Different Levels, Different Problems
A few days ago I came across an interesting post (https://www.dhirubhai.net/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7092435145789452289?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop) on how much of the company's problems is seen by people at different levels of the organisation. It seemed intuitive but something was not right.
Executives are not limited to 4% of the company's problems, and staff are certainly not aware of 100%. They are all aware of the problems at their own level, and are likely ignorant of problems at levels far below or above.
Let me illustrate using the typical risk modeling operation at a bank.
Modelers deeply understand problems relating to day to day operations. Issues like data cleanliness, methodology, regulations around the building of models and usage for decisioning, lack of internal coordination, documentation, coding languages, IT issues like speed/space and so on. Typically they are looking ahead a few months, and are the most hands on.
领英推荐
The level above them are concerned with building sustainable infrastructure for analytics, cost of operations, retaining IP when staff leaves, business continuity, retaining and training staff, identifying bottlenecks in the full model and deployment lifecycle, software integration, figuring out how to get the work done within budgets, resourcing in modeling and validation to deal with multiple languages and systems, identifying emerging problems before they become bigger, and so on. This level plans for 1-3 years in the future.
The top most levels understand and deal with a different set of issues. They typically are looking at 5-8 year horizons and deal with resiliency of the bank to shocks, portfolio P&L, picking industry trends to bet on and the right time to do so, enterprise wide infrastructure, investing in upcoming tech, regulatory pressures, getting ROI from their investments and so on. In my experience the folks at this level (typically CRO's and heads of risk for example) are the most active listeners and ask deeper questions (note to myself : talk less, listen more). In some cases these folks are aware and participate in hands on decisions - those tend to be ex-modelers who understand what the people downstairs are doing through.
I'd therefore challenge the idea that execs only know 4% of the problems in any firm. They may be unaware of many problems that have not been brought to their attention. Good middle management is the key - they understand the issues below them and know the priorities above. They should keep their upper management informed. Interestingly, very often external vendors who meet with many levels and departments of institutions tend to be the information source for these senior execs as to whats going on in their organisations.
Either way, open communication between the levels create a better functioning organisation that can avoid these "icebergs of ignorance".
CX Measurement Strategy, Advanced Analytics, Insights, and Business Improvement
1 年I agree their premise is probably too simplistic. My experience suggests it’s more like the three blind men all trying to describe an elephant from the part they are holding. One holds the trunk and says it’s like a snake, the other touches the leg and says it’s a tree, and the last touches the side and says it’s a wall. All players are limited in their information so none see the whole problem. This is where truly creative analytics people can solve the problem more easily but it takes time
Senior Manager - Retail Risk Analytics at Gulf International Bank
1 年Data scientists see 101% of the problems
ULRM 2nd Edition available now | I help you navigate consumer credit with content (book, course, newsletter, social posts).
1 年Great risk modeling example. A more meaningful metric might be the % of problems each level is aware vs. they should be aware.
Risk Management | Analytics | BNPL | Fintech | Model Risk Management | Sustainability
1 年That’s right Naeem Siddiqi, at different level another kind of problem/s