Comments on: Four Pillars: On the use of social software in risk management http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2006/07/01/four-pillars-on-the-use-of-social-software-in-risk-management/ a blog about information Wed, 10 Mar 2010 20:38:42 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: BK http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2006/07/01/four-pillars-on-the-use-of-social-software-in-risk-management/comment-page-1/#comment-172306 BK Thu, 09 Aug 2007 20:56:23 +0000 http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2006/07/01/four-pillars-on-the-use-of-social-software-in-risk-management/#comment-172306 So much is written about risk without a useful definition being proposed and the ensuing conversation intensely CONFUSING. I hear people talk of risk in positive and negative terms. It is clear to me that a specific capability is a mitigation to a specific threat and with a specific attitude can become an opportunity, but only when compared with a competing capability. To me the essence here is in perspective and recognition of risk. Management of risk becomes about attitudes and the building of knowledge resources to increase capability. Like Chaos theory the trick to understanding risk is not in isolated analysis but in the recognition of its patterns and always taking a lateral approach to understanding it from a stakeholder and an external perspective. If we are to understand risk, impacts, etc and how to manage it, the imperative is to be aware of consequences and recognise that there will always be unknown consequences because we stop looking for them and cannot know them all. Consequences do not stop they change or we ignore them. Risks are the unknown. Although we should not stop trying to define them lets stop pretending we know what they are when it is not possible. It is extremely dangerous sometimes to define a risk. The consequences can be blame ridden cultures where responsibility is attached totally inappropriately. The key to the danger is in trying to define 'a' something. There cannot be 'a' risk. The unknown is not definable. So much is written about risk without a useful definition being proposed and the ensuing conversation intensely CONFUSING. I hear people talk of risk in positive and negative terms. It is clear to me that a specific capability is a mitigation to a specific threat and with a specific attitude can become an opportunity, but only when compared with a competing capability. To me the essence here is in perspective and recognition of risk. Management of risk becomes about attitudes and the building of knowledge resources to increase capability. Like Chaos theory the trick to understanding risk is not in isolated analysis but in the recognition of its patterns and always taking a lateral approach to understanding it from a stakeholder and an external perspective.

If we are to understand risk, impacts, etc and how to manage it, the imperative is to be aware of consequences and recognise that there will always be unknown consequences because we stop looking for them and cannot know them all. Consequences do not stop they change or we ignore them. Risks are the unknown. Although we should not stop trying to define them lets stop pretending we know what they are when it is not possible. It is extremely dangerous sometimes to define a risk. The consequences can be blame ridden cultures where responsibility is attached totally inappropriately. The key to the danger is in trying to define ‘a’ something. There cannot be ‘a’ risk. The unknown is not definable.

]]> By: JP http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2006/07/01/four-pillars-on-the-use-of-social-software-in-risk-management/comment-page-1/#comment-2135 JP Mon, 03 Jul 2006 22:16:36 +0000 http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2006/07/01/four-pillars-on-the-use-of-social-software-in-risk-management/#comment-2135 This focus on second-order and reputational risk has some other awful consequences. An entrenching of blame cultures and shoot-the-messenger responses. Whistleblower muzzling. Nanny states and governments and firms and departments. Sadly it is primarily amongst "professionals". This focus on second-order and reputational risk has some other awful consequences. An entrenching of blame cultures and shoot-the-messenger responses. Whistleblower muzzling. Nanny states and governments and firms and departments.
Sadly it is primarily amongst “professionals”.

]]> By: Jürgen Ahting http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2006/07/01/four-pillars-on-the-use-of-social-software-in-risk-management/comment-page-1/#comment-2132 Jürgen Ahting Mon, 03 Jul 2006 21:52:03 +0000 http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2006/07/01/four-pillars-on-the-use-of-social-software-in-risk-management/#comment-2132 @ "professional bodies are increasingly taking defensive steps to protect their own name, rather than managing risks on behalf of the public": This fits well with my suspicion/experience that the primary purpose of QA/QS-departments at ISVs is to improve external quality to cover up the hideous internal quality - the primary source of follow-on costs. @ Harnessing Hindsight: This sounds much like the processing of a neural network where the nodes are human individuals - recognizing patterns and violations of them. @ “professional bodies are increasingly taking defensive steps to protect their own name, rather than managing risks on behalf of the public”:
This fits well with my suspicion/experience that the primary purpose of QA/QS-departments at ISVs is to improve external quality to cover up the hideous internal quality – the primary source of follow-on costs.

@ Harnessing Hindsight:
This sounds much like the processing of a neural network where the nodes are human individuals – recognizing patterns and violations of them.

]]> By: [Mauvaises pensées d’un consultant] :: Risk management [en] :: July :: 2006 http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2006/07/01/four-pillars-on-the-use-of-social-software-in-risk-management/comment-page-1/#comment-2070 [Mauvaises pensées d’un consultant] :: Risk management [en] :: July :: 2006 Sun, 02 Jul 2006 15:50:15 +0000 http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2006/07/01/four-pillars-on-the-use-of-social-software-in-risk-management/#comment-2070 [...] Un papier passionnant –cité par ‘Confused in Calcutta’– sur un renversement complet de perspective dans l’analyse des risques : en gros; un "near-miss" (presqu’accident) est une parfaite occasion d’analyser le fonctionnement réel du système… [...] [...] Un papier passionnant –cité par ‘Confused in Calcutta’– sur un renversement complet de perspective dans l’analyse des risques : en gros; un "near-miss" (presqu’accident) est une parfaite occasion d’analyser le fonctionnement réel du système… [...]

]]>