2008 May 20 - Tue

Confusion by Committee

In reading Rob Weir's An Antic Dispoition blog today, he has a very cogent observation regarding committees:

I have a theory concerning committees. A committee may have different states, like water has gas, liquid or solid phases, depending on temperate and pressure. The same committee, depending on external circumstances of time and pressure will enter well-defined states that determine its effectiveness. If a committee works in a deliberate mode, where issues are freely discussed, objections heard, and consensus is sought, then the committee will make slow progress, but the decisions of the committee will collectively be smarter than its smartest member. However, if a committee refuses to deliberate and instead merely votes on things without discussion, then it will be as dumb as its dumbest members. Voting dulls the edge of expertise. But discussion among experts socializes that expertise. This should be obvious. If you put a bunch of smart people in a room and don't let them think or talk, then don't expect smart things to happen as if the mere exhalation of their breath brings forth improvements to the standard.

The quotation stems from his observations regarding the committee which was stick handling Microsoft's OOXML standard through the fast track process. Sometimes committees, when doing things properly, can be better than the sum of the parts, but without proper communication and time allotments, can turn out to be no better than the weakest link.

[/Personal/Business] permanent link