

Cargo Cult Management. - mspeiser
http://laserlike.com/2008/09/02/cargo-cult-management/

======
DenisM
Here's an interesting observation, if a bit dangerous for my karma:

On average a succefull media outlet is serving the interest of its audience,
otherwise audience will leave and the new one may never come. So you have Fox
News with republican audience that only shows them the news and views they
want to see. Then there is some similar liberal news outlet that is also
careful not to expose the users to an uncomfortable thought. In some sense
this is an "Innovator's Dilemma, media edition" - the customers hold producers
hostage by using their consumption preferences.

So where am I going with this? There is a distinct flavor of media that is
railing against "management". Dilbert being the flag and the articles like the
one linked is the rank and file. The article is pretty much devoid of content
and is full of emotional appeal to anymosity against "them" and affinity with
"us, the sane folks". Just like the previously mentioned political "news"
media.

In other words when reading your favorite rant you are reading the content of
your own head, as best guessed by the author and selected by your filters.

Most of the time you are reading yourself.

...no mushrooms were hurt in production of this message...

~~~
wynand
I grant that we read what we want to believe, but this is true of everything,
whether true or false.

I can't convince you that the article is not thin other than pointing out that
most writing is about communicating a handful of (and often just one or two)
elaborated ideas.

~~~
DenisM
That's fine but this idea was better communicated by simply pointing to the
original piece - Feynman's speech.

This article was a rehash of Feynman's speech plus a lot of "managers do this,
down with managers!". Ironically in its blanket unqualified assertions the
article itself is what it complains about - junk science.

------
ojbyrne
As I just commented recently on another story here, I am reading "Good to
Great" and I tend to agree somewhat. Social science is different from real
science, though, and there may be a valid research approach behind Mr. Collins
and his team. Its just not clear. And seeing Fannie Mae on the list of "great"
companies is just laughable.

~~~
mspeiser
I agree that social science is different from the physical sciences, but
that's not an excuse for the cargo cult science that dominates the field. Read
Historians' Fallacies for a view of how the social sciences should approach
their work. ([http://www.amazon.com/Historians-Fallacies-Toward-
Historical...](http://www.amazon.com/Historians-Fallacies-Toward-Historical-
Thought/dp/0061315451)).

~~~
ojbyrne
Social sciences have well-developed methodologies for dealing with fallacies.
[http://www.amazon.com/Experimental-Quasi-Experimental-
Design...](http://www.amazon.com/Experimental-Quasi-Experimental-Designs-
Generalized-Inference/dp/0395615569) is the bible, and is mostly taught to
doctoral students. But chances are Mr. Collins has never heard of it, since
he's in business faculty. But he might have, and might actually have a solid
research design. Just that its hard to tell from the book.

The practice of management in the real world is full of imperfections, because
its about people, and people are imperfect.

------
ajkirwin
Am I the only person who exposes themselves to things they don't like (be it
Fox News, conservative blogs, or even sites on car repair and marxism), just
so they can avoid this trap? So you can know that whilst, yes, most of the
time you're 'reading your own mind', as it were, you're also making sure to
give yourself a taste of the other side.

