Wednesday, February 18, 2015

Connecting the Dots

Steve Jobs once famously said that “you cannot connect the dots going forward”.  Every risk manager at some level understands this.  The fact that the future unfolds in an unpredictable manner is in some way the reason that the discipline of risk management exists.  It is however a lot easier to connect the dots going backwards – but this exercise has some hidden traps.
Connecting the dots on what happened is a way to deconstruct a risk event and learn from it.  This (to coin a phrase from the ‘90s Martha Stewart) is a “good thing”.  However it often becomes a bad thing for several reasons.
Firstly, we are often shallow in connecting the dots going backwards.  We find a few major correlations, and we assume these correlations are the cause.  In reality it is often the much more subtle and more hidden catalysts that are the loosely connected dots that as risk managers (and regulators) we need to be looking for and learning from.  The reality is that we often superficially take the first few major dot connections as our answers.  Risk is much more nuanced than that.  (I will leave the obvious issue of correlation not necessarily being causation out of the discussion for now.)
Secondly we assume that the same dots will exist going forward.  This is frequently incorrect.  The dots, and their connections going forward are usually not the same.  Risks and how they arise evolve, adapt and change.  The same dots will not necessarily produce the same connections and in turn produce the same results.  The effect is compounded when we include the fact that we likely did too superficial of a job analyzing the dot connections from the previous risk event – as discussed in the previous paragraph.
Risk management is not an “if-then” management exercise.  Fortunately, or unfortunately (depending on your point of view), risk management is not a connect-the-dots coloring book.  (I really enjoyed connect-the-dot coloring books as a kid.)

No comments: