{domain:"www.qualitydigest.com",server:"169.47.211.87"} Skip to main content

User account menu
Main navigation
  • Topics
    • Customer Care
    • FDA Compliance
    • Healthcare
    • Innovation
    • Lean
    • Management
    • Metrology
    • Operations
    • Risk Management
    • Six Sigma
    • Standards
    • Statistics
    • Supply Chain
    • Sustainability
    • Training
  • Videos/Webinars
    • All videos
    • Product Demos
    • Webinars
  • Advertise
    • Advertise
    • Submit B2B Press Release
    • Write for us
  • Metrology Hub
  • Training
  • Subscribe
  • Log in
Mobile Menu
  • Home
  • Topics
    • 3D Metrology-CMSC
    • Customer Care
    • FDA Compliance
    • Healthcare
    • Innovation
    • Lean
    • Management
    • Metrology
    • Operations
    • Risk Management
    • Six Sigma
    • Standards
    • Statistics
    • Supply Chain
    • Sustainability
    • Training
  • Login / Subscribe
  • More...
    • All Features
    • All News
    • All Videos
    • Contact
    • Training

How to Avoid Mistakes When Doing Analysis and Making Recommendations

Three pitfalls on the road to success

Mike Figliuolo
Wed, 11/11/2020 - 12:03
  • Comment
  • RSS

Social Sharing block

  • Print
  • Add new comment
Body

A hypothesis-driven approach to problem solving and making recommendations can be tremendously efficient. You create a hypothesis (i.e., something taken to be true for the sake of argument), conduct analysis designed to prove or disprove the hypothesis, then make your recommendation based on the results of your analysis. Typically, your hypothesis is based upon prior experiences you’ve had as well as your knowledge of the subject matter you’re evaluating.

ADVERTISEMENT

I’ve personally used this approach for years. I refer to it as the structured thought process. The method is both efficient and effective. That said, using this approach is not without risks.

Risk No. 1: Confirmation bias
Although it’s great to have experience and prove your hypotheses are correct, that same experience carries risk with it. Confirmation bias—the tendency to look for or interpret information in a way that confirms your preconceived ideas—is the biggest risk you face when using a hypothesis-driven approach like the structured thought process.

 …

Want to continue?
Log in or create a FREE account.
Enter your username or email address
Enter the password that accompanies your username.
By logging in you agree to receive communication from Quality Digest. Privacy Policy.
Create a FREE account
Forgot My Password

Comments

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed, 11/11/2020 - 09:41

Your parenthetical phrase

Dude that's an assumption, not a hypothesis.

  • Reply

Submitted by Quality Digest on Wed, 11/11/2020 - 10:18

In reply to Your parenthetical phrase by Anonymous (not verified)

Merriam-Webster definition

Definition of "hypothesis" from Merriam-Webster

1a: an assumption or concession made for the sake of argument
b: an interpretation of a practical situation or condition taken as the ground for action

2: a tentative assumption made in order to draw out and test its logical or empirical consequences

  • Reply

Submitted by Jim Duarte (not verified) on Wed, 11/11/2020 - 12:38

Analysis mistakes

It seems that there is more to this subject than what is presented.  More data is not analysis paralysis.  Traditionally hypothesis testing is to take a sufficient sample size to make a decision from the test to minimize false positive or false negative conclusions about the population.  This article focuses on "accepting" an hypothesis.  That means having sufficient data to avoid a false positive conclusion of accepting a result incorrectly.  It also depends on the statistical tools for Big Data that one uses to handle large data sets, not analysis paralysis. (see Duarte, J, "Data Disruption", Quality Progress, Vol. 50, Issue 9, Sept. 2017)  There are other topics in this article worth commenting on, but I chose to address only one at this time.

  • Reply

Submitted by ANUP CHANDRA (not verified) on Thu, 11/12/2020 - 06:03

RISK ANALYSIS

I  AGREE WITH YOU 

THE ANALYSIS IN POSITIVE DIRECTION IS IMPORTANT

INTERPRITATION OF ANALYSIS AND CORRECTIVE ACTION IS VERY IMPORTANT . RELATION BETWEEN PRODUCTION , QC AND ANALYSIST IS IMPORTANT

anup.chandra@yahoo.com

  • Reply

Add new comment

Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.
Please login to comment.
      

© 2025 Quality Digest. Copyright on content held by Quality Digest or by individual authors. Contact Quality Digest for reprint information.
“Quality Digest" is a trademark owned by Quality Circle Institute Inc.

footer
  • Home
  • Print QD: 1995-2008
  • Print QD: 2008-2009
  • Videos
  • Privacy Policy
  • Write for us
footer second menu
  • Subscribe to Quality Digest
  • About Us
  • Contact Us