Skip to main content
Theory of Knowledge for Business

Theory of Knowledge for Business

By Bart Vanderhaegen

A podcast about management through the lens of the theory of knowledge (epistemology): problem solving, knowledge creation and (infinite) progress. My attempt at applying the ideas of Karl Popper (and his epistemology "Critical Rationalism") and David Deutsch (author of "The fabric of reality" and "The beginning of infinity") to management.
Available on
Apple Podcasts Logo
Castbox Logo
Google Podcasts Logo
Overcast Logo
Pocket Casts Logo
RadioPublic Logo
Spotify Logo
Currently playing episode

Episode 112 - The kinds of questions your organisation structure does not answer

Theory of Knowledge for BusinessFeb 03, 2022

00:00
08:29
Episode 150: It is not people who solve problems, it’s ideas that solve problems

Episode 150: It is not people who solve problems, it’s ideas that solve problems

About the (intuitive) misconception: it’s people who solve problems, not really ideas

Dec 08, 202306:22
 Episode 149 : The common flaw in both “hard” and “soft” management methods

Episode 149 : The common flaw in both “hard” and “soft” management methods

"Hard" management methods: Focused on measurements (deviation between a target/ forecast and actuals), setting up authority (hierarchy, roles & responsibilities), predictions (visions, targets, goals, …), providing "clarity", ...


"Soft" management methods: Focused on putting “people” central, with the idea that performance follows when people feel good



Dec 04, 202316:34
 Episode 148 : There is something fishy about the “blue” color type in the Insights Discovery people assessment

Episode 148 : There is something fishy about the “blue” color type in the Insights Discovery people assessment

Sharing a quibble I have with the "blue" people characteristic in the Insights Disovery people assessment method.

Nov 04, 202305:57
Episode 147 : The 2 very different types of answers to “why?” questions

Episode 147 : The 2 very different types of answers to “why?” questions

The same question "why?" about some phenomenon in reality can have 2 very different types of answers: (i) the proposal of a causal explanation and (ii) the justification of the truth of the phenomenon

Nov 04, 202305:09
Episode 146 : Forget “result-driven/ action-driven”, try to become “explanation-driven”

Episode 146 : Forget “result-driven/ action-driven”, try to become “explanation-driven”

An explanation is a consistent mental model of a transformation/ task/ change, and it contains:

  • The result or goal you want to achieve
  • The actions required to achieve that goal
  • The arguments why (why that particular goal (and not some other), why will those particular actions lead to the goal (and not some others))


Jun 19, 202310:54
Episode 145 : Why is epistemology relevant and important ?

Episode 145 : Why is epistemology relevant and important ?

Epistemology is relevant when explaining *any* human activity, as it is a better/ deeper explanation than explanations at the level of behaviours (actions) or personality (assessments of persons as a whole)

Jun 08, 202309:01
Episode 144 : on the use of KPIs

Episode 144 : on the use of KPIs


Key aspects discussed related to how companies typically use KPIs

  1. Start from the KPI and not from the problem and solution (for which the KPI was supposed to be an indicator)

  2. Corrective actions are parochial and without causal power

  3. Corrective actions that have causal power are corrective explanations and contain not only an action but also a goal and argument for how the action will cause the goal, but the corrective explanation is disconnected from the original explanation, i.e. does not serve to improve either one of both or both

  4. KPI focus leads to the idea that only KPIs are a relevant source to criticise a solution. Whereas *any* creative argument can serve as good criticism to improve a solution (think about the aspects of a solution that are still not measurable because too early stage for example)


Apr 19, 202312:36
Episode 143: There is no problem solving method (and that is a good thing !) 

Episode 143: There is no problem solving method (and that is a good thing !) 

There are no "problem solving methods".

Reason being that if there were such a method, we would be able to automatically crank out solutions by simply following it.

The same goes for the "scientific method" (science is also problem solving). For example, Einstein had 2 miracle years (1905 and 1915), but followed "the scientific method" every day of his 40+ year career. If there was a valid scientific method, his output would have been much more smooth over that entire period.

Solutions to problems come from creativity, and improvement in solutions comes from correcting mistakes in the solutions. Both creativity (having ideas) and error-correction can not be prescribed by a method.

Which is a good thing ! It allows novelty, progress, improvement, ...

By the way, there is a method for "problem definition" though: the steps to take to define a problem, i.e. the AS-IS vs the TO-BE, the obstacles in between, the root causes of them, ... But defining a problem is still independent from the idea that will solve it.


Mar 31, 202308:21
Episode 142: The austrian economics argument for why money creation cannot increase wealth in society

Episode 142: The austrian economics argument for why money creation cannot increase wealth in society

Does money printing create wealth ? Austrian economics says no and with a very simple but powerful logical argument.

Mar 17, 202314:29
Episode 141: On David Deutsch’ “Knowledge is information with causal power”

Episode 141: On David Deutsch’ “Knowledge is information with causal power”

Some thoughts on David Deutsch” definition of knowledge as ‘information with causal power”

Also some ideas on how to use this in organisations

Mar 16, 202311:21
Episode 140: The problem with problem solving

Episode 140: The problem with problem solving

It is not contested that managers rely on their teams to get problems solved.

However, in practise this turns out less easy than stated here. I go into some of the reasons why it is not trivial and concrete ways for improving this.

Mar 15, 202312:36
Episode 139 - The austrian business cycle theory

Episode 139 - The austrian business cycle theory

What is a business cycle ? The role of money. The unhampered economy. The hampered economy


Feb 03, 202330:35
Episode 138 - In the long run, the strength of an organisation is only dependent on the quality of error-correction inside

Episode 138 - In the long run, the strength of an organisation is only dependent on the quality of error-correction inside

Unpacking the slogan ...

Jan 26, 202309:07
Episode 137 - A critique of the Lencioni pyramid in teamwork

Episode 137 - A critique of the Lencioni pyramid in teamwork

The natural state of any relationship is that fact that ideas differ. That is not “a shame” … or a proof that there is distrust. It is just the natural starting position. If it were a proof of distrust, then the first step would indeed have to be to start developing trust

Instead, trust emerges, but is not a methodological primary step to achieve

The moral process and the knowledge creation process run in parallel.

  • Moral: being open, not lying, not being opportunistic, listening ….
  • Knowledge creation : the correction of errors on both sides
Jan 04, 202306:48
Episode 136 - A criticism of and alternative to the DMAIC method in continuous improvement

Episode 136 - A criticism of and alternative to the DMAIC method in continuous improvement

DMAIC:

  1. Define the problem (Set the goal, ...)
  2. Measure the problem (AS IS, ...)
  3. Analyse (Root cause analysis, ...)
  4. Implement (Find solutions test and implement)
  5. Control (Monitor and sustain improvements, ...)

Popper’s method:

  1. Problem definition ( "What to do next ?" Given the ... Root cause analysis, AS-IS / TO-BE, ...)
  2. Tentative Solution (Tentative answer to the what to do next question, i.e. a guess for what to do to solve the problem)
  3. Error-correction (Using not only data but also argument)
    1. New Problem
Dec 20, 202214:58
Episode 135 - Problem solving methods: the crucial ingredient they don’t mention

Episode 135 - Problem solving methods: the crucial ingredient they don’t mention

Illustrating what methods don't mention via the DMAIC problem solving method

Dec 10, 202210:52
Episode 134 - Two radically different approaches to problem solving

Episode 134 - Two radically different approaches to problem solving

Comparing the Popperian method to problem solving to it's alternative

Dec 02, 202211:24
Episode 133 - The problem with ESG as a vehicle for moral progress in companies

Episode 133 - The problem with ESG as a vehicle for moral progress in companies

Thoughts on why I think ESG is not a good vehicle for moral progress in companies

Nov 05, 202212:49
Episode 132 - How I got into Austrian Economics

Episode 132 - How I got into Austrian Economics

Some thoughts on why and how I took up an interest in Austrian Economics

Nov 05, 202219:49
Episode 131 - A new brainstorming format and procedure

Episode 131 - A new brainstorming format and procedure

<ol>
<li>Start from a problem (incl. scope, conditions for good solutions, …)</li>
<li>Generate ideas with idea owners</li>
<li>Separate session on criticism in group (NOT adaptations)</li>
<li>Idea owner’s free choice to adapt idea or not</li>
</ol>
Oct 07, 202212:21
Episode 130 - Management, just like science, is "explanation based", and not "evidence based"

Episode 130 - Management, just like science, is "explanation based", and not "evidence based"

Knowledge creation is "evidence based" when it starts from evidence, and "explanation based" when it starts from a problem and a (guessed) explanation for how to solve it

Oct 04, 202216:31
Episode 129 - Why all plans are wrong and why that is a positive thing

Episode 129 - Why all plans are wrong and why that is a positive thing

All plans are wrong for 2 main categories of reasons

  • The goal is wrong: What you really get when you execute the steps may not correspond to the stated goal. Or the goal conflicts with another goal you want to achieve
  • The steps are wrong: you need different steps to achieve the goal you said to achieve

There are 2 ways to deal with this:

  1. The bad way: seeking positive arguments
  2. The good way: seeking criticisms and improve the plan
Sep 06, 202211:10
Episode 128 - Two opposite conceptions about what science is: the inductive method versus Karl Popper's explanation

Episode 128 - Two opposite conceptions about what science is: the inductive method versus Karl Popper's explanation

Covering two opposite conceptions about what science is: the inductive method versus Popper's method

Also briefly covering what the relevance of this is to all our "other" types of knowledge (e.g. sociological, political, moral, ...)

Aug 19, 202221:08
Episode 127 - Why do we like personality tests so much ?

Episode 127 - Why do we like personality tests so much ?

We seek answers to the question "Who am i ?"

But is that possible ? What is the alternative ?


Aug 12, 202211:59
Episode 126 - The role of goals and goal setting in a companies

Episode 126 - The role of goals and goal setting in a companies

What you can not use a goal for:

  • Derive what you should do next

What you should not use a goal for:

  • As an infallible prophecy of the future that cannot be wrong

What you can use a goal for:

  • Challenge your plans - eliminate things from your plan that will NOT get you to the goal
    • Only one of the many ways to improve your plans, not the only one !
Jul 19, 202211:08
Episode 125: Are you an optimist or a pessimist ?

Episode 125: Are you an optimist or a pessimist ?

Introducing 2 possible approaches to answering this question ....

Jul 08, 202212:22
Episode 124 - Two basic problems with KPI’s

Episode 124 - Two basic problems with KPI’s

They cannot confirm your plans (only falsify them)

  1. They take away the attention from other ways to improve, other than measuring things (arguments)

Both problems are soluble

  1. Notice KPIs only when they contradict a plan
  2. Spend more time on critical arguments rather than measurements only
Jun 23, 202212:02
Episode 123 - People can only act upon their own ideas

Episode 123 - People can only act upon their own ideas

We act upon our ideas - our behavior is a consequence of our ideas (goals, plans)

Ideas can be explicit, inexplicit and subconscious

Ideas evolve via conjecture and criticism

Now, when we want to make people do things, we try to replace existing ideas with new ones

Jun 20, 202213:44
Episode 122 - There are no departments/ units/ divisions in companies, there are only ideas and conflicts of ideas

Episode 122 - There are no departments/ units/ divisions in companies, there are only ideas and conflicts of ideas

Departments like Finance, Sales, … are constructs (to label and structure where people are)

What really exists are problems: conflict of ideas

For example: Finance wants customer payment periods shortened for working capital reduction, sales want to give longer payment terms. 2 ideas are conflicting here. You can never say that Finance deals with this, because sales is going to counter argue.

The solution to the conflict is never black and white IN a particular department

It is a mistake to think it should. “We are finance so we decide on payment terms”

It is all cooperation around a conflict of ideas from both sides. The solution that is implemented CAN EVEN come from a sales guy … or from any outsider. And those can be good solutions.

Or a sales person can criticise an initial solution from Finance, making Finance change their solution. Can you then say that the Finance department solved it ? No you can’t

What is the concrete implication: do not restrict solutions too narrowly to departments, set-up open, cross-functional teams to solve these problems, understand that solutions evolve via criticisms from many parties, making them eventually much better than the initial idea

May 23, 202209:45
Episode 121 - What exactly are you hiring when you are hiring people?

Episode 121 - What exactly are you hiring when you are hiring people?

People are the collection of ideas plus a universal capacity to change or improve them

When we hire people, we hire both aspects.

May 13, 202207:18
Episode 120 - “One way of working” programs in organisations

Episode 120 - “One way of working” programs in organisations

Many companies launch One Way of Working programs

Why

  • Oversee complexity - you don’t see it in small companies
  • Monitor and control deviations

Flaws

  • Methodology is never the key driver of impact
  • People act in vitally unique ways every day when solving problems
  • Take the autonomous thinking out of people’s job
  • Problem solving is impeded or delayed
May 01, 202210:43
Episode 119 - The difference between prediction and explanation in business

Episode 119 - The difference between prediction and explanation in business

We want to change in companies: from any current state to any new state (goals/ objectives). We need 2 things for that: a prediction (of the goal we want to reach) and an explanation for how to actually reach it (current state, actions, decisions, milestones, issues, ...)

We focus on predictions too much : the goals in and of themselves / plus the KPIs to show how far we are away from the goals, the rewards when reching the goal, the importance of the goal, ...

What is more important is to have good explanations for how to reach goals

  • For people to reach goals they need to know how. You can’t reach it without knowhow

And criticisms to improve those explanations

There are however still good and bad explanations

Bad explanations: “If you take your responsibility, you will reach the goal”

  • It is close to true but a bad explanation, it doesn’t explain how the goal will be reached

Good explanations: clear plans, with real-time updates whenever you learn from criticisms

  • Either from trying something or aligning/ correcting something in the plan before trying it out

The real knowledge is in the explanations, not in the goals not in the KPIs

Recommendations:

  • Explanations should get more time
  • Explanations should be written down (apart from all the goals and KPIs that are already transparant)
  • Criticism instead of seeking support for your explanation
Apr 17, 202216:24
Episode 118 - The difference between “moralising” and solving a moral problem

Episode 118 - The difference between “moralising” and solving a moral problem

Moralising

  • Start from a situation that they consider a moral problem
  • Something immoral, unfair
  • But then …
    • Reverting to blaming the people,
      • generalizing from a specific event to general characteristics of the person in question or groups of people
    • Excluding the possibility that people can learn from mistakes
    • Appealing to condemnation of those people
    • Signaling that you are not one of those people, that you have more truth

Solving a moral problem is the opposite

  • Identifying the problem, even asking if it is a real moral problem
  • Go into the specifics of the problem, the context, the actual events, criticisms on certain claims about the event … consider all your claims fallible, you seek more truth
  • Propose and test solutions
Apr 14, 202208:59
Episode 117 - Appearing on the Economics for Business podcast - Mises institute

Episode 117 - Appearing on the Economics for Business podcast - Mises institute

Sharing the recording of my appearance on the Economics for Business podcast where I talked about the experience of Flow and how to create open organisations that allow for more Flow experiences

Mar 19, 202255:25
Episode 116 - Some thoughts on Change Management

Episode 116 - Some thoughts on Change Management

Change is unpredictable

  • What you think the change will be
  • What I think the change will be
  • What the change really is going to be

Change can be overstated

  • Because it is unpredictable, we tend to overstate it
  • Cynical approach is taking over
  • People change all the time however.

Change is content related

  • People’s acceptance of change is linked to the way they perform their new work
  • It is not linked to or less dependent on how well you communicate the change

You need a minimum of autonomy to figure out how to accommodate for the change

  • Even if hard decisions have been made at the level of process or software, their consequences at the level of the work of everyone are not fully determined yet
Mar 18, 202214:47
Episode 115: Name change of the podcast

Episode 115: Name change of the podcast

Short announcement of the name change

Mar 05, 202200:51
Episode 114 - The difference between fallibility and failing

Episode 114 - The difference between fallibility and failing

You have failed versus you are fallible

  • You have failed = subjective judgment, because the standard against which you have failed can be anything to anybody
    • The same objective series of events can still be labeled as failures or success depending on the subjective standard you want to measure them against
  • You are fallible: objective, there is objective truth and you can be objectively wrong about it

Why is fallibility important, regardless of failure of success?

  • It is the only way to allow to detect where you are wrong and try to correct it (improve it)
  • It has 2 opposites
    • Relativism: I am already correct as what is true is what I consider to be true, other people may consider other things to be true. I cannot improve upon my claims because I assigned them already as true for me
    • Dogmatism: I know I am right because I have infallible knowledge that cannot be improved. I have absolutely true knowledge in my hand already

Fallibility and failure are independent of each other, have nothing to do with each other

  • You can have failed and still learnt something about your plan/ goal
  • You can have failed and also NOT learn something about your plan/ goal
  • You can have succeed and have learnt something new
  • You can have succeed and not have learnt something new (your plan was sufficient for the problem at hand, or you have been lucky, or the subjective standard for success was so general …)

All 4 combinations of fallibility and failure are therefore perfectly possible

One danger is to equate fallibility to failing: admitting that you are objectively wrong is often equated to failing. And that is wrong, it is admitting that you are looking for improvement of your ideas and that you are not falling in the trap of relativism or dogmatism. So fallibility is something that should be encouraged in organisations ! Failure of course should not be encouraged, but it will not when you encourage fallibility. One because they are completely different things and Two because fallibility is the key condition of knowledge growth, and when problem become more complex, knowledge growth IS the key thing you need in order not to fail !

Mar 05, 202206:10
Episode 113 - You cannot justify a decision by appeal to authority

Episode 113 - You cannot justify a decision by appeal to authority

Authority can never be a "logically correct" justification for taking a particular decision.

Instead what we do (individually when contemplating a decision, or together) do is compare the content of candidate decisions, criticise that content (incl. consequences) and take the decision that survives criticisms best.

Feb 24, 202209:42
Episode 112 - The kinds of questions your organisation structure does not answer

Episode 112 - The kinds of questions your organisation structure does not answer

An organisation structure is any theory about:

  1. How to divide work in entities and departments
  2. How to organise those entities "internally"
  3. How to organise the connection between those entities

However, it is a theory that is completely distinct from that other important question: "How to capture value in the market, consistently ?"


Feb 03, 202208:29
Episode 111 - 100 management gurus against 2 philosophers

Episode 111 - 100 management gurus against 2 philosophers

What I learnt from the theory of knowledge that I didn’t learn from reading 100+ management books

Feb 02, 202219:23
Episode 110 - The key question a CEO should lie awake about at night

Episode 110 - The key question a CEO should lie awake about at night

The question for all CEO's: "How am I making it easy to correct errors in my organisation?"

People are solving problems. They do that with idea’s. Some ideas are suggested, but many need to be developed. All initial ideas contain errors.

Now there is a simple 2 way outcome: 1) either people correct their errors or 2) people don’t

An organisation should be judged in how easy it is for people to correct their errors

Hard: no transparency, blaming and shaming, authoritarianism, superficial opinions without good explanations (why?)

Easy: comfortable with criticisms, allow to make errors (before they do harm), seeking good explanations

Dec 20, 202114:50
Episode 109 - Why personality tests (MBTI, Insights Discovery, …) are a denial of human creativity

Episode 109 - Why personality tests (MBTI, Insights Discovery, …) are a denial of human creativity

About personality tests such as MBTI, Insights Discovery, DISC, ...

Dec 17, 202108:54
Episode 108 - IN DUTCH - 1 van de minder slechte argumenten van anti-vaxxers (over testen met vaccins)

Episode 108 - IN DUTCH - 1 van de minder slechte argumenten van anti-vaxxers (over testen met vaccins)

Dutch version of episode 107

Dec 13, 202113:46
Episode 107 - One of the less dramatic arguments of anti-vaxxers (on vaccine testing)

Episode 107 - One of the less dramatic arguments of anti-vaxxers (on vaccine testing)

There are dramatic and less dramatic arguments of anti vaxxers. The dramatic ones are the ones dealing with the 5G chip implanted in the vaccine or the conspiracy theories of virologists and politicians to make the people obey and stay home …

But some arguments are less dramatic than those (but still false though).

An example of this kinds of arguments: The vaccines are not tested for the long term effects

Dec 13, 202116:57
Episode 106 - Why it is a fallacy to think you need to be “hard” when you coach top performers

Episode 106 - Why it is a fallacy to think you need to be “hard” when you coach top performers

What “hard” coaches really do, has nothing to do with coaching:

  1. You scare your athletes (which is not giving any advice)
  2. You can already cover yourself in the case of bad performance (which also has nothing to do with coaching)
Dec 07, 202106:26
Episode 105 - Two key questions for sales people

Episode 105 - Two key questions for sales people

  1. How will I meet this expectations ?
  2. Why in that way and not another ?

(to be asked continuously)

Dec 05, 202114:58
Episode 104 - Why we CAN (try to) understand quantum mechanics

Episode 104 - Why we CAN (try to) understand quantum mechanics

About interpretations of QM and why those "can" allow us to understand QM.

Dec 05, 202112:59
Episode 103- The 3 ways of using “Why?”

Episode 103- The 3 ways of using “Why?”

"Why did that happen?" is a common question.

You can, rationally, answer this question in 3 (very) different ways:

1) Giving evidence for the phenomenon happening

2) Giving "a" cause for the phenomenon

3) Explaining why your cause is a better explanations than some other cause (comparing explanations and retaining the one that survives the comparison, so the one that explains "best")

Dec 05, 202109:29
Episode 102 - The fallacy of “Tell me how you are paid and I will tell you how you will behave”

Episode 102 - The fallacy of “Tell me how you are paid and I will tell you how you will behave”

A short treatment about what is wrong, pessismistic and dangerous about this statement ;-)

Oct 19, 202113:07
Episode 101 - Why personality tests such as MBTI and Insights discovery are wrong, and why that is actually a good thing

Episode 101 - Why personality tests such as MBTI and Insights discovery are wrong, and why that is actually a good thing

Discussion about why personality tests "must be" wrong and why that is actually a good thing (that they are wrong)

I am referencing 2 specific tests (there are many more) 

  • MBTI test: 16 types of behaviours
  • Insights discovery test: 4 colors and 8 types of behaviours

My arguments for saying that they are wrong are based on Karl Popper's epistemology (critical rationalism)

Oct 04, 202119:29