In God We Trust, All Others Bring Data

at
Categories
Tags

 

 

W.E. Deming, the father of modern statistical quality control, is generally considered to be the originator of the saying “In God We Trust, All Others Bring Data.” While most of the people who cite Deming in this instance use the quote to focus on the need for data-driven decisions, and that was clearly one of the messages Deming wished to communicate, the quote also contains a powerful statement about God’s omniscience and trustworthiness. Implied in Deming’s statement is that the data others must bring should share to some degree in these same qualities of God; in other words, it must be valid and it must be reliable.

The requirement for others to bring data is rooted in two sources: humanity’s limited knowledge and questionable integrity. People seldom know as much as they think they do; and what they know is often incorrect or has been improperly interpreted. And clearly, there are many gaps in our understanding of the causes or solutions of problems that we face. Data can help verify what is known and potentially discover new knowledge. Good data analysis can bring clarity to problems, point the way to potential solutions, and provide compelling proof for ideas or arguments. It can also speak to the truthfulness or falsehood of those it describes.

Truthfulness and integrity are at the heart of good data analysis. Data that is misrepresented, or even manufactured to support a particular point of view is not good data. As researchers focused on solving problems, your commitment to accurately gathering and reporting data is key to effective problem-solving. Just as integrity is a key characteristic of the Virtuous Leader and Virtuous Organization, so too must integrity be at the heart of good research. At times, our research will lead us in directions that we would rather not pursue. Sometimes it may indicate that the solution may not be affordable or acceptable to all of the stakeholders. In these times, all a good researcher can do if to maintain a commitment to integrity and accurately reporting what the data indicates.

The Virtuous Business Model argues that integrity and competence are earmarks of virtuous leaders. Make sure your data demonstrates your integrity and competency as you begin your journey into research and problem-solving.

Upon successful completion of this discussion, you will be able to:

Critique the relationship between integrity as described in the VBM and good decision making.

Instructions:
Review the rubric to make sure you understand the criteria for earning your grade.
Prepare a discussion post that answers the following questions:
Describe a decision you have made in the past that you later understood was influenced by bad data. If you cannot recall such a decision, then look for an example of a public official who has done so.
What was the result of the decision informed by bad data?
What were the reasons bad data was used to make the decision?
How might good data have been obtained to make a better data-driven decision?

Sample Solution

becomes fundamental when errands are extensive and complex. Associations can track down the Belbin jobs every individual fits through a poll, and consequently adjusted gatherings can be shaped covering every one of the jobs. Be that as it may, as with Fiedler’s possibility model, the hypothesis when meant practice can frequently turn out to be exceptionally unreasonable for associations to routinely carry out. This is to a great extent on the grounds that the association is compelled by the characters of their workers, their might be a wealth of one character type and a shortfall of another, the main arrangement is to employ remotely to fill the missing jobs inside groups. This can bring about a broad finance for an association and tremendous monetary ramifications as they can’t legitimately excuse representative’s on the off chance that they have an excessive number of one character type. The significance of Belbin jobs in a group became clear for Group 1 on the main day of the outside administration course, the gathering had 5 individuals who filled the completer finisher and practitioner jobs, but had nobody filling the asset agent or screen evaluator job, the gathering used up all available time and didn’t get done with the responsibility effectively. Clearly using up all available time was not the sole reason for the gatherings disappointment, but in the event that somebody had been checking time and execution, the gathering might have understood their choice was impossible and might have tracked down an elective arrangement. One answer for absence of Belbin jobs is to relegate explicit jobs to people, this was carried out vigorously on the outside administration course for jobs apparent to be fundamental for progress, for example, time keeping. This strategy works for basic undertakings, but for complex errands the person with the appointed liability can frequently become immersed in the errand and fail to remember their job, or the inverse turning out to be excessively engaged with the obligation they have been relegated. Eventually, as with initiative guaranteeing groups are working appropriately is profoundly reliant upon the circumstance, and turns into the pioneers liability to investigate what is happening and accurately put together gatherings to guarantee a good outcome

This question has been answered.

Get Answer
WeCreativez WhatsApp Support
Our customer support team is here to answer your questions. Ask us anything!
👋 Hi, Welcome to Compliant Papers.
Hi, how can I help?