I find it genuinely hilarious that we seem to think businesses have a wide variety of problems to solve and a wide variety of strategies they need to engage in yet the solution for this will be to assume all human beings need to work the same way, make it make sense
Everything gets to vary except for individuals! I mean... Come on
TBF people often try to work under the assumption that the problems businesses solve can be squashed into the same mold too. In my anecdotal experience assuming this and assuming that everyone works the same way is correlated, so much so I assumed without thinking that they have the same cause.
A particular example of same-mold thinking I was thinking of was wanting a metric for "how well a given problem is solved right now" and expecting it to be slowly varying over time, which ignores problems where any partial solutions are worthless or nearly worthless.
If you apply a (claimed) solution, and the metric for solution value remains zero, then it's still a valuable metric.
Yes.
What makes no sense is to expect a good solution that takes a long time to implement to increase the metric gradually while it's being developed/deployed.
Such assumptions lead people to create metric that measure progress of a solution instead of state of the issue, which causes (a) people to declare success when the "progress" metric reaches some threshold lower than 100% (b) fixation on a particular solution.
@robryk @grimalkina
I was thinking about this a lot recently. We have a culture of fanatical individualism but we also have extreme ideas of normality to the point that in much of social science simply being female puts you outside of the statistical research, let alone being trans or non-binary. We recognise that everyone is entitled to their own opinion but miss the point when doing nutritional science that some people might have different metabolism. It is very incongruous
@Duncan @robryk I wrestle with this a lot as well, particularly because as a social scientist I want to contribute to the world with generalizable claims that can be used to steer evidence based decisions, but recognize that people's eagerness to reduce everything to one answer will take those claims too far, and wanting to recognize the differences between groups, but also without turning everything into a fishing expedition and artificially inflating group differences (another risk)...
@robryk that's a fair point, I will think about that!