Evidence-Based Management – Not Just for Medicine and Business!

Reading Mr. Pfeffer and Mr. Sutton’s argument in favor of evidence-based management, I was struck by the apparent lack of the use of evidence in the implementation of systems throughout the business world. According to the authors most business management seems to institute systems, for compensation, performance evaluation, product design etc., without experimentation to test its viability or without adjustment to be successful in a specific organization. Instead they state that most organizations utilize outdated information, copy successful organizations’ systems, and regularly “buy-into” whatever is the newest trend. The cause of these tendencies, and the true aspects that needs to be tweaked in the business world to transition to evidence-based management, results from the continuing paradigm of the “hero/paternal leader” and the focus on short-term bottom-line numbers. Both of these lead to the endless circular implementation of ineffective, or less-than- triumphant, systems, and until paradigms are broken companies will continue to do this because it is quicker, and cheaper, therefore providing enough of a short-term success so that everyone involved (i.e. the CEO, the consulting company, the executive team) gets paid.
It almost seems counter-intuitive that companies employ systems without evidence of their success, but looking at the attitudes still displayed in many organizations it is not surprising. If an organization has a leader that believes himself (or herself) to be that infallible “source”, the oracle, the father to his people, than that leader will always take the approach that “father knows best.” And that individual will be negative and skeptical toward any system that he did not invent himself, or locate himself, or implement himself. Because if one is all-knowing then one cannot learn anything from evidence anyway, therefore the systems implemented must be correct and it is the people within the system that are not effectively utilizing it. For one to experiment with ideas before implementing them, seems ultra-simple, but is difficult for the oracle-leader because if the leader’s idea fails in the experiment that leader’s fallibility is then on display for the organization which could potentially weaken that leader’s mandate. The paradigm of the oracle-leader must first be broken before any movement toward evidence based management can occur, and this can be done through continued education and training within an organization, and increasing the visibility in the media of truly successful organizations that utilize the partner-leader mentality.
Pfeffer and Sutton use an interesting example for a successful organization, in the US Women’s Soccer Team. It is true they have experienced unparallel success in a competitive market, (though they did leave out the fact that growing up in the US affords our women greater opportunities to learn the game versus other countries) however when one delves deeper into the organization it is clear that there is a true partnership between players and coaches, and that no idea is discounted if there is evidence that it may be successful. For example following the 1999 win in the World Cup the team’s success began to slow, and Brandi Chastain (a valuable defensive player), had well-publicized conflicts with a the team’s head coach, and her own ideas about how the team was being run, and the system the coach insisted upon (mainly with her on the bench, but it is still valid). She voiced her opinions to the coach, and the media, and the resulting conflicts ended with her off the team. The coach making the fundamental attribution error, and putting her own ego (married to her ideas she implemented through new system design) at the forefront, and blaming the people instead of truly examining the effectiveness of her new system. However, following Chastain’s removal the team’s success was hampered by the new system and the coach’s unwillingness to amend the system, and reinstate Chastain, resulted in the loss of her position and a reinvention of the US Women’s game-play style, leading to a gold medal in Athens.
The necessity in our business world today for delivering immediate short-term results has been shown repeatedly to lead to ineffective systems that need to be overhauled every few years to keep up with top industry producers, or to jump on the bandwagon of a new performance evaluation philosophy, or simply because it is easier and cheaper than taking the time to design and conduct experimentation to determine a system that can be effective and sustainable for an organization. Becoming sustainable may also be regarded as developing a system that functions successfully while quickly and constantly adapting to needed changes (the author’s frame this as always treating one’s organization as an unfinished prototype). Focus on the short versus long-term can be compared to buying shoes. If one needs a pair of black open-toed sling-back heels one can go to Payless and buy fake leather ones that roll off an assembly line in China, are poorly stitched with inferior materials that maybe will last one a year if worn regularly. Or, one can go to Macy’s and spend ten times what one spends at Payless, but one will get a product constructed of the finest Italian leather, and hand-crafted with excellent stitching and materials. Now this shoe, if treated properly will last the owner for a lifetime. Like an organization the expensive shoe must be cared for, small adjustments such as inserts, or leather treatments, or re-cobbling, may be needed but one has a shoe for life, versus having to repurchase the same shoe every year (because one always needs a black sling-back heel in their closet). By focusing on the long term one will eventually save money on their shoes, and will have a better product to boot! Now it goes without saying that rigorous shopping trips to find the right design, and taking the time to try out the shoe in the store and at home if possible, are necessary for this system to work. And as far as following the current trend (viewed as important in shoe-buying as business) if one focuses on a classic style one will always be suitably attired, and as trends are circuitous, every five to eight years one’s shoes will again be on the cutting edge. No doubt causing all your competitors to run out and buy the same style, most likely on the cheap, therefore ensuring one continues to have the best product in your closet and on your feet.
Until businesses begin to truly employ partner-leader relationships within the hierarchies of their organizations, and not just spout the rhetoric of such ideals, and begin to focus on long-term success and sustainability evidence-based management will always be second to the cheap quick fix and newest trend. In my opinion, this may be an underlying problem with our society as a whole, with everyone in search of a quick buck so they can keep up with the Jones’, but the fact that professional educators and business trend-setters, such as Jeffrey Pfeffer, are advocating a new approach is hopeful. It will take time but these philosophies will eventually, one day, trickle down through our society so and we will reinvent our paradigms, starting in elementary school, showing the world what a successful organization looks like.