Are computers better decision makers than humans?  Chris Snijders, a Dutch sociology professor seems to think so.  He’s devised an algorithm for routine decisions that he says out performs humans.  When he tried it out with purchasing managers buying computer equipment and software at over 300 companies the computer did a better job in sticking to the budget, meeting specifications, and achieving on time delivery.

Snijders attributes the human fallibility to our inconsistency in applying knowledge.

People get emotional over decisions involving money and can get overconfident in their ability to read situations.  Such unwitting biases lead to inconsistencies, inefficiencies, and poor legal risk management.  Better knowledge management can therefore reduce a company’s risk profile.

Snijders admits computer modeling is not a total solution for all decision making — but it does sound like a promising compliance tool..

In yesterday’s mail I received a flyer for The Harvard Business School Publishing Guide to Better Business Writing.  What caught my eye was a study it cited of 120 blue-chip American companies that found 1/3 of all employees have poor writing skills — a problem that costs businesses $3 billion to correct.  Wow!

As I continued to read the flyer I noticed that the Guide seemed to focus on how you write more than on what you write.  That approach certainly makes good business sense.  It also helps avoid the creation of smoking gun documents that can later be used as ammunition against the company in litigation and is why striving for clarity and accuracy is rule #7 in my 12 Rules for Avoiding Smoking Guns.  (see further chapter 6 of The Business Guide to Legal Literacy: What Every Manager Should Know About the Law)

When you think about the relationship between poor writing, smoking gun documents, and the cost of correcting those mistakes I think $3 billion is on the low side.  A handful of juicy judgments could easily represent a sizable portion of that amount because what you write about is as important as how you write about.  An offer to engage in price fixing written in perfect English is still illegal.

Good grammar is no substitute for legal literacy. But, combine the two and you have an unbeatable combination that can be used as an effective communications tool to protect the company as well as propel the business to new heights.  That’s one way to leverage a $3B problem into a  $3+B advantage.