Skip to content

1 June, 2023

Subscribe Advertise About Us
  • My Account
  • Register
  • Log In
  • Log Out

Board Agenda

  • Governance
  • Strategy
  • Risk
  • Ethics
  • News
    • Categories

      • View All
      • Board Moves
    • EU CSDDD

      Pressure builds on EU to amend due diligence rules

      More companies have added their voices to the call to make the EU Corporate Sustainability...

    • norges vote Norges Bank leads investor voting against Exxon and Chevron

      The fund seeks to push the companies into speeding up their climate transition plans and...

    • ESG battle ‘Change fiduciary laws’ to end ESG battle in US

      Academics suggest a truce between left and right, based on separating political issues from investment...

  • Insight
    • Categories

      • View all
      • Governance
      • Strategy
      • Risk
      • Ethics
      • Board Expertise
      • finance
      • Technology
    • Climate finance

      How climate change alters the financial landscape

      To achieve sustainability, companies and boards will need to look not only to their operations,...

    • generative AI

      Five AI issues to consider right now

      We may not know what AI will mean for us all in the long term,...

    • sexual misconduct

      How to prevent sexual misconduct in your organisation

      Revelations about the CBI may be shocking, but there is no place for complacency and...

  • Comment
      • View all
    • hybrid AGM

      Hybrid AGMs maximise shareholder participation

      Avoid virtual-only annual general meetings: although pragmatic in an emergency, they water down shareholders’ rights.

    • ESG break up ESG: Should E and S break up with G?

      In the world of investing, maturity has revealed significant practical shortcomings in combining environmental, social...

    • controlling shareholders The politics and geopolitics of controlling shareholders

      Shareholders with a controlling interest influence not only financial matters but can also wield great...

  • Interviews
      • View All Interviews
      • Podcasts
      • Webinars
    • information resilience IT transformation sees boards moving to ‘continuous’ management

      Data analytics available on demand requires a resilient—and selective—approach to sharing information, a webinar panel...

    • life sciences podcast Reform of NHS levy ‘harms UK competitiveness’

      Boards in the pharmaceutical and life sciences sector face increasingly difficult decisions, according to a...

    • Board priorities 2023 Board priorities 2023: tact, trust and transparency

      We asked key figures what would help boards this year. The answers ranged from 'smarter...

  • Careers
      • View all
      • Selection
      • Board Moves
    • board survey 2023 Board appointments fell sharply in 2022

      Companies appear to be sticking with experienced leaders—to the detriment of progress—suggests FTSE 350 boardroom...

    • diversity statistics Diversity statistics challenged by new scorecard

      Companies can ‘hit the target, but miss the point’, say academics researching a more ‘holistic’...

    • CEO turnover CEO turnover rises steeply

      The researchers say political changes and business difficulties may have accelerated turnover, which has risen...

  • Resource Centre
      • White Paper Downloads
      • Book Reviews
      • Corporate & Advisory Services
    • Mazars c-suite 2023

      Mazars C-suite barometer 2023

      The Mazars C-suite barometer is based on responses from more than 800 C-suite executives from...

    • CFO Career Survey Report

      Our survey, in December 2022, of almost 200 CFOs across the public, private and non-profit...

    • The Engagement Appeal: The Path to Inclusive Investor Engagement

      The Engagement Appeal: The Path to Inclusive Investor Engagement

      The Path to Inclusive Investor Engagement highlights the need for greater engagement between companies and...

  • Events
  • Search by topic
    • Governance
    • Strategy
    • Risk
    • Ethics
    • Regulation
    • ESG
    • Investor Relations
    • Selection
    • Board Expertise
    • finance
    • Technology

How ‘risk blindness’ threatens the effectiveness of board decisions

by Garry Honey

A board’s highly sophisticated procedure for making risk decisions can often be undermined by a failure to identify risk in the first place.

Businesswoman on a cliff edge

Image: eelnosiva/Shutterstock.com

While behavioural economics aims to understand why we often make irrational decisions, risk management aims to mitigate against unfavourable or undesirable future outcomes through better risk decisions.

The success of risk management is based on the accuracy of prediction. Philip Tetlock and Dan Gardner examined the art and science of prediction in their seminal work Superforecasting, which followed the Good Judgment project in the US to determine how the quality of judgment can best be improved through data and analysis. Delivering “good judgment” is what behavioural economics and risk management have in common.

My own work on risk decisions with boards has found that a highly sophisticated procedure for risk management is often undermined by a failure to identify or recognise risk in the first place. In some cases, risk is seen but not recognised; in some it is recognised but ignored or deemed otherwise acceptable; in some cases, it is seen but misinterpreted or recalibrated by a higher authority with different priorities.

There are many types of risk blindness, as indeed there are many types of sight impairment. Here are some possible diagnoses.

Risk myopia

In the case of risk myopia, the threat is not seen because it isn’t on the risk register; it lies beyond comprehension or consideration as a possible future outcome.

This short-sightedness prevents us from seeing the bigger picture because we are focused on risk types we know or have previously experienced. In heuristic terms this is familiarity or confirmation bias.

Within this category I also include long-sightedness of hyperopia, where some risks are not seen because they are so immediate or proximate that we don’t see them. They are right under the nose, hidden in plain sight. These are what Michele Wucker would call Gray Rhinos from her book of the same name. These are risks we don’t see because they are so obvious we look right through them.

Treatment for risk myopia and hyperopia requires an open mind and creative thinking, which are not always part of a risk manager’s armoury. Imagination and envisioning a range of future outcomes would help, and tools are available such as scenario planning and futures modelling.

Risk denial

In this case the risk is not seen because those defining risk within the organisation refuse to acknowledge it. This may be for cultural or ideological reasons, but there are definitely blinkers, which restrict a 360-degree view of possible risks. Those familiar with Margaret Heffernan’s book Wilful Blindness will recognise this type of behaviour.

Treatment for risk denial requires a level of honesty and objectivity often lacking in those with an agenda

A cultural example can be found in the financial services market in the years leading up to the crash of 2008. The financial risk of selling loans to people who clearly could not afford them was not seen because the debt was repackaged and sold as an asset class to third parties. The sales revenue from the loans, plus that from the collateralised debt obligations (CDOs) meant that the risk of loan default was obscured.

An ideological example can be found in the UK government pursuit of the policy of leaving the EU for populist reasons, not economic ones. The financial risk of leaving an established trading bloc was ignored, while there was political imperative to secure a mandate to govern for the next five years—albeit using the nebulous claim of taking back control and regaining sovereignty.

Treatment for risk denial requires a level of honesty and objectivity often lacking in those with an agenda or point to prove. As an estimated future outcome, and it is rare for two people to share the same vision of risk. Some are optimists who see the glass half full, others are pessimists who see the glass half empty.

Risk inertia

Risk inertia occurs when the systems are so complex that there is a confidence that the risk must be manageable, i.e. “We have it on our radar so that’s OK because the systems are designed to cope.”

This hubris leads to a failure to even stress test. Examples of this type of failure to see risk can be found in industries awash with safety systems so that a risk is often obscured by too much information, so that those monitoring the dials or gauges cannot react to a warning signal.

Boeing developed the 737 Max as a fuel-efficient plane and sold it to many airlines before two fatal crashes halted all flights from March 2019. The flight control technology had the facility to override pilot commands, yet this vital function was poorly explained, and not all pilots knew how to switch it off or work with it. It cost the lives of 189 people on Lion Air flight 610 in October 2018 and 157 people on Ethiopian Airlines flight 302 in March 2019.

Other well documented examples of inertia in risk decisions include the Challenger space shuttle in 1986 and the Texas oil refinery fire in 2005—also detailed in Wilful Blindness. The engineering industry has more examples of risk safety lessons from nuclear power plants such as Chernobyl and Fukushima.

Treatment for risk inertia requires clarity of communication: on a dashboard or control panel, where are the dials that are most important and which need to be taken most seriously? Are these located in the line of sight and calibrated so that danger is immediately obvious? It is the same with financial reporting and recognising danger signs in accounts, such as imminent insolvency.

Risk compromise

Risk compromise sees a threat downgraded or underestimated due to conflicting priorities within the organisation.

This is quite often when the cost of prevention is calculated to be unacceptably high, so the risk probability is re-appraised to justify downgrading severity. This is common in government infrastructure projects like Crossrail or HS2 where once begun, costs overrun. In terms of cognitive bias this can lead to escalation of commitment or optimism bias.

Risk probability is re-appraised to justify downgrading severity

In 2016 the UK Department of Health ran a stress test to cope with a surge in demand for services due to a novel virus. Exercise Cygnus found that the NHS would be overwhelmed and needed substantial resource upgrades to meet public demand. In 2020 when Covid-19 struck it was found that the risk had subsequently been downgraded and investment reduced by the Treasury.

This month the Department of Transport finally decided to halt the roll out of Smart motorways for safety reasons. Since their introduction in 2014 a total of 38 people had been killed in their stationary vehicles on smart motorways, yet the data used to support the roads policy was selective. The safety risk was ignored by a cost-benefit of removing the hard shoulder to improve traffic flow.

Treatment for risk compromise is to agree the necessary cost for a project and ring-fence this so that no subsequent financial or political interference can reduce project effectiveness. Easier said than done, but compromising public health and safety will ultimately have a political cost.

Risk misunderstanding

Some risks are unseen due to cognitive bias caused by the dynamics of the group and the environment in which risk decisions are made.

Time pressure can lead to patterning or availability bias, hierarchies and power politics can lead to dissonance reduction and groupthink. How many cognitive biases exist? One leading investment website lists 188 types.

Only by recognising and accepting bias can it ever hope to be neutralised

In their book Radical Uncertainty, the co-authors Mervyn King and John Kay draw attention to the importance of understanding the type of uncertainty you are trying to address in the boardroom. Is it a puzzle or a mystery? The former can be solved with information and effort, but the latter will always remain insoluble. Much time can be wasted trying to solve a mystery in risk assessment.

Cognitive bias comes from limited processing ability of the brain and its preference for seeking shortcuts to selecting information. Overlaid on these are emotional and moral motivations, social influence and our ability to store and retrieve memories. In short, these lead to irrational decisions boards call prejudices, preferences and politics. All boards have cognitive bias in risk perception.

Treatment for risk misunderstanding in the boardroom involves working with no more than 12 common biases, grouped according to how executives might meet them. For example, three personal ones like loss aversion or familiarity; three group ones like obedience to authority or dissonance reduction; three infrequent meeting ones like hindsight and patterning; three project progress ones like confirmation and over-optimism. Only by recognising and accepting bias can it ever hope to be neutralised.

In conclusion, I would urge anyone unfamiliar with it to read not only Daniel Kahneman’s Thinking, Fast and Slow, but also Dan Gardner’s Risk: the Science and Politics of Fear. The latter sets out the psychology of fear and how it underpins much of how we frame risk as a concept and toxic term.

Garry Honey is a writer on risk and uncertainty and is the founder of risk consultancy Chiron Risk.

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google+
  • LinkedIn
  • Mail

Related Posts

  • 5 topics to improve the effectiveness of your board
    May 31, 2022
    notebook on boardroom table

    How many board meetings result in real progress for your company? Make sure these discussion points have a regular spot on the agenda.

  • Battle of the boards: risk, ESG and two-tier board structures
    April 22, 2022
    Board risk meeting

    There is an inherent conflict of interest between main and executive boards, with two different time horizons and two different risk impacts.

  • Risk: beware the leadership clique
    December 1, 2022
    FTX collapse

    The rapid collapse and bankruptcy of huge cryptocurrency exchange FTX carries a salutary lesson about the need for challenge on every board.

  • Why risk perception is vital
    June 9, 2022

    It is easy to see the tragic situation unfolding in Ukraine in terms of a failure of risk perception by both Russia and the West.

For thoughtful journalism, expert insights on corporate governance and an extensive library of reports, guides and tools to help boards and directors navigate the complexities of their roles, subscribe to Board Agenda

board decision-making, board expertise, board risk oversight, Garry Honey, risk, risk management

Search


Sign up to our Newsletter

Receive independent news, thoughtful journalism & expert insights about leadership, corporate governance & key boardroom issues straight to your inbox every week.

SIGN UP

Follow Us

 

 

 

 

Most Popular

  • Corporate governance code review boosts internal controls
  • News round-up: this week in governance
  • New audit committee standards finalised
  • ESG: Should E and S break up with G?
  • Dual class shares have become ‘dual class stock lite’

Featured Partner Profile

Diligent

Diligent

Diligent Corporation, which was founded in 2001, is headquartered in New York, NY with a European HQ in London. Diligent’s modern governance platform empowers leaders and teams at every level of the organisation to digitally transform and create ...

Featured Partner Resources

The Engagement Appeal: The Path to Inclusive Investor Engagement

The Engagement Appeal: The Path to Inclusive Investor Engagement

This is the inaugural white paper from The Engagem...

Stakeholder Engagement: A Roadmap for UK Plc Boards

This guide aims to provide directors and their col...

Digital Boards: How Technology Adoption is Driving Culture Change and Resiliency

Digital tools proved their worth to boards during ...
Leadership in AI report

Leadership in AI

This report from Board Agenda and Mazars, in assoc...
Director's Guide to Internal Investigations

A Director's Guide to Conducting Internal Investigations

An internal investigation must be handled meticulo...
 

ADVERTISE – FREE CORPORATE LISTING

FREE - Add your company profile to our Corporate & Advisory Directory.
ADD

ADVERTISE – PROMOTE YOUR REPORTS & WHITEPAPERS

FREE - Add your company profile to our Corporate & Advisory Directory.
Add Resource

Register Free

Register to receive free article views, selected resource downloads, and all the latest news alerts straight to your inbox. Register


  • Editors & Contributors
  • Editorial Advisory Board
  • Corporate & Advisory Services
  • Media Marketing Solutions
  • Contact Us
  • Careers
  • Board Director Network
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookies
  • Sitemap
|