In 1927, Harry Warner of Warner Brothers was asked about the newest filmmaking technology: movies with sound. His response: "Who the (heck) wants to hear actors talk?"

A few decades later Thomas Watson of IBM declared: "I think there is a world market for maybe five computers."

Evidently, so-called experts can be absolutely wrong. That's why I cringe a little when entrepreneurs contact me in search of "expert" advice, or I hear about them paying large amounts of money to "experts" to get business guidance, especially when the evidence suggests that entrepreneurs would be better served by getting the advice of a diverse set of friends or strangers than getting the advice of experts.

In his book, "The Wisdom of Crowds," New Yorker columnist James Surowiecki cites numerous examples of how diverse groups of people are usually smarter than one or two people who are considered expert on a given subject. A number of studies cited by the book showed that nonpsychologists are better at predicting people's behavior than psychologists. Similarly, studies in stock market investing and livestock judging show that experts are as likely to disagree as agree.

A study at the University of Michigan even used a computer simulation to demonstrate a process during which agents were given different abilities to solve a sophisticated problem. Researchers discovered that groups made up of smart and not-so-smart agents almost always did better than a group consisting of only smart agents. Which leads me to believe that you would do better to get the input of several diverse agents than to spend all your time trying to determine who the smartest agents are.

showed an important advantage for expertise." He also declared: "One would expect experts to have reliable information for predicting change and to be able to utilize the information effectively. However, expertise beyond a minimal level is of little value in forecasting change."

Author Surowiecki cites many other examples in which diverse sets of people perform dramatically better than one or two experts.

At Brigham Young University, researchers have documented "overconfidence" by investors. When markets rise, investors make money, and they believe they can predict the market better than the average investor. Ultimately markets fall, and these "experts" tend to run up costs buying and selling in an attempt to beat the market. The end result is that investors underperform the market due to the trading costs.

The simple fact is, not all investors can outperform the market. In fact, if they spend money buying and selling, trying to outperform the market, on average they will underperform the market by those trading costs.

I am not suggesting that entrepreneurs should not try to get good advice. When it comes to questions about legal issues or tax issues where there is a definitive answer, it makes sense to buy the expert advice of people who have spent a great deal of time understanding what those definitive answers are. But when you are trying to predict the future and make business decisions based on those predictions, expertise may not be as valuable as getting input from many people with different backgrounds and different opinions.