Data is often treated like truth. Cold. Hard. Objective. For some its the holy grail and a hammer to beat you with. But here’s the catch: data doesn’t speak by itself — people interpret it.
And depending on who is doing the interpreting, the story that data tells can look wildly different.
Hand the same data set to a data analyst and a brand strategist, and you’ll get two very different takeaways. Both are valid. But they’re generally not the same. And that matters.
👓 The Analyst’s View: What Does the Data Say?
A good data analyst deals in clarity. In logic and in proof.
Their goal is to report on what’s happening, based on the numbers in front of them. Unlike strategists, they don’t even really need to know the context to the data, as their job is to tell us what it says.
The approach is typically:
- What can be measured?
- What patterns are emerging?
- What’s performing well or underperforming?
This kind of interpretation is essential — it keeps businesses honest, rooted in evidence. It powers dashboards, informs KPIs, and ensures we’re not leading the witness or picking and choosing the positive narrative.
But by nature, this view is often binary. Fact-based. Less concerned with why something is happening — and more focused on what the numbers confirm.
🧠 The Strategist’s Lens: What Might the Data Mean?
A strategist or behavioural economist looks at the same dataset and starts turning it upside down.
Not just what the numbers say — but what they don’t. What might sit behind them. What human behaviour, bias, context, or contradiction could be distorting the story.
This mindset introduces:
- Questioning of stated preferences vs revealed behaviour
- Interpretation through cultural, psychological, or emotional frames
- Curiosity around missing data or what wasn’t measured at all
It’s less about reporting and more about interrogating. And yes this is where the tension often lies. Where a data analyst might say, “The campaign had low engagement,” a strategist might ask, “Were we even engaging the right people, in the right way, with the right context?”
In that sense, strategy often lives in the grey. It searches for tension, nuance, and contradiction — not just patterns. But can also be perceived as trying to ‘spin’ a bad result or a better narrative.
🔄 So, who’s right?
They both are — but critically, not in silo.
And that’s where multi-disciplinary teams and thinking becomes powerful.
The best insights don’t come from one lens. They come from the collision between fact, context, psychology, culture, and sometimes — uncomfortable truth and ambiguity.
The So What?
The next time you’re handed a report or data deck, ask not just “What does this say?” — but also:
“Who’s interpreting it? From what angle? And what might we be missing?”
Because when you only rely on one lens, you risk oversimplifying the story.
But when you blend analytical rigour with strategic empathy, you start to uncover not just what’s happening — but why it happened, how to respond, and where the next big step should go.
The So What... 
Leave a comment