[Sigia-l] research: when is it enough? vs. ethics

[Ziya Oz]

"PeterV" wrote:

> We all know if we quote some Forrester study and throw in some
> numbers, it makes you look more convincing for many business people.

Utterly. My constant objection to 'research' on this list is precisely this.
A lot of the 'research' floating around is very much guided, paid-for, and
ultimately, a sales tool for somebody. Left-handed midgets from the Midwest
like their popcorn buttered and frequent ecommerce sites 23.7 hours/week,
type of stuff. (Guess who funded it?) Abstract: people 28 years old and over
like their nav bars on the left. Full 'research': $59.95, download here;
credit cards and PayPal accepted; lecture next Tuesday; the book's on the
way.

During the dotcom era 'savvy' startups and many VCs used to buy 'research'
to prove their company had a bright future in a rosy marketplace adorned
with fantastic adoption/usage numbers. You dropped numbers like there was no
tomorrow and you got your money. It was expected. You'd look naïve if you
didn't resort to 'research' numbers.

It was a battle to point this out to people while it was going on; it looks
silly now. But, as you say, this is that happens in the 'real life
trenches'. 

Recognizing this is one thing, confusing it for something sacrosanct or
'scientific' is another.

Best,

Ziya