> these kinds of models assume the thing you're measuring is a static thing No > a property of, say, an individual Also no > there's a fundamental, basic

> these kinds of models assume the thing you're measuring is a static thing No > a property of, say, an individual Also no > there's a fundamental, basic assumption that if you rank people, you are establishing measurements of those persons Deming says that's bad > Another possibility, though, is that your rankings are measurements of your own perception That's built-in > But the paradigm that is being described assumes that the evaluators are omniscient, unbiased entities measuring properties of some fixed, unchanging objects Exactly not > their models of the world are wrong, and they're often not as operationally rigorous as they could be. Yes, they've misinterpreted what Deming was saying. Seems to be a common affliction.