MAR 1, 2011 9:21am ET

Related Links

Business Analytics Services Spending to Reach $89.6 billion in 2018
September 15, 2014
Artificial Intelligence Meets the C-suite
September 15, 2014
Mayo Clinic to Use Watson to Bolster Trial Enrollments
September 11, 2014

Web Seminars

Why Data Virtualization Can Save the Data Warehouse
September 17, 2014
Essential Guide to Using Data Virtualization for Big Data Analytics
September 24, 2014

Science of Business vs. Evidence-Based Management

Print
Reprints
Email

I've written a lot over the past couple of years on the science of business and evidence-based management. In my "Science of Business Manifesto" blogs a few months back, I used EBM as a synonym for the SOB, drawing on the connotations of both to the conduct of business by the rigorous formulation, measurement, testing and evaluation of alternative courses of action. But a recent interview/article in the MIT Sloan Management Review, “Matchmaking With Math: How Analytics Beats Intuition to Win Customers,” is making me question whether there might be a nuanced difference between the two that's important for BI.

Get access to this article and thousands more...

All Information Management articles are archived after 7 days. REGISTER NOW for unlimited access to all recently archived articles, as well as thousands of searchable stories. Registered Members also gain access to:

  • Full access to information-management.com including all searchable archived content
  • Exclusive E-Newsletters delivering the latest headlines to your inbox
  • Access to White Papers, Web Seminars, and Blog Discussions
  • Discounts to upcoming conferences & events
  • Uninterrupted access to all sponsored content, and MORE!

Already Registered?

Advertisement

Comments (12)
Great article and example on how to use data to improve business results, but I agree with the commenter above that it draws a false distinction. The point is to use understanding of the data to improve hypotheses, not to abandon the scientific method. The article doesn't describe them, but might some of the silicon-derived ideas bombed out in practice as well?
Posted by Bob L | Thursday, March 03 2011 at 6:36AM ET
...We don't necessarily know the reason why. Nor do we need to ... And therein lies the difference. In our system there isn't a lot of science behind why these differences exist...

I understand, from a performance standpoint, that improvement is improvement and why care why, but; how can you share a best practice and broaden improvement in an organization if you haven't "learned" what that best practice is? Without learning - improvement is random. At some point you have to try & identify "What was Different" & "Can you transfer or replicate that difference to broaden improvement elsewhere".

Getting beyond the paradigms to improve a process is great but eventually you'd better learn what is different.

Posted by Tim H | Thursday, March 03 2011 at 9:01AM ET
Add Your Comments:
You must be registered to post a comment.
Not Registered?
You must be registered to post a comment. Click here to register.
Already registered? Log in here
Please note you must now log in with your email address and password.
Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
Login  |  My Account  |  White Papers  |  Web Seminars  |  Events |  Newsletters |  eBooks
FOLLOW US
Please note you must now log in with your email address and password.