The discussing about evidence based management is very much alive today. In the Dutch management journal M&O magazine, three scholars take things one step further. They wonder in their article if evidence based consultancy is within the realm of possibilities. They describe evidence based consultancy as a service innovation in consultancy, where interventions are supported by scientific evidence and/or repeatedly proven positive practices. They are aware of the huge gap between theory and practice. In their article they refer to the evidence based medicine practice as a way of working in the medical profession and see potential for evidence based consultancy. In order to achieve this, a few basics need to be warranted:- compliance with professional codes of conduct for consultants
- interventions backed up by scientific evidence and/or information on best practices
- systematic integration of the context (the client's organization)
Non Dutch speakers are advised to use Google translate to upload the file and translate Dutch to English to read the full article.
Source: M&O Magazine, january 2009, dr. J.M.J. Baaijens, prof. dr. P.N. Kenis, prof. dr. M.T.H. Meeus
There are a few problems with evidence based consulting. The first basic is the professional code of conduct. Consultancy is a free (and commercial) enterprise. A small percentage of consultants are members of a professional organization (check the ICMCI for your local branch). Of this small percentage even a smaller number are 'certified consultants'. An additional problem is legislation. A certified management consultant (CMC) is not a recognized 'title' like for instance a registered accountant (CPA) or a member of the bar association (lawyers and judges). The second problem is contributing to a body of knowledge. Contrary to scientific research, this is not (always) the case for consultants. They prefer to 'share' knowledge in order to reach customers (look how smart I am, hire me). Also clients never give consultants 'carte blanche'. Most of the times, the 'best intervention' is not necessarily the solution the client is looking for (f.i. personal agendas, politics or affirmation of radical plans). But, maybe I'm wrong.
Suggestions or examples are welcome.
Thanks for the link Richard;
ReplyDeleteI agree with the article that there is an infrastructure problem between academic based theoretical research and the requirements of practice, and that a better infrastructure is needed. I'm still trying to frame how to think about this, but, as I've said before, I think it will fall under the general idea of practice validity modeled from the idea of test validity. If this works, it will mean that there is a possible place for consultants as technical masters of evidence-based practice validity. This lack of infrastructure is the problem needing to be addressed and the consultancy opportunity.
Validity will not be found in a list of best practices, but in evaluating the validity of the use of a particular practice. I have to re-look at some materials, but the analogous situation in test validity is that the test is what ever the test is. It has some reliability and technical characteristics, but a validity evaluation depends on how you are using a test and what you are using it for. Similarly a practice would be valid depending on how it is being used not in how it is described. Consultants would then make evaluations between best practice lists, how actual practices conform to those lists in context specific ways, and in various sources of evidence that support or recommend against a specific use of a specific practice.
Sorry this is rather long and confusing, I'm still thinking it through and will likely post more on my site soon.
Hi Howard,
ReplyDeleteThanks for your reply. A test is just a test. The best example is the infamous IQ test. It was originally designed just to assess a person's mental capabilities. Nowadays, it is often used as a selection instrument by HRM professionals. The manual of the IQ test states that is not to be used for this purpose, but who reads manuals? From my preliminary assessment of EBMgt, I think that academia are the first in line to provide an infrastructure for the development of business management as a profession (which develops over time). This is the foundation for EBMgt. Since management is a social science, professionals/consultants always need to asess the available 'evidence' and apply it in the context of their organization and culture. I don't think there are recipes for management.
Richard;
ReplyDeleteI recently thought of you on reading David Brooks NY Times op ed title "Bentham vs. Hume": http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/06/opinion/06brooks.html
Your blog heading Evidence-based/Skeptical Thinking is much like this op ed. Much of my recent reading has also highlighted the importance of being skeptical in regards to the interpreting the usability of research, that is, all research / evidence has limitations and we should not understate those limitation when making practice recommendations, again that is, we should look at all evidence with a skeptical eye. Would love your opinion / interpretation on this.
Hope things are going well with you.
Howard,
ReplyDeleteEverything is well, thank you very much. I've been swamped in work recently (grading too many research papers from my students and starting new consulting projects...). I've just read the NY Times column "Bentham vs. Hume" and perfectly understand your association with my little blog. Naturally, I sympathize with mr. Hume. However, people like certainty, simplicity and soundbites. That's why interim managers, consultants and politicians (like mr. Bentham) are so successful. They tell good stories, based on anecdotal evidence and are never really challenged by skeptical thinkers.
The example debate on innovation in the NY Times article is remarkable similar to a situation here in the Netherlands. Last year, a committee of wise man wrote an elaborate report on innovation and explained to the minister of Economical Affairs that government needs to accept that 9 out of 10 innovation initiatives fail. Her first reaction was, I can't sell that to parliament.... It's a cultural problem. It's hard to change, but not impossible. That my drive for skeptical thinking. Challenges everything! (and don't forget to laugh a lot).
When I have a little more time, I'll resume posting new columns.
Have a very nice weekend!
Richard;
ReplyDeleteThis post continues to be on my mind. A consultancy approach would provide a potential experimental ground for developing and spreading an evidence-based model. With my last post at howardjohnson.edublogs.org (A New Path for Organizational Learning) I fell like there might be a model developing in my mind. I would love your opinion if you have a chance.
PS Loved Rob Mynott in our video bar. The Horner bass and the band's suits seem like a Beatles reference, no?
Hi Howard,
ReplyDeleteTo answer your last remark about Rob Mynott, it is definitely an Beatles reference. To show your that I spend way to much time on the internet, this is where I think he got the inspiration for this videoclip. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JzqumbhfxRo
I'll post my thoughts on your preliminary EBMGt based model on your blog.