(2022-06-14) Chin Notes From Building A Cft Business Case Library

Cedric Chin: Notes From Building a CFT Business Case Library. Last week, we ran an alpha test for a Cognitive Flexibility Theory-inspired business case study library.

the Commoncog Alpha test consisted of eight case studies on the concept of ‘scale economies’ (Economies Of Scale). Cases were sent via email once a day, every day, for eight days

About halfway into the alpha test, a reader pinged me to say that the case studies weren’t doing it for her — she was expecting management consulting-style cases, i.e. tightly-written cases that were written to illustrate specific nuances of a particular concept. This was notable, mostly because CFT argues against tight cases for complex concepts — instead, the theory recommends exposing learners to complex real world stories that contain multiple concept instantiations.

When you boil it down, these are basically problems of product management. I don’t know the answers to the above questions, or even what a final solution might look like — but I’m fairly certain that the solution is out there.

One clear lesson from the alpha test is that an email frequency of one case a day was simply way too high for some readers.

I used to say that I read narrative before bed because I found it relaxing to do so. But the truth is that ever since I discovered CFT, I’ve not actually had a great time reading business biography before bed — I find myself more engaged and more thoughtful than in the past.

Active reading, as it turns out, doesn’t make for a great pre-sleeping habit.

it’s somewhat unrealistic to expect casual readers to engage with the cases at a level that is recommended by the original expertise researchers

Based on the results of our test, we discovered that the bulk of respondents were reading the cases for fun, and not attempting to answer the questions at the bottom of each email.

But it’s not as if such readers derived no value from the cases. One of the things that comes through when you read the original CFT research is that humans think by analogy quite naturally. We absorb stories for fun. So who is to say that such readers won’t be able to call up on relevant cases when it’s time for application?

I think there’s an interesting problem here where you can’t optimise for maximum pedagogical benefit when building a self-serve education resource. (infotainment)