Research Summary Rare events and other nonerror outliers (such as the COVID‐19 pandemic) are important phenomena in global strategy contexts. Despite their salience, however, they have hardly been studied systematically in our field (or organizational research at large). We suggest that this is due to a dominance of the Gaussian paradigm, which (often unrealistically) assumes linearity and independence of observations. Moreover, case‐based qualitative studies which offer contextualization have been underrepresented. We thus call on researchers to abolish the practice of habitually discarding outliers, reflect on nonnormal distributions, and pursue more qualitative studies. Journal editors and reviewers should widen their assumptions regarding “acceptable” papers and reflect on the requirement of contributing to big “T” theories. Finally, PhD training should juxtapose fundamental paradigms and associated implications for epistemological choices. Managerial Summary Extreme occurrences, such as organizational crises, recessions, or pandemics, are challenges most practitioners deal with and worry about. Understanding their determinants, characteristics, and dynamics allows for heightened vigilance, preparedness, and ultimately performance. Yet, much of global strategy research (and organizational research at large) has focused on “average” phenomena, based on methodologies that assume bell‐shaped distributions and independent observations. In this note, we argue that this is not a realistic way to think about most social phenomena. In fact, most are characterized by their high degree of interdependence among elements, as well as a relative commonness of “rare” events and outliers. As a result of embracing the reality of nonnormality, scholars will be able to offer more relevant guidance to practitioners.