Our Nov 3rd post—Ask The Right Person The Right Question—pointed out that for us to be confident in the answers to our questions, it’s imperative that the person(s) be ‘in a position to know’. Perhaps that seems obvious, but too often questions are asked of people that aren’t really informed on the subject in question. This is especially true when it comes to surveys.
Consider the sample survey we use to assess the strength of the mind-sets within an organization. A seven point scale is assigned to each of the seven mind-sets—seven is great and one is terrible. An organization may score consistently high (6.3) in mind-set #1 (professionals have a bias for results) across the entire enterprise. Mind-set #2 (Professionals realize (and act like) they’re a part of something bigger than themselves) may also score well (5.4).
The score of 6.3 for mind-set #1 seems like a natural in light of the organization achieving 110% of its annual revenue goal—the organization’s most important objective for the year. Across all departments, no department scored mind-set #1 lower than 6.0—showing great consistency across all departments.
Mind-set #2 is another story. Every department scored mind-set #2 at least a six—except for one. The CFO’s office collectively scored mind-set two a 3.1. It was the scores from the CFO’s office that brought the overall score for mind-set two down to 5.4. Was there unique knowledge contained within the CFO’s office that prompted the 3.1? Turns out, there was!
In light of the great revenue year, the company was sitting on a pile of cash. Instead of paying down the company’s extensive debt, the organization’s leaders (by way of a contentious 60%/40% vote) elected to take generous bonuses instead. This ultimately proved problematic as creditors later came with saber’s rattling.
Those in the CFO’s office had unique knowledge. In turn, they scored mind-set #2 poorly—deservedly so. Had the rest of the enterprise known the same, no doubt, they too would have scored mind-set #2 poorly. What initially looked like a pretty good score for mind-set #2 turned out to be a false-positive. This was caused by the lack of good information…people were simply ill-informed.
Sometimes what looks like a survey aberration is really an important by-product of unique knowledge. It would have been a mistake to become confident about the survey results associated with mind-set #2 from the raw numbers alone. Confidence should stem from informed choices….and reinforces the point that people aren’t necessarily ‘in the know’ as much as we assume.
No comment yet, add your voice below!