Whatever Scientists Do, It Begins To Look Like Science

Have you heard about a "trolley problem"?

The trolley is rushing along the rails. Up ahead, there is a switch. If the trolley goes to the right, it will run over five people. If it goes to the left, it will hit a woman with two children. You can switch the track. What is your choice?

This ethical dilemma is often mentioned in the press in regard to self-driving cars, where the algorithm is supposed to make such decisions. 

I remembered it recently when I saw a funny picture on the internet. There were a trolley, rails, a switch, and a person by it. But both ways were empty – no people in danger. The caption on the picture read: "Who will you put on the rails to prove your scientific hypothesis and write a monograph?" 

This is what some (but not all, of course) business studies look like. 

Picture by bowie15 on iStock

Does a proof prove anything?

I am a blogger. I am free to write about what I believe in. You may or may not like my stories, but I don't have to prove that my ideas work. I share my opinion. 

But scientists are not bloggers. They can't just say that the XYZ method is good and ZYX is not. They need to prove their findings by gathering enough credible evidence. 

And it creates a big problem when it comes to business strategy.

Scientists have made many attempts to find out what differentiates successful companies from failing ones. Jim Collins is one of the most famous authors for his books Good To Great and Built To Last. 

You may have known that some of the "built to last" companies are no longer with us. 

I see several problems here:

1. These people are scientists, so they observe a business or the market from outside. It is quite normal when an economist or sociologist observes people's actions and makes valuable conclusions. But societies and economies are subject to complex laws, and individual actors do not act collectively. These are chaotic self-regulating systems. But an organization is a unique phenomenon where different people try to align their actions with some common goals and principles. 

2. The scientists rarely have their own managerial experience. And business people rarely have enough time to gather and process so much data. If they want to write a book, they'll prefer memoirs.

3. Each company is a complex system embedded in a multitude of even more complex systems and has intricate relationships with them. These systems are society, culture, traditions, economy, industry, religion, climate, technological order, and many others. And all of them influence each other. But most scientists try to find a reason for success only inside the companies they studied. 

You can pick any popular business concept and find a lot of evidence that disproves it.

For instance, scientists claim that a good leader should be supportive, kind, inspiring, motivating, etc. But I've seen quite rude leaders in my life, but their companies succeeded. 

Business gurus affirm that having a strategy, mission statement, and bold vision helps companies to succeed. I can't prove it, but I believe few companies have these documents, and only a handful of them follow their strategies to the letter. 

Business cases

Each management school students read and study dozens of business cases. When I hold lectures on strategy, students always ask for them. 

That's how our brains work:

1. We love stories, and any case is a story.

2. It is easier for us to grasp a concept or idea through examples. 

3. We are all victims of the so-called availability heuristic. When we learn a case in which a company uses a tool or method and becomes successful, we jump to the wrong conclusion that this tool will make any business successful. So, we subconsciously look for silver bullets in business cases. 

Reading business cases is inspiring and thought-provoking but less valuable than it is believed. 

Scientific research is a business

Scientific research in general and business studies in particular have become an industry. Many people support their families by conducting such studies, writing articles, and publishing books. 

But when they write a book or a monograph, they must stick to the scientific method and principles of hypothesizing and proving the hypotheses. And it doesn't always work. 

I am far from the thought that all business studies are useless or wrong. When scientists research an applied tool or concept, such as intrinsic motivation or interpersonal relationships, they can bring many benefits to businesspeople and managers.

But all the attempts to research business success scientifically or by reading business cases are doomed to fail.