What Gets Measured Gets Done...But....

....What gets pressured gets spun.

Targets. Targets. Targets.  A curious thing.  They include not only a prediction of the future, but also a prediction of influence on that future, and specific measurement of all that too.   Seeking that special sweet spot between being both challenging and achievable at the same time.

Of course in some cases it might well be visionary and aspirational, as in the old Eastern proverb ..."Aim for the top of the tree and you'll never leave the ground.  Aim for the moon and you might at least get to the top of the tree".  But more often than not it's about performance, and about success or failure.  Binary rather than multidimensional.

So big headlines around falsification of the measurement of cancer treatment waiting times to meet government targets.  The Care Quality Commission (CQC), the independent regulator of heath and social care in England found that measurements in one hospital, nearly a third of the patient records examined (22 of 66) had been altered to hide "extensive" delays for treatment.

What is measured and targeted sure does get attention and focus.  But once the that pressure tips the balance from being a priority, to being the pure judgement of success or failure, then unhelpful creativity and system redesign sets in.

That might just be managing the system.   There's the example from transport logistics moving electronically tagged parcels.  The sorting centre will bring the parcels inside only once they are ready to process them. Simply bringing them over the thresholds starts the electronic clock.   So best they wait outside until we can start the clock when it suits us.. That may well minimise the amount of time in the sorting centre, but overlooks the bigger picture of overall faster delivery.

It's also possible to entirely design out measurement of failure.  There were maximum waiting times from booking to appointment to see your local GP.  The solution.....take away the advanced booking system so you can only book on the day for the day.  No luck today, then it all starts again tomorrow.

What's disappointing is that the target it set at the minimum acceptable level.  So take the original four hour target for waiting times for Accident and Emergency departments.   So the margins can be managed, for example ambulances can be left queuing before patients are accepted which starts the hospital acceptance clock, and patients can also be transferred to "assessment units" which stops the clock.

That was strongly reinforced, hearing super presentation at the recent Royal Statistical Society Annual Conference (Sept 2014) from the joint academic and medic research team at the University of Sheffield. There's a fantastically clear spike where patients were admitted in the moments before they exceed the 4 hour waiting time.  The target has gone now but by all accounts the 4 hours is still a strong corporate driver.

What's even more staggering is some of the background measurement activities.  Different hospitals measure these things in different ways.  In fact it's possible to stay two nights and still not be classed as an admission.

So rather than the one dimensional focus on four hours, what about a four dimensional focus.....on the number of people waiting for 1hr, 2hrs, 3hs and then 4hr.   The elapsed time is being measured anyway so there's no additional measurement overhead.  That's a much more refined perspective.

Post four hours might well be failure, but how about some success focus too, at the 1hr and 2hr end of the spectrum.  Sure there might then be micro management at the hour margins, but at least it's a fuller and more multidimensional picture. Two A&E departments with identical performance at the 4hr threshold, might well look different when it's unpacked into the hour performance slots.  Even mean waiting times might give a more insightful view.

Some Psychological Context for Evidence

Evidence based decisions.  A mantra that gets used widely.  But there is of course a balance in decisions between evidence and judgement.  Decisions are easy, good decisions are more difficult, as they rely on getting that balance right between evidence and judgement.  But it does not stop there.

The reality of the world is that the evidence is set in the context of individual and social behaviours, which it can be easy to overlook.  The psychologists and sociologists have articulated and categorised plentiful behaviours that influence us both personally and collectively.  That adds another layer of challenge to power of evidence.

Here's just a few of those psychological contexts...

Cognitive Dissonance.  This is all about self perpetuating perspectives.  Where something is counter to a prevailing view (cognitive consistency), there are tendencies to find ways to assimilate those contradictions.  (Leon Festinger 1919-1989).  So the remedial action can typically include decreasing the perceived importance of the dissonance.  Dissonance can also be designed out....only taking information or news from specific sources for example.

Groupthink.  Really just cognitive dissonance for groups.  Coined in 1971, this describes the mutual reinforcement of group behaviour, often demonstrated as a general collective over confidence.   

False Memory.   Memories may not always be real.  They can be a distorted recollection or entirely imaginary.  So where memory is incomplete, the gaps can be filled with other information from other circumstances.  Entire false memory can be quite easily induced in experiments, often through mis-information.

Invisible Gorilla.  This about missing something obvious by being so focussed on something else.  In an experiment, a person in a gorilla suit (or dressed as a ghost or on a unicylce) walks through as baseball game and goes unnoticed by half of the spectators who have been briefed to count the number of passes.   More interestingly perhaps, even expecting the unexpected doesn't help you see it.

Halo Effect. Where one positive trait or outcome can lead to the assumption that other traits or outcomes are positive.    It works the other way around too as the "Horns Effect".  Its a long standing cognitive short cut for dealing lots of complex or missing data.

Muller-Lyer Illusion.  This is about the influence of visual context, especially important with the ever increasing infograhics and visualisations.  This is where the same two lines will seem to be of different lengths depending on their immediate visual context (typcially inward or outward facing arrows at each end).  The lines with the inward facing arrows will seem shorter, due to visual conditioning around perspective. 

Barnham Effect.  Named after the US Showman P.T. Barnum (1810-91), this describes statements which on the surface appear detailed or specific, but in fact will be vague or ambiguous, and even self contradictory and hence widely applicable as it covers all angles....Barnam described it as "having a little something for everyone".

Sources: Freudian Slips. Joel Levy. 2013

Serial Thinking

There's an emerging mainstream "thinking about thinking"  Given that "Learning about Learning" has become more common place and even expected - the explicit focus on Study Skills for example - so the same interest is applying to thinking.    In short there's increasing recognition about how our brains can work better if we're more concious about it.  Welcome to one such example....Serial Thinking.

So move over multi-tasking and welcome to serial tasking.  So if multi-tasking is parallel working, then serial tasking is linear working.  Of course multi-taking is really just lots of micro serial tasking with lots of switching.

There seems to be some increasingly recognition that the busyness of constantly switching from one area of thinking to another has more explicit downsides.   So natural multi linguists who start counting in one language then switch to another will stumble on the switch.  Its the overhead of switching tasks.  The more the switching the more the overhead, and hence becoming less productive, and often when we need to be more productive.  I'm not sure we should be surprised at this.  It would appear that the word "priority" only took a plural addition "priorities" in the 1970's.

So it's about having the mental capacity, space and energy to both focus on the specific and to have the capacity to think more broadly too, and without carrying in the baggage of previous tasks or the anticipation of the next one. "It's not just about time but about bandwidth...when we are most busy we think we are becoming better users of time when we are really becoming worse managers of our bandwidth" (Sendhil Mullainathan, Prof of Economics at Harvard).  As ever it's a matter of balance in these things.


That can translate beyond the personal to the more corporate and cultural.   Easy to be busy on the wrong things or in the wrong way (wrong busy), rather than making the space to make sure that it's doing the right things in the right way (right and less busy).

Sources: Wired October 2013

Rush to Wrong

In the world of strategy, planning, analysis and performance, there's a real balance to be struck between planning and action.   Sometimes this can be simple enough, especially in short term and reactive situations.

My favourite example here is generating parliamentary answers to parliamentary questions - with the red flag clipped to the wallet "Ministerial - Immediate at all stages".  But as scale increases, and where there is more choice, then that balance needs to be more sensitively managed.

There are two ends of that action-planning spectrum.....

Rush to Wrong.  Without sufficient planning then action can be wasted, even contradictory or counter-productive.  In a desire to do something and get busy, that might end up being "wrong busy".  That may take us further from our objective and makes things more difficult or longer to subsequently achieve.  If we're looking for the buried treasure, it's digging in the wrong place (ineffective) or with the wrong tools (inefficient)

Paralysis by Analysis.  With to much planning there is a risk of over-analysis.  Elapsed time can take a real toll.   There's the now immortal quote...."Move fast and break things. Unless you are breaking stuff, you are not moving fast enough" (Mark Zuckerberg).  That would rather assume that it's right things that are being broken.

So the challenge is to get the balance between those two extremes just right for the context.

News Numbers - Helipcopters

With plenty of numbers being used in the news, it's often very tempting to overplay the effect of the numbers, often quoting without some context.

Hence having personally coined the term "Numberator"....the use of a number without some necessary contextual denominator here's another example....Another of those news number naughties.... or news numberation.

So the UK is very helpfully sending aid to the Philippines to support victims of typhoon Haiyan.  HMS Darling is helping out but will be replaced by HMS Illustrious announces the Prime Minister...

"And I can announce today that once Daring has started its work, we are actually going to be able to replace in time HMS Daring with HMS Illustrious which is of course a carrier with helicopters, seven times as many helicopters as on HMS Daring and with the key ability to process fresh water. So we will be giving further assistance in the best way we can". 

So "seven times" as many helicopters, that's quite some emphasis.  That's also the edited sound bite that made the main news headlines.  So how many would that be in practice?

Actually it's seven helicopters in total.  HMS Darling had one and HMS Illustrious has seven.  So yes technically seven more.

"Seven times more helicopters" does seem to have a more powerful emphasis than "Seven helicopters". Seven times is a relative statement that can apply in multiple situations for higher numbers.  So if there were 2 helicopters on HMS Darling there could be 14 on HMS Illustrious, if 3 helicopters on Darling then 21 on Illustrious.    So while the relative statement can be applied for larger (and even much larger) scenarios, here it's applied in the lowest possible extreme scenario, but at the same time can, and arguably does, imply larger scenarios.  In the larger scenarios the "7 times" is helpful shorthand.  Rather than saying something in increased from 123 to 861, the "7 times" gives a better quicker sense.   So when we hear "7 times more" were more naturally drawn to assume it's shorthand for bigger numbers than simply 1 to 7.  

An there's another twist.  Of course while HMS Illustrious does have seven times more helicopters than the one on HMS Darling which is already deployed. The net increase in the Philliplines is of course only 6 extra helicopters.

One simple calculation step away from the raw data, but looses so much meaningful context in the presentation.  It's also a comparative measure rather than an absolute one.

This is a great simple demonstration of the powerful message around exploratory data analysis  The further we are from the underlying data, the greater the chances of misunderstanding and misrepresentation. Add to that the messages from the Statistical Process Control movement,  "No data has meaning apart from it's context".

Statistics Views - Summit

For a couple of days, the great and good of planet earth's statistics academics and closely associated players
came together to take stock on the past, present and future.  All as part of the International Year of Statistics, and hosted by our own Royal Statistical Society (11-12 November 2013).

So a mixture of presentations, workshops and discussion.  Much like a conference, but very efficiently high level.  The subject diversity was huge and very technical too.  Here's my key generic messages from all of that.

Collaboration is key. A much stronger emerging collaboration between disciplines, and even between disciplines.  Add a call to "divide and conquer" as approaches to big problems need breaking down for the solutions, then building up the solutions.

Big data.  It's not just big it's granular and partial ("missingness").  To that I would add "now" and "open".  So big, open, now, granular and partial.  Potentially a new scientific paradigm.

Numeracy Paradox.  Recognising different reading ages and languages, maybe we need to explicitly target different numeracy levels.

Transparent Representation.  A clear desire for informed and impartial.  Prof. David Spiegelhalter's always so very engaging and eloquent here.  The example of the high profile unemployment figure which increased by 34k, with the appendix small print which gives an error rate of +/-87k, which means it could in fact have gone down.

Graphics over numbers.  Some pioneering representation of statistical risk, especially around breast cancer, which both avoids probability and an overall judgement, just presents both pro's and con's graphically - icon arrays and frequency trees.  Breaking new ground here, and can be slow going.  It's make your own mind up based on your own circumstances and  what's important to you.

Now over future.  Communicating the risk to life is evolving.  Rather than describing the risk of various heath issues as effective length of life, implicitly focussed on lost time at the end of life, the ideas now is to measure the current health age of body components.  So you might well be 40, but as a smoker your lungs have are already 50. It's about the power of now and accelerating through life, ageing faster.... that cigarette ages your lungs and extra 15 minutes right now....

Anecdotal Reasoning.  Broad aspiration to reduce that all round.

And the prize for greatest technical phrase goes to super polynomial hyperbolic relaxations, closely followed by  The Bag of little bootstraps".

A scientific paper will come in due course, and designed as a lobbying tool for more stats skills too.

Keep it Simple and Difficult

It was only 1981 when researchers asked students "How many animals of each kind did Moses take into the Ark?" to which 81% answered "two". It's only on reflection when people note that it was the arc of Noah, rather than Moses.  

This has lead to further research which focuses on this "automatic pilot" engagement, taking mental short cuts and missing key things.   That does seem to be challenging the "keep it simple"  mantra - uncomplicated, accessible and memorable - which could encourage the Moses Illusion.

Research is pointing to more effective mixed models of engagement, where short bursts of mental complexity - "cognitive dis-fluency" - can help overcome that automatic pilot.

So in a new Moses Illusion experiment, 88% went for Moses when the prose was presented in a easy to read type face, reducing to 55% when presented in a more difficult to read type face.    The more difficult type face seems to stimulate the recognition that there's a more difficult task in hand that requires, and then gets, more mental effort.  This disruption or "dis-fluency" also seems to encourage more abstract thinking.

So a multidimensional rather than uni-dimensional approach is likely to be an overall better way to engage....that balance between simplicity with some complexity.  That rather rings of the paraphrasing quote of Albert Einstein...that things should be as simple as it can be but not simpler.

Sources: Wired. Oct 2103.  Adam Alter, New York University Stern School of Business.

Statistics Definitions

Statistics is one of those terms which mean different things to different people, even within the profession.   There's good reason for that, given the wide scope from high end methodical development through to National Statistics.     In the simplest of terms a statistic can just be a data item (a datum, the singular of data), through to a number emerging from a statistical technique (such as r-squared in regression).

Source: www.statistics2013.org

Statistics becomes the process around all of that, including the analysis and interpretation.Hence there's not a specific definition in the Royal Statistical Society's new strategy.  The strap line now is data, evidence, decisions.  And "analysis" nearly had a place in there.

However for the International Year of Statistics (2013statistics.org) there's a practical set of definitions which encompass that scope:

• The science of learning from (or making sense out of) data
• The theory and methods of extracting information from observational data for solving real-world problems
• The science of uncertainty
• The quintessential interdisciplinary science
• The art of telling a story with [numerical] data

Source: A Career in Statistics: Beyond the Numbers by Gerald Hahn and Necip Doganaksoy:

So broadly the science of collecting and analysing data, and increasingly in so many areas that impact on everyday life.  Again the International Year of Stats has helpfully distil that big picture purpose too, focussing on the increasing government and business appetite for properly data driven decisions across that touch our lives in so many ways.

UK Statistical Policy Landscape Infographic

There's a strong emergence of the infographic, helping to make numbers more visual - a varied mix of shapes, colours, numbers and words.  Some are able to tell the story better than others, and variably able get over a key message or two, but none the less a very positive and welcome direction of travel.

The statistics world is going through some similarly positive moves to strengthen the impact and visibility that statistics and statistical analysis can have.   So our Royal Statistical Society has a new strategy for that, plus a stronger focus around the strap line of data-evidence-decisions.   (In fact, analysis has a part in there too and was part of the consideration).

At some point there's be some convergence between the increasingly open data that feeds lots of  the infographics, and the more long standing stats and analysis world, and especially around that Open data which is Public. 

So as a contribution to that convergence....here's my infographic which represents the current statistical policy landscape.

This was presented at the Royal Statistical Society's 2013 Annual International Conference. 2-5 September in Newcastle.

Purpose: This poster provides the macro scope, influences and connections of the UK statistical policy environment. It is also a consolidated reference source in it's on right with the key messages and emphasis emerging. It's a particular take on the ever popular infographic trend, presenting our environment in a strategic and visual way to create interest and support debate and discussion.

Abstract - This infographic presents and inter-relates the key components of the UK's statistical policy landscape.  The scope includes key bodies, legislation, policy, guidance, and key contextual factors and influences.   This provides a single strategic visual overview and reference source, illustrating the evolution, relationship and synthesis of those components over the last decade.  This also helps to illustrate to a lay audience the extent and development of the background rigour and governance in public data management, use and communication.

International Year of Statistics 2013

UK Royal Statistical Society

So 2013 is the International Year of Statistics.  Recognising the contributions of statistics to society worldwide.  It's being coordinated through statistics2013.org on behalf of the international professional statistical bodies.

It's all based around the fact that statistics have powerful and far-reaching effects on everyone, and trying to get that message over.

More than 2,000 organizations—professional statistical societies, colleges and universities, primary and secondary schools, businesses, government entities, and research institutes are participating in this worldwide event.


There's a helpful breadth of definitions of what statistics is....

• The science of learning from (or making sense out of) data

• The theory and methods of  extracting information from observational data for solving real-world problems

• The science of uncertainty

• The quintessential inter-disciplinary science

• The art of telling a story with [numerical] data

And curious and wide ranging examples of the areas in which statistics impact....

Foods you eat
Weather forecasts
Assessing disease risks
Protecting your pet’s health
Improving your health care
Transportation systems you use
Assessing your credit worthiness
Pricing your insurance policies
Ensuring national security
Examining economic health
Prosecuting criminals
Ensuring the safety of medicine
Assessing teacher effectiveness
Monitoring climate change

And predicting the need 4.4m statistical jobs in coming years, a taster for that applied work...

• Estimating the safety of nuclear power plants and alternative energy sources
• Evaluating the impact of air, water, and soil pollution
• Estimating the unemployment rate of a country
• Analysing consumer demand for products and services
• Designing studies for and analyzing data from agricultural experiments to increase crop productivity and yields

So that all has a global generic take of course, but the value shines though.  And then there's the homage to the great statisticians.....one per month over the next 12 months.

So wishing the project a fair wind and a good impact.

Source: www.statistics2013.org

Statistical Steerage

April sees the change at the helm of the UK Statistics Authority.  That can be helpful stock-take  point to get a big picture sense of where things are, and where they are going. 


UKSA was created by the Statistics and Registration Service Act of 2007 and came into being on 1st April 2008 (See Statutory Statistical).  The Authority's statutory objective is to promote and safeguard the production and publication of official statistics that serve the public good. It is also required to promote and safeguard the quality and comprehensiveness of official statistics, and ensure good practice in relation to official statistics. 

Interestly, the Chair of UKSA is Crown appointment, made with the approval of Parliament following a pre-appointment hearing before the House of Commons Public Administration Select Committee and a formal motion debated on the floor of the House of Commons.  The first five years have been under the stewardship of Sir Michael Scholar KCB.  The baton has now been handed over to Andrew Dilnot CBE.  An eminent public figure (Institute of Fiscal Studies, Social Security Advisory Committee, the National Consumer Council)  and indeed the founding presenter of  Radio 4's more or less show about stats in real life issues.  A good provenance then. 

So where are we.  In short the UKSA has been doing three things:

1. Code of Practice for Official Statistics.  Creating what is in essence the guide to best practice context for data - consolidating, refining and developing lots of guidance over the decade from amongst others, the Audit Commission, HM Treasury, Cabinet Office.  Covering 74 business processes (principles, protocols, practices) from consultation on needs through to publication processes.  It is quite a challenge to get right, and helpfully sets the bar high.  In the spirit of the original Chinese saying...."If you aim for the top of the tree you'll probably never leave the ground, but if you aim for the moon you might at least get to the top of the tree".  Fundamental here is that this is a generic code, and applicable to "official" as opposed to just "national" statistics.  Some interesting emphasis has follow on this.  


2. National Statistics Stamp.  Steadily working through the entire scope of national statistics and given them the stamp of approval, resulting in:


- Assessment Reports: Currently 190 and counting. 
- Breach Reports in respect of the Code: 59.  
- Issues Log for issues highlighted to UKSA in 11/12: 50


3. Challenging and championing.  In respect of the use of official statistics.  Leading and supporting some of the very technical debates (Retail Prices Index etc.) and at the other end of the spectrum. very publically challenging the inappropriate use of statistics by those who should know better.  Ministerial apologies being a familiar outcome.


So where are we going.  Perhaps most indicative at such a pivot point are the parting shots from the previous chair and the very early signs from the new chair.


A. Administrative data is an opportunity


This is a significant and substantive outgoing message.  It's all about the use of administrative date for statistical purposes.  Building on some earlier debate about the boundaries of management information, statistical, research administrative data. In short how administrative data - process data collected not primarily for statistical purposes - can be effectively embraced and harnessed for statistical use, with the right expert engagement and with important caveats too.
   
The wordcloud of the UKSA letter to the Cabinet Office on the use of administrative data....

In fact data is data.  It's all of the other things which are different and determinate. Purpose, definition, methodology, accuracy, scope and so on  (See Data Provenance).  Understanding that context is the key to unlocking whatever the potential might be.  So having compartmentalised data to help clarify and understand, there is a timely opportunity to bind them together in an informed and useful way.  


B. Interpretation is key.


The UKSA has created a foundation to explore the importance of the role of interpretation. After all the data the means to an end - specifically the means to the message.  This has been encouraged and supported by the influential Public Administration Select Committee "recommends that the Statistics Authority should take a proactive role in ensuring that data released is intelligible, objectively interpreted and in a readily accessible format"


This is also emphasised in some of the correspondence to MPs encouraging "more systematic public presentation of all the relevant statistical material along with appropriate professional explanation and guidance".   This was reflected more generally in the significant and succinct UKSA guidance on The Value of Statistical Commentary, previously discussed in Age of Analysis.


This is clearly echoed by the incoming chair, in the second sentence of the initial statement... "I care.... not just about the numbers themselves but about the ways in which they are used and interpreted", and "the need and value of sound and strong statistical analysis" and that "impartial commentary, explanation, and tools for dissemination are critical to our success".   Here's the word-cloud for that opening statement...

So the debate starts to move beyond data into the surrounding analytical and interpretation.  That said the early emerging focus is around what might be described "interpretation of tables"
rather than "process of analysis" from which insight and messages are distilled and synthesised, and of course where the real value is realised. A means to a greater end (see Impactometer).

Hence data is the foundation, and the debate progresses to value the analytical processes that build on and around that.  Probably not helped by the ease by which the term statistics is interpreted so differently  - from "the quantitative data" through to the "science concerned with the collection, classification and interpretation of quantitative data".  So statistics is both the data and the interpretation.  Of course, not forgetting the specific statistical techniques which can produce statistics.....  

Data Directive Decade

The previous decade provided a suite of best practice guidance on "data".  Key guidance came from the Audit Commission, HM Treasury, Cabinet Office, National Audit Office, and the Office for National Statistics.  So opening the debate and raising the bar on the appropriate use and management of data.

This all helpfully culminated in the Code of Practice for Official Statistics provided by the UK Statistics Authority - the defining guidance of best practice around data, with both great scope and depth.  That code is also quite challenging, so there's still some way to go in practice.  That also provides a strong foundation for other sectors too - after all it's about building on the right principles which are generally cross sector.

Projects - Management and Delivery

There are plenty of project management methodologies with their respective emphasis and strengths.  When we look into the heart of projects it is simply about balancing management and delivery.

Management

The management is the oversight which should increase the chances of the project being a success.  Hence the management is a means to an end.  That end being the project delivery.  Management uses project tools – business case, risk log, communication plan, financial profiles etc – These are ephemeral, they exist within the life of the project.  

Delivery

A project is about delivering something specific and explicit.  It has some clear purpose which is the driving influence.  Delivery results in specific project outputs or products.  These are the reason the project exists, and represents the project legacy.

Both Management and Delivery need to be both effective and visible. This gives the four pillars of success:

• Effective Management - the application of  successful governance and management 
• Effective Delivery - the successful delivery of the project purpose
• Visible Management - transparency of the management and governance
• Visible Delivery - transparency of the delivery which constitutes success for the project.

There is a balance of effort between management and delivery to get just right.  It’s quite easy to become a slave to the project tools – project software in particular – and all the necessary governance administration.  Equally an over emphasis on delivery can mean that the checks and balances are missed, and that can effect both project effectiveness and it's perception.

Equally there's an important balance between actual delivery and the visibility of that delivery.  Often it's easy to see lots of management tools being frequently updated during the life of the project, especially if the actual project products may emerge more slowly or even not until the end.

So plenty of science, but some art too.


 

99% Disambiguation

Disambiguous.  That's the plural of sale.  Also defined as clarification that follows from the removal of ambiguity.

With some of the grand and overt promotion that goes with Sales, there might well be some contradiction here in these two definitions. Some of the proportionality implied in those marketing materials might raise an eyebrow at the very least.

Here's some sale posters for a leading high street clothing retailer of over 100 years...

Notice the "selected lines" tucked in at the bottom under the "50% off sale".  Not much emphasis there.

Might we reasonably expect the space given over the the "50% discount, compared to the space given to "selected lines" to be in some way proportionate.  So the spatial emphasis gives us a fair sense of the lines in the "50% off sale".

Let's measure.

So in comparative terms, the "50% off sale" gets 100.8 sq units compared to 1,08 sq units for "Selected lines".

That works out at 99% of the spatial emphasis on the "50% off sales". Assuming some reasonable sense of proportionality, that might well lead us to assume that the discount might well apply to 99% of lines.  That's nearly everything (assuming of course that all "lines" have a similar number of items).  Perhaps we might be surprised if all bar 1% of the lines had 50% off.  Perhaps we're used to this so much, that we just know that's not going to be the case..... 

So perhaps Disambiguation might well be the right term, which intuitively seems to be more about disingenuous ambiguity.....

With the shift to more overt ethically produced clothing, then how about a shift to more proportionate marketing of those clothes....

I am what I am

Whatever the balance between nature and nurture, this phrase has some provenance.

Whether it's from the song made famous by Shirley Bassey and then most recently John Barrowman ... I am what I am, my own special creation, a notable Popeye phase from the 1930s, and with earlier biblical references too.

We are all different, and that's reflected in every personal interaction, and hence every work interaction too. That's why in the world of work there's a lot of time and effort expended in that understanding of self, as a steeping stone to understanding others.

One of the most popular models of types of us is the Myers-Briggs Type, based on the work of the Karl Jung. Here's my ready reconner that lays this out in a visual way to get a personal sense of where our personal preferences lay.

Numberator

This is one of my terms.

This is used to describe a number that should be berated for being presented out of it's context.  Most typically this is a number is a numerator, presented in the absence of any denominator context

Project Traction

Everything is a project.  With some combination of purpose, time and resources.  This applies to life in general too.  Going on holiday is a project, some purpose (maybe sun or surf or serenity), then some planning, then using resources and doing activities.  We think of projects more often in the workplace context , especially where project management methodologies start to be wheeled out.

Once project management methodologies get wheeled out then even the simpler projects can seem more complex, because with project management methodologies, there's simply more to do.  So not just to achieve the purpose of the project, but now also to construct and feed the project management machinery along the way.

So at this point it can be helpful to distinguish between what the project delivers to achieve it's purpose and what the project delivers to support the project management.  After 20+ years, PRINCE 2 is the de-facto project management standard for public and not for profit sector (originally developed through the office for Government Commerce (OGC), now subsumed within the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills).

It can be more helpful to also think of this is a more accessible way.  And to maintain some explicit air gap between these things.   The things that the project delivers to fulfil its purpose are deliverables. products or outputs.  The things that the project delivers to support the project management can be more simply described as the project tools.  The same way a carpenter's toolbox contains things that enable the carpenter to achieve some purpose with wood, the tools are the means to that end,and while important - even critical  -to achieving that purpose - those tools are a means to an end, rather than an end in themselves.  (Sure for someone else their purpose is to make tools for the carpenter in the first place - probably making tools with machinery.

It's the project management that can reliably provide the traction for the project.  The way a tractor is designed to provide the traction in  range of circumstances - to pull different tools.  The tractor is that generic  tool, just just those project management methodologies. Both can be applied to different purposes in different circumstances....

Risky Business

Risk is an integral part of our world and our lives and so too of the workplace. 

Risk management, an industry in in’s own right, defined as “the identification, assessment, and prioritisation of risks (defined in ISO 31000 as the effect of uncertainty on objectives, whether positive or negative) followed by coordinated and economical application of resources to minimise, monitor, and control the probability and/or impact of unfortunate events or to maximize the realisation of opportunities”. Source: Wikipedia

Corporately risk is often seen in the use of ‘risk logs’ – a project management tool used to list, assess and (even) managing risk– used to support larger streams of work.  Then of course the more implicit approaches in activities like SWOT analysis – strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats.  Those threats being potential risks.  However those opportunities present a more positive approach to risk – the risk of not doing positive things.

There’s some really helpful pointers to getting to grips with risk from David Spiegelhalter, who is Professor of Public Understanding or Risk at Cambridge University.  The author of some really useful materials, not just studying public understanding of risk, but also enabling that understanding too.  So some really helpful materials.   Having seen the talk (the University’s Department of Continuing Education)  on communication risk and uncertainty explaining “how people's perceptions of risk and uncertainty are influenced by the words, numbers and pictures used to communicate them”, there’s some really helpful observations and pointers to help get to grips with practically thinking about risk.  Here my key observations from that talk….

Approaching risk…  

We have two approaches to risk.  Firstly there’s the feeling approach.  That’s the gut reaction, fuelled by intuition, emotion and culture.  Secondly there’s the rational approach, weighing things up in a structured way, with careful analysis and measurement.  We’re seem to be comfortable with the more intuitive approach especially for the more personal matters.   When it comes to decisions taken on our behalf – for example by local and national government – we of course expect to see the more rational approach.  There in lies the world of business cases and cost benefit analysis.

Framing this issue… 

The purpose or context in which risks are presented is key.  It might simply be to attract attention to the issue, perhaps to inform or educate, or even change behaviour.

Numbers... 

Risk is often reported as tables of numbers, but increasingly as graphics too.  Interesting that the smallest number actually represents the biggest risk, 1 in 100 (higher risk) vs 1 in 10,000 (lower risk) when represented this way.  It’s proven that we act is some pre-disposed ways to how risks or probabilities are presented.  For example, Ratio Bias is where we focus on the numerator more so than the denominator.  So those two black bags...bag ‘A’ with one while and two red balls, and bag ‘B’ with two white and six red balls… so if the challenge is to get a while ball  then we’ll opt for bag B, the chances are exactly the same but the fact that we know there’s more while balls is too much to resist.  While that’s subtle, then how about Denominator Neglect where we ignore the denominator entirely.  So with those balls in the bag, we behave as it the red balls don’t exist at all.

Evidence and consensus… 

Certainly for some of the big areas of risk with lots of focus by lots of experts, we can look to a “meta” assessment of the risk, to get an overall impression of the understanding of the risk.  The two dimensions here are (a) the robustness of the evidence and (b) the degree of consensus.   So the robustness covers type, amount, quality and consistency, and the consensus covers the extent of agreement amongst experts.  Here’s how the assessment quality of evidence might considered, based confidence in estimates of medical treatment effects:

• High quality – further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of the effect.

• Moderate quality – further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate and may change the estimate.

• Low quality – further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate and is likely to change the estimate.

• Very low quality - any estimate of the effect is uncertain.

Of course the same evidence can be interpreted in different ways.  A favourite example of mine is the measurement of “staff turnover”, which for several years a national performance indicator for all police forces in England.  So a low turnover either means “staff are very happy here and are not drawn elsewhere” or  “staff are not good enough to achieve employment elsewhere”.  Probably the former that holds sway by default.

So arguably what we seek is a strong expert consensus based on robust evidence, rather than disagreement based on weak evidence.  That said, the world of consensus has had plenty of wake up calls, or “paradigm shifts” which can turn current thinking on it’s head….the worlds in now officially round. 

Tools...

There’s interesting ways to help present risk to ease understanding.  The idea of the “micro mort” which is a 1 in a million chance of dying, being used to more easily compare probabilities.  Examples of experiencing a micromort are travelling 6,000 miles in a train, driving 230 miles in a car, riding six miles on a motorbike.

Then there are the visual tools.  For example, a risk ladder shows the level of risks on a log scale to make comparing bigger and smaller risks easier.  Arrays of icons – grids of icons – help see the risk relative to a larger group.  Blocked arrays (where risk icons are clustered) are good for comparing, while scattered arrays (where risk icons are scattered) are good for seeing personal risk. 

Meeting Measure

Meeting…. defined as the act or process of coming together as an assembly for a common purpose. A very laudable and effective exercise when done well.  However, the practice of meetings can seem a little less rigorous at times, and not as effective as they could be.  Some key factors at play here, and here’s thoughts specifically around preparation and purpose.

In practice preparation can be quite variable.  Here’s a simple meetings measure to reflect the degree of preparation.  At one end of the continuum there is “Nightclub” style…just turn up and play it by ear.  Might even leave to go to something more interesting part way through.  At the other end of the continuum is “Bookclub” sytle …pre read with insightful collective reflection.  Materials are read and reflected on in advance,  and the meeting is the chance to share perspectives.  Most practical meetings are somewhere in between, but there’ll be a tipping point where just the right amount of preparation can maximise effectiveness.

In practice the purpose might not always be explicit enough.   Perhaps we need a more dynamic term for the person that’s in charge, rather than the ‘chair’.  So not a great metaphor - a passive functional object.  How about the “purposer”, as someone who is relentlessly focussed on delivering the purpose or objective of the meeting…

Data Quality Standards

This is a helpful framework for explicitly thinking about data quality.

There have been plenty of frameworks for performance and data, see for example A Framework for Performance Information or the Code of Practice for Official Statistics.  However this one, although not the most recent, has a quite unique depth of focus on the quality of data as an end in itself, and the corporate standards to help achieve this.

A joint product from the collective auditing bodies of the UK.....

There are are two broad sets of considerations here.  The first are the characteristics which are displayed by good quality data.  These are the outcome of the second set of considerations, which concern the corporate arrangements which directly influence the quality of data, and are described as the standards.

So the characteristics of good quality data....

And those characteristics are delivered by these five standards, the corporate arrangements to secure good quality data, and summarised as follows....

And each of these standards have some exacting questions to test against, each of which are listed below.

Not surprisingly perhaps, the emphasis is on the governance and leaderships for data quality from which all else follows.  It's worth noting that this is not describing the leadership for data, rather the leadership specifically for data quality, and hence for which there might even be different leadership roles.

It might be helpful to consider policies-and-procedures and systems-and-processes more as a whole. Given these terms are not explicitly defined.  In simple terms, policies-and-procedures can be considered as the guidance, and the systems-and-processes the actual data activity.

And here's all those 30 questions as a wordcloud...so that data quality emerges from the predominant themes of management, reporting, staff, recording, proceedures....