In World Class R&D we build effectiveness into the act of Evidence Gathering: gathering the right kinds of evidence to the right level of assuredness...
We gather evidence to see if we’re working on the right R&D pursuit, which means we also gather evidence to see if we should shut down the pursuit. We want enough evidence, not too much. There’s always enough ambiguity to call for one more study. But not in industrial R&D. Effective evidence gathering means developing a tolerance for ambiguity
+ , backed up by in-depth, contextual understanding of the underlying science. Assuredness comes from a mixture of just enough evidence combined with a tacit understanding
+ of how the evidence fits into the research area.
Expand all | Collapse all We build effectiveness by changing the way we do science: deciding which studies to run and how to run them, almost on an hourly basis
The two inner circles in the diagram show the headings under which these tactical changes are discussed. However, evidence gathering occurs within an overall plan of attack which is managed and governed by others as listed in the two outer circles. Effectiveness in Evidence Gathering must address the needs of all the players. For example, it does no good to design new work practices if management still expects the old formats. The act of evidence gathering happens within a defined program. We can’t change the way we do science without also changing the way we fund and manage the science pursuits.
There are two ways to make researchers more effective: tell them what to do; or set the stage so they figure out what to do
In World Class R&D we opt to set the stage. We build a program that allows researchers to demonstrate they are ready to figure out what to do: the Compulsories+
There is no clear definition of what constitutes effective evidence
Evidence is just as effective if it tells us where not to go as where to go. It’s effective if it opens up new avenues of research. It’s effective if it reveals what we don’t know, or what we don’t need to know. It’s effective if it allows us to choose from amongst different avenues of research. Evidence is often considered effective if it allows us to make better decisions in the face of uncertainty.
It is just as difficult to know when evidence will prove to be ineffective
Evidence is in effective when it tells us much more than we need to know in order to make a decision. It’s ineffective if it leads outside the scope of our R&D pursuit or is directed at the wrong pursuit. It’s ineffective if it’s not bounded by commercial considerations (i.e., science for science sake). It’s ineffective if it’s divorced from what our colleagues are pursuing. It’s ineffective if we need a magnifying glass to see the results: we seek interocular+
We can disentangle the effective from the ineffective by following the World Class R&D agenda
We ensure the laboratory or field results are as unbiased as they can be (e.g., using the compulsories). We build effectiveness into the design of the work itself (practices). We eliminate obstacles to effectiveness by broadening the mandate (scope). We build incentives for effectiveness through our governance approach. Effective practices flow down from the top, but we also ensure researchers are capable of receiving and internalizing these practices.
More Core Arguments for Evidence Gathering
