ourselves about where to go next.