Should we believe the experts Part II
Below is a MRR and PLR article in category Business -> subcategory Other.
Should We Believe the Experts? (Part II)
Summary
Experts are often consulted to predict the future; however, accurate predictions are rare. History is filled with instances where even the most qualified individuals failed to foresee future developments.Article Body
Experts play a crucial role in helping us anticipate the future. Whether it's a physician forecasting the effects of a drug, a stock analyst predicting market trends, a human resource manager evaluating a candidate's potential, or a market researcher estimating product sales, experts are expected to guide decisions. But should we trust their predictions? History indicates that precise predictions are uncommon. This series of articles explores examples from the arts (Part I), business (Part II), and science (Part III).
Should We Trust Business Experts?
Consider the case from 1876, when Alexander Graham Bell offered his telephone patent to Western Union for $100,000. A committee of experts was set up to assess the potential of this new technology. They decisively rejected it.
They doubted Bell's invention, claiming his background as a voice teacher lacked the expertise of telegraph engineers. They argued that the public wouldn't be able to handle technical equipment and cited numerous potential communication barriers. Ultimately, the committee advised against investing in Bell's invention.
This rejection stemmed partly from what is known as numeration bias. People, including experts, often evaluate an idea based on the number of supporters it has. Faced with numerous seasoned workers in the field versus Bell, an outsider, who could blame Western Union for dismissing his patent? However, the impact of their decision was significant. By 1877, with thousands of telephones already in use, Western Union realized its mistake and created the American Speaking Telephone Company. Bell's company sued and won, forcing Western Union out of the telephone business.
Connection to Qualitative Research
In qualitative research, similar biases can skew analysis. Analysts may mistakenly rely on frequency counting, valuing ideas by how often they appear in data. This approach can be misleading.
Consider the sentence: "Bill, the duck, used his bill to pull a bill out of his pocket to pay the bill and then angrily said: 'Bill me!'" Frequency counting suggests "BILL" is most important due to its repetition. But each "BILL" holds different meanings?"referring to a person, a beak, money, a tab, and an action. Grouping them would be misleading. Also, the frequency method might overlook the significance of the anger expressed, mentioned only once.
Unlike structured quantitative data, qualitative data often features unique expressions articulated by individuals. These expressions can convey sentiments shared by many but uniquely verbalized by one. Therefore, qualitative analysis should focus on articulation, not numeration, to avoid drawing misguided conclusions.
Source: Martin J. Future Developments in Telecommunications. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice-Hall, 1977.
You can find the original non-AI version of this article here: Should we believe the experts Part II .
You can browse and read all the articles for free. If you want to use them and get PLR and MRR rights, you need to buy the pack. Learn more about this pack of over 100 000 MRR and PLR articles.