Shruti Cheriyan’s work sits in the spaces where public health, development, and demography overlap — and where answers are rarely straightforward. Over time, she’s learned that good research isn’t just about finding patterns in data, but about questioning assumptions, sitting with uncertainty, and understanding the systems behind the numbers. In this Team Speak, she reflects on learning to trust her judgement, resisting oversimplified narratives, and why curiosity remains central to the way she approaches her work.
Shruti (S): Yes, that happens - often unintentionally. In many settings, complex work is often communicated through a focused set of indicators or summary insights, particularly when timelines call for clarity and efficiency. But all development challenges rarely operate in silos; they are shaped by social norms, institutions, incentives, and lived realities that don’t lend themselves to simple narratives.
I’ve learned that it’s important to stay anchored in evidence and systems thinking. That means asking questions like what assumptions are we making, who might this leave out, or what downstream effects are we not accounting for. It can be as simple as reframing the problem, bringing in qualitative insights alongside numbers, or showing how different pieces of the system interact. Over time, consistently doing this builds credibility and allows for more nuanced conversations.
(S): It wasn’t a single moment, but a gradual shift that came from being closer to execution and decision-making. When you’re involved not just in analysis, but also in designing studies, managing trade-offs, interpreting imperfect data, and communicating findings to diverse stakeholders, you begin to realise that judgement is an essential part of the work.
What changed for me was recognising that sound judgement is built from repeated exposure to complexity, learning what works in real-world constraints, and being honest about uncertainty. Feedback from peers and clients also helped - especially when recommendations I contributed to shaped decisions or improved processes. That reinforcement made me more comfortable owning my perspective while remaining open to being challenged.
(S): What keeps me curious is that the questions and solutions never stay the same. Much of this work requires close attention to context - policies, behaviours, technologies, and contexts are constantly evolving, which means answers that worked once may not work again.
I’m particularly motivated by work that focuses on strengthening systems - how institutions respond, how people navigate constraints, and how incremental changes can compound over time. That combination of analytical depth and practical impact keeps me engaged and willing to sit with ambiguity, keep learning, and keep asking better questions.
