I Bring You a Gift of Contributory Risk

Decisions are the culmination of contributory examination and debate culminating in a degree of clarity as to right choices and options. There is always a residual amount of uncertainty that exists. To mitigate this uncertainty add consideration is given to possible outcomes that can possibly occur and the reactionary strength that the organization has.

Key to all of this is the role of each individual who brings experience to the process. In critical cases the experience isn’t measured in years but also in formal knowledge attainment and diversity in roles. This tempers the outcome with practical influences, while the diversity of the group serves to stabilize the contextual application of the decision.

In one of our recent discussions with our global team we asked ourselves the question, ‘what do we bring to the decision process’?  The discussion immediately jumped to all of our skills, abilities, experiences, education… but one thing that came abundantly clear to me listening to all of this was are we also bring a risk variable? Judging from the blank and confused stares in the ZOOM? panels it seems that we never think of ourselves as bringing a risk and not simply the virtues of enlightened wisdom. Each and every person brings risk, not just value. The risk is deeply rooted in uncertainty, situational experiences involving luck, and regularly a lack of mastery in specific applications of the ideas surrounding the decision.  Thinking more on this topic I reached out to colleagues, outside of our organization to get a sense of their experience with contributory risk. Some of their responses were,

• The role is never one of certainty but one of uncertainty. Awareness is the key to driving higher quality results, whether it be in forming a decision or implementing them,
• Contributory risk is never really seen until you start to seeing corresponding results coming from the risk, both good and bad.
• Outsiders bring objectivity that partially offsets contributory risk. The degree of unbiased thinking on the part of the outsider will determine if it abates of further contributes, and
• Risk starts with acknowledgement. In simple terms it’s a matter of frequency but also the impact that it can have. Thus contributory risk is based on dependency of the source. If it is vested in one person the risks are much higher than if it is shared. But bear in mind that even shared risk involves persuasion and sometimes a singular role dependency.

I personally found these comments beneficial in thinking about our role and how we position ourselves, including the need for a layer of committed oversight.  Advisors are notoriously egotistical in so far as the value. Once an expert always an expert so it may seem. But we are human and humans are prone to moments of weakness, focus and all of those other distractions that take away from being perfect. In the spirit of team we are making fervent attempts to always be at out best. In order to do so we rely on being mentor/coaches on both assignments, and in the normal course of non-contract business. The goal has always been to bring value and the difference today is that we now purposeful in insuring that we bring minimal contributory risk. In my way of thinking it’s not enough to have been successful, but to strive for higher levels of success by reducing even further the risks that all companies encounter during the course of decision making.

In the course of time we have been engaged to provide guidance to a variety of companies, big and small, domestic and foreign, and in an untold variety of industries.  Our success is without question (statement of fact not boastful self-acclaim) but I wonder if it is deserving? Success is a condition as of a point in time. Under different conditions what was once may now be questionable. We are experiencing the results of massive disruptions and this creates conditions that far exceed stable responsible guidance. Look about and see the decisions choices made, pre-pandemic that now are collapsing on the weight of those decisions. Choices to start a business, make a capital commitment, hiring staff, investing and expanding are all up for failure with very few worth of continuation. This is a reason why the pandemic forces us to reexamine our businesses (to make correction) and to forcibly look at in-flight pursuits. At the same time outside advise is sought to added perspective and guidance. As one prospect shared, any advice and direction is better than relying on ourselves. I thought this was pretty sound thinking but now I take the task even more to heart now that we strive to further reduce the effects of contributory . Rest assured its not a matter of being willful neglect in our duties, far to the contrary, but rather the strive to continually improve and not remain with the expert status mindset. Mark Twain said that, “Continuous Improvement is Better than Delayed Perfection” and it gives rise to the ever present concern to not be complacent.

Decision are often informal, spontaneous, routine and even authoritative endeavors. The balance of pragmatics is under assault with time driven spontaneity. While plausible within known conditions it becomes a dangerous prescription for guiding an enterprise when we are in uncharted waters. This gives rise to the importance of diverse teams. These teams have embedded contributory risk that get further elevated when applied in enterprises where team based interactions have yet to become a cohesive endeavor. What you end up with is;

Decision(Dr)+Contri.(Cr)+Team(TCr)+Uncertainty(Ur)+External Influence(EIr) =

Failure Potential

The decisive plan is to reduce each of these variables as much as possible by applying appropriate measures. Each step taken is carried out based on the matter of decision importance. We often opt for more formality but in and of itself it can produce added risk as a result it’s disruptive effects. Therefore cautious and responsible consideration are the order of the day. This is particularly true when prescriptive measures are proposed that have not been tuned to the conditions at hand. One size does not fit all without discomfort and the potential of negative outcomes. Each of these elements may place added responsibility on the shoulder of decision participants. As an example, rather than engaging in team work training the team may rely on using smaller teams, coaching and operational oversight. If the decision is more apt to be about routine choices then possibly the investment in team work training may be the better choice to establish the foundation of traditional continuity.

Decisions are common and precipitated by conditions that either are opportunistic or disruptive responsiveness. Abdicating to simplicity for the sake of expedience is dangerous. Even if you only spend 15 minutes to contemplate and maybe discuss with a couple of people it will produce value and risk reduction. Know the limits of reasonable acceptable risk and understand that most of what we do, decisions or not, will always involve risk. Risk resides both outside and inside of our role involvement. To acknowledge allows for it to be managed, minimized and applied properly. An expert is one who admits they don’t know, but they are also the ones who can find out the depth of the unknowing.

FINAL NOTEWORTHY POINT: Abstain from the blame game. If there is blame to be given let me be on points of open integrity than on finding an willing victim.

Freely Redistribute/Share With Our Permission

Clarity Group Global is an intellectual decision validation institution dedicated to the support of leaders, companies and organizations that face challenging choices. Making right decisions that produce significant value equates to less disruption and chaos, "non-tradition made exceptional".I