Mar 4, 2010

Pinpointing the Risk

"It is important to correctly identify the cause from the risk", said the presenter of a risk management process overview.
 
I hadn't given much thought about the distinction between the two, and simply implicitly assumed that I know which is which.  But when I tried to articulate how to distinguish between the a cause and a risk, I felt stuck.  After all, they all seemed to be a chain of event/consequence.
 
Ignoring for the meantime that each event E can be a consequence of any number of events, and that E itself can cause any number of consequence, it is clear that from one point of view, an event E2 can be a consequence of an event E1.  Similarly event E3 can be a consequence of event E2.  So a specific event is both a cause and a consequence.
 
For example, let us suppose we are concerned about the risks our property is facing.
 
Risk: Fire
Cause: Faulty electrical wiring
Consequence: House burns down
 
In this case, we put "Fire" as a risk in our risk register.
 
But what about "Faulty electrical wiring"?  Isn't it a risk as well?
 
Risk: Faulty electrical wiring
Cause: substandard workmanship
Consequence: Fire, leading to house burning down.
 
So should Faulty electrical wiring then be in the risk register?
 
Kik Piney reminded me that it is essential to be clear first about the objectives when going about identifying risks.  Having just studied ISO 31000:2009, I am aware of the relationship between objectives and risk, but for some reason I left it out.  (I am not too sure about being clear first about objectives before going about identifying risks, because sometimes noticing potential areas where things can go wrong will actually help you know what your objectives are).
 
Now suppose we have decided that our objective is "to protect our property".  In this case, it is clear that the risk is fire:
 
Objective: Protect property
Risk: Fire
Risk: Repossession
Risk: loss of property due to plane falling on property
Risk: loss of property due to earthquake
 
"Faulty electrical wiring" is not a risk. Either the property has faulty wiring or it does not.
 
If the objective instead is 'Acquire a problem-free property', then 'faulty electrical wiring' is a risk.  The property we are considering to acquire 'may or may not' have this characteristic. 
 
Final point: always relate risks to objectives.  Nothing new here. Just a reminder.

No comments: