Blog Post - Experts or the Crowd: Who should we listen to? by Anita Longley FICRS
As CRS professionals we can be overwhelmed with advice from experts and the crowd. We manage complex and often emotive issues, ranging from climate change to human rights violations. How can we make sound decisions when stakeholder opinions might be widely different?
Recently, the ICRS Annual Debate asked the question ‘experts vs. the crowd: whose voice should responsible organisations prioritise?’
We tend to think of experts as people who base their advice on research and can provide empirical evidence to support their assertions. They seem in our society to hold credence and credibility. But as Michael Gove stated perhaps the public has had enough of experts.
The crowd may base their opinions on expertise, experience and background, or have their views shaped by the media. And social media means that the crowd is now able to share their views with a larger audience and have more influence than ever before.
Most recently the crowd helped us get fast action on plastic pollution. But fast action isn’t always the answer, it can lead to unintended consequences and knee jerk reactions from business and regulators. That’s where expert advice is needed.
Recent evidence from Ipsos Mori suggests that trust in experts is rising. Public trust in professors rose sharply last year. If you take a critical issue like healthcare we’re probably better off seeking advice from a cardiologist than the Internet. Though many of us may turn to the web for self-diagnosis in the first instance. We trust healthcare professionals because they have training and experience. And we are more likely to listen to those we trust.
Ben Page (Ipsos MORI) reminded us that there is often a great disparity between reality and perception. Perception is often driven by the media, because shocking, vivid headlines are far more common than good news stories. This can distort the views of the public, generate prejudices and fears.
Some so-called experts might not be experts at all and yet they hold great power over public opinion. There is a distinction between ‘practitioner experts’ and so-called ‘media experts’ who command large audiences and opine on a whole range of issues.
David Goodhart talked about the new tribes shaping British politics. His analysis highlights a concern that in today’s society, ‘smart people’ have too much power. These ‘smart’ people could be classed as experts. He cautions that if we allow ourselves to be swayed only by the presentation of facts we could be losing knowledge generated through experience. And we could be in danger of losing wider society values in our decision making.
If we make decisions based only on the facts and don’t appeal to heads and hearts, we can’t expect the crowd to support our strategies.
Diversity of thought within both the crowd and the expert is important. How do we engage young people in our decision making? How do we ensure that the voice of those in poverty is heard along with the expert opinion?
What does all this mean for us as CRS professionals?
Clearly, we need to listen to both experts and the crowd. However, we must understand the motivations of both groups.
When it comes to experts, it is important to understand their credentials and their context; who’s paying them and why? Experts can be prone to subjectivity and their voice may be given priority by virtue of their status.
The crowd can provide an alternative view to challenge the expert. But it’s important we don’t just listen to those that shout the loudest, doing our best to avoid knee jerk reactions to public views. As we know, knee jerk reactions don’t always result in optimum outcomes.
We should actively generate diversity of opinion and be aware of our own prejudices. After all we are just as likely as anyone else to be influenced by those who we most trust or who share our personal views.
And we need to recognise that there’s often a difference between perception and reality and that personal experience is key to engendering trust. Word of mouth and personal interactions can be as powerful as an expensive advertising campaign. Employees can be our best ambassadors and great sources of information.
Finding the right solutions against this backdrop is not easy but it will make our decisions as CRS professionals better.
The summary of the Annual Debate is available on the ICRS website.
Anita Longley is chair of the ICRS