|
Of course, we can. We
have been doing it for thousands of years. The astronomical
observatories of the past were able to predict celestial events with a
very high degree of accuracy. It is, however, only in the last few
centuries that the prediction business has really gotten underway as the
scientific enterprise. The fundamental proposition of science is to
demonstrate that one's theories of the world are valid by making
accurate predictions. So what! We all know we can predict the future of
physical systems. Can we predict the future of human affairs? Again of
course we can. We do it all the time. Social interaction would be
impossible if there were not some very predictable behavior in our
complex socio-cultural-political-commercial world. Actually the problem
of forecasting in the physical world and the social world are
essentially the same theoretical problem. I will discuss this in
greater detail in Section 2, where I will discuss the limitations
imposed by complexity, chaos theory, contingency theory, and
evolutionary dynamics.
The important question is not can we
predict but rather how accurately can we predict? Many claim to
predict. But how accurate are they? Just because it must obviously be
possible to predict does not mean we know how. The prediction business
about human affairs is littered with absurd soothsayer beliefs. I wish
I could ignore these, but there are still many people who believe in
Tarot cards, astrology, and the “Madam Ruby's” of this world. What are
of greater concern to me are the less obviously false approaches that
attempt to dress themselves with the appearance of rationality and
science. Peter Schnaars effectively demonstrates many examples in his
book, Megamistakes. Schnaars took the simple (Although no one
else seems to have thought to do it as extensively.) scientific step of
checking the predictions made by a large number of mainstream well
respected "Think Tanks" and other groups of leading experts in their
fields. The record as Schnaars says is dismal. I recommend his book.
It is important to realize how very easy it is to be so very wrong.
It sometimes appears that the corporate
world has lost faith in strategic planning, which, at its core, assumes
we can make some useful predictions about the future. I do not know if
Schnaars killed strategic planning but its demise was concurrent with
his book. Just because it was done wrong in the past is not reason to
give up. It is, however, reason to be careful. It is possible to do it
right, although it is not easy. I will discuss how, in detail with
examples, in the Section on The Theory of Society. For the
present I will simply state that my simulations demonstrate that
organizational achievement is very sensitive to our ability for
forecast. The quest to forecast is well worth the effort. This should
be obvious.
It should also be obvious that sometimes
we can do so accurately and other times cannot get even close. I take a
very hard line position that a forecast is of no value unless there is a
substantiated estimate of the accuracy of the forecast. For the present
I will leave this subject noting that there are 4 factors that determine
the accuracy. 1) How well do we understand the dynamics of the system?
2) Which outcome parameters have mathematically chaotic behavior? 3)
How accurately can we measure the current state? 4) What is it that we
don't know?
It is not easy to predict, especially the
future.
ç
Prior Page of Text
Next Page of Text
è
(C) 2005-2014 Wayne M. Angel.
All rights reserved. |
