NSW Risk Engineering Society &
Risk Management Institution of Australasia
(NSW Chapter)
Perception Risk and
Communication
Introduction to Rick Stejer
http://au.linkedin.com/in/stejer
My career interests
•
Business Consulting
•
Building teams
•
Training and assessment
•
Designing blended learning
My professional interests
•
Building training courses about the 'best practices' we use to engage people in
Transformation Programs and Projects
Quirky interest
•
I developed and contrasted ‘Cooperative Competency’ in IT project teams working in
telecommunications and banking for my doctoral thesis
Presentation overview
Objective
To clarify how Communication standards can be practically applied to help
Risk Managers assess risks.
Agenda
Perceptions and interpretation of risks
•
Overview of the International Standard, ISO 31000:2009
•
Challenges and biases of miscommunication
•
Not as objective as we think - the Fundamental Attribution Error
Growing your repertoire of communication styles
Maturity Assessment, an opportunity to resurrect?
Overview of ISO 31000:2009
Categories of risk
1. External risks
1.
Directive
2.
Reflective
3.
Supportive
4.
Emotive
2. Organisation risk
Risk assessment
Risk identification
Risk analysis
Risk evaluation
Monitoring and review
Communication styles
Communication and consultation
Establish the context
Risk treatment
ISO 31000:2009, Figure 1, page VI
3. Project (change) risk
This model is
for managing
risk, not for
discerning risk
Challenges and biases of
miscommunication
Key challenge toward good communication
•
“A real challenge ... is [to know] how to influence people’s perceptions, ... so that they are
motivated to select ... relevant information at appropriate times.”
(Glendon et al., 2006, p. 79)
Key hurdle against miscommunication
•
Biases (perceptions) are our ‘blinkers’, our ‘feelings’ and ‘gut reactions’, that prevent s our
objectivity
•
Biases influence the priority we place on information or experience
(Australian Encyclopedic Dictionary)
Getting along, getting it wrong
Risks emanating from defensive communication
Self-serving bias
Adjustment
Severity bias
Representativeness
False consensus
Small numbers
Situation bias
Anchoring
Correlation bias
Over-confidence
Negative weighing
Hindsight
Availability
(Glendon et al, p 89-94)
Not as objective as we think –
the Fundamental Attribution Error
When assessing other people’s actions, we overemphasise personal
characteristics to explain risk incidences
•
Their failure is due to incompetency and/or poor work ethic
•
Their success is due to good luck and/or accessibility of better skills, information, favour
When assessing our actions, we overemphasise circumstances to explain
risk incidences
•
Our failure is due to bad luck and/or external constraints
•
Our success is due to competency and/or good work ethic
(Glendon et al, p 88 )
Attribution errors our work, everyday
A PM should delay giving the customer bad news about a project until after
there is a clear resolution & recommendation. (LinkedIn poll, Jon Herbold, 4 Sep 2011)
24%
29%
31%
25%
76%
71%
69%
75%
Percent responses
(n = 1011)
100%
Strongly Agree
& Agree
75%
50%
Strongly
Disagree &
Disagree
25%
0%
18-29
30-36
37-44
Age Group
45+
Growing your repertoire of
communication styles
Responsive
Supportive Style
High-energy display and movement
Active listener, shows approval
Informal, personal, first-name basis
Displays feelings in voice, gestures
Naturally persuasive, dramatic
Fast speaking rate, infrequent pauses
Encourages with pauses and eye
contact
Directive Style
Reflective Style
No-nonsense attitude
Shares distinct opinions, dominant
Expressive, uses gestures
Limited displays of feelings
Unassertive
Assertive
Emotive Style
Passive listener, limits mannerisms
Appears deep in thought, limits
speaking
Orderly and attentive to details
Unresponsive
(Fetzer, 2009)
Maturity Assessment, an opportunity to
resurrect?
The IACCM Business Risk Management Maturity Model
•
Last update BRM3, version 14, 30 January 2003
•
Now abandoned
•
Let’s redevelop the Intellectual Property
BRM3 specifies risk competencies across 4 levels of maturity
•
Novice
•
Competent
•
Proficient
•
Expert
BRM3 assesses 4 corporate attributes
•
Culture
•
Process
•
Experience
•
Application
References
Eunson, Baden. Communication in the Workplace. Milton, QLD: John Wiley & Sons
Australia, 2007.
Fetzer, Ronald C. “Communication Style: An Important Factor for Successful
Communication.” In The 2009 Pfeiffer Annual: Management Development, by
Robert C. Preziosi, 65-87. San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer, October, 2008.
Glendon, A. Ian, Sharon G. Clarke, and Eugene F. McKenna. Human Safety and Risk
Management. 2nd Edition. Boca Raton, FL: Taylor & Francis, 2006.
IACCM. “The IACCM Business Risk Management Maturity Model (BRM3).” IACCM International Association for Contract & Commercial Management. January 2003.
www.iaccm.com/research/library/?id=3698 (accessed July 7, 2011).
Thank you
Questions