Imagine you are assigned to a team that will start and run a new venture for your company. You and your team are entrusted with funding to obtain a facility, manufacture products, hire employees, and market and sell your products. You and your team must decide everything from product pricing, to taking loans for improvements and paying expenses as you work toward the goal of building equity and net worth.
You make mistakes along your journey and in doing so learn firsthand why “cash is king” and how your venture can be profitable while tottering on the brink of bankruptcy. And while you and your team benefit from these valuable business experiences, you are never in danger of financial ruin or suffering the many other life-changing pitfalls of running a business.
Welcome to the world of simulation business training.
When I saw the recent news about a pill with an ingestible sensor to track medication adherence/compliance, essentially the next level of Medication Event Monitoring Systems, I thought again about what I refer to as the “Belson Fallacy” – the belief that tech can solve every problem.
What I found particularly interesting was that this unique drug-device combination is intended for the “treatment of schizophrenia, acute treatment of manic and mixed episodes linked with bipolar I disorder”, conditions that can include symptoms such as “extremely disordered thinking and behavior that impairs daily functioning“. So while on the surface, I do see a certain logic in having another means to ensure that patients are taking their medications, does this tech approach stand up under a little further scrutiny?
Do you have the courage to question your own understanding of the world, doubting a cherished belief that may not be supported by evidence? Would you be a better leader, team member and citizen if you did? Researcher Brendan Nyhan seems to have this kind of courage.
Nyhan was one of the researchers whose work evolved into the popular backfire effect, a widely reported behavior where once a person forms a belief, then offering objective evidence to the contrary causes the person to dig in their heels and defend the belief even more firmly. Now, Nyhan is considering new research that may refute the backfire effect.
The newer research considered claims regarding violent crime bantered about during the 2016 Presidential election and people’s perception/beliefs. Providing corrective information reportedly led people to adjust their opinion about their original belief on crime trends – but not necessarily related beliefs; for example, their support for a particular candidate who may have promoted non-factual claims. So while people may agree that the facts upon which they placed their belief need to be adjusted, they don’t necessarily adjust their larger position/support.