Why did Pablo Picasso end up earning more than Vincent Van Gogh? Picasso left an estate valued at $750 million, Van Gogh died a pauper.
According to Professor Gregory Berns, it was all because Picasso knew how to network, and Van Gogh didn't. Van Gogh was a loner, his only connection to the art world was through his brother. Picasso, on the other hand, mixed with writers, politicians and other artists. More details about Berns' theory is in the Sloan Management Review.
As the magazine points out, social networking is crucial for innovation as we now see more companies finding ideas and technologies from external sources. Procter & Gamble and IBM are cases in point.
Still, I reckon extending it to Picasso and van Gogh is a bit too much. Van Gogh's big problem wasn't his inability to network, it was his mental health that in the end had him taking his life. Besides, there are many artists with extensive networks that wouldn't earn anywhere near what Picasso made.
So Van Gogh's mental state affected his future. But genius might have had something to do with Picasso's success.
no comment untill now