Yoel Kluk

The trap of people data that misleads with precision

Perfect precision can mislead: overfitting makes data learn the past, not the lesson. Avoid falling into this trap in People Analytics.

Written by
Yoel Kluk

Also Director at Deepple, the people analytics company he co-founded a few years ago out of his passion for data science, Yoel loves creating business strategies that connect innovation with real results.

This is the second article in a series of three on data fallacies—the most common mistakes in interpreting data that, far from helping us, can lead us to wrong decisions.

In the first one, we discussed the trap of summarized metrics—you can read it here; today we explore an even more dangerous one because it disguises itself as perfection: overfitting.

When data “learn by heart”

Imagine someone studying for an exam by memorizing all the questions from previous years. On test day, they might get a perfect score—but if the questions change, they won’t know how to respond. The same thing happens with data models that fall into overfitting: they look flawless because they fit the past with absolute precision, but they fail when faced with new situations.

In other words, data learn by heart, not the lesson.

Everyday examples


Weather prediction: A model that fits a single month in great detail may seem accurate. But the following month, patterns change and the prediction loses all validity.
The overly confident GPS: A GPS that memorizes every pothole and traffic light on your daily route will be perfect… only on that route. If you travel to another city, it becomes useless.

In People Analytics
In the world of people management, overfitting appears more often than we think:

  • A model that perfectly explains the results of a survey… but only for a specific period or area. When applied in another context, it fails.

  • A turnover indicator so specific that it only reflects particular cases and does not help anticipate real trends.

  • Performance predictions with too many irrelevant variables, resulting in fragile models that are impossible to replicate.

The problem is that apparent precision misleads us: we believe we have the “perfect model,” when in reality we have built a house of cards.

Final reflection

Overfitting reminds us that the past does not guarantee the future. In People Analytics—and in any data-driven discipline—we are not looking for explanations that fit perfectly with what already happened, but for robust models that allow us to anticipate what is coming.

Sometimes, perfection in data is not an achievement, but a trap.

By Yoel Kluk, Partner at Olivia Mexico.

 

Other reflections from Yoel Kluk

The invisible network where work truly happens

Culture is not felt in a PowerPoint. It is felt in who helps you when you don’t understand something.
Read more

The analysis-paralysis fallacy: when HR confuses measuring with transforming

But by measuring so much, we sometimes forget what is essential: data changes nothing if decisions do not change.
Read more

Beyond the Averages: The trap of summarized metrics in People Analytics

Data has become an essential tool for decision-making. However, even with abundant data, it's easy to fall into traps that lead us to mistaken conclus...
Read more