Hacker News Reader

Comment by hermannj314 | Hacker News Reader

What is the estimated probability that we have good vs bad ideas? What is the probability that we think ideas are good vs think they are bad? How often do we misclassify a good idea as bad or a bad idea good? What is the benefit vs. cost of misclassifications(false positive, false negative) and the value of true positives/true negatives? How much does the chief dissent officer want to get paid? What would those probabilities look like with a CDO in place?

I'm glad FastCompany has done the calculations and knows definitely, that regardless of any of the answers to any of those questions, your industry, size, or strategic plans - your company needs a chief dissent officer.

View on HN

I think they have the right idea but for the wrong reasons. Having a person whose sole job is to play devil's advocate on every idea can help minimize the risks of group think. Often truly bad ideas are not a mystery, plenty of people on the ground level of a company think they are bad ideas but also know that speaking out will hurt them politically within the company. There is nothing a company can do to prevent this feeling, it's a natural part of human behavior. Having someone who does nothing but question and criticize might give these voices a safe channel from which to express their perspective, preventing bad ideas from moving forward in good companies.

I would argue it wouldn't help that much, because the rest of the group would quickly start ignoring the designated devil's advocate's feedback. "Oh, don't mind him, he's just saying that because it's his job."

Not that they wouldn't sit there and politely listen, of course (especially if he's a C-level exec), but unless he had some actual authority over the people he's advising they're not likely to think about what they hear.

While I applaud your backhanded complimenting of the article by your assertion that it could and should be the focus of at least two PhD dissertations and possibly a 300+ page book, I would suggest at the same time that perhaps you might be setting the bar a bit high here.

I mean, take as an example your own message, in which you simply fling a few trite accusations at the author without, yourself, doing any work to substantiate or expand on them. Perhaps you would consider extending the privilege you so freely used to others.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com