Friday, August 28, 2009

Is the evidence based management movement dead?

When you go to see a doctor, you would like him or her to make medical decisions based on scientific evidence and research. Not stick the first needle or pill in you, because he or she heard rumours that it just might work. However, in management we are still in the middle ages of science, where the alchemists still try to make gold from lead. And by alchemists I mean all types of managers (managers, consultants, coaches, interim-managers, project managers, etc.). One of the reasons why managers still make decisions based on anecdotal evidence, gut feeling or a whim is the fact that management is not a profession. Well, perhaps it is, but we lack a body of knowledge and skills. Everybody with decent qualifications can become a manager in contrast with nurses, judges or engineers. Management is still treated as a 'skill' and if you have a better story than the next guy, you just found yourself a new career.

Around the year 2000, the evidence based management movement emerged. It is a movement to explicitly use the current, best evidence in management decision making. Its roots are in evidence based medicine, a quality movement to apply the scientific method to medical practice.

Evidence-based management (EBMgt) entails managerial decisions and organizational practices informed by the best available scientific evidence. Like its counterparts in medicine (e.g., Sackett, et al., 2000) and education (e.g., Thomas & Pring, 2004), the judgments EBMgt entails also consider the circumstances and ethical concerns managerial decisions involve. In contrast to medicine and education, however, EBMgt today is only hypothetical. Contemporary managers and management educators make limited use of the vast behavioral science evidence base relevant to effective management practice (Walshe & Rundall, 1999; Rousseau, 2005, 2006; Pfeffer & Sutton, 2001). (Source: en.wikipedia.org)

Last month the annual Academy of Management meeting was hosted in Chicago and a couple of my colleagues who work for Universities went to meet people and take in the latest developments on Organisational and Management Science. The Evidence Based Management movement is still there, but progress is really slow. Most developments are exchanged in closed communities and you really have to make an effort to dig up new information and stay in the loop of recent developments. I'm now in the process of preparing an interview (together with my friend Coert Visser) with the four figureheads of the Evidence Based Management movement. These are Denise M. Rousseau, Tracy Altman, Jeffrey Pfeffer and Bob Sutton. Interviews take time, but I'm confident we'll get some answers. Wait and see what they have to say about the future of Evidence Based Management.

2 comments:

  1. If you're only going after "the four figureheads" you are contributing to the closed community problem EBMgt is having. You have to get out beyond these preachers and talk to the practitioners. The people actually managing real organizations by the evidence.

    You will find that how practitioner's define evidence is much looser than how these high priests define it.

    You will also find that within organizations it takes time ("baby steps", as some like to say). Evidence is integrated slowly, especially when the decision to become evidence-based is not shared by all involved. This partially explains why evidence is more broadly defined amongst practitioners.

    The EBMgt movement is barely a decade old. Of course it's going to be moving slow. You have decades of managerial "gut". You have many managers, and most especially HR types, who "just don't do math." You have thousands of gurus proclaiming to have the solution to all business' problems. You have hundreds of thousands of managers who think someone can "just tell me how to do it." All of these things have to be ovecome, and that takes time.

    To advocate and advance an E-B approach one must have patience. One must be humble (there are going to be very few public praises -- Pfeffer is the exception, not the rule). And one must be tireless. It will continue to be, for many years to come, a glory-less task.

    If any of these interviewees bemoan the lack of advances, call them out for what they really are. Narrcicistic glory seekers. Those who really belive in EBMgt know it will work. We've seen it work in real firms, with real people. But we also know there is much resistance, which can and will be overcome... with time and effort.

    The EBMgt approach doesn't work miracles. It does not guarantee 100% correct decision making. It is not flashy. It improves decision making, increases the probability of getting the preferred outcome, and quietly improves business success.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hello Chris,
    Thank you very much for your elaborate reply. Since I'm new to the field of evidence based management, I just want to explore the field. I thought it would be a good starting point to talk to the 'high priests' first. Not that I'm having much luck with that, but I just found out that they are aware of this posting (I just checked the EBM collaboration listserv at the Academy of Management). Besides this, I absolutely agree that it is very important to learn from the practitioners in the field. And your right that lore and anecdotal evidence takes years to eliminate (I mean, how long did it take us humans to master fire making?).

    From my limited experience in this field, I observe a view steps which would help to develop the EBM movement.

    1. Explain what EBM really entails
    2. Explain the (possible) benefits
    3. Explain the limitations
    4. Develop infrastructure to disseminate info.
    5. Foster a community of practitioners.
    6. Publish, publish and publish.
    7. Do sanity checks. Be skeptical (not cynical).

    Cheers!
    Richard

    ReplyDelete