Unbelievable the FAO statistics & rankings I am seeing out there. If there's one thing that got drilled in my head during grad school MANY moons ago, it was to pay very close attention when reading statistics:
#1: Always question a statistic. Look behind the #s. It never ceases to amaze me how many "experts" rate/rank/comment on the supplier market without any credible data to back them up. I don't know, maybe it's my anal-retentive nature, but it floors me to no end how incredulous most of the stuff being distributed out there really is. None of it rests on a tried-and-true research methodology.
#2: Keep in mind who is sponsoring the study. There is an inherent bias in 9-out-of-10 outsourcing-related studies. I always ask myself, "what is the motivation behind firm xyz claiming this?" More often than not in this space, the people ranking at the top are "paying" to be there in one way, shape or form, have an existing deeper relationship with the study sponsor than those at the bottom, or serve to validate a point the research sponsor is trying to make.
#3: Read the fine print. It's always there - the assumptions about how the survey was conducted or, even better, what was NOT included in determining the final analysis. Maybe the research didn't take into account European business, as an example. Or maybe it missed certain-sized contracts...or certain-sized suppliers. Ah, that explains it. (But it still doesn't!)
I sound ornery, but I guess that's because it just doesn't stop. Badly-analyzed data or, even worse, information that is heavily skewed (and most of it is) makes people mad...especially those with integrity and folks who REALLY know what's going on. I call it "spin"...other people call it something else. (!)
I am not mentioning any names, but...
...a recent supplier analysis in the FAO space claims to be a definitive, legitimate study with a thorough methodology. IT GIVES A COMPLETELY AND TOTALLY MISGUIDED, UNEDUCATED AND INACCURATE VIEW OF THE MARKET. It's impossible to have a sound-enough methodology to make apples-to-oranges comparisons and then rank one as "better" than the other. These types of "expert studies" just keep on keepin' on.
Having been an analyst in this space for more than 12 years, I can honestly say, without any level of arrogance, that I know who the movers-and-shakers are in this space and I know the strengths and weaknesses of the supplier community may be even a bit more than they know mine. And there are maybe a dozen or so other analysts who truly "get it" with regard to outsourcing, and even fewer in relation to FAO.
I just hope beyond hope that the prospective FAO buyers out there don't believe everything they read. I hope they question the statistics and rankings, understand why results may be skewed and notice the research assumptions. I just hope they know enough to separate the wheat from the chaff.
I'll get over it. I know I'm not a lone cowboy girl. I just feel unsettled thinking that some may buy into this stuff...and I know many do.
Comments