Post

Running with Your Hair on Fire – In a 3-Piece Suit

In The Risk Paradox on February 13, 2012 by admin Tagged: , , , ,

Some of the most dedicated and talented risk-takers do not drive race cars, jump out of airplanes or swim near sharks.  They go to work in an office, dress in business attire and work in the insurance business.

People in the insurance industry, particularly on the underwriting side, are at times seen as risk adverse to a fault.  They have never met a risk they liked.  But the truth is that they would not have a job if it were not for risks and our need to take them.

If it was possible to create a risk free life (it’s not) or be successful in business without taking risks (it’s not), we would not need insurance companies.  But living a fulfilling life or creating wealth in the business world requires some risks to be taken.

So, it is with admiration that I read the short article in today’s Wall Street Journal that identifies the film “The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo” as the riskiest movie production of last year.  It turns out there is a group at Fireman’s Fund that specializes in providing insurance for movie productions.  These pros actually assess every stunt, explosion and other for of intentional mayhem in advance to determine the likelihood of a problem and how to minimize the chances of things going wrong.  They even review footage submitted to them when they are underwriting the production of stunt people attempting stunts that will appear in the picture so they can assess proficiency. 

These pros identify specific risks then help their clients to manage them.  If they do it well, they are profitable.  If they do it poorly, they pay dearly.  That’s the real deal.  They are taking big financial risks and presumably getting it right most of the time.  They are running with their hair on fire.  I wonder if their business suits are made out of fire proof fabric.

Comments Off

Post

Perception of Risk

In The Risk Paradox on October 7, 2011 by Jim McCormick Tagged: ,

This was the headline for a story that appeared on page 12 of the Wall Street Journal on December 12, 1980:  “Apple Computer Set to Go Public Today; Massachusetts Bars Sale of Stock as Risky”

Comments Off

Post

He Did Us All Many Favors

In The Risk Paradox on October 6, 2011 by Jim McCormick Tagged: , , ,

It is with sadness that we note the passing of Steve Jobs.  He was one of the most talented risk-takers of our time.  Consider the profound impact he had on our society in a short 56 years.  Even if you never own a device made by Apple, you will benefit from their brilliance in innovation and design.  The organization’s influence is pervasive.

Comments Off

Post

It’s Nice to be Affirmed

In The Risk Paradox on September 29, 2011 by admin

There was a lengthy article on the front page of the 4th section of the Wall Street Journal this week that promoted the exact means of encouraging innovation I have been recommending for years.

The article is titled “Better Ideas Through Failure” and suggests awarding “Heroic Failure” awards to employees for their “mistakes and questionable risks.”  Over five years ago I wrote an article titled “Seeking Initiative and Innovation? Reward Failure!” that now appears on over 12,000 sites on the Internet.  (http://www.takerisks.com/pdf/Innovationv3.pdf

My article presents the same strategy as the Wall Street Journal article.  The whole concept is centered on the premise that innovation is a messy process and many efforts will not be successful.  But if you do not welcome the less successful outcomes, you will get a lot fewer successful outcomes.

Did I mentioned that it’s nice to be affirmed?

Comments Off

Post

The Embodiment of Intelligent Risk-Taking

In The Risk Paradox on September 3, 2011 by Jim McCormick Tagged: , , ,

An example of our strained relationship with risk is that we go to great lengths of avoid it yet admire the people who harness it well.  Few business leaders of our time have done a better job of risking well than Apple co-founder Steve Jobs.  The following piece that appeared earlier this week in The Economic Times pays tribute specifically to Jobs talents in exploiting risk and successfully innovating.

 ===

 Steve Jobs: Reaping the rewards of risk-taking

 Since Steve Jobs resigned as chief executive of Apple last Wednesday, much has been said about him as a peerless corporate leader who has created immense wealth for shareholders and guided the design of hit products that are transforming entire industries, like music and mobile communications.

All true, but let’s think different, to borrow the Apple marketing slogan of years back. Let’s look at Jobs as a role model.

Above all, he is an innovator. His creative force is seen in products like the iPod, iPhone and iPad, and in new business models for pricing and distributing music and mobile software online. Studies of innovation come to the same conclusion: You can’t engineer innovation, but you can increase the odds of it occurring. And Jobs’ career can be viewed as a consistent pursuit of improving those odds, both for himself and the companies he has led.

Jobs, of course, has enjoyed singular success. But innovation, broadly defined, is the crucial ingredient in all economic progress – higher growth for nations, more competitive products for companies, and more prosperous careers for individuals. And Jobs, experts say, personifies what works in the innovation game.

“We can look at and learn from Steve Jobs what the essence of American innovation is,” says John Kao, an innovation consultant to corporations and governments.

Many other nations, Kao notes, are now ahead of the U.S. in producing what are considered the raw materials of innovation. These include government financing for scientific research, national policies to support emerging industries, educational achievement, engineers and scientists graduated, even the speeds of Internet broadband service.

Yet what other nations typically lack, Kao adds, is a social environment that encourages diversity, experimentation, risk-taking, and combining skills from many fields into products that he calls “recombinant mash-ups,” like the iPhone, which redefined the smartphone category.

“The culture of other countries doesn’t support the kind of innovation that Steve Jobs exemplifies, as America does,” Kao says.

Workers of every rank are told these days that wide-ranging curiosity and continuous learning are vital to thriving in the modern economy. Formal education matters, career counselors say, but real-life experience is often even more valuable.

An adopted child, growing up in Silicon Valley, Jobs displayed those traits early on. He was fascinated by electronics as a child, building Heathkit do-it-yourself projects, like radios.
Jobs dropped out of Reed College after a semester and trekked around India in search of spiritual enlightenment, before returning to Silicon Valley to found Apple with his friend, Stephen Wozniak, an engineering wizard. Jobs was forced out of Apple in 1985, went off and founded two other companies, Next and Pixar, before returning to Apple in 1996 and becoming chief executive in 1997.

His path was unique, but innovation experts say the pattern of exploration is not unusual.

“It’s …often people like Steve Jobs who can draw from a deep reservoir of diverse experience that generate breakthrough ideas and insights,” says Hal B. Gregersen, a professor at the European Institute of Business Administration, or INSEAD.

Gregersen is a co-author of a new book, “The Innovator’s DNA” (Harvard Business School Press), based on an eight-year study of 5,000 entrepreneurs and executives worldwide. His two collaborators and co-authors are Jeff Dyer, a professor at Brigham Young University, and Clayton M. Christensen, a professor at the Harvard Business School, whose 1997 book “The Innovator’s Dilemma” popularized the concept of “disruptive innovation.”

The academics identify five traits that are common to the disruptive innovators: questioning, experimenting, observing, associating and networking. Their bundle of characteristics echoes the ceaseless curiosity and willingness to take risks noted by other experts. Networking, Gregersen explains, is less about career-building relationships than a search for new ideas. Associating, he adds, is the ability to make idea-producing connections by linking concepts from different disciplines – intellectual mash-ups.

“Innovators engage in these mental activities regularly,” Gregersen says. “It’s a habit.”

Innovative companies, according to the authors, typically enjoy higher valuations in the stock market, which they call an “innovation premium.” It is calculated by estimating the share of a company’s value that cannot be accounted for by its current products and cash flow. The innovation premium tries to quantify investors’ bets that a company will do even better in the future because of innovation.

Apple, by their calculations, had a 37 percent innovation premium during Jobs’ first stint with the company. His years in exile resulted in a 31 percent innovation discount. After his return, Apple’s fortunes improved gradually at first, and improved markedly starting in 2005, yielding a 52 percent innovation premium since then.

There is no conclusive proof, but Gregersen says it is unlikely that Jobs could have reshaped industries beyond computing, as he has done in his second stint at Apple, without the experience outside the company, especially at Pixar – the computer-animation studio that created a string of critically and commercially successful movies, like “Toy Story” and “Up.”

Jobs suggested much the same thing during a commencement address to the graduating class at Stanford in 2005.

“It turned out that getting fired from Apple was the best thing that could have ever happened to me,” he told the students. Jobs also spoke of perseverance. “Sometimes life hits you in the head with a brick,” he said. “Don’t lose faith.”

Jobs ended his commencement talk with a call to innovation, in one’s choice of work and in life. Be curious, experiment, take risks, he said. His admonition was punctuated by the words on the back of the final edition of “The Whole Earth Catalog,” which he quoted: “Stay hungry. Stay foolish.”

“And,” Jobs said, “I have always wished that for myself. And now, as you graduate to begin anew, I wish that for you.”

Comments Off

Post

Risk Assumptions are Never Correct

In The Risk Paradox on March 29, 2011 by Jim McCormick Tagged: , , ,

A segment early this month on Science Friday from National Public Radio presented a fascinating discussion of the revised risk level of the early space shuttle missions.  At the time, astronauts and the rest of us were told that there was somewhere between a 1 in 24,000 and a 1 in 100,000 chance of any given mission resulting in a catastrophic failure.  With the benefit of thirty years operating experience, NASA has determined that the early missions where considerably riskier with a 1 in 10 chance of losing the shuttle and crew.

What are the implications of such a dramatic underassessment of the risk of a mission?  First let’s note that no one is suggesting any effort to misrepresent the risks.  This appears to be an honest change in risk assessment based on additional information.

So, were the crew members of these early shuttle missions ill-served by these flawed assessments?  Yes and no.  Yes in that they made their decisions to fly on the shuttle based on a flawed bargain.  No because the information they were provided was the best available at the time.

NASA would have had no problem filling every seat on the early shuttle missions even if it was known that there was a ten percent of the crew and craft being lost.  The composition of the crews may have been different, but all the seats would have been filled.  It is the nature of the astronaut corp that there would have been plenty of willing crew members.  With that said, it just seems wrong that so many people took a far greater risk than they knew.  It offends our sense of fairness.

So, how does this apply to all of us who were never offered the opportunity to fly on the space shuttle?  We all make decisions based on the perceived risks involve, whether fly in an airliner, snow skiing, snowboarding or riding a bike.  However, often our perception of risk is far from accurate.

An example is that research shows that riding a bicycle on public streets is riskier than snow skiing, snowboarding or flying on a commercial air taxi with fewer than ten seats.  Yet many of us would assume that riding a bike would be the least risky of those activities.

It comes down to this, whether in business or on a personal level:  we need to assess the risks as best we can when we are considering a certain action or initiative, compare the risks to the possible rewards and make a decision.  Our assessment of the risks involved will almost always be off.  Maybe not as much as in the case of the early space shuttle missions, but still at variance with actual.  We cannot defer a decision until all information is known.  If we do, we will never take any action.

Astronauts are highly admired, as they should be.  They are seen as disciplined, devoted and amazingly accomplished.  They are also role models for courageous risk-taking.  We may have experienced a mix of excitement and dread as we watched many successful space shuttle launches, not realizing that we were vicariously adventuring through those courageous men and women on board that amazing craft.  Perhaps after all that is one of the greatest gifts they gave us.

Comments Off

Post

Back at It

In The Risk Paradox on March 29, 2011 by Jim McCormick

Sorry for the hiatus from blog posts.  I have been consumed with getting my most recent book done and to the publisher.  A new post will go up later today.

Comments Off

Post

Keeping Risk in Perspective

In The Risk Paradox on December 28, 2010 by Jim McCormick Tagged: , , ,

I am just getting started on a fascinating book I recommend to any thoughtful observer of the risk-taking process, Denialism, How Irrational Thinking Hinders Scientific Progress, Harms the Planet, and Threatens Our Lives.  The author Michael Specter offers some profound insights drawn from his extensive research and interviews.

A few paragraphs I read yesterday resonated with me to the extent that they figuratively jumped off the page.  Let me share them with you.

Risk always has a numerator and a denominator.  People tend to look at only one of those numbers, though, and they are far more likely to remember the bad than the good.  That’s why we can fear flying although it is hundreds of times safer than almost any other form of transportation.  Nobody comes on television to announce the tens of thousands of safe landings that occur throughout the world each day.

Specter continues a with another keen observation:  The week in 2003 that SARS (severe acute respiratory syndrome) swept through Hong Kong, the territory’s vast new airport was deserted, and so were the city’s usually impassable streets.  Terrified merchants sold face masks and hand sanitizer to anyone foolish enough to go out in public.  SARS was a serious disease, the first easily transmitted virus to emerge in the new millennium.  Still, it killed fewer than a thousand people, according to World Health Organization statistics.  Nevertheless, “it has been calculated that the SARS panic cost more than $37 billion globally,” Lars Svendsen wrote in A Philosophy of Fear.  “For suc a sum one probably could have eradicated tuberculosis, which costs several million people’s lives every year.”

Readers of this blog and my books Business Lessons from the Edge and The Power of Risk know that I regularly commented on our strained relationship with risk and risk-taking.  These observations speak eloquently to the impact and cost of being irrationally fearful.

Comments Off

Post

Utilizing All Traits in Successful Risk-Taking

In The Risk Paradox on November 20, 2010 by Jim McCormick Tagged: , ,

A letter to the Financial Times published this week asserts that mixed gender teams have superior results to single gender teams in a business environment.  The writer states specifically that mixed gender teams provide a better balance in intellectual risk-taking behavior.  The letter is written by Elizabeth Pollitzer who does not reference specific research to support her observations, but they are reasonably intuitive and thought-provoking.

The suggestion that mixed gender teams are more effective relates to successful individual risk-taking.  Intelligent risk-taking involves effectively engaging both intellectual assessment and instinctual awareness.  One can easily see that mixed gender teams are more likely to have the breadth of talents necessary to be successful in this realm.

Similarly, results from individual risk-taking initiatives are more likely to be successful if a person draws on the full breadth of their abilities, from intellectual to instinctive, in analyzing and implementing.

The letter from Ms. Pollitzer can be found at:  http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/887a0bea-f1d9-11df-84ef-00144feab49a.html#axzz15rLLmVSk

Comments Off

Post

Risking in the Public Square

In The Risk Paradox on November 5, 2010 by admin Tagged: , , ,

The recently completed mid-term election campaigns were a seminar in risk-taking in a compressed time frame.  You can see how the role of advising candidates can be so engaging and exciting.  Decisions have to be made in minutes and hours as the election approaches.  Strategies and ads are all about risking.  Some were spectacular successes and others were dismal failures – all played out in a public venue.  Raw risking.  Trusting instincts – for better or worse.  Not always well done but often interesting.

Comments Off