This lecture talks about the importance of evidence in scientific, business, and innovation research. It lists down important examples to carry this process in perspective of the problem statement.

1. Using Evidence
Yesoda Bhargava

2. Why we
need to study
this?
• Having evidence to prove or refute
ideas is a scientific way to promote
critical thinking and progress in
ideation.
• Helps us ensure value of what we are
doing.
• Research evidence is better than
expert opinion alone.
• Using evidence-based research (EBR)
can ensure the value of a new study.
2

3. Research Evidence
• Can help you understand what works, where, why and for whom.
• Can also tell you what doesn’t work, and you can avoid repeating the
failures of others by learning from unsuccessful programs.
• Evidence also challenges what we might think is common sense.
• Example: Increasing the amount of police on the street to reduce crime. The
evidence does not support this. More informed police patrolling the streets
might make the public feel safer, but it can actually take police away from
solving crimes. Source
• When budgets are tight, one cannot afford to waste money on policies and
ideas that don’t work.
• Another example: Getting laptop and high-tech gizmos into every school
may be a good headline-grabbing commitment, but it does little in itself to
benefit young people’s learning.
• Research by OECD has found that frequent use of computers in schools is
often connected with lower academic results. Source

4. Throwing money at most problems
will of course often do some sort of
good. But could that money have
been spent more effectively on
something cheaper?

5. The importance of evidence
• Whether it is a police station, a school classroom or the
boardroom of a charity, evidence can help you make better
decisions.
• It is helpful not only in frontline service delivery, but also in
creating smarter organizations – charities, local authorities,
government departments etc.

6. What is Evidence-Based Research?
9/3/20XX Presentation Title 6
• Use of prior research in a systematic and transparent way to inform a new study so that
it is answering questions that matter in a valid, efficient, and accessible manner.
• A single study can very rarely (if ever) provide a definitive answer to the question
investigated.
• Placing a new idea, in the context of relevant previous research is key.
• The risk of bias is high if only a subset of earlier studies is included in the ideation of the
work.

7. Evidence Pyramid
• Depicts the evidential strength of different
research designs.
• Studies with the highest internal validity,
characterised by high degree of quantitative
• Analysis, review, analysis, and stringent
scientific methodology, are at the top of the
• Pyramid.
• Observational research and expert opinion
• Reside at the bottom of the pyramid.

8. • Any model of good decision-making should be wary of putting
professional judgment on a pedestal as experts can sometimes get it
horribly wrong.
The four elements of evidence-based management

9. The Nesta innovation spiral

10. The trouble with professional opinion
• Sometimes professional judgement can fail to get it right.
• A study by the American psychologist and political writer Professor Philip E. Tetlock
found the predictions of most experts were wrong.
• He gathered 80,000 expert predictions and compared them to what actually
happened.
• The results were devastating. Academics, government officials, journalists and other
pundits performed worse than ‘dart-throwing monkeys’ in forecasting the future.
• Indeed, those specialists who had more detailed subject knowledge seemed to
perform even worse than average.
• Source

11. Cognitive bias
• Experts can sometimes carry a “heavy burden of prejudices, preconceptions and even
partiality”.
• As humans we are ‘predictably irrational’ and may experience upto 150 cognitive
biases that distort our thinking.
• Cognitive bias refers to our inability to be entirely objective, which may manifest as
perceptual distortion, inaccurate judgements and illogical and/of irrational
interpretations.
• It means we should be highly cautious about the accuracy of expert decisions.
• Cognitive bias is a tendency to see the evidence that fits with what we believe,
and to ignore or discount what doesn’t.

13. Its not just about experts, it
is about everyone who is
selective in their use of
research evidence.
We look for evidence that fits our beliefs.

14. What
evidence
should
you
choose?

15. What evidence should you choose?
• Not all evidence is equal. Some is stronger-and more relevant to your challenge-than
others.
• Think about the appropriateness of your evidence.
• You need not know every type of approach.
• For the non-specialist ‘consumer’ of research, its more important – and easier- to
understand the assumptions that underpin these ways of doing research.

16. In the context of Innovation….

17. Judging the quality of research
• Another way to help you choose which sort of research you need is to ask a different
question : what research can you trust?
• What is good enough evidence to fir you needs?
• People often cite peer-reviewed journals as THE EVIDENCE.
• In a famous paper, John Ioannidis from Stanford University caused a stir by arguing that
‘most published findings are probably false’.
• He examined the most cited papers (1,000+ citations) in the best regarded medical
journals in the world – largely drawn from The Lancet, the New England Journal of
Medicine and the Journal of the American Medical Association.
• Of those with claims of efficacy whose results had been tested, 41 per cent were either
found to be wrong, or the impact was much smaller than the original study suggested.
• This is not to say that peer-reviewed evidence is useless. Its vital, but keep your
objectivity afloat.

18. Avoid cherry-picking evidence

19. The importance of repetition and corroboration
• How many studies need to be included for you to be comfortable that a strong body of
evidence exists?
• A couple of good studies if they are good? Or may be dozens, or hundreds?
• There is no magic number of studies.
• But the size of the body of evidence is important: there is strength in numbers, and we
must have repetition and corroboration.

20. Where should you look for evidence?
• Established international and national organization reports and studies. Credibility is
established if you choose organizations known for their rigor in scientific investigation.
• Peer-reviewed studies.
• Newspaper reports (Guardian)
• National and International Ministry websites.
• Depending on the nature of your idea/topic, see which one of the above fits.
• Example: https://www.pewresearch.org/

21. How to communicate your findings?
• Evidence rarely speaks for itself.
• Involve stakeholders.
• Make recommendations as specific as possible.
• Make your message Easy, Attractive, Social and Timely.
• Easy: simplify the message.
• Attractive: use images or personalization.
• Social: use anecdotes, and real people.
• Timely: make your timing right, prompt people when they are likely
to be most receptive.

23. Summary
• Implement changes or advice based on evidence that is as strong as possible (and vice
versa, be wary of changes or advice if the evidence is weak).
• Be evidence-aware in your decision making.
• Beware of potential cognitive biases in your decision making.
• Think about the right type of research to suit your needs.
• Type of evidence must match your question.
• Be smart in how you communicate your evidence.