Whether or not this month's respondents represent a self-selected sample of enthusiasts for the book, The Wisdom of Crowds, they agree that the findings it presents have strong implications for leaders, particularly those in large, compartmentalized organizations.
Several expressed the view that the term "crowd" might be a bit extreme in describing effective management processes. For example, John Baxter suggests that "a group of knowledgeable 'veterans' ... in conjunction with others from the external world ...can make more well-informed judgments than a crowd…." As Dean Robb put it, "... the use of the term 'crowd' is inappropriate, because crowds generally fail the test of independence from each other's decisions."
Others saw the findings strongly affirming the role of leadership. D. Prescott Andersen commented, " ... it does not take away the need for strong leadership. Without leadership there would be no questions to answer and no problems to solve." John Dmohowski echoed this view in his comment:"I don't believe groups would be as useful in establishing agendas, developing alternatives, or setting priorities—things for which leaders are required ... And I certainly would not want large groups involved in developing vision, innovation, or strategy ...." Joe Violette added, " ... getting those ideas and solutions to surface, particularly in group discussions, takes a very effective leader."
But the nature of leadership affirmed by the "wisdom of crowds" is clearly circumscribed, according to others. Jack Hughes, for example, says, "The Wisdom of Crowds has effectively shattered the narrow view that the right leader can consistently make the right decisions. The right decisions are based on the best information, information offered by your employees, customers, vendors, and investors." Ian Cook points out that "leadership is more about involving people in understanding, interpreting, and shaping their reality than it is about telling them their reality." Mary Ann Ulrich describes what may be one of the most important challenges in leading the crowd when she comments that "... trusting the result will be the greatest challenge for most leaders and the greatest area for learning."
These comments raise several additional questions. Do these ideas apply in all situations begging for wisdom? For example, David Physick opines that "Different situations require different leadership: sometimes single-minded dogmatism and other times much more collegiate or crowd-based leadership. The good leaders learn where to set the dial along this continuum according to the situation." Do you agree? Does unleashing the "wisdom of crowds" work well in situations where rapid-fire decision-making is called for? Or is it a luxury available only when the pace of the organization's business permits it? What do you think? 