Monday, October 4, 2010

Living Capital Metrics ... some excellent perspective on metrics

Dear Colleagues

I will not try to summarize the work that is on the web at the following URL ... it is an excellent perspective on metrics.

As I understand it, the driver of this work is William Fisher ... his web bio is:
William P. Fisher, Jr., Ph.D., shows how improved psychosocial measurement, standards, and data quality can lead to new and exciting possibilities for communicating quantitative information more clearly and meaningfully. His articulation of the dynamics of living capital metrics in the management of human, social, and natural assets brings new standards of scientific rigor, practicality, and convenience to these domains.

As a result of Dr. Fisher’s consultation and teaching, hundreds of managers, educators, clinicians, students, and researchers have experienced the “jaw-dropping effect” produced when they see their data anew in the light of scientifically rigorous, yet practical and flexible, probabilistic conjoint models for measurement.

Dr. Fisher was previously a Professor in the Departments of Public Health & Preventive Medicine, and Biometry & Genetics, at LSU Health Sciences Center in New Orleans, Louisiana. For six years before joining LSU, he was Senior Research Scientist for Program Evaluation at Marianjoy Rehabilitation Hospital & Clinics in Wheaton, IL, serving on the Management Team, and on the Clinical Programs and Quality Assessment & Improvement Committees.

After completing the University of Chicago’s Social Sciences Divisional Master’s degree in 1984, William was a Spencer Foundation Dissertation Fellow, earning a Ph.D. in Chicago’s Department of Education in 1988, concentrating in Measurement, Evaluation, and Statistical Analysis (MESA).

William is currently on the staff of the National Center for Special Education Accountability Monitoring, and on the Editorial Boards of Quality of Life Research (where he recently received special recognition for the quality of his peer reviews), and the Journal of Applied Measurement. He organized and hosted International Objective Measurement Workshops in 2000 and 2002, while at LSU HSC. His research has been presented in over 50 peer-reviewed journal articles and in over 150 presentations at professional society meetings and academic lectures all over North America, as well as in Great Britain, France, Australia, and Hong Kong.
Simply put the Living Capital Metrics are very much compatible with the work that has been done in the development of The Burgess Method (TBM).

The Living Capital Metrics description of the nature of metrics is very clear ... very elegant.

TBM is not quite in the same space. TBM is looking to see better socio-economic performance through better management and decision making using metrics that are relevant in a living society that is made up of many people, many places, many organizations, many sectors and utterly chaotic ... a mathematical nightmare!

TBM is not looking to use more and more mathematics but rather more and more understanding ... not only by big decision makers, but also by little decision makers that are more numerous and in aggregate more important. But TBM wants to relate to and associate with systems of metrics that are rigorous and relevant in every area where the activities have impact on the state of the socio-economic system and the quality of life.

Peter Burgess

No comments:

Post a Comment