Byron's Babbles

  

In an ideal world, social science research would provide a strong basis for advocacy and social
policy. However, sometimes advocates misunderstand or even ignore scientific research in pursuit of their policy goals, perhaps especially when research pertains to controversial questions of social inequality. This past week’s lesson in A Year With Peter Drucker dealt with using affluence and influence to become passionate advocates of change and important initiatives. In other words we must be good stewards of affluence and influence.   
Drucker (Maciariello, 2014) believed we must be passionate advocates for innovative projects. These projects could be within our organizations or for social change. Drucker (2014) believed in using pilots. Neither studies nor market research nor computer modeling are a substitute for the test of reality. Everything improved or new needs, therefore, first to be tested on a small scale, that is, it needs to be piloted. In other words, we should pilot innovative projects on a small scale before introducing them on a larger scale. 

 A big advantage to pilots is the ability to identify unintended consequences on a smaller scale. This is especially important for complex government programs that often experience many unintended consequences of well intended legislative programs (Maciariello, 2014). Public administrators should learn from experience, and piloting is a way to gain experience. 

 Reference

Maciariello, J. A. (2014). A year with Peter Drucker: 52 weeks of coaching for leadership effectiveness. New York, NY: HarperCollins Publishers.