Good
strategy requires good thinking. Jean Haley (Endangered
Minds, Why Children Don’t Think and What We Can Do About
It) observes, “the way people use language is braided
together tightly with the way they think.” Language is our
vehicle for thought. (This is not to say that thought
requires language; language presupposes thought and becomes
its tool, which further refines it.) Nevertheless, Haley
points out that language development is critical for
attentive and sound thinking. Others (e.g. J.P. Moreland)
argue that the devaluation of grammar and syntax correlates
with the way we use language increasingly to express
emotions, convince or sell (emotionally), or create
experience and less to examine issues of reasoning, truth
verification, or precise expression of thought.
Good
thinking at higher levels of conceptualization, such as
evaluating trends or strategy, also requires some degree of
numeracy (ability with quantitative information, i.e.,
math). The development of numeracy requires correct facility
(syntax and grammar) with language, English in our case.
Studies have shown that proper grammatical ability
establishes the basis for good math reasoning since we
reason linguistically as we learn to do math. (Eventually
math becomes a second “language” and we are unconscious
of its linguistic underpinnings, but solving a
“story-based” algebra problem quickly reminds us of the
language-math link.) Poor linguistic capability, poorer math
reasoning. Good grammar doesn’t guarantee numeracy but
poor grammar does relate to innumeracy.
Back
to my point, innumeracy assures poorer systems (and process)
thinking. Poor systems thinking, poorer strategic thinking.
Our
systems and processes “talk” to us. However, the
language used is measurement and data. Therefore, to
understand our systems and processes we must learn to
understand what the data is telling us or we must ask for
measurements that will give the data, and hence, the
information we need. We must learn to understand the
system’s language. But even with good numeracy skills the
human mind is quite limited in grasping the implications in
an array of data. (You know how you feel when presented with
a large array of data.)
Fortunately,
there is a “translation” technique for making the data a
great deal more understandable for the average
decision-maker. Convert the data to visual information. The
proper (honest) representation of the data visually enables
the human brain to grasp vast amounts of data easily and
correctly, something it can’t do looking at such data
alone. We are wired to perceive patterns, even very complex
multidimensional patterns and also patterns in motion.
Consequently, the best tools for understanding our systems
and processes (even financial ones) are data visualization
tools that
represent data, (especially complex data), visually. In
getting started, frequently, if not usually, time should be
the x axis, since processes take place in time. The use of
simple run charts will tell an immense amount about the
process and even whether there is a process!
Richard
M. Biery, MD, 2004