Improving Risk Management: From Lame Excuses to Principled Practice
Improving Risk Management: From Lame Excuses to Principled Practice
复制标题
改善风险管理：从蹩脚的借口到有原则的实践
作者：
E. Paté;L. Cox
风险分析的三大经典支柱是风险评估（风险有多大，我们能有多大把握？），风险管理（我们应该怎么做？），和风险沟通（我们应该对它说什么，对谁说，什么时候说，如何说？）。我们提出两个补充作为这三个基础的重要组成部分：风险归因（谁或什么可寻址的条件实际上造成了事故或损失？）以及从减少风险的经验中学习（哪些方法有效，效果如何？）。复杂系统中的故障通常会引起指责，通常对故障的根本原因关注不够，包括情况，设计决策或社会规范和文化的某些方面。然而，专注于责备会抑制有效的学习，反而会引发转移注意力的借口和感知的罪责。因此，要想有效地理解哪里出了问题，以及如何做得更好，就需要摒弃相互指责和借口。这篇文章确定了常见的责任转移“蹩脚的借口”为不良的风险管理。这些措施通常对有效改善情况贡献不大，而且可能使真实的风险和可预防的原因得不到解决。我们从风险和决策科学以及组织设计中提出原则，以改善结果。首先是组织领导。更具体地说，它们包括：故意测试和学习，特别是从未遂事故和事故前兆中学习;仔细分析事故的因果关系;风险量化;坦率地表达风险降低方案的成本和收益的不确定性;优化收集额外信息和立即行动之间的权衡;促进安全文化;以及谨慎地分配人员，责任和资源以降低风险。我们建议，这些原则为改善成功的风险管理提供了坚实的基础。
The three classic pillars of risk analysis are risk assessment (how big is the risk and how sure can we be?), risk management (what shall we do about it?), and risk communication (what shall we say about it, to whom, when, and how?). We propose two complements as important parts of these three bases: risk attribution (who or what addressable conditions actually caused an accident or loss?) and learning from experience about risk reduction (what works, and how well?). Failures in complex systems usually evoke blame, often with insufficient attention to root causes of failure, including some aspects of the situation, design decisions, or social norms and culture. Focusing on blame, however, can inhibit effective learning, instead eliciting excuses to deflect attention and perceived culpability. Productive understanding of what went wrong, and how to do better, thus requires moving past recrimination and excuses. This article identifies common blame‐shifting “lame excuses” for poor risk management. These generally contribute little to effective improvements and may leave real risks and preventable causes unaddressed. We propose principles from risk and decision sciences and organizational design to improve results. These start with organizational leadership. More specifically, they include: deliberate testing and learning—especially from near‐misses and accident precursors; careful causal analysis of accidents; risk quantification; candid expression of uncertainties about costs and benefits of risk‐reduction options; optimization of tradeoffs between gathering additional information and immediate action; promotion of safety culture; and mindful allocation of people, responsibilities, and resources to reduce risks. We propose that these principles provide sound foundations for improving successful risk management.