HAVE YOU CHECKED YOUR ASSUMPTION?

 

“Because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say, we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns – the ones we don’t know we don’t know. And if one looks throughout the history of our country and other free countries, it is the latter category that tends to be difficult ones.” (Donald Rumsfeld, US politician)

Many years ago, John Walcott of Politico Magazine wrote that a classified report by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld about the US-led coalition in the Iraq war landed on the desk of the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.  Rumsfeld wrote: “It is big.” Above all, it was about what the U.S. doesn’t know about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction. The blunt assessment: “We’ve struggled to estimate the unknowns.” To the bitter end, the knowns turned out to be unknowns – a rummage of wrong assumptions and wishful thinking about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction. The rest is history.

Whether in the geopolitical scene, or in the business world, the cost of wrong assumptions was steep. In 2014, Jeff Bezos’ Amazon launched its Fire Phone as its signature response to coming aboard the mobile phone bandwagon as the surging trendsetter then. Flouting the Amazon way, Fire Phone bet on the assumption: everything Bezos touches will turn to gold. Not only was the assumption wrong, but it was also prideful -- sowing the seeds of its $175 million bungle. Robert S. Kaplan of Harvard Business School put on the alert:

“The worst decisions leaders make are the ones based on assumptions they never even acknowledge, let alone challenge.”

Here and now, riding out the world’s longest pandemic lockdown and living through a recession with a record-breaking economic contraction and high employment rates, the Philippine economy particularly the real estate market has been pressed down with reduced supply and demand along with declining property values and rental rates.

One colleague bought a real estate property looking forward to a rewarding return on his investment. Without warning, the pandemic entered the picture. Turning his optimistic assumption upside down, the pandemic forced his hand to sell his property at a loss. He needed the cash to sustain the daily provisions for his family during the protracted lockdown.

“Incorrect assumptions lie at the root of every failure.” (Brian Tracy, author)

The hustle and bustle of the campaign season tell of a crucial presidential election in our country moving closer every passing day. Seven decades ago, “Dewey Defeats Truman” – three words -- a wrong headline bannered on the front page of the Chicago Daily Tribune the day after U.S. President Truman won an upset victory over his opponent, Governor Dewey. Those three words must haunt any election survey cocksure frontrunner like Marcos Jr.  Such a headline was a screw-up of an early press time and wrong assumption (9 out of 10 newspapers fell flat) of the U.S. presidential election regarded as the greatest upset in American political history.

Since the early stage of the campaign, Marcos Jr. operatives have patently devised a bandwagon effect through mind conditioning by rolling out election scenario banners like a “landslide” or “game over” for BBM-Sara UniTeam reinforced by a handful of dubious election survey results.

At this point, let’s take another look at the present state of affairs of surveys or polls. (A survey uses multiple questions; while a poll, one multiple choice question.) By the way, there are two types: election surveys and issue surveys. An issue survey example is the SWS hunger survey. Pew Research reported that “in a closely divided electorate, a few percentage points [in an election survey] matter a great deal. In a poll that gauges opinions on an issue [issue survey], an error of a few percentage points typically will not matter for the conclusions we draw from the survey."

Let’s focus on the election survey, particularly the voters’ preference for a presidential candidate. We draw on the US election framework -- an objective benchmark – endowed with the latest technology-based election prediction platforms and, most of all, devoid of only-in-the-Philippines election survey shenanigans. After getting the “black eye” worldwide – failing to predict election results -- including the U.S. 2016 & 2020 elections, sad to say, the election survey performance report card has obtained failing grades alongside the following valuation notes and flak:

1. It is no longer true that the candidate who is leading in virtually all national polling or survey is the candidate who will win the election.

2. Polling or survey is irrevocably broken.

3. Polls or surveys should be ignored

Being cognizant of the election survey fiascos worldwide, SWS has been prudent enough in emphasizing issue surveys. On the other hand, after its survey results have been called in question in public due to its flawed methodology, Pulse Asia must smarten up keeping in mind that business life, as a whole, would go on after the election. Marcos Jr. operatives have been left with only one survey outfit to call into play: Laylo Research Strategies.

In the U.S. for example, Real Clear Politics, cited frequently by various media outlets, calculates its average figure from the top 10 survey results among a horde of U.S. pollsters: Rasmussen, Economist, Reuters, Politico, Gallup, GU Politics, IBD/TIPP, PPP, NPR/PBS/Marist, NBC/Wall Street Journal, and The Hill. Even so, it still missed the mark in predicting the presidential election results. In contrast, here in the Philippines, the whole eggs of election survey prediction are put in a basket of one solitary pollster like Laylo.

In a nutshell, surveys are unreliable; their results, dubious; their implications, unfavorable. One FB friend, Long, came up with the idea that Marcos Jr., a survey frontrunner, would be in a better position in missing the debates. Being an engineer, Long hypothesized that attending the debate would give him an opportunity loss of minus 20 (an arbitrary number) for the expected shaky performance due to Marcos brand baggage. On the other hand, missing a debate would give Marcos Jr. a relatively lower opportunity loss of only minus 10 (an arbitrary number). His survey lead would be more than adequate to make up for such opportunity loss.

Looks logical. But, there’s the rub: What if the survey frontrunner assumption is wrong? “Talo na, default pa,” my FB friend Bai Lan hit the nail on its head.

“The most misleading assumptions are the ones you don’t even know you’re making.” (Douglas Adams, author, screenwriter and essayist)

In high school, I have a booklet of quotations. A likely source of Donald Rumsfeld’s words, the following Arab proverb would wind up this article.

He who knows, and knows he knows, he is wise – follow him;

He who knows, and knows not he knows, he is asleep – wake him;

He who knows not, and knows he knows not, he is simple – teach him;

He who knows not, and knows not he knows not – he is a fool.

So foolish that he doesn’t even know he is making a wrong assumption. Too bad.