or those of us who have spent years in R&D, trial design and placebo are hardly unfamiliar territory. I thought I knew what this article was about—until I got to the uncomfortable part.

We form a hypothesis, design the trial around it, interpret the result through it, and then carry that conclusion forward as the next assumption. And so the loop perpetuates itself. The danger is not simply getting the hypothesis wrong; it is building a system that keeps making the hypothesis feel right. Can we tell when our belief has taken the reins from the evidence?

This is why the example resonates with me beyond healthcare. In high-stakes decisions, leaders often seek perspectives outside their team—but the real value isn’t another opinion that confirms the prevailing view. It is someone willing to challenge the assumptions underneath it, especially when the consequences of getting them wrong are difficult to reverse. In healthcare, that can mean irreversible consequences; in business, the same pattern can quietly shape an asset, a deal, or an entire strategy—until the decision becomes much harder to unwind than the assumption that started it.

Link to Article published on The Economist