7: is voting really useful?

650) This. width = 650; "src =" http://s3.51cto.com/wyfs02/M01/44/40/wKioL1PgXO3z848EAAED9_7I4Q0490.jpg "Title =" e9f2738caeb1ec7e9abfbc7f39de6ec1.jpg "alt =" wkiol1pgxo3z848eaaed9_7i4q0490.jpg "/

I have seen this phenomenon recently. Many friends are always willing to send a group vote when they have no idea about one thing. I think from the perspective of the initiators, it should be like this: 1) the wisdom of a group is a correct guarantee and democracy. 2) since it is a group decision, the consequences of this decision are not the responsibility of the individual.

However, this is often the result. There is no final result for a few discussions over the past few days, because the person who may be able to make a shot is not involved, and the initiator is embarrassed at this time, no matter what the final decision is, there will always be people who are not satisfied, always offend one party, and there is no result yet. At the same time, heated discussions (especially email discussions) will involve a lot of irrelevant people. It is easy to take a long time to get one more thing, which affects the decision-making time, delayed the progress of the event, so the initiator eventually suffered losses.

Here I still need to be clear. Some people always believe that democracy is the most correct at any time, but what I often see is that "truth is in the hands of a few people ". Because the judgment on one thing involves the degree of understanding, educational background, experiences, and other factors of this person, a superficial judgment that does not know the truth is often wrong, for example, many people often say that China wants democracy and referendum, but at this stage, the most efficient execution is the centralized system. It doesn't mean that democracy is not good. It just depends on the implementation of the system at what stage, and India, which is very "democratic", knows that there are four levels of systems, and there are still dead people in the river.

Things are a little too big. I have two comments when making a decision:

1) if it is a professional field, it should be done by experts in this field, so there will be much less chance of misjudgment.

2) if you are unable to make judgments, a team sometimes needs fast decisions and fast trial and error attempts. Many things cannot be judged right or wrong without going through market tests, because market factors are too complex, it is better to do quick verification first than spend a lot of time discussing it. This is more efficient, the agile development that we often hear during development is similar to this.

For the sake of your convenience, this method of voting for decision-making is still rare.

====

My microblog: @ the best dumb