The other day,
a very striking research finding that turned conventional wisdom and
generational practice upside down was published widely (http://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/health/high-milk-intake-tied-to-increased-mortality-risk/article6544831.ece).
It said that those who drink more than three glasses of milk (700 ml), instead
of facing a lower risk of fractures as believed hitherto, faced instead a risk
of higher mortality. This, obviously, is counter to the received wisdom that it
is beneficial to drink more milk as it leads to greater calcium intake and thus
leads to healthy bones, apart from it being a wholesome food for general human
development. The study was carried out by the reputed Uppsala University of
Sweden and covered 61,000 women and 45,000 men of certain age groups for more
than 20 years. This study caps a series of such studies which question the past
precautions, biases and beliefs on a variety of subjects, ranging from eggs and
coconuts to salt and cocoa (one such study is that intake of certain types of
fat is good for brain health!).
At the end of
the milk research summary, however, there was a caveat that the study pointed
to an association rather than a link. It suggested more investigations to
conclude on the topic. This caveat is not surprising given the diversified
nature of human genetics, the multi-factorial nature of human aging and disease
affliction. Identification of the core ingredients of prophylactic and
therapeutic potency as well as side effects and adverse effects of natural or
synthetic ingredients is wrought with great complexity. Potentially, these
research journeys would continue, leading one day to more conclusive and more
validated hypotheses on what causes what. While the complexities of
understanding these bio-chemical challenges at molecular level are
understandable, it is intriguing that apparently simpler and more visible
aspects of human relationships should threaten the stability of, and cause
volatility in, human relationships at family, organizational, social and
national levels. This blog post presents certain models of researching and
understanding human behaviour as a way of development.
Individuality and conformity
The evolution
of one’s personality over the years is the result of continuous interplay of one’s
quest for individuality and the individual’s ecosystem’s norm for conformity.
The ecosystem could variously be the family (pre-marriage and post-marriage),
the school and college, the organization and the society. At every point of
time, the individual is simultaneously advised to be expressive and empowered
as well as conformist and compliant. While absorbing this indoctrination, the
individual also constantly observes the players and role models he or she
encounters in the various ecosystems. The observed behaviours are much like the
various items of food that one ingests for biological development; they are the
complex ingredients of food for emotional health. Much like the example of milk
above, the behavioural inputs that are embedded as features of ecosystems are
akin to inner ingredients like lactose
and galactose sugar in milk that are now found to cause oxidative stress and
inflammation for individuals. There are more complexities, in addition.
Nations with
developing and diversified habitat conditions such as India have multiple and
diverse ecosystems at different points in scales of extreme polarities; poor
and rich, rural and urban, squalor and luxury, unemployed and unemployed, and
so on. Amidst all this diversity, there are two common national cultural
trends; aspiration for growth and passion for equity. Each individual develops
his or her own personality that expresses individuality and conformity that are
not only influenced by the observed behavioural inputs but also the embedded
factors of the ecosystems. These influences on individual personality
development and collective social motive force are rarely appreciated with the
needed perspicacity so much so the pressures get built up to alarming levels.
Sudden and volatile expressions of resentment in families, institutions, firms
and societies are a result of insensitivity to what could constitute an optimum
balance of individuality and conformity on one dimension and economic growth
and social equity on the other dimension.
Observation and research
Unfortunately,
by the time one gets to recognize the need for personality optimization, much
of one’s personality gets formed. The only way one rebalances and optimizes
one’s personality is through observation and research. And the start point of
one’s observation and research must be revalidation of the hypotheses that have
been allowed to embed themselves over the years; like the several food and
nutrition examples that have led to contrarian conclusions through more
objective and intensive observation and research. Observation is the act or
faculty of watching something or someone carefully for a period of time,
especially to learn something. Research takes observation to the next level.
Research is the careful study of a subject, especially with a view to discover
new facts or information about it. Observation and research are an essential
component of personality redevelopment that has several facets to it.
Observation becomes relevant only with an open state of mind while research
becomes helpful only with an analytical bent of mind.
The triggers
for an individual to be motivated to observe and research are rooted in
relative success of others and one’s own outlook. At a national level,
countries aspire to achieve a national comparative advantage to achieve
superior economic growth; but a few countries like India tend to be sensitive,
rightly so, to social acceptance of economic platforms. At an entity level,
firms seek to achieve firm level competitive advantage to achieve superior
business growth. At an individual level, people seek to achieve personalized
intellectual advantage to achieve superior career development. These are
achieved not merely through past achievements but more through contemporary
benchmarking and futuristic aspiration. Korea needed to observe and benchmark
with Japan to develop itself as an Asian Tiger. India desires to observe and
benefit from multiple national models, from China and Singapore to USA and
Japan. The US automobile industry observed and learnt from the Japanese
automotive industry to rediscover itself. An NITian (a student of National
Institute of Technology) observes and wonders why he or she cannot be better
than an IITian (a student of the Indian Institute of Technology). The whole
group in any typical class wonders why all of its constituents cannot land
themselves into plum jobs offered by Google or McKinsey.
Coincidence, connectivity and correlation
The processes
of observation and research have three nuances. These are coincidence,
connectivity and correlation. Coincidence is the fact of two things happening
at the same time by chance, in a surprising way. Life, it is said, is full of
coincidences. The occurrence of someone putting in low effort and achieving
high success is more a coincidence than a law (possibly related to a more
compassionate evaluator rather than anything else). Connectivity is the state
of two things being associated together; it is a state of association by which
one causes the other. Passive or active smoking and development of cancer are
connected events. Make in Japan is, for example, associated with higher quality
and high cost. Correlation is a variable state of connectivity where a change
in one factor is accompanied by a change in the other factor. The incidence of
diabetes in a society is correlated with an increase in consumption of junk
food, for example. The processes of observation and research must learn to
differentiate between coincidence, connectivity and correlation. In a
meritocracy, getting handpicked for performance based on random interactions
would be a coincidence while knowledge and experience would more surely get
connected with performance and reward. At a micro level, multiple factors like
nature of qualification, type of institution, depth of experience, nature of
industry etc., get statistically correlated with career advantage.
While life does
have a fair share of coincidences, in so far as performance is concerned, it is
best to assume that there can be no coincidence. Many people confuse
opportunities with coincidences. An aspirant job-hopper travelling by plane for
a scheduled interview may happen to be seated next to a CEO of a different
organization in a plane; this “coincidence” may lead to a conversation and a
job offer if the CEO is impressed. The opportunity may seem to be a coincidence
or a matter of luck but underlying the opportunity lies the ability of the
individual to network and impress, the openness of the CEO to be inquisitive, and
the willingness of both to make a considered choice. Life may be full of
incidents and occurrences like the one mentioned but it is the connectivity
between ability and accomplishment that matters. Oftentimes, a simple two
factor connectivity may not suffice. In the case of a firm, for example, a
firm’s performance may be correlated to its product diversity, geographic
diversity, capital expenditure premium talent pool, export share etc.,
different firms may have different equations of correlation for the same
independent variables. Right optics and smart analytics are required to ensure
that the processes of observation and research are effective.
Discrimination, differentiation
As an
individual observes his or her role model or as an organization observes its
industry leader, it is important to develop the right optic (the right sense of
sight) to observe, and the right analytics to differentiate between
coincidence, connectivity and correlation. Fortunately, both right optic and
smart analytics have one faculty in common - discrimination. Discrimination is
the ability to recognize differences, and more importantly, the ability to
judge the good quality of anything or anyone. Discrimination comes in multiple
hues. One set of hues relates to an ability to discriminate between data and
information, information and knowledge, and knowledge and wisdom. Another set
of hues relates to an ability to discriminate between revenue and
profitability, growth and sustainability, market share and revenue share, focus
and specialization, and enterprise value and market capitalization. National
set of hues relates to an ability to discriminate between economic growth and
per capita economic growth, employment and inflation, and economic equality and
social equity. Even regulators have the needs to discriminate; for example
between monopoly and monopsony, premium and predatory, private weal and public
good, and proprietary protection and corporate veil.
The moment an individual,
entity or nation decides to become superior, association (and correlation) between
enablers and outcomes needs to be established. The correlating variables and
the factors of association or connectivity need to be established. The
observation and research may lead from the macro to micro as in the case of the
Uppsala University’s milk and mortality study wherein the connection between
higher milk consumption and higher mortality was first established and then
probable contributory causes such as lactose and galactose sugar were later
drilled down. In the study of leaders, an association between the leadership
styles and firm performance may be first established at a macro level and the
more impacting correlations established later. Firms may identify an association
between operational excellence and firm performance at a macro level and seek
multiple correlations thereafter. The blog post has proposed observation and
research, enhanced by right optics and smart analytics and bound together by
discrimination as the fundamental tool kit to think beyond coincidence, and
establish connectivity and collaboration for development of individuals,
entities, societies, and nations.
Posted by Dr CB
Rao on November 9, 2014
No comments:
Post a Comment