Last night I watched Moneyball, the 2011 movie
about the Oakland Athletics’ (Oakland A’s) General Manager, Billy Beane, and
his attempt to create a winning baseball team using computer-generated data.
Great movie. Check it out if you haven't already! |
Like any team, the Oakland
A’s needed good players, but there wasn’t enough money to get or retain top
talent—or what everyone commonly perceived as top talent—and so a solution
other than money needed to be found. Beane finds that solution in an unexpected
place by making an alliance with an unexpected person—a young economics major
from Yale who understands data and how to use them to see what others are blind
to.
Generally, any movie that
has to do with sports will send me running in the opposite direction, but Moneyball is no ordinary sports movie.
Nope. This is a thinking person’s movie about gumption, challenging
assumptions, challenging the status quo, and the beauty that’s created when
cold hard data are analyzed with smarts and insight. (Well, I think it’s beautiful when someone
takes the time and is motivated to view things a little differently than
everyone else; when someone recognizes the importance of asking the right questions rather than the same old questions that
are yielding the same old unhelpful answers.)
Seriously? Now there’s another group hiring managers don’t want
to be bothered with?
Over the past few months
we’ve read about companies not liking the unemployed,
the middle-aged, the too young, the too
black, the overweight, and now this.
Or, as one commenter put it, “Ran out of people to red line. Gotta find a new group.”
What’s this got to do
with Moneyball?
Well, the WSJ article was brief and didn’t go into
a whole lot of detail, but readers conjectured that maybe one reason employers are
leery of the self-employed is out of suspicion that many are using the term
“self-employed” to cover up a lack of employment, period. Or maybe out of a belief that self-employed people are just too "free spirited" to make good corporate employees. Or … something. And that brings me smack back to assumptions
and biases and all that good stuff that Beane’s methodology cut through,
allowing him to hire what turned out to be some pretty special talent.
Will other employers
find the courage to do the same?
The study the WSJ referenced was conducted in the
United Kingdom, not the United States, and one (a selfish one that is, living
here in the States) can only hope that were the study replicated with American
employers there’d be a different result.
But I wouldn’t bet money
on it.
No comments:
Post a Comment