
Sign up to save your podcasts
Or
Have you ever walked out of a meeting with a clear idea of the analysis that you're going to conduct, only to find yourself three days later staring at an endless ocean of crunched data and wondering in which direction you're supposed to be paddling your analysis boat? That might not be an ocean. It might be an analytics rabbit hole. In this episode, the gang explores the Analysis of Competing Hypotheses approach developed by Richards Heuer as part of his work with the CIA, inductive versus deductive reasoning, and engaging stakeholders as a mechanism for focusing an analysis. Ironically, our intrepid hosts had a really hard time avoiding topical rabbit holes during the episode. But, acknowledging the problem is the first part of the solution!
For complete show notes, including links to items mentioned in this show and a transcript of the discussion, visit the show page.
4.8
164164 ratings
Have you ever walked out of a meeting with a clear idea of the analysis that you're going to conduct, only to find yourself three days later staring at an endless ocean of crunched data and wondering in which direction you're supposed to be paddling your analysis boat? That might not be an ocean. It might be an analytics rabbit hole. In this episode, the gang explores the Analysis of Competing Hypotheses approach developed by Richards Heuer as part of his work with the CIA, inductive versus deductive reasoning, and engaging stakeholders as a mechanism for focusing an analysis. Ironically, our intrepid hosts had a really hard time avoiding topical rabbit holes during the episode. But, acknowledging the problem is the first part of the solution!
For complete show notes, including links to items mentioned in this show and a transcript of the discussion, visit the show page.
1,830 Listeners
1,459 Listeners
161 Listeners
480 Listeners
621 Listeners
298 Listeners
140 Listeners
3,995 Listeners
156 Listeners
267 Listeners
192 Listeners
441 Listeners
462 Listeners
84 Listeners
42 Listeners