We learned in science class that we should use the scientific method to evaluate hypotheses. We should study the problem, formulate a hypothesis, run a controlled experiment, analyze the resulting data, and then make an objective decision. We have also heard innumerable times that we should make “data-based decisions.” These principles have been around for centuries in one form or another, yet all too often they have been ignored, often with disastrous results.
ADVERTISEMENT |
In this article, which will be presented in three parts, I’ll look at some examples from history and daily life that illustrate key pitfalls in experimentation and data interpretation. I’ll also discuss possible countermeasures that you can apply.
Pitfall 1: Not running an experiment at all
Often we come up with a theory that makes sense to us, and then, instead of testing the theory first, we go ahead and run with it and end up with surprisingly bad results. For example, we’ve all learned the hard way that some food items should not be microwaved. How many times have you turned something into shoe leather and then immediately asked yourself why you didn’t try microwaving a small sample before ruining the entire batch?
…
Comments
Peter Drucker on the Edsel
The interested reader might want to view Peter Drucker's comments on the Edsel.
>> Ford realized that something was happening in the automobile market that ran counter to the basic assumptions on which GM and everyone else had been designing and marketing cars. No longer was the market segmented primarily by income groups; the new principle of segmentation was what we now call “lifestyles.” Ford’s response was the Mustang, a car that gave the company a distinct personality and reestablished it as an industry leader.
https://hbr.org/2002/08/the-discipline-of-innovation
Ignoring the experiment & losing 159 lives
Flight Data Analysis and Interpretation of the outward flight to Barcelona of pilot Andreas Lubitz who crashed Germanwings Flight 4U9525 would have identified aberrent behavior and should have grounded him pending investigation. In his outward flight Lubitz was found to have experimented with low altitude flight on autopilot prior to executing his final mission on his return flight. This lack of analysis and investigation until a fatal crash happened has proved catastrophic and costly to Lufthansa/Germanwings as well as public confidence in modern aviation. Similar lack of tracking analysis and trending had led to the mysterious disappearance of MAS flight MH370 and 258 lives. While trending is not part of the service contract, safe delivery of customers and goods to destination is an implied condition of travel/delivery service. Thus we are slowly beginning to see the harsh and tragic implications of lack of data analysis and interpretion for potential problem avoidance. Dr CF Lee
Add new comment