Matthew Dent

This article touches a bit on the same thing we have been learning about over the last few weeks. Last week we read an article “Good to Great” which focused on data mining that is article seemed to drive the point home. Using evidence to help decided a strategy is what was focused on in this article. This article proves that every company requires a slightly different system to make it function on all cylinders.

 The data mining process went to an in-depth analysis of gaming customers. Although they were unaware, each and every move that could be tracked by the gaming cards was actually being analyzed in a way to see the habits of the customer. By tracking and analyzing the customers you can begin develop a pattern and start catering to their needs. In doing this you are building a relationship that will last. The rewards cards allow the loyal customers benefits and rewards for continued loyalty. This process encourages them to continue spending money but also rewarding them for there efforts.

 This system is setup to benefit the casino however it ultimately give the casino a bit of an insight into how you function.

The “Dean’s Disease” is very true not only in academia but also in the “real world.” Too often people are given control and power they lose track of reality. This is article where we have a situation that deals with the Dean and how he becomes out of touch with what is really going on and the individuals around them. This article also touches on how individuals control subordinates by coercive or reward power. In simpler terms they control by either belittling them or controlling compensation. You may have good intentions when you were originally promoted, however, over time these fade and you fall into the trap of your predecessor.

 We see this all the time someone with years of experience get moved up and put into a situation based simply on the fact, they have the experience. In the real world or academia if you don’t surround yourself with individuals that have different perspectives and are able to give you there honest perspective you will ultimately fail. This article touches on how the Dean will do whatever it takes to make sure the college stays happy. It is much easier to agree and pretend like everything is just perfect than to pave a new route. Too often Dean’s will have power over the faculty by one of two things. They will either control them on an incentive base, controlling how much they make or simply by belittling them in a coercive manner. When there is this much control the individuals you have surrounded yourself with are no longer looking out for what is good for everyone. This becomes a cut-throat environment where they are just trying to survive and keep a position. They won’t speak up against in fear of being shot down or possibly exiled from the circle. The power that is exerted and the separation has left the Dean in a sense of distorted reality. The control factor has left the Dean in an awkward situation surrounded by a punch of people that aren’t threatening and aren’t helping the college.

 In the “real world” or in academia power hungry individuals can greatly hurt a company or college.

In the case study by Harvard Review titled Evidence Based Management we see how executive practice there own management when it is proven to fail. The facts are out there, so why don’t mangers use them? This was the questions asked by the authors in this article. Instead of seeking the truth and actually helping the company many executives seem to practice there own untested management practices.

I am blown away by the story of physicians only 15% of the time diagnosing a problem based on evidence. Instead of staying current with there ideas they tend to use what they know and what they have seen and choose not to be update on recent practices. This seems like a foolish way to go about practicing medicine but is very similar to what we see in the business world. Many companies have competent employees who can analyze a situation or system but simply stick to what they know because they are lazy and don’t want to put out the effort if they can get by with there system.

When corporations implement a system they tend to stick with that system until someone can convince them to do otherwise. Unfortunately many great ideas get passed up because or are delayed because of change. Changing the way individuals do something they have become familiar with is not easy. If this change is something drastic or completely different from what they have done previously it is going to be very difficult to get everyone on board.

The problem is in the system. Companies try to get by with fewer individuals performing more work. Running lean is good for when the economy takes a dip and bad when you want to have a company that will continue to succeed and profit.

The book Good to Great may make some points about how a company becomes great. The one thing missing is the evidence to back up the claims. This is classic example of how opinions are formed based on no factual evidence. We are all guilty of it and I remember hearing someone say that 80% of statistics aren’t correct and that 90% of the time when using statistics we make the number up on the spot.

I learned a couple new terms in the article but liked the term data mining. This is when you find patterns in your data and create an explanation based on the patterns observed. Results can easily be manipulated and especially when it comes to statistics. You can take the data completely reverse the outcome you want to show with the same set of data just by rephrasing your question or answer. I learned at a young age that numbers can be manipulated to persuade individuals and not to believe statistics. When statistics are presented be careful and don’t just assume they are fact.

A sample of data is simply just a sample until the data is tested which could lead to more factual proof the statistics are correct.