Analytics in People Science is Ostrich with head in sand

Analytics in People Science is Ostrich with head in sand

Analytics driving precision in prediction and control has been immensely successful in proving its effectiveness across various fields of science and study, almost every. Hence, the obvious tendency to look at and aim for analytics or artificial intelligence to act as guiding path on achieving predictability leading to control over people behaviour. However, people science is different from other, so called, ‘materialistic science’.

‘Enlightenment Effect’, a term from organisational behavioural science which describes how different patterns or theories observed and identified about people behaviour instantly change the behaviour. Elaborating briefly, if we are to observe a group of people and share details about their behaviour patterns observed, as soon as they become ‘aware’ of the patterns, those patterns are either avoided or amplified depending upon the ‘values’ of individuals and group as a whole. In either cases, the behaviour observed, instantly ceases to exist as an existing pattern. Studying other materialistic science, say electricity for an example, doesn’t change the way it behaves or its nature, however, studying people systems even by an enquiry (Simultaneity principle), instantly changes the way it behaves making the observed patterns obsolete.

So, why does this happen, and how can we arrive at a reliable pattern describing people behaviour? The answer would be, we possibly cannot, and here’s why. The expectation from science and gaining knowledge, as against wisdom, has been grossly restricted to Cognitively Conceived Control (CCC). The word ‘pattern’ in itself is on basis of assumption that everything in the world around, including people behaviour, exists in ‘absolute’ sequences which can be cognitively conceived and eventually controlled. We are looking for absolutes in this comparative world of nature…

From a macro view, zooming out, all the information about how things work are highly subjective to the person studying them, the reference point of observation. Let us look at the quadrant below:

The so called ‘True Nature’ of behaviour of anything in the universe when looked at from perspective of people studying it, can be holistically split in four quadrants as described. In the drive for predictability and control by human mind, we focus only on one quadrant of CCC. Anything and everything in the universe, including people behaviour is attempted to be confined in that space. Numbers and analytics represent a language of communication which restricts the world we live in (we perceive) within the limits of first quadrant. We focus on only those parameters impacting a particular behaviour, which can be easily quantified and spoken in language of numbers. Any other parameters which cannot be articulated in language of numbers are often attempted to be blocked out creating an ‘ideal’ space for the theory to work, or even worse is complete denial of their existence. Truly, an Ostrich sticking head in sand.

While focusing on the fact that this quadrant represents highly individualistic perception of the world, and as long as we are referring to cognitively conceived framework, it will continue to be individualistic. The accepted theories of practical approach, and well-known ‘AbsoluteTruths’ belong to only those phenomena which have become a part of conceiving for most of the people around. The theory of ‘Carrot & Stick’ or say ‘Reward and Punishment’ driving people behaviour is a widely accepted phenomenon and hence, extensively used. However, does that form a major part of human motivation and behaviour? Absolutely, not, but it still continues to be the most conventionally used human motivation driver. And of course, ‘Carrot & Stick’ does easily speak language of numbers as desired by CCC.

What is interesting is, even when we can conceive nature’s impact on behaviour by phenomena which may not be spoken in language of numbers, we instantly jump on translating it. For an example, referring to people behaviour, for a very long time ‘Emotions’ were considered as restrictive part in organised people working. Their existence was denied and firmly attempted to be restricted in, so called, professional and practical environment. Eventually, over a period of time when the impact of emotions was collectively considered as ‘Real’, the immediate attempt was to translate it in ‘Emotional Quotient’, language of numbers which can help us ‘Control’ and ‘Predict’ impact of emotions driving results of people behaviour. Does it really work? We all ‘Feel’ and even ‘Know’ that it doesn’t, but we do still attempt to translate the language.

Emotions are just one aspect on top of mind; there are many other phenomena driving people decisions and behaviour. Ever thought of bungee jumping, or taking a solo trip, or simply helping a person in need? Even think about ethics or moralities, a desire of not consciously harming someone. These phenomena do drive people decisions, both individually and in large groups, and are often driven by metaphors, connotations, analogies, etc. Do we usually consider all these driving factors while drawing a plan for an organisation or change management strategy? We often don’t, and the answer is, these phenomena cannot be translated to language of numbers, hence, we either attempt at shutting them out, or we ignore their existence by sticking our head in CCC….

Dale Carnegie said, when dealing with people; remember you are not dealing with creatures of logic, but creatures of emotion. The exploration on why do we restrict ourselves to only CCC, is a separate topic of discussion. Is it East-West dichotomy or is it limitation of human intelligence and cognitive tendency, is a debatable topic. However, I see analytics and artificial intelligence adding very little ‘qualitative’ value on creating ‘wisdom’ about people behaviour. Although, it does act as awe-striking ‘art’ and ‘entertainment’ for CCC fanatics.

Wishing you a Peaceful Life!

Deep Mody

A Change Leader

Helping Humans do what they do the best – Be Human