Source | LinkedIn | Srikanth Karra | CHRO at Mphasis
With the advent of quantum mechanics, the whole world of classical physics and traditional theories was rattled. It even prompted someone like Einstein to say in disbelief that “God does not play dice.” Classical mechanics had given rise to unprecedented applications of predictive linearity in economics and the gumption to apply it to predict human behavior using a set of psychological tests. As a result, the world order was all set to follow a set pattern of rules.
All was well until we started hearing about a certain uncertainty principle and a thought experiment involving a cat. The two gentlemen, Heisenberg and Schrodinger, along with a host of other physicists postulated that you cannot determine the position, direction and speed of a (quantum) particle with precision and a cat locked in a radioactive box can exist in two states (dead or/and alive), until an observer opens the box and determines the state. Schrodinger’s and Heisenberg’s postulates showed that there is an uncertainty that cannot always be predicted through equations and laws, unlike in classical physics.
Today, the laws of physics deal with probabilities, not certainties. Now, this seems very familiar to the business environment, where the world order surely cannot be predicted with the same old cocky certainty. Time and again we have seen economic, political, environmental and certainly behavioral predictions go awry. So, where does this lead to in the debate of data-driven insights versus intuitive probabilities?