<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>datadoodle &#187; intuition</title>
	<atom:link href="http://datadoodle.com/tag/intuition/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://datadoodle.com</link>
	<description>Where the humans meet analytics and related subjects</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 13 Jan 2012 00:03:56 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
		<item>
		<title>To hell with &#8220;guts,&#8221; Accenture&#8217;s survey gave a false choice</title>
		<link>http://datadoodle.com/2009/02/02/to-hell-with-guts/</link>
		<comments>http://datadoodle.com/2009/02/02/to-hell-with-guts/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 Feb 2009 11:15:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ted Cuzzillo</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[BI industry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[definitions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intuition]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[survey]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://datadoodle.com/?p=389</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Forty percent of business executives trust their guts over data? I admit those survey results made me raise an eyebrow &#8212; but then I put it down again. False alarm. Forty percent may be significant, but compared with what? Is that worse than last year? For all we know &#8212; at least from the press [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p></p><p>
Forty percent of business executives trust their guts over data? I admit those survey results made me raise an eyebrow &mdash; but then I put it down again. False alarm.
</p>
<p>
Forty percent may be significant, but compared with what? Is that worse than last year? For all we know &mdash; at least from the <a href="http://newsroom.accenture.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=4777">press release</a>, since I can&#8217;t seem to find the actual report &mdash; this could be a huge improvement for the analytics industry.
</p>
<p>
I&#8217;d like to know more about that 40 percent who prefer &#8220;guts&#8221; over data. How many used pure clairvoyance, and how many used aids like tarot cards, tea leaves and pig entrails?
</p>
<p>
If the survey had probed more &mdash; I assume it didn&#8217;t &mdash; it would have found the answer: Data is everywhere, and it&#8217;s often stored layer upon layer and called experience. &#8220;Guts&#8221; is another way to say, &#8220;I don&#8217;t know where I got the data.&#8221;
</p>
<p>
Even a lot of thought leaders in the analytics industry would admit to deciding by gut. Imagine if 254 of them were asked &#8220;guts or data for most decisions about your own business?&#8221; They decide every day things like whether they&#8217;ll attend this conference or that one, when to take a vacation, how to replace that failing keyboard, and whether to go to the mall with the wife or finish that damned course outline. What&#8217;s it gonna be, Charlie, data or guts? My gut says most would pick guts.
</p>
<p>
Here&#8217;s what the results do say: Sixty-one percent of those who opt for guts cited lack of good data &mdash; I suppose as in, &#8220;Hmm, no data. Let&#8217;s eyeball it.&#8221; Wouldn’t anyone say so? The survey&#8217;s base of 254 managers and executives working at companies earning $500 million or more in 2007 are no fools. (At least as reported here.) Sixty percent &mdash; apparently overlapping the first group &mdash; cited no past data, data that could show trends. Fifty-five percent gave the excuse that their decisions relied on qualitative or subjective factors.
</p>
<p>
Guts or judgement is a murky choice, but the results are total waste if the questionnaire forced respondents to define terms for themselves. Were respondents given the simple choice of analytics or &#8220;judgment&#8221;? If so, the &#8220;40 percent&#8221; results mean nothing.
</p>
<p>
To see why, look at the comments after Thomas Wailgum&#8217;s <a href="http://advice.cio.com/thomas_wailgum/to_hell_with_business_intelligence_40_percent_of_execs_trust_gut">&#8220;To Hell with Business Intelligence: 40 Percent of Execs Trust Gut&#8221;</a> on CIO.com. Most confuse analytics with tools, architecture, or Dilbertertian obstacles. So what did respondents really mean when they chose guts or judgment? Did some, for example, think of a bad interface and select judgement as a way of voting against the tool? We don&#8217;t know.
</p>
<p>
Only a few commenters, such as Kalido CTO Cliff Longman, try to untangle the false choice of guts-or-data.
</p>
<p>
Longman writes, &#8220;Managers make all decisions by gut feel (a mixture of experience, beliefs, observations etc.) &mdash; but if there is trusted data available for them to see, I think it becomes part of the &#8216;gut feeling.&#8217; &#8230; Digestible data &mdash; good for the gut.&#8221;
</p>
<p>
Me, I use tea leaves. Good for the guts.
</p>
<p>
<i>Also see Neil Raden&#8217;s <a href="http://mjfb-books.blogspot.com/2009/01/several-executives-still-trust-in-gut.html">&#8220;Gut Versus Analytics: What&#8217;s the Real Story?&#8221;</a> and Marcus Borba&#8217;s <a href="http://mjfb-books.blogspot.com/2009/01/several-executives-still-trust-in-gut.html">&#8220;Several executives trust gut.&#8221;</a></i></p>
<img src="http://datadoodle.com/wordpress/?ak_action=api_record_view&id=389&type=feed" alt="" />]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://datadoodle.com/2009/02/02/to-hell-with-guts/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

