I agree wholeheartedly. I would also like to say that I think some of the concepts I have learned in the course of my education in business can be applied to peoples lives and attitudes-the halo effect is one of them. When you are doing well everyone loves you and you are so smart and deserve it. When bad fortune for whatever the reason, it must be something you did wrong, and you must deserve it. People don't want to know you then because maybe it's contageous, which furthers the downward spiral.
The Halo Effect is a pathbreaking and very interesting article and concept at its fundamental levels. It is essentially the "serial correlation" corollary to the "random walk" of "Fooled by Randomness" (Nassim). Nassim suggests that much "success" is in fact pure luck due to spurious correlations--mostly in trading where random walks abound. The Halo Effect suggests that much "success" can be put down to spurious correlations due to lagging effects. What would be really interesting is more research to see which one is more likely in which industry. Cheers Greg Swinand phd
The lack of science in the various management books that get widely read and, sometimes, reflected in the practice of management consultants used to worry me for all the reasons the author sets out so much better than I could.
But then you realise that CEOs rarely actually implement the recommended approach, even when they claim to be doing so.
So what is going on ? Something much less rational, more emotional. The value of such books lies less in the ideas they promote than in the processes their existence facilitates - processes of private reflection on management and collective questioning of corporate values and assumptions.
The author of The Halo Effect might usefully have considered why such patently slight books (in scientific terms) have such broad appeal and I think he would find the answer by seeing such books as part of a cultural practice, best understood as a kind of ritual