The Most Underrated Bias: Quantification!

Mistakes of Mainstream Management [MMM Series]: Chapter 10

Mainstream management makes many mistakes - quantification bias is just one among them (well, this is chapter 10 of the series). Don’t get me wrong - metrics and quantification are needed to manage a business. Quantification by itself can’t be asserted as inherently harmful.

Having said that, our bias to focus on things that are easily quantifiable has been pointed out by many multidisciplinary thinkers over time. Here is the late Charlie Munger on this topic:

“𝗜𝘁’𝘀 𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗹𝗹𝘆 𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗿𝗶𝗯𝗹𝗲 𝗶𝗻 𝗯𝘂𝘀𝗶𝗻𝗲𝘀𝘀.

𝗬𝗼𝘂’𝘃𝗲 𝗴𝗼𝘁 𝗮 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗲𝘅 𝘀𝘆𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗺, 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗶𝘁 𝘀𝗽𝗲𝘄𝘀 𝗼𝘂𝘁 𝗮 𝗹𝗼𝘁 𝗼𝗳 𝘄𝗼𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗿𝗳𝘂𝗹 𝗻𝘂𝗺𝗯𝗲𝗿𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗲𝗻𝗮𝗯𝗹𝗲 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝘁𝗼 𝗺𝗲𝗮𝘀𝘂𝗿𝗲 𝘀𝗼𝗺𝗲 𝗳𝗮𝗰𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘀.

𝗕𝘂𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿𝗲 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗼𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿 𝗳𝗮𝗰𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗿𝗶𝗯𝗹𝘆 𝗶𝗺𝗽𝗼𝗿𝘁𝗮𝗻𝘁, 𝘆𝗲𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿𝗲’𝘀 𝗻𝗼 𝗽𝗿𝗲𝗰𝗶𝘀𝗲 𝗻𝘂𝗺𝗯𝗲𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝗰𝗮𝗻 𝗽𝘂𝘁 𝘁𝗼 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝘀𝗲 𝗳𝗮𝗰𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘀. 𝗬𝗼𝘂 𝗸𝗻𝗼𝘄 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝘆’𝗿𝗲 𝗶𝗺𝗽𝗼𝗿𝘁𝗮𝗻𝘁, 𝗯𝘂𝘁 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝗱𝗼𝗻’𝘁 𝗵𝗮𝘃𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗻𝘂𝗺𝗯𝗲𝗿𝘀.

𝗪𝗲𝗹𝗹, 𝗽𝗿𝗮𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗹𝗹𝘆 𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘆𝗯𝗼𝗱𝘆 𝟭) 𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘄𝗲𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘀𝘁𝘂𝗳𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗰𝗮𝗻 𝗯𝗲 𝗻𝘂𝗺𝗯𝗲𝗿𝗲𝗱 𝗯𝗲𝗰𝗮𝘂𝘀𝗲 𝗶𝘁 𝘆𝗶𝗲𝗹𝗱𝘀 𝘁𝗼 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘀𝘁𝗮𝘁𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗹 𝘁𝗲𝗰𝗵𝗻𝗶𝗾𝘂𝗲𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝘆’𝗿𝗲 𝘁𝗮𝘂𝗴𝗵𝘁 𝗶𝗻 𝗮𝗰𝗮𝗱𝗲𝗺𝗶𝗮 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝟮) 𝗱𝗼𝗲𝘀𝗻’𝘁 𝗺𝗶𝘅 𝗶𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗵𝗮𝗿𝗱-𝘁𝗼-𝗺𝗲𝗮𝘀𝘂𝗿𝗲 𝘀𝘁𝘂𝗳𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗺𝗮𝘆 𝗯𝗲 𝗺𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝗶𝗺𝗽𝗼𝗿𝘁𝗮𝗻𝘁.

𝗧𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗶𝘀 𝗮 𝗺𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗸𝗲 𝗜’𝘃𝗲 𝘁𝗿𝗶𝗲𝗱 𝗮𝗹𝗹 𝗺𝘆 𝗹𝗶𝗳𝗲 𝘁𝗼 𝗮𝘃𝗼𝗶𝗱, 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗜 𝗵𝗮𝘃𝗲 𝗻𝗼 𝗿𝗲𝗴𝗿𝗲𝘁𝘀 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗵𝗮𝘃𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗱𝗼𝗻𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁.”

- Charlie Munger

But, the mainstream management mantra in Silicon Valley has always been and still is:

If you can’t measure it, you can’t manage it.

I’ve always wondered about this conflict… What nuanced message are the multidisciplinary thinkers trying to convey? Today’s post will explore this topic.

Table of Contents

The Human Element

I’ve worked with several business, software development and cybersecurity executives - both as a consultant and as full-time employee. I have studied this phenomenon curiously as to how executives usually miss the human elements - both inside the corporation (their employees) and outside the corporation (their customers).

  • Inside: They only look at a dashboard to make decisions and formulate their “strategy” - they miss reading the room, ignore the psychological disposition of their people, not factor in their aspirations and motivations (& incentives) and the conflicts that could arise from them. They don’t get that the outcomes that they seek are very much socio-technical and not just technical.

  • Outside: They don’t understand what they are measuring, what it is a proxy for, and why they should optimize it and the second-order effects of such optimization. The number and the dashboard themselves become the focus of every meeting, all the teams rally behind it, but the business/customer implications are completely ignored. Here is Jeff Bezos cautioning leaders to be always on guard when it comes to ”metrics-driven” management 👇🏾

Let’s now look a couple of examples where the focus on the “not-so-easy-to-quantify” aspects led to creative solutions… As it turns out, the fundamental ideas about this stuff is well-known and used by marketing folks that understand behavioral science. I’ll set the context with a pertinent quote that is often attributed to the legendary advertising tycoon, David Ogilvy, the 'Father of Advertising':

“The trouble with market research is that people don't think what they feel, they don't say what they think and they don't do what they say.”

- David Ogilvy

Subscribe to keep reading

This content is free, but you must be subscribed to Cyb3rSyn Labs - Newsletter, Library & Community to continue reading.

Already a subscriber?Sign in.Not now

Reply

or to participate.