Wisdom of Crowds

The Wisdom of Crowds

By John Taylor; 29 November, 2005

Back on the first of June, 2004, in an essay entitled, "Covenant and
Search in an Age of Responsibility" I briefly summarized a review of a
book by James Surowiecki called "The Wisdom of Crowds." Working
through my present book-in-progress, whose present working title is,
"Mound Architecture," I kept returning in my mind to Surowiecki's
book. I felt deep down that I could not go any further in this
exploration without coming to grips with "Wisdom of Crowds." I went to
the library and they did not have it, it is too new. So in a move
almost without precedent in my El Cheapo research methodology I
actually went out to Chapters and bought the book right off the shelf
and then read it from cover to cover. I have been digesting it almost
a week now and will comment on it today, but first, here is what I
wrote about the book in June of last year:

"There is a thought provoking new book out this year that explains how
this spirit of search for truth can work its way into the opinions of
a collectivity. By one James Surowiecki, it is called "The Wisdom of
Crowds." As he himself points out, he only traces recent research that
confirms the wisdom of a very old saying.

"Where there is no counsel, plans fail; But in a multitude of
counselors they are established. Joy comes to a man with the reply of
his mouth. How good is a word at the right time!" (Proverbs 15:22-3,
WEB)

"Surowiecki points out that the popular television show, "Who Wants to
Be a Millionaire?" demonstrated how very accurate a crowd can be.
Overall it was found that when a contestant asked for help from an
expert, the expert was right about 60 percent of the time. When a poll
was taken of the audience, they were correct well over 90 percent of
the time. Other examples he cites are the uncanny ability of a random
crowd at an agricultural show to guess within a pound the dressed
weight of a cow. Then there is the spot-on guess within a few hours by
the stock market as to which contractor was responsible for the
Challenger shuttle disaster. The stock price of that company dropped
and stayed down while other contractors' prices fell but recovered
shortly afterwards. Months later expert investigators (including our
hero, Richard Feynman) confirmed what the market guessed right away,
that this company's O rings were brittle in the cold.

"This collective ability to divine the truth tends of course to
confirm the value of both democracy and free markets, both happy
combinations of individual and group judgment. But as Surowiecki
points out, this wisdom only works when four factors characterize the
crowd, diversity, independence, decentralization and aggregation.
Diversity of opinion means that each person should have some private
information, even if it is an eccentric interpretation of known facts.
Independence requires that the opinions not be determined by those
around you, in Baha'i and Platonic terminology, "imitation."

"This independence factor points to what I have long thought, that
there is a great future for the voting devices that were built into
the seats at the set of "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?," or as many
teachers are now doing, building them into personal remote controls
that each student keeps at hand during lectures. These devices input
your opinion without influencing it by knowledge of what those around
you think. It is also testimony to the brilliance of the Master, who
so often spoke of the necessity of "unfettered" and "independent"
search for truth.

"Decentralization, the third requirement, means that people can
specialize and draw on local knowledge. I'll have to read the book
rather than a review of it to know exactly what this means, but it
certainly seems to indicate what Baha'is call consultation, where the
expertise of a small group enhances the specialized training of
individual experts by "rounding off" their inevitable blinkers and
biases. Medicine itself is no longer relying on a single diagnosis but
in recent years is taking a team approach of several experts to handle
the most serious health care problems.

"The last factor, aggregation, refers to the need for an agreed upon
mechanism for turning private judgments into a collective decision. I
need not go into how this is done in Baha'i administration and will
only note that in the case of personal problems, "aggregation" is left
up to the individual. That is, if I ask an ad hoc group to consult
about whether I should jump in the lake, the final decision as to
whether to take the leap is still left up to me, whether a majority of
consultants lean one way or not -- though an exception seems to be in
medical consultation where I am obliged to obey a wise doctor's
counsel; of course I still decide whether she is wise or not. Giving
the individual final say in personal consultation, I suppose, pays
obeisance to the supremacy of search for truth.

Okay, now that I have read the book and given it due attention and
thought, I can comment a bit more coherently, I hope. The most
striking anecdote Surowiecki gives is the case of the consultation
that led to the second shuttle disaster. Like most business meetings
in most business contexts, the NASA administrators did not trust to
the wisdom of the committee and subverted it by turning it into a
sounding board for the bosses' opinions. The shuttle was orbiting with
unknown damage and the Debris Assessment Team boss asks for an opinion
on the damage from the ice-foam. Upon hearing that it is
"significant," she then sums up their "consultation" in these
memorable words,

"And I really do not think that there is much we can do so it is not
really much of a factor during the flight because there is not much we
can do about it." (Wisdom of Crowds, 174)

As it turned out after the crew had gone down to its fiery,
spectacular death, there were at least three ways that they could have
been saved, if only that committee had taken this issue seriously. But
who is going to challenge your boss when the boss's opinion is built
into the sentence like that? It is nailed onto the front of the
summary, and in case you did not notice it there, it is tacked onto
the end of her summary! You read this and then you sit back in awe at
the wisdom of the Guardian, who told Assemblies when they form a
committee to just let it function, do not try to dominate or intervene
or micromanage its decisions, unless of course principle is broken or
they go egregiously astray. Only now are studies, admirably collected
together in this book, confirming that a small group on the spot,
operating under the proper conditions, is demonstrably smarter than
the smartest of its members. All we need is the faith to place our
whole trust in that wisdom, and let them go at it.

This anecdote is just one example of why this is such a very, very
important book. I cannot recommend it too highly. It will have a huge
impact on the way things will be run over the next several decades,
for it is living proof, far more effective than any parochial
sectarian could produce, of the power of Jesus' words:

"Again I say unto you, That if two of you shall agree on earth as
touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of
my Father which is in heaven. For where two or three are gathered
together in my name, there am I in the midst of them." (Matt 18:19-20,
KJV)

--
John Taylor

badijet@gmail.com