Evidence-based management (EBM) has such an appealing ring to it. Sounds like validity, authority, legitimacy, and, of course, efficacy. Seemingly all good things. The attainment of those seemingly worthy goals, however, is far from assured even in a serious EBM effort. Efficacy may well be the opposite of the effect an EBM effort creates. And those other qualities? They may be exactly the problem with EBM.

Here is a chapter for a forthcoming book on EBM that I wrote with Dr. Ruth Zaplin, Assistant Director of Key Executive Leadership Programs at American University in Washington, DC.

We suggest that managers likely will find EBM to be an elusive objective, much more difficult to implement effectively than one might expect. Moreover, we claim that the EBM concept may not be as desirable as it would appear at first glance.

Undermining EBM’s promise, we suggest, are the natural mental processes that managers and leaders would need to overcome when considering the value of “evidence.” We advocate for a more holistic and systemic approach to management, and champion the helpful role of dialog-based executive development such as executive coaching.

The chapter is: “Believing is Seeing: The Impact of Beliefs on Evidence-Based Management Practices.”

Zaplin, Ruth T., Blohowiak, Don. In press. “Believing is Seeing: The Impact of Beliefs on Evidence-Based Management Practices.” In Evidence-based public management: Practices, issues and prospects, eds. Anna Shillabeer, Terry F. Buss, and Denise Rousseau. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.