As leaders, parents, investors, and coaches, we often make decisions with imperfect and incomplete information. Therefore, we benefit by having an approach or philosophy for dealing with uncertainty. When screening and evaluating analysis, I start by confirming that what we have in hand is clean and accurate. Building a history of clean, error-free, detail-oriented work builds trust and puts you in a better position to influence decisions and lead the room.
Errors Inject Doubt
For strategic questions and market projections, I prefer clean data and analysis over rushed, subjective intel. Ideally, we have both, but if given the choice, I want things clean, with an “as of” date, over speculation on today’s unconfirmed events. It’s how we report things at Forisk, since we, like many market analysts, rely on government data and other sources that often lag actuals by weeks, months, or quarters, and this data often gets revised in future months.
If the report I have has multiple errors, then I doubt everything it contains. If it’s clean but a little behind, we can still make decisions and assess performance. We can also evaluate the likelihood and implications of the most recent market intel when it comes in. Without a clean, verified understanding of historical events, we are poorly positioned to evaluate new theses or announcements. However, with a clean dataset and framework, we can develop intuition and scenarios on how changes affect the market and our clients.
Understand How Things Work on the Ground
When conducting forest industry analysis, teams I work with are mindful of the fact that “operations come first” to truly understanding how things function on the ground. If our analysis and understanding is inconsistent with what mill managers or procurement foresters see, then we have something to reconcile. In our role, we add value by connecting information across markets and over time, which prioritizes clean analysis to make our work credible for clients who need to make decisions.
If we hear a piece of market intel that could change our thinking, we call local contacts working in the field and ask, “is this true? How could this affect you?” As with many things, news is often a rumor, and the impact is regularly overstated.
Conclusion
There are situations and occupations where the most recent intel has more value, such as on the battlefield, in the operating room, or at the trading desk. However, for strategic questions and projections, and given the choice, I’ll take clean over current.