BewareOfExperts.com
EXPERTS ARE LEAST SUITED TO JUDGE NEW EXCELLENT IDEAS
It seems a perfectly
rational approach to appoint experts to the task of evaluating and judging new
ideas in any field of knowledge. The startling truth is that, as a group,
experts in any field of knowledge are the least suited to identify excellent new
ideas. Experts are the most likely to ridicule and dismiss as nonsense those
ideas that depart farthest from their familiar body of knowledge and beliefs in
any field of expertise. The majority of experts are rote learners devoid of
creative juices. They posses a vast store of knowledge of facts, figures and
detailed minutia of their particular field of expertise but lack the creative
ability to venture outside the confines of their narrow field of knowledge and
beliefs.
EXPERTS ARE VITAL
Experts in all fields of
knowledge have been a vital ingredient in human endeavor and progress (and lack
thereof) throughout the ages. Experts are vital for safe
and slow changes that come in small incremental steps. On the other hand,
experts stifle progress that requires great leaps of faith by discarding old
sacredly held beliefs and replacing them with totally new insights. Thus experts
guard mankind from potential disasters by restraining enthusiasm for good
sounding ideas that in reality could turn out to be big mistakes. On the other
hand, experts deprive mankind from making big leaps of progress by totally
ignoring or ridiculing new ideas that constitute a total departure from their
familiar body of currently held beliefs.
GUARDIANS OF THE STATUS-QUO
Experts are primarily the
“Guardians of the Status-Quo”. This means that experts most often stifle
progress because they are very averse to new ideas that differ from their
strongly held beliefs. Their reasoning is that they know almost everything about
the body of knowledge and beliefs dealing with the area of their expertise and
that anything in conflict with that body of beliefs must be false. Not a logical
approach, because all new ideas by definition must differ from the old ideas.
Ridiculing and dismissing all really
new ideas is a very safe and practical approach for experts because 80% of all
new ideas are most likely nonsense and 20% range from acceptable to brilliant.
Merely saying “NO” to all things new will result in an impressive track record
of at least 80% of the time being right
(see
www.MaleIntuition.com ).
MASTERS OF MINUTIA
Experts are also the
“Masters of Minutia”. This means that experts know the smallest detail about
their field of expertise but they often have great difficulty seeing the big
picture. That is why small incremental changes to their conventional beliefs are
much more acceptable to them than complete replacement of their beliefs with
totally new ideas.
TINKERING WITH OLD IDEAS
Experts are much more open
to tinkering with small details of existing accepted ideas and beliefs than to
discarding old ideas and adopting sweepingly new ideas. When confronted with
totally new ideas that they have not had the time to ponder, they try to dismiss
these ideas with quick jabs of unsupported arguments that have a clear ring of
authority but often amount to nothing more than impressive sounding jargon and
acronyms that no one outside their expert fraternity knows the meaning of.
WHAT PASSES FOR EXPERTISE
Expertise does not denote
correctness or accurate fact. Expertise is merely the ability to offer opinions
based upon a body of firmly held beliefs in a particular field of knowledge. It
is a reflection of currently held beliefs supported by interesting sounding
acronyms and phrases developed specially for and by the experts belonging to the
fraternity of each particular body of expert beliefs.
MEDIOCRITY TRUMPS OVER BRILLIANCE
Brilliant new ideas are
destined for ridicule and easy dismissal because they cannot hope to be
supported by experts for reasons of their dissimilarity to the firmly held
expert beliefs. The creators of such very new ideas cannot be expected to be
experts because experts are not the creators of ideas that seek to destroy the
body of belief that is the foundation to their expertise. Experts can only be
expected to create small mediocre incremental changes to the body of their own
expert beliefs. Those incremental small change ideas created by experts triumph
easily over brilliant revolutionary ideas created by non-experts because
tinkering with old ideas is what experts are good at and their colleagues will
easily agree no matter whether the tinkering makes the original idea more
complicated or inferior. That is how the original 14 page USA income tax of the
year 1913 grew to the 17,000 page monstrosity it is today (2005).
SO WHO SHOULD JUDGE NEW IDEAS?
So who, if not experts,
should judge new ideas? There are experts who are not rote learners reciting old
ideas in opposition to new ideas. They are creative thinkers and know that
dismissing new ideas simply because they are unfamiliar is an arrogant mistake
that precludes progress. But where do we find those experts? They are not the
experts that appear on expert lists for media wonks to chose from when they are
in need of sound bites or video clips. They are the kind of experts that are
very careful in having any kind of quick opinions or to make quick negative
pronouncements about any new idea unfamiliar to them. They are not very useful
for the media or for panels of experts because they do not give quick opinions
or make judgments about brand new ideas. They excuse themselves and request time
for reflection. They like to study the new idea before giving their opinion and
that does not make for the immediate news required by the media.
THE BEST SOLUTION
The best solution might be to make panels of experts aware of the natural
tendencies of experts and beg them to be less arrogant and give brand new ideas
the special attention they deserve instead of quickly dismissing all things new
based upon the illogical reason that they do not conform to their standard body
of knowledge and beliefs. Over 80% of new ideas will still be found to be wrong
but at least the 20% of new ideas that are actually good or even excellent will
have a fair chance of being found to be good or excellent.
|