Still in São Paulo, at the airport waiting for my flight when I wrote this post.
believe que a conferência da SCIP foi muito boa, as pessoas com as quais falei ficaram contentes, o número de assistentes subiu de 100 para 120, os patrocinadores ficaram contentes, os palestrantes também estiveram satisfeitos.
Fico pensando porem, talvez seja fanático mesmo, mas sei lá, será que a gente tem ponto cego com isso lá? Será que temos muito que melhorar ainda (eu fiz a minha análise e temos algumas áreas de melhora, sempre tem, mas fico pensando nisso).
Ainda tenho que fazer a análise para ver se na verdade temos pontos cegos, mas nestes dias, recebi montes de emails onde me falavam (como reação a minha palestra lá), você teria que vir para minha company, top management has lots of blind spots. It happened this or that and they do not realize. What happens to them?
But this is normal even if they knew then it would not be blind spots.
we have a conversation yesterday with his friend Fernando de Almeida seems that controversy arose at the conference was that he mentioned (and I agree) that provides intelligence analyst, as it can not be otherwise, your version of history. That is, the analyst also has biases, perceptual problems, etc.. and is also blind spot. There is no perfect analyst, even though I'm Argentinian;)
But why is one who is more likely to have blind spot is who's on top of the organization?
What is happening is that the professional intelligence and actually a good amount of middle management professionals are much closer to market and other stakeholders and thus is less likely to have blind spot, because they speak (or should speak ) often with the different stakeholders of the company so we should have fewer problems with blind spots. Who is on top, usually does not speak with key stakeholders so frequent. But
, CI professionals are immune to the same blind spots?
I think unfortunately not. All the world is subject to confirmation bias (in fact the process of KIT and the chances you have at the beginning of the cycle are high chances that this has happened).
Everybody is also subject to having assessment bias (the analyst is more likely because it is in fact on a daily basis so you have more facts in mind the next). The decision maker, however, is not so tied to assessment bias because he has (or should have) a look of longer-term.
And those are just some of exemplinhos that we can have.
But how do we solve these problems with the biases and points blind, as I said in my talk is the way to focus on what we believe are our strengths and weaknesses, our competitive advantages and the same points of our competitors, because that is where we suffer the most damage.
But one theme is that competitors are not always the usual suspects. For example, who is the main competitor of Bombril the guys who make the same products that it or cookware manufacturers who are increasingly using Teflon and are therefore superfluous to your product?
Edson Ito agree with that good CI professional must have a low ego, but I also realize is that many think they have the absolute truth and I believe that there must be more humble and consider that we only have one version of reality. Poor advice of humility that comes from an Argentinian, right?
Big hug, Adrian Alvarez Lic
Founding Partner
Midas Consulting
Direct Phone (Argentina):
Direct Phone +54-11-4775-8983 (Brazil): +55-11-3010-1685
http: / / www.midasconsulting.com.ar/
0 comments:
Post a Comment