Thread by @swardley

X : Is mapping right?
Me : It's a map (which by their nature are imperfect representations of a space) built upon a model of evolution (which by the nature of being a model is wrong). It is imperfect and wrong but it seems to be useful.
X : How do you know that?
Me : Well ...

Me : ... the hypothesis is that looking at your landscape is more useful than not looking at your landscape. That can be tested and I believe @RoserPujadas1 was looking into that. Whether the hypothesis holds or not is one we will find out over time.
X : But ...

X : ... lots of people seem to find it useful.
Me : I certainly have that impression but then I'm mindful of selection and confirmation bias. It's just annecdote at the moment, it will need a proper study to test whether mapping is useful and I can't do that being biased.

X : So ... imperfect, wrong and you can't prove it's useful?
Me : That's about right. Which is why you should only use it if you find it useful not because of some belief that it will be useful. Such is the nature of emerging things.
X : Will it be useful?
Me : Time will tell.

X : That's really frustrating.
Me : What is?
X : Can't you get together a group of execs to explain how it's useful?
Me : Yes, but that isn't evidence of it being useful. That is evidence of me be able to find people who say it's useful. This is what is normally called marketing.

X : Isn't it evidence of it being useful though?
Me : No. If you want evidence then you need to start with a hypothesis that mapping is more useful than not mapping and the causation (which we mostly have), design an experiment to test this and then you need to go and test it.

Me : You're actually hitting at a common problem with most management books I read. They rarely start with a hypothesis, design an experiment and test it. They often start with an idea and gather confirming "evidence" for why the idea is right ...

Me : ... in reality, all they are actually testing is their ability to gather evidence to confirm that their idea was right rather than whether the idea was right or not.

X : But you will eventually be able to prove mapping is right?
Me : No. We will eventually be able to prove or disprove the hypothesis that mapping is more useful than not mapping.
X : Which makes mapping right?
Me : No, the maps will still be imperfect representations ...

Me : ... of a space and built on models (that are wrong). However, we should be able to create better models including better maps over time. Testing the hypothesis just tells us whether this would be a useful activity or not.
X : I need something more concrete for my executives.

Me : Well, I can't help you there. I can only show you the maps and explain the limitations. They are imperfect, ultimately wrong but some people seem to find them useful though we do not know yet whether they are actually useful or what constraints exist on usefulness.

X : What about your doctrine table?
Me : The list of universally useful principles? This ...
X : Yes
Me : It's derived from mapping and inherits all its characteristics. I have some evidence of it being useful.

X : You mean people saying it's useful?
Me : No, that would be evidence of my ability to gather people who say it's useful. I have actual evidence of its usefulness in areas such as organisational models and next generation behaviours. Not strong evidence but at least something.

X : I can't go to executives with all these caveats.
Me : I can't give you certainty and I'm certainly not willing to pretend that I can.
X : What about your next generation behaviours?
Me : You mean this?
X : Yes.
Me : I have good evidence on that, an entire population study ..

Me ... in fact, it gives evidence of the importance of guiding principles - they are a contraindication, same with earlier reports on pioneer-settler-townplanner structure. In other words, you can't do this stuff without guiding principles.
X : Your principles?
Me : Alas ...

Me : ... whilst I can say that guding principles matter, I can provide a list of principles derived from mapping and I have some other evidence supporting usefulness ... I would take it with a pitch of salt / skepticism. It's not bad but no more.

X : Not bad?
Me : Yes, there's some evidence of usefulessness in discrete parts of mapping and it is growing as I do more studies. It's not - "here is my idea, I've gone and collected examples to confirm it".
X : Who does that?
Me : Most stuff I read in management books.