[Note: This post contains spoilers for the first episode of Tom Clancy’s Jack Ryan]
A TV show where the lead character is a SQL-using analyst and economist? Count me in! But, it looks like it will mostly be a wartime heavy action political thriller so I probably won’t be as into it as Moneyball. I watched the first episode, though, and I think it’s a decent demonstration of some good and some bad data communication.
JACK: Uh, Jack Ryan. I work Yemen. I’ve been monitoring SWIFT network transactions in and around Aden.
GREER: And?
JACK: And Um Well, actually, in the last few months, I have red-flagged several of these transactions as potentially suspicious.
GREER: Suspicious? How so?
JACK: It’s anomalous to see large, one-off SWIFT transactions to individuals, especially in Yemen. And normal SWIFT transactions usually occur in patterns.
GREER: What’s your concern? What’s at issue?
JACK: Um, it is my theory that the individual behind these transactions could be a high-level target.
GREER: Hmm. Which one? Well, now, that I’m not [CHUCKLES] – necessarily clear – Who is he?
JACK: I believe his name is Suleiman. It means “man of peace.” He just popped up on CTC Yemen’s radar. The RH assets have mentioned him as well
GREER: That’s it? They heard a name. What else have they said?
RYAN: It’s not about what they’re saying, sir, it’s about how they’re saying it. I mean, they’re talking about this guy with real reverence, and I’m not talking sectarianism. I mean, he appeals to Shia and Sunni.
GREER: Wow. A brand-new bin Laden on my first day. Who would have thunk it? [LAUGHTER] So how come you’re the only one that knows about this mystery man?
RYAN: Well, one of the difficulties in cobbling together intel is dealing with two databases – that aren’t meant to talk to one another.
GREER:- Mm-hmm.
RYAN: That’s why I’ve actually written a custom SQL query
GREER: Next.
…
[ELEVATOR BELL CHIMES]PATRICK: SQL query. Seriously? You went there, Ryan?
TAREK: Ops guys like maps and graphics. You should try putting stick figures in your reports next time.
Working in data can be hard – how to get people to see and trust the data as you, the analyst, have intimately come to trust the data?
Jack Ryan is a financial analyst working for the CIA, using complex SQL to make “two databases – that aren’t meant to talk to one another”, well, talk to one another.
Jack Ryan’s colleague critiques how he introduces himself and the data he has been working on to their new group chief, James Greer. And while its true maps and graphics can go a part of the way to getting people’s attention, Jack Ryan actually did something right that helps show how to get people’s attention when sharing your data analysis.
What did Jack Ryan lead with? He leads with the ‘why’. The big clincher of what his SQL and monitoring SWIFT network transactions all meant: a potential high-level target, ‘Suleiman’. This kind of stuff gets people listening. All too often, after working on the detailed nitty gritty of the data for days, weeks, or even months we as analysts forget to step back and see the big picture: How does this fit into the company’s goals?
Additionally, Fishtown Analytics suggests that “In order to disseminate factual knowledge, it is insufficient to simply disseminate data. Factual knowledge must include the data themselves as well as the knowledge about how those data were produced. ” Jack Ryan includes how he got the data (“monitoring SWIFT network transactions in and around Aden”) and even provided perhaps too much detail (“I’ve actually written a custom SQL query”). Know your audience: Give them the high-level background of how your data was obtained, so they are more likely to trust it, and give details if they are interested and technically minded enough to understand it.
Another part of the ‘why’ is a recommendation. Recommendations can get the conversation rolling and get people thinking about how they can use the data at their disposal. Jack Ryan also does this later in Greer’s office by recommending they freeze Suleiman’s account. Greer disagrees. He doesn’t communicate well about what he is doing with the insight, though, leading to Jack Ryan going behind his back and freezing the account anyways.
Communication and trust in a team are important. Maybe the decision maker doesn’t do exactly what you suggest, but at least after sharing the ‘why’, the data details, and a potential recommendation they are listening and looking at the data you provide. Jack Ryan was presumptions and very confident in his abilities, but he hadn’t gained his higher up’s trust that he wasn’t just BSing his way through the analyses. I think it takes time and experience to build trust, and proven wins. It’s easiest to start small with this as small wins often back lower risk involved. If Jack Ryan had suggested doing monitoring in advance instead of assuming his analysis was correct, and then the monitoring yielding more confirmation, its likely Greer would have trusted Jack Ryan’s abilities over the long run. Further, if Greer had communicated he disagreed with Jack Ryan’s recommendations resulting from his insights and discussed with him and the team about alternatives of what to do, the whole debacle could have been avoided. Of course, this is TV, and TV drama often stems from miscommunication, so this wouldn’t happen.
Jack Ryan went into perhaps a tad too much detail, and appears to have given an unpalatable recommendation and go at things behind Greer’s back, he clearly provided enough detail and interest to get Greer listening. At first, it seems like Greer has ignored what he said, but it turns out he had been listening (just communicating terribly).
GREER: What’s the matter? You don’t like flying?
JACK: What the hell’s going on?
GREER: That account you froze. S.A.D.and Yemeni PSO picked up somebody.
JACK: Suleiman?
GREER: No. A couple of couriers, they think.
JACK: Wait, you said S.A.D.- but I didn’t order any surveillance.
GREER: I did.
JACK: I thought you said I wasn’t “there yet.”
GREER: You weren’t. But that doesn’t mean you were wrong.
JACK: Well, how come you couldn’t have said that, instead of throwing me out of your office? GREER: Because I don’t know you. And I don’t answer to you.
Greer listened to Jack Ryan’s data. I think Jack Ryan had good data communication in this episode, other than him going behind Greer’s back and doing his recommendation anyways and Greer not communicating his tentative belief in Jack Ryan’s findings. Because Jack Ryan started the conversation with the ‘why’, gave data details to back up the findings, and gave concrete recommendations, it got Greer listening. While the implementation of what to do next was handled poorly so we could watch an action political thriller, we can learn good data communication and learn from this mistake.