Who measures the measurements?

I know I'm supposed to be an evangelist for the dataflood, but as someone who actually studies how people process information I often find myself in the position of designated skeptic. Luckily that's not so bad a position to be in, because the way some folks wax rhapsodic over junk data makes pickin' 'em off rather easy.

Anyway, here's a nifty piece of research via Guy Kawasaki, a University of Iowa study indicating that "people who have only a little information about a product are happier with that product than people who have more information."

The press release focuses on blissful ignorance in consumer choice, which sounds a bit flim flammery. But it also has important ramifications for the reputation of nonprofit organizations.

Remember a point I've made here, and if you've talked to me recently, ad nauseum in private conversation: the net effect of the accountability movement will be to undermine trust in NGOs. I know it sounds counterintuitive, but by framing nonprofit identity in terms of untrustworthiness we've actually made nonprofits seem more untrustworthy. The more we focus on the need to get more data from nonprofits, the more people will assume that nonprofits are ineffective at their missions and have something to hide.

It's good news from nonprofit lawyers, accountants and consultants, I guess, 'cuz folks will need us more than ever to keep the wolves at bay. But for nonprofits themselves, it's expensive in more ways than cash. What Kawasaki aptly describes as "romantic" information design can be much more effective--and it's exactly what our so-called experts are telling us to strip away.

Back to the Iowa study. The heart of what it's about is connection, the nonprofit stock in trade. And the lesson couldn't be more simple: the more detail you throw at folks, the less they'll will want what you're selling.