Airbag - steering-wheel continuum: Difference between revisions
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{a|devil| | {{a|devil| | ||
{{image|Airbag|png|The Karma Police, yesterday}} | |||
}}In a {{nutshell}}: {{maxim|You only need airbags if you don’t steer straight}}. | }}In a {{nutshell}}: {{maxim|You only need airbags if you don’t steer straight}}. | ||
The “[[airbag - steering-wheel continuum]]” is a management thought experiment<ref>I know what you are thinking: ''“''Who knew [[Middle management|management]] experimented with ''thought''?”</ref> that asks: '' | The “[[airbag - steering-wheel continuum]]” is a management thought experiment<ref>I know what you are thinking: ''“''Who knew [[Middle management|management]] experimented with ''thought''?” Actually, the JC made it up, and it is ''not'' a management thought experiment, though it should be. It is a ''[[constructive]]'' management thought experiment.</ref> that asks: ''Which is your “containment device” of choice?'' | ||
Where, in other words, does your [[risk]] strategy sit, on the spectrum between: “I will conduct my affairs using market experts, whom I have empowered, to deal with sensible customers, whom I know well, in a prudent manner, with a view to maximising [[shareholder]] return in the long run and minimising the firm’s exposure to extreme events, even if that means foregoing short-term gains in some cases” — in the terms of this [[metaphor]], this is the “steering wheel” tactic — and “sod it, I have an ejector seat, I’m okay, so dammit, let’s bet the house on red!” — this is an “airbag” tactic. | Where, in other words, does your [[risk]] strategy sit, on the spectrum between: “I will conduct my affairs using market experts, whom I have empowered, to deal with sensible customers, whom I know well, in a prudent manner, with a view to maximising [[shareholder]] return in the long run and minimising the firm’s exposure to extreme events, even if that means foregoing short-term gains in some cases” — in the terms of this [[metaphor]], this is the “steering wheel” tactic — and “sod it, I have an ejector seat, I’m okay, so dammit, let’s bet the house on red!” — this is an “airbag” tactic. | ||
Revision as of 11:21, 31 January 2024
|
|
In a Nutshell™: You only need airbags if you don’t steer straight.
The “airbag - steering-wheel continuum” is a management thought experiment[1] that asks: Which is your “containment device” of choice?
Where, in other words, does your risk strategy sit, on the spectrum between: “I will conduct my affairs using market experts, whom I have empowered, to deal with sensible customers, whom I know well, in a prudent manner, with a view to maximising shareholder return in the long run and minimising the firm’s exposure to extreme events, even if that means foregoing short-term gains in some cases” — in the terms of this metaphor, this is the “steering wheel” tactic — and “sod it, I have an ejector seat, I’m okay, so dammit, let’s bet the house on red!” — this is an “airbag” tactic.
Should things not go according to plan, the likely outcome of the former is gradual, unspectacular prosperity. The likely outcome of the latter, in the best case is you write off your car, but walk away — with a only a mild case of whiplash and a luxuriant regulatory enema to look forward to.
Risk managers: if your first question, at an unexpected turn of events, is “hey, legal eagles, can I close out?”, you are an airbag sort of person.
Employers: if you hire risk managers who are airbag fans, you are an airbag sort of person.
Don’t be an “airbag” sort of person.
See also
References
- ↑ I know what you are thinking: “Who knew management experimented with thought?” Actually, the JC made it up, and it is not a management thought experiment, though it should be. It is a constructive management thought experiment.