Given how much money business consultants make, one would think they have pretty good insight into a given industry or market. And sure, they may have lots of information unavailable to most people, but does that necessarily imply they are better?
All data received, we must remember, is context-dependent. Data never, ever, speak for themselves. Interpreting and developing models for given market structures is extremely difficult in this regard because it requires certain assumptions.
Consider the following real-world example: when the guys from Xerox (the copy machine company) wanted to start selling their machines to businesses, they met stiff resistance from consultants and financial backers. “Why would anyone spend thousands of dollars on a copy machine when we have a perfectly good, cheap substitute: carbon paper? Copy machines will never sell.” Prima facie, this criticism seemed legitimate. Firms and experts observed secretaries and typists using carbon paper to make copies for distribution. There didn’t seem to be any demand for copy machines.
Undeterred, the Xerox guys pressed on. They decided to give companies the hardware, toner, and paper for free up until the first 2500 copies per month. Firms jumped at the idea. After all, how were they ever going to use 2500 copies a month?
Well, the rest is history. Xerox is still around. Carbon paper is not.
Why? What did the experts get wrong?
They got wrong the scope of the market. Copy machines weren’t for people writing letters. They were for people receiving and distributing letters! The market for copy machines was for the owner who got a letter from his lawyer who wanted to distribute it to the rest of the team. It was for the product manager who needed to itemize his costs for different departments. Etc etc.
There is an implicit conceit in economics that we know the market, the shapes of demand and supply curves. But the reality is, we never do. We have only data points in a certain context which may or may not provide useful information about other contexts. This implicit conceit becomes vitally important when we start talking about regulation or “optimal taxes,” which require knowledge of the scope and shape of the market. Knowledge we simply do not have.