Data-Driven vs. Idea-Driven

Now then.

The "data-driven" approach involves making decisions based on data analysis results. In contrast, the "idea-driven" approach is advocated from the perspective that "No, no, that won't reveal new possibilities, will it?" Which do you think is more effective?

The more responsibility one holds within an organization, the more likely they are to choose "data-driven." That makes sense. Rather than committing to something as vague as an idea, it's only natural to choose the "right path" that seems less likely to fail.

In fact, in many business settings, data-driven "objectivism" is prioritized over idea-driven "subjectivism." While new possibilities aren't dismissed outright, they're treated merely as one element within a logical framework like PDCA.

In modern society, we're essentially forced to be "data-driven," meaning "objectivity-centered business processes" are the only option. But is that really the best approach? That's the theme we'll explore here.

If the current trajectory seems manageable with some tweaks, then correctly layering objective analysis may suffice. However, when sufficient growth doesn't seem achievable along the current path, can a perspective that overturns conventional wisdom – a "Why didn't I think of that?" insight – truly emerge from a "properly" structured sequence like "Research → Problem Identification → Ideation → Execution → Evaluation → Improvement"?

For example, Starbucks' "Third Place" idea (Ideate) was likely discovered simultaneously with the "problem identification" of "people without a place in the city." (It's unreasonable to think they first identified this unusual problem ("people without a place in the city") and then pondered how to solve it, eventually arriving at "Third Place.")

Can we even objectively manage the inherently subjective process of "idea generation"? Therefore, as an alternative to "objectivity-centered business processes," I propose a "human-centered business process where objectivity and subjectivity are treated as completely equal: fifty-fifty."

For that subjective feeling to become a third-person objectivity that anyone can understand, it must always pass through a dialogue between two subjects. This dialogue requires the second-person (someone other than oneself) to experience that "Aha! That's it!" moment of empathy. And at that moment, the content of that "Aha! That's it!" empathy, when verbalized, becomes the "concept (idea)."

This "dialogue" between subjective perspectives is always a serious contest happening "right here, right now." For both parties to truly internalize the other's perspective as their own, they may need to move back and forth between various stages—problem definition, creative solutions, foundational research, and sometimes prototyping—as required, regardless of any pre-planned sequence.

Naturally, you can't just say, "Let's wrap up the problem-extraction stage in three weeks." To those who believe efficient project progress is the essence of management, this might seem like "waste." Yet, it's precisely this seemingly wasteful process that unlocks perspectives capable of overturning conventional wisdom.

As some may know, Chinese mythology tells of the primordial deity Hùntún, who lacked the seven orifices of eyes, ears, mouth, and nose. Out of goodwill, the Emperors of the South and North Seas attempted to grant him these seven openings, creating one per day. By the seventh day, Hùntún perished. This illustrates the inherent difficulty in controlling everything through objective order.

Now then. The "concept" born in this "world of subjective dialogue" becomes the starting point for the next "world of objective analysis." In business, a concept is fundamentally not just flowery language to adorn a proposal; it is the very strategy forming the core of the business plan. It undergoes rigorous, logical verification based on various data: "Will it sell? Can we win? Will it be profitable?"

What is required at this stage is precisely the business process you all know well. It is also a world of division of labor where it is clear: by when, who, where, what, and how it will be done. As Henry Ford's famous quote illustrates—"If I had asked customers what they wanted, they would have said 'faster horses'"—we cannot simply run concepts (ideas) through consumer surveys. Instead, we subject them to rigorous verification, incorporate them into plans, and proceed through stages like "Plan → Do → Check → Action."

Once a business launches this way, "experience" emerges, initiating a "world of subjective dialogue." Innovation only occurs through this human-centered business process, where "experience" and "concept" serve as touchpoints, constantly oscillating between the subjective and objective realms.

Put another way, the very premise of the initial question, "Data-driven or idea-driven? Which do you think is more effective?" is nonsense. It's a bit of a cop-out, but both are important, equally so. There's no need for objectivity to control subjectivity, nor is there any reason ideas should reject numerical verification.

Right now, the business world is fixated on "objectivism." The illusion of "the one right answer in business" reigns supreme. Our proposal is this: To foster innovation, why not break free from that spell as soon as possible and practice business processes centered around "people"?

This may be an abstract concept and difficult to grasp. If you require further explanation, please feel free to contact the Indwelling Creators office.

【Contact Indwelling Creators here】
opeq78@dentsu.co.jp Contact: Yamada

 

Believing that everything begins with "experience," I took on the challenge of making homemade miso at the end of last year.

The ingredients alone—large-grain Hokkaido soybeans ("Tsurimusume"), natural salt cooked in a wood-fired cauldron in Kochi, rice koji, and barley koji—ended up costing quite a bit. But anyway... Four months have finally passed, so I cautiously opened the jar... and there it was! Miso!

It might be obvious, but it was cute, cute miso. It felt too precious to use in miso soup, so I tasted it straight – delicious! I savored just a tiny bit, then sent the rest off for long-term aging. Two years, three years... no, no, aiming for ten years. My dreams just keep expanding.

Please, help yourself!