Rita McGrath on the benefits of thinking the unthinkable

Here is an excerpt from an article written by Rita McGrath for the Harvard Business Review blog. To read the complete article, check out other

Rita McGrath

articles and resources, and/or sign up for a free subscription to Harvard Business Review’s Daily Alerts, please click here.

*     *     *

My colleague Gökçe Sargut and I are doing some work on how executives can improve the way their organizations operate under conditions of complexity. As we did the background research [click here], I was fascinated by counterintuitive thinking from Aaron Wildavsky [click here], a well-known social scientist. He argued that when facing risks, organizations have two basic possible responses. Systems can be designed to stave off risks, or they can be designed to be resilient, so that when terrible things happen the system can respond. Most organizations are heavily biased toward risk prevention: we create systems so risk-averse that we truncate learning, sometimes even increasing the very risks we’re trying to avoid.

Three recent events serve as a reminder that building resilience into organizations — in effect, thinking the unthinkable and preparing to face it — may serve us better than risk avoidance.

The first is the case of volcanic ash from Iceland that shut down significant air corridors between Europe and North America for days, shutdowns which promise to recur at unpredictable intervals. Before the unavoidable ash from the Eyjafjallajökull volcano, standard procedure in the airline business was not to fly through ash — in other words, to avoid it completely. When the unthinkable happened — an ash cloud so large that it couldn’t be avoided — everyone was unprepared. Only now is the industry envisioning a world in which large clouds of ash may be a permanent feature.

The second, of course, is the untamed BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. Whatever mistakes were made in the prevention department, it is absolutely clear that little thought went into preparing to respond if something did go wrong.

And the third was described in a recent Wall Street Journal article, “Using Science against Suicide Bombs.” The conventional approach to combating suicide bombings has been to try to prevent them through security and vigilance. A complementary approach is being explored by US-educated Fulbright scholar Zeeshan-ul-hassan Umani, who suggests that systems be designed to minimize the damage bombs can cause. Simulation software he’s developing indicates (among other things) that when bombs go off in mosques, where people sit in rows, fewer deaths occur than when they go off in crowded places, where people randomly move around. His research suggests that, if event organizers in threatened locations used rows rather than circular seating, it could reduce deaths and injuries by up to 25%.

Of course, we would always prefer to avoid negative outcomes if possible, and organizations should certainly invest in prevention. It may be wise to remember, though, that investing in resilience can be a complementary and essential component of preparing to face risks.

*     *     *

To read the complete article, check out other articles and resources, and/or sign up for a free subscription to Harvard Business Review’s Daily Alerts, please click here.

Columbia Business School professor Rita McGrath studies innovation, corporate venturing, and entrepreneurship. Her latest book is Discovery Driven Growth (2009).

To check out her website and the abundance of resources provided, please click here.