A camel is a horse designed by committee

I was reading an article in the Financial Times this morning that referred to an old proverb that I have not heard in a while - "a camel is a horse designed by committee."  I think the proverb is trying to say that a committee isn't very effective at making decisions and coming up with unique and innovative ideas.  Committees, by virtue of the fact that they are made up of several members, each with different perspectives, viewpoints, and preferences, have a difficult time reaching consensus.  Their logic is fragmented, flawed, and prone to failure.  So, as the saying goes, if a committee set off to design a four-legged animal that was strong enough to pull a heavy load (for example, a wagon), smart enough to follow directions, and fast enough to carry a rider from one village to another in a reasonable amount of time, they would come up with something that looks like a camel, as opposed to a horse.

In this particular case, the proverb is actually a quote (supposedly) by Sir Alec Issigonis.  Issigonis was a highly innovative automobile designer who is known for the design and development of the Mini.  Clearly, Issigonis felt that most committees, at least in regards to innovation and design, were completely useless.

What can we say about the camel, though?  Is a camel really that useless?  Actually, the camel is perfectly designed for the harsh desert climate of the Sahara Desert.  When I was young, I was led to believe that camels stored water in their humps - this is actually not true.  The hump is actually where the camel stores its fat.  This particular adaptation allows the camel to withstand the hot temperatures of the desert climate.  Fat is a perfect insulator - if the camel's fat stores were distributed evenly all over its body, they would not be able to withstand the hot desert temperatures for very long.  The camel's thick coat of hair protects it from the intense sun in the desert.  The camel's intestines are able to absorb water much better than most mammals, and similarly, the camel's kidneys are able to conserve water and excrete a concentrated urine.  The camel's long eyelashes and ear hair prevents sand from irritating the eyes and ears.  Camels also apparently have a transparent third eyelid to further protect the eyes from blowing sand.  Finally, camels do not sweat.  In other words, a camel is perfectly designed for its primary purpose, just like a horse is perfectly designed for its primary purpose.

So, are committees good at innovation or not?  I happen to believe that the diverse membership of most committees is an asset, not a liability.  Different backgrounds, viewpoints, opinions, and perspectives create environments that foster innovation.  Moreover, team diversity is much less susceptible to something known as "groupthink" (more about groupthink in a later post), where members of the committee come to a consensus too early on a solution or design that is not necessarily the best.

Different personalities and experiences can, at times, be challenging to manage.  However, in the long run, if a team or committee is led by someone who creates an environment that encourages different viewpoints while at the same time pushing the team to come to a consensus, we end up with the best of both worlds - a highly innovative group that forms a consensus in a reasonable amount of time.  In other words, we end up with a committee or team that is perfectly designed for its primary purpose - we get a camel if we are in a desert and a horse if we are anywhere else!