{[ promptMessage ]}

Bookmark it

{[ promptMessage ]}

Week 2 Stats 2 - I was unable to grasp how this was...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This really was an amazing clip. First of all, “gambler fallacy” as Mr. Devlin refers to it is hilarious. My aunt is that exact same way. My dad however will not play slots because he understands that the odds never change. Instead he plays black jack and still loses, but apparently he likes those odds better. The other part of this interview that I found very interesting is Mr. Devlin explanation; people have a very hard time being able to think in terms of probability or even accept the results when they are offered. The best example I can share is when I worked in a call center. I found it very hard to accept what our boss offered as being simply probability math. He was always preaching about the probability of how many sales you will close based on the number of calls you make.
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: I was unable to grasp how this was possible, because in my opinion it really is ultimately up to who you get a hold of, whether or not they will buy. His explanation was simple: they seek out our services, we do not cold call. Therefore, they are already interested. Therefore if you make 100 calls, you should get a hold of 75 people. A 75% lead contact conversion. Of those 60 people you should have at least 15 interviews. A 15% lead to interview conversion. Of those 15 interviews you should get 7 sales. A 7% lead to sale conversion. I’m not sure that many employees bought into this idea, but maybe if our boss provided the sales data to the team, the probability would be more believable and realistic....
View Full Document

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Ask a homework question - tutors are online