Chess, Argentina and Competitive Intelligence

My friend, Adrian Alvarez (Midas Consulting, Buenos Aires, Argentina) shared some interesting thoughts on the importance of making decisions and taking action, rather than just collecting data and adding it to piles of data. Adrian quotes from an article he found on www.intramanagers.com.

I have made an amateur translation of his article below. Hopefully, he'll forgive me for any errors or liberties I may have taken:

“I read a note about Garry Kasparov (for those too young to remember or not fond of chess, he was the youngest person to win the world-wide championship). There are several parts that make me think that I should learn to play chess and that it is a game especially apt for Competitive Intelligence professionals.

“Here, I will transcribe a few paragraphs, although I recommend that you read the complete note, [if you can read Spanish –Chris]. (Adrian’s comments are in italics):

“The great champion, Lasker, introduced to chess the value of the relative movement: Instead of making the best play, he made the best play against that adversary. I believe that I do not need to say that this is what we must do in Competitive Intelligence.

“According to Kasparov, one of the problems of chess is how to differentiate the valuable from that which does not contribute anything, the false thing from the authentic, what is lifted up and what should be ignored?

“I suppose all analyst of intelligence has had this dilemma sometimes, and might have that problem daily. The dilemma is solved, according to Kasparov, if you consider that the computer only provides information. The second premise is that one must create his/her own formula to accept or to reject information. In this process it is very important to consider our strengths and weaknesses.

“The great danger is that many leaders do not trust that they will find an answer and they do not want to assume the risk of deciding. For this problem we invoke the term "paralysis by analysis" and I must say that it is quite common.

“It is necessary to accept the possibility of committing errors and one must control the fear of being mistaken. I believe that that is a fundamental subject and is the main cause of the paralysis by analysis.

“My prescription in this case is to try to make a small bet and to be increasing it step by step. For example if the launching of a product is risky, send it into a small region and expand the effort if it is successful. This strategy is superior to continuous calculation and analysis. Calculation and investigation can endorse the strategy, but not replace it. I believe that this subject it we could translate for us in which the fundamental part of I circulate of competitive intelligence is the analysis and not it harvesting.

“And, I suppose we should learn to play chess. Who’s wants to play?" - Adrian Alvarez

I agree that the value of competitive intelligence comes from having knowledgeable interpretation of quality data. Don’t spend all of your time harvesting data. Make sure that you spend time thinking about what the data may mean and interpreting.

And, be willing to lean into the wind a bit. Sometimes, you really do have enough data. Sometimes, you really do know enough about the situation. Apply your experience and give someone some direction to move forward. There’s a good chance that you will be mostly right and only a small chance that you will be extremely wrong.

Let me know if you have some different thoughts. I’m interested in your take on the most effective way to practice competitive intelligence. (cdalley@primary-intel.com, 801-838-9600 x5050)