Dr. Roger Kobbl’s talk over Expert Failure discusses the theory of experts and how experts are sometimes given too much power. He defines experts as people who are paid for their opinions within their professions.
I don’t entirely agree with Dr. Kobbl’s definition of an expert. Most people would widely regard an expert as someone very knowledgeable and well-versed in their respective fields. However, there may be some “experts” out there getting paid for their opinions but are not necessarily knowledgeable. Kobbl uses economists as examples of experts but argues that NASCAR drivers aren’t experts in their profession. I would personally lean more towards the 10,000 hours distinction when defining an expert. Though it would be difficult to say they are definitely well-versed after 10,000 hours, I believe it is a better mark than saying they get paid for their opinion.
After Kobbl defines his version of an expert, he goes into discussing examples of past expert failure. He notes the weapons of mass destruction in Iraw, Samsung phones exploding, and Alan Greenspan’s economic failure that led to the Great Recession.
A more specific example is the collapse of the Tacoma Narrows Bridge. As an aspiring engineer, I have heard time and time again about the Tacoma Narrows Bridge as a technical engineering failure but I had not given it much thought as an expert failure. These engineers were trusted as experts to design and construct the bridge but their mistakes led to the bridge catastrophically collapsing nine months following its opening. Fortunately, no one was injured or died from this catastrophe. This example set a precedent in the world of engineering for greater design reviews and testing so that we do not have too much power in the hands of a few individuals.
I really liked when Dr. Koppl said “expert failure is more likely when experts have monopoly power and when experts choose for non-experts.” This applies in many different situations like the Tacoma Narrows Bridge or the Flint, Michigan Water crisis. Many people relied on experts and trusted them to serve the public. But a few select engineers or public officials held the expert power and their mistakes either led catastrophe.
Overall, I enjoyed the idea behind Dr. Koppl’s talk and it helped me realize the dangers about expert power. There were times, however, I found it difficult to follow his presentation as he rambled on a few topics and went on a handful of tangents from the main point of discussion. But I liked his topic of expert power and I believe that I will be more aware of expert power moving forward.
