Analyst Interrogative #3
Why Not Why?
Understanding Why is part of the DNA of every young analyst and philosophy major I’ve ever met. Why is the venerable holy grail of the cognitive sciences and theories on why are far more fun at cocktail parties than discussions on Poisson distributions and CHAID models. They play to everyone’s natural curiosity and lead us down a long path of questions and hypotheses. So never stop wondering Why? Just stop asking it…
The issue with Why can be broken down into a few key components:
Why is really hard to answer with certainty
Analysts should never fear hard challenges. When dealing with Why, the challenge can be damn near impossible. Worse still, it is not that you won’t find and answer. The real problem is that any answer you find will be very easily disputed.
To emphasize, when we consider Why in the context of this article, we are focused on why questions that involve people, behavior, and motivations. If your question is Why is the sky blue, this really won’t apply. This article is also not about understanding Why your business partner, boss, or client wants a question answered, as long as that question doesn’t start with a Why. The motivations and interests of any given individual are easier to accept at face value (though be careful there as well).
Returning our focus to the motivation and behavior of groups of people, consider for a moment the issue of quantification? How does one measure why? Of all the various interrogatives, why is clearly the least measurable. If it can’t be measured (or even if it is difficult), it will be doubly hard to prove.
Why really doesn’t lead to an answer
By now, even if you are not sold on the recommendation, you must, at least, admit that Why is a big question. It is difficult. And it is time-consuming. Perhaps those very facts are what most inspires you to ask such questions?
Let’s consider what happens if we actually get the answer we are looking for. As an example, suppose you are working for Dominoes or Papa Johns and the question is posed — Why do people like pizza? What are you going to do with your answer? Probably just ask more questions…
Maybe that is too vague. Ask then — Why do some people prefer pepperoni to sausage? The same question applies. Whether it is taste, texture, regional preference, greasiness… there is no clear actionable outcome of your work. All that work… no outcome. Analysts should leave that for the philosophers…
Why is not constructive
Questions that don’t lead to clear decisions or outcomes are not constructive. Constructive analysis drives these things and therefore, drives ROI. This in turn makes them measurable, testable, and preferable to questions that are not.
I have noted in early articles that my clear preference is for questions that begin with How. It was for this very reason. How do people like pizza? is not a well-formed question but almost any answer leads me quickly to a possible set of outcomes, tests, and marketing campaigns.
As an analyst, you should never stop wondering why… but strive to always ask how. This should include — How will the answer to this question drive decisions and outcomes? How will I make my insights testable? How do I maximise the ROI of this project?
Focus on what is measurable and leave motives to the TV detective series.
In our next installment - Analyst Interrogative #4 defined.
Analyst Interrogative is a series created by Corsair’s Institute to increase the reader’s understanding of the analytic process. For more articles like these — please subscribe to Comprehension 360.
