Is it worth the risk?
04/07/2017

Recent events, namely the awful Grenfell Tower fire and its aftermath, prompted me to think about risk. A common definition of risk is: “ a situation involving exposure to danger”. We all know that just to be alive is to expose oneself to danger, it can’t be avoided. Naturally we take steps to ensure we limit the level of our exposure. But where do we draw the line?
At one extreme, we could avoid the risk of commuting to work or even the risk of tripping on the pavement outside by staying in bed all day – but that would bring with it all the risks associated with lack of exercise and loneliness. Even laughing holds risks, although few of us would think about that. Laughing, it seems, helps you to burn calories and increases your tolerance to pain. But, occasionally it can cause dislocation of the jaw and the spread of infectious diseases and some very unfortunate people have had the misfortune of inhaling foreign objects.
Then there’s a psychological element to be considered. One person’s “risk” is another person’s adventure.
It made me wonder what all this means for businesses which as we know face many different types of risk from health and safety to finance and reputational risk. It’s impossible for an organisation to be “risk free”, just as it’s impossible for an individual to live a risk- free life. There would be no innovation for a start and a risk-free business would probably be a very boring place to work (just imagine all the rules, regulations and processes!). Rather like people, some businesses are naturally risk averse and in some cases it’s probably right that they should be. I don’t want other people taking too much risk with my life savings, for example. On the other hand if it’s only held “safely” in cash, that very security creates a risk if there is any inflation.
So, perhaps it’s worth reflecting both on our own individual attitude to risk and on our organisation’s. Are we so risk averse that we are prevented from doing useful things? Or perhaps we are sailing too close to the wind and taking too many risks? What is the effect on the culture of our organisation? Are there too many processes, rules and bureaucracy? Or, perhaps we encourage employees to take too many risks in order to get on?
The thing to remember is nothing is risk free. Money we spend mitigating a risk in one area is money we can’t spend doing something in another. Time we spend scrutinising one project is time taken from other things. Not doing something means the development and learning that would have been gained is lost. So the risks of not taking risks too have consequences.
Pippa Bourne
Categories & Tags:
Leave a comment on this post:
You might also like…
Sourcing company Betas in LSEG Workspace and Datastream
Following our introductory post on sourcing Betas, this post will go into a little more depth for those who may be seeking more complex data. Betas are accessible in LSEG's Workspace service, through Workspace itself, ...
You could save a life: The real impact of learning CPR
When writing this, my sister told me to tell you my age. I won't do that, but I will tell you that I was in my forties, with no previous heart problems when I ...
Need to create a reference list or citation quickly? Try MyBib or ZoteroBib!
Are you looking for a fast and free way to generate accurate citations and bibliographies for your assignments or research projects? Perhaps you've tried some reference management software and found that it wasn't really what ...
Downloading the FileOpen plugin for British Standards Online
You need to install and use a FileOpen plugin on your device to access any document you find on British Standards Online (BSOL). This protects BSOL’s digital assets from copying, piracy, and unauthorized sharing. You ...
Navigating Change from Private Sector to Humanitarian Supply Chain Management
Seven questions with alumna Miori Naito, Supply Chain Officer in Kenya on her inspiring career shift from commercial to humanitarian supply chain operations, the challenges and rewards of her bold move from Tokyo to ...
Sadaf’s ‘gap-bridging’ MBA. A transformative Cranfield experience
After six years of digital transformation projects for a global, financial institution, Sadaf sought to scale her influence, contribute meaningfully to the business world, and lead change in a structured and strategic way. Recognising ...
Pippa, Some good questions???? I have always seen good risk management as the flip-side of the coin to good (business) process management. In that context it is much easier to do the usual risk management “gamble” – identify risk, categorise risk, how much do we spend on mitigating risk, and where stuff outside our control (if it’s inside our control, then it’s the business process at fault) happens, what’s the contingency plan – and then striking a balance between the mitigation cost and contingency cost.
It’s unfortunate that the Borough of Kensington & Chelsea’s Procure to Pay (P2P) Process was seriously flawed in the decision to purchase non-fire-resistant cladding for such a structure and worse, did not have any contingency plan in case of fire. The real shame is that the owners of the process and decisions they took gambled with the lives of Grenfell Tower’s residents, while the risk the process owners had was to their livelihood (i.e. reputational, and financial). Not quite balanced in my book!