Warning
systems exist to alert us to potential loss. Yet sometimes they fail and losses
occur. Do we expect too much of these systems?Do we spend too little time thinking about this vital layer in our
defenses?Likely.
First,
we need to know exactly what we are protecting and how it links with the
organization’s objectives.No link, no warning needed.Second, we need to know the threshold for activating a warning.If too sensitive, false warnings will occur. (a Type I error) If too
insensitive, losses will occur. (a Type II error)Now the scary part: Type I errors induce Type II errors and vice versa!
And worse yet, a vicious circle can emerge.Third, the conditions activating a warning must be understood by those
responsible for sending, receiving or acting on that signal.Fourth,
the warning must be accurate and timely. Lastly, all responsible staff
need training and management support to respond effectively. Is there a
Type III error? Yes: solving a small problem while a larger one
is waiting to be resolved.
Increasingly, automation
is used to ‘manage’ warnings. But automation can easily mask the rich context
of background signals. Seamless
switchovers to back-up systems and heavily remoted operations also hide risks and
can lull us into a false sense of security.
The people involved in warning systems
are prone to error-causing factors e.g. fatigue,
boredom, distraction, bad days, complacency.If unsure of the facts, unclear about their authority or if they fear their
boss’s reaction, they’ll be reluctant to sound the alarm.Staff need to know you’ll support them if and when it ever hits the fan.
A common and frustrating failure mode for warnings is when the party responsible sees the
problem but doesn’t properly perceive it; hears of a problem, but either
doesn’t understand it or doesn’t act.Management
and staff are equally vulnerable. Periodic
tests are needed and not all of them
should be 'canned."
Do all actors behave as expected?Finally, don’t put all your faith in technology or warning systems.
Knowledgeable, motivated human beings, although susceptible to their own
problems, can be your best warning system.It pays to listen to them.
On the mechanical side, the warning system itself may break
down. What assumptions does it depend on? What is the back-up
system?Has it been recently
tested?Have parameters and
tools been calibrated? In
sum, warning systems can be very helpful, but only if they work as intended.Neglected, they can fail, just when you need them most.Any change in the warning system, its environment or the staff
responsible can induce errors.A sustained period free of loss is no reassurance – it is its own warning!When did you last check to see if your system worked as
intended?A catastrophic loss is
the most useless warning system of all.
Recommended Reading for Risk
Managers
Understanding
Risk: Informing Decisions in a Democratic Society. This concise(250 page) account, edited by Paul C. Stern and Harvey V. Fineberg, was
released in 1996 by the US National Research Council. It covers the
characterization and integration of public risk, always a challenge in a society
with many diverse stakeholders. It also includes a short section on ways to
effect common deliberation and public participation.
One page, once a month. Also available by fax or e-mail.
Want to subscribe?Just
drop us an e-mail, fax or call.
Managing
Your Public Risk enjoys an overwhelming (over
99.8%) acceptance
rate. If you have any comments, suggestions or criticisms, please let
us know. To those currently subscribed by fax, please consider our e-mail
edition.That way, you can forward your copy to others and no one can swipe
yours!Please let us know if you’d like us to switch you over.(in Word 97/2000 format)
(Available in Word 97/2000 by email or by fax
from):
Managing Your Public Risk