How tall is it?
How low can you get?
The Civil Engeenring department had that geodetic surveying task—to measure the height of a certain chimney in a nearby refinery plant1.
Now…most years, students would rather forgo the pleasure of trudging through the mud around the plant; they were more inclined to copy the report from their previous semesters’ well-graded predecessors, who—in turn—did the same…
And it worked fine.
But then, that student had fewer friends [or references], or he was just a goody two-shoes type; he decided to go out and take the measures himself.
It was a hard task; he put much effort into it, arranged a very nice report, and passed it to his teacher.
He received a failing grade.
Aghast, he approached the professor to inquire why, on earth2, he had failed.
What was wrong with his calculations?
The good, honest professor went over the report very thoroughly.
He was quite surprised to see that everything was done right.
But the final answer—the measured height of that certain chimney—was off…
The intrigued professor picked up the phone and called his friend in the plant.
He asked him for the height of that particular chimney.
The answer was the same as the student had claimed.
“Really…?” hummed the professor.
“Yes,” answered his friend,
“We had raised that chimney some five meters a decade ago…”
We all experience that tendency to regurgitate “truths” and “assertions” without actually checking their relevance, accuracy, or validity.
When it comes to process management—this becomes preposterous3.
If this is the way management [or decision-making] processes are conducted—one should be worried… 4
This true urban legend had originated decades ago in the Civil Engineering/Geodesics Dept. in the Technion.
Pun intended.
Risky? Dangerous? Stupid? Wasteful? Misguided? Frustrating? Discouraging? Demoralizing?
Exercise:
“They say AI can do [this] and [that] better than [this and that], so we don’t need to do [whatever] anymore.”
Discuss.