The problem I have with all of Gladwell's works (Blink, Tipping Point, etc.) is that his theories are overly simplistic. They are formulated at the cocktail party level, they make interesting stories but they are not sufficiently well thought out or detailed to actually make testable predictions or be useful in any practical sense. This is a shame because some of the things he studies (especially in Blink) is potentially very important and well done research could have wide ranging positive influence.
Ultimately though Gladwell proves himself as not a scientist, and seemingly content to just write interesting stories rather than to do the less glamorous work of fleshing out his ideas into something of practical value.
Gladwell clearly has a gift for writing interesting stories. Maybe he is also capable of being a great scientist, but I don't think he needs to be. The practical usefulness is twofold:
1. His works serve as food for thought. There are far too many topics for one man to research them all. Providing inspiration for further research is a worthwhile endeavor as well.
2. He provides thought frameworks. He reminds me of an old wise man. His writing contains key ideas, while not based on scientific fact, which are useful as rules of thumb. Sometimes decisiveness and confidence is more important than correctness or optimality. Tribal knowledge has its place.
Sure; he is basically writing popular science, for which conceptual simplicity is a key requirement.
some of the things he studies ... [are] very important and well done research could have wide ranging positive influence.
Sure, but there is no shortage of real social science research on the topics Gladwell writes about -- in fact, much of his writing takes the form of summarizing and selecting from the actual research done in the field. This research is rarely presented in a way that is interesting or approachable to the general public -- but you're free to go read a more rigorous discussion if you want to. Apparently most people are content with Gladwell.
Gladwell proves himself as not a scientist
Gladwell is absolutely not a scientist, but I don't think he is trying to be one, or would claim to be one.
Ultimately though Gladwell proves himself as not a scientist, and seemingly content to just write interesting stories rather than to do the less glamorous work of fleshing out his ideas into something of practical value.