Upon reading about the U-Haul example in Sarasvathy’s article, I googled U-Haul to find out more about it. Being from Ireland, I only recognised the brand name from watching american movies. This forbes article incorporates a good few subtle examples of effectual reasoning and casual reasoning.
Firstly, this model of effectual reasoning could not have been created through causal reasoning but now needs causal reasoning to reach new heights. Once there’s enough information then causal reasoning starts to play a role. Saroki, an experienced analyst and investor, finds investment opportunities through causal reasoning. Looking for ways to allow Amerco’s U-Haul reach new heights in 2017, Saroki contemplates the question “What is the market missing?” – This question is key in causal reasoning.
In contrast, effectual reasoners will not do market research. They create a market predicated on the people they are able to bring together. This brings me onto my second point which is to emphasise U-Hauls continued success due to its substantially impenetrable network. This highlights the importance of the crazy quilt principle inherent in effectual reasoning.
Lastly, tying in our discussion about the Walker article, the lawyers working for U-Haul early on should have been better equipped to handle the management of the company. It has a tumultuous management history due to family infighting for control of the business following the founders suicide, and this has eventually led to it being undervalued in the market.
What I found most interesting about the article is that, on top of its brand recognition and strong network, the fact that U-Haul can thrive in a good and bad market essentially leaves it untouched by the effects of recession. Also as it is the only/lowest cost option for one way moves it seems to be immortal to the effects of new competition.