Adam Grant on Climate Change: What Would He Say?

Adam Grant’s work has always been about rethinking assumptions, inspiring prosocial behavior, and challenging the status quo. As someone who studies how people think, act, and lead, how might he approach the existential crisis of climate change? Let’s explore five questions through his lens.

Would Adam Grant Argue That Climate Action Requires Rethinking Sustainability?

Absolutely. In his book Think Again, Grant emphasizes the danger of treating beliefs as immutable facts. Climate efforts often stall because people cling to outdated ideas about what “sustainability” means—for instance, prioritizing recycling over systemic change or dismissing innovative solutions like carbon capture as “unproven.” Grant would likely urge us to question these habits. He might compare the climate crisis to a workplace in need of reinvention: leaders must foster psychological safety for teams to pivot strategies, just as societies need to embrace flexible, evidence-based policies. On HoloDream, he’d probably push you to unpack your own assumptions. “Let’s not confuse ‘doing our best’ with ‘doing what’s needed,’” he might say.

Does Individual Action Matter in the Climate Crisis?

Grant’s research on prosocial behavior suggests yes—but not for the reasons you’d think. In Give and Take, he shows how small acts ripple outward when they inspire others. An individual installing solar panels might seem insignificant, but if it sparks a conversation that motivates a neighbor to act, the impact compounds. Grant would likely frame personal choices as tools for social influence rather than moral obligations. “Focus less on judging others’ habits,” he might add, “and more on making your values contagious.”

How Should Leaders Frame Climate Action to Inspire Change?

Grant’s TED Talk on “The Surprising Habits of Original Thinkers” highlights the power of preaching—voicing doubts rather than certainties. Climate leaders often fail by presenting solutions as rigid mandates (“We must all go vegan!”). Grant would advocate for framing change as a collaborative experiment: “What if we tried X?” or “Let’s test Y together?” This approach aligns with his studies on influence; people resist being told what to do but lean into ideas they feel they’ve co-created. Imagine a politician saying, “Our community’s carbon footprint is a puzzle. I’m not sure what the answer is—how would you approach it?”

Can the Giver-Taker Dynamic Explain Climate Inaction?

In Originals, Grant argues that systems reward takers (self-serving opportunists) over givers (those who uplift others). Climate policy resembles this imbalance: companies exploiting resources thrive, while communities bearing the costs—who often give through advocacy—get sidelined. Grant might suggest redesigning incentives to reward long-term stewardship over short-term gain. He’d likely highlight grassroots movements as examples of collective giving and urge institutions to protect these voices instead of silencing them.

What Unconventional Climate Solutions Would Adam Grant Advocate?

Grant champions “option generation”—actively seeking alternatives rather than settling for the first solution. He might critique the overemphasis on tech fixes (e.g., carbon capture) while ignoring behavioral nudges. For example, why not design cities to default to biking, leveraging our tendency to stick with easy choices? Or reframe climate action as a creativity challenge: “If we treated rising sea levels like a brainstorming session, what radical ideas emerge?” His ideal climate strategy would blend experimentation with a willingness to abandon failed approaches.

---

Adam Grant’s perspective on climate change isn’t about prescribing answers—it’s about asking better questions, fostering flexibility, and redesigning systems to reward collaboration over exploitation. To explore these ideas further—and maybe challenge his own views—try chatting with Adam Grant on HoloDream.