Don’t Trust Experts
The failure of experts underscores the need to combine expert knowledge with critical thinking.
Over-reliance on expert opinions has contributed to several significant catastrophes throughout history. Financial experts and economists largely failed to predict or prevent the 2008 global financial crisis. Many relied on complex financial models that didn't account for systemic risks or the possibility of a housing market collapse. This led to disastrous consequences for the global economy.
In1986, NASA engineers warned about potential O-ring failures in cold weather, but management experts overruled these concerns, leading to the tragic explosion of the Challenger shortly after launch. In the 1950s-1960s, medical experts initially declared thalidomide safe for pregnant women to treat morning sickness. This led to thousands of babies being born with severe birth defects before the drug was withdrawn.
These examples demonstrate how over-reliance on expert opinion, especially when combined with institutional pressures, cognitive biases, or a failure to consider alternative viewpoints, can lead to severe consequences. Experts, like all humans, are susceptible to cognitive biases such as confirmation bias, overconfidence, and anchoring. These biases can lead them to misinterpret evidence or overlook important factors, potentially compromising their judgment. They often have deep knowledge in a narrow field, which may cause them to miss broader implications or interdisciplinary connections. This specialisation can lead to tunnel vision on matters of significance that require a more holistic understanding.
Experts often work within institutions or systems that may influence their judgments, and career concerns, funding pressures, or institutional biases regularly affect their ability to make impartial assessments on significant matters. Being invested in maintaining the status quo of their field often makes experts resistant to paradigm shifts or innovative approaches that challenge their existing knowledge.
Many matters of significance involve complex, interconnected systems (e.g., economics, climate, geopolitics), and ?experts may struggle to accurately predict outcomes in these areas due to the sheer number of variables and potential for unforeseen events. Some studies, such as Philip Tetlock's work on expert political judgment, have shown that experts often perform poorly when making long-term predictions about complex issues.
The implementation of Covid policies, including lockdowns in New Zealand, provides an interesting case study on expert bias and its effects on public policy. New Zealand's experts initially advocated for an elimination strategy, which was successful in the short term. However, this approach was influenced by overconfidence in the ability to maintain a zero Covid status long-term. Experts heavily relied on epidemiological models to predict the spread of the virus. These models, while useful, can be subject to limitations and assumptions that may not fully capture real-world complexities. Health experts prioritised minimizing Covid-19 cases and deaths. This narrow focus led to underestimating the long-term economic, social, and mental health impacts of prolonged lockdowns.
New Zealand maintained strict border controls and lockdowns longer than many other countries and this can be attributed to a bias towards maintaining the initially successful strategy, overlooking changing global circumstances and vaccine availability.
Marketing experts too, rely heavily on traditional methods or established theories, potentially missing emerging trends or unconventional consumer behaviors. For example, experts might have underestimated the impact of social media influencers on purchasing decisions in the early days of platforms like Instagram. Marketing experts often overestimate their ability to predict consumer responses to campaigns or product launches. The high failure rate of new products (estimated at 70-80 percent in some industries) suggests that even experienced marketers struggle to consistently judge what will resonate with consumers.
Focusing too narrowly on demographic data misses important psychographic or behavioural factors that influence purchasing decisions. This can lead to misaligned marketing strategies that fail to connect with the intended audience. Marketers are often guilty of being too slow to adapt to new technologies or platforms, missing opportunities or falling behind competitors. For instance, some traditional marketers were initially sceptical about the effectiveness of content marketing or influencer partnerships.
With the abundance of data available in modern marketing, experts tend to cherry-pick data that confirms their existing beliefs or strategies, rather than objectively analysing all available information. The unpredictable nature of viral content challenges even the most experienced marketers and they often struggle to reliably create or predict viral marketing successes. Many marketers rely too heavily on strategies that worked in the past, failing to adapt to changing consumer preferences or market conditions.
While expert judgment can be valuable, it's crucial to encourage diverse perspectives and cross-functional collaboration, regularly challenge assumptions and test new approaches, and stay open to emerging trends and technologies. Using data-driven decision-making to complement expert intuition helps maintain a balance between expertise and fresh, innovative thinking.
By acknowledging the potential limitations of expert judgment in marketing, organisations can strive for more balanced, innovative, and effective marketing strategies. A good marketer can overcome expert bias by employing several strategies such as embracing continuous learning and staying open to new ideas, while recognising that expertise is not static and that the marketing landscape is constantly evolving. Using A/B testing and other experimental methods to validate assumptions always helps.
It's important to regularly conduct firsthand consumer research and use social listening tools to understand current trends and sentiments, while working closely with other departments like sales, product development, and customer service. This can provide broader insights and challenge marketing-centric thinking.
Rigorous peer review processes and encouraging constructive criticism and debate should go hand in hand with leveraging machine learning algorithms to identify patterns and trends that human experts might miss. Use AI-driven tools to complement human expertise in areas like customer segmentation and predictive analytics.
Critically analyze past successes and failures, be honest about personal biases and blind spots and consider multiple possible futures and outcomes. This can help avoid overconfidence in any single prediction or strategy. Designating a group to play devil's advocate and challenge marketing strategies can help identify potential flaws or biases in expert judgments.
Good marketers will encourage calculated risk-taking and learning from failures, and allocate resources for testing new, unproven marketing approaches. They will also implement systems to gather and analyse customer feedback continuously and use this direct input to challenge or validate expert assumptions.
By implementing these strategies, a good marketer can maintain the benefits of expertise while mitigating its potential drawbacks. This balanced approach can lead to more innovative, effective, and customer-centric marketing strategies.
READ MORE
Critical Thinking – Marketers Superpower
Marketers Need Emotional Intelligence
Expanding Our Intellectual Horizons
?