Plans are useless but planning is indispensable. - Dwight D. Eisenhower
I recently ran across an interesting article in the Opinion section of the Wall Street Journal, ostensibly on the passing of statesman Robert McNamara, entitled "From McNamara to Obama." McNamara was defense secretary under Presidents Kennedy and Johnson, a primary architect of US strategy for the Vietnam war, and later served as president of the World Bank. A former Harvard professor and corporate “Whiz Kid”, McNamara came to be associated with a technocratic style of problem solving that “symbolized the idea that [the Kennedy administration] could manage and control events in an intelligent, rational way. Taking on a guerrilla war was like buying a sick foreign company; you bought your systems in”. In national defense as well as subsequent roles at the World Bank, McNamara used meticulous plans driven by quantitative analysis to “help fashion a better life for mankind.” He was the quintessential Planner. Alas, McNamara's mechanistic planning approach was less than fully successful with either national defense or world poverty -- points he acknowledged later in life.
It seems that Planners are now non grata in the international war on poverty, having been supplanted by what developmental economist William Easterly calls Searchers in both his book, The White Man's Burden, Why the West's Efforts to Aid the Rest Have Done So Much Ill and So Little Good, and scholarly article, Planners vs Searchers in Foreign Aid. Easterly's arguments against Planners and for Searchers are, I believe, just as pertinent for business as they are for third world economics, even if he views planning simplistically in a negative light.
In a business context, the Planner thinks she already knows the answers, which are derived from planned solutions to technical engineering problems. A Searcher, on the other hand, acknowledges upfront that she hasn't all the answers, but is intent on finding them through trial and error. Planners determine what to supply; Searchers seek what's in demand. Planners have grand ideals; Searchers are modest in intent, looking for little victories. Planners are top-down experts; Searchers are bottom-up experimenters. For Planners, the plan with fixed objectives is too often the end game; Searchers, in contrast, are not unduly attached to their ideas, but instead are flexible and nimble, willing to vary objectives with learning. Planners raise expectations; Searchers crave feedback and accountability.
I think the Planner/Searcher dichotomy is quite pertinent for business intelligence as well, and believe there's room for both Planners and Searchers in modern BI. Never much a theorist or top-down strategic thinker, I'm predisposed to “search”, driven by exploration, experimentation and predictive analytics as points of departure for bottom-up business theories. What follows is a starting point of my own biases for contrasting the Planner and Searcher approaches to BI. I'm sure the list will continue to evolve over time, and welcome input from readers.
http://www.information-management.com/blogs/business_process_kpi_owners-10015840-1.html#read
of course, some of the sharpest minds seem to be able, like chess players - to envision more of the small steps, and their result, than the rest of us - so maybe some of those who we think are planners are doing their searching in ways that others may not see...