Joint fact-finding is a cooperative venture and communication among the participants is critical to success. Analysts have begun to recognize this and have started to adjust their craft to reflect the communicative character of their work. Non-analysts usually judge experts' opinions by their value, effectiveness, and legitimacy rather than soundness of the conclusions. Accordingly, experts must recognize the importance of these non-scientific criteria, and learn to communicate better with their non-expert colleagues. Practically, this means explaining the rationale and implications behind their findings in an easily digestible way. Andrews uses real cases to illustrate his argument that analysts should marry process to analysis, spread information, reason inductively, broaden their analytic scope, put analytic results into lay terms, and constantly seek out feedback on their work. Technical specialists who perform analysis in public settings can turn to Andrews's book for ideas about how to do their jobs more effectively. Scholars interested in the connection between expertise and the process of social learning will find his case study approach useful. Beginning with an analysis of the motivations and concepts at work in the process of joint fact finding, Andrews assesses the challenges analysts face from those who hire them and from their non-expert colleagues. He then illustrates his remarks with case studies of projects that have failed and succeeded. The book concludes by summing up the mistakes learned and elements that make for successful joint fact finding. | Humble Analysis by Clinton J. Andrews, Hardcover | Indigo Chapters