**15. In conclusion**

Whenever, under whatever circumstances, risk management is being considered, one must first consider whether any risk must be in existence in the first place. In a condition of great advantage, such as commercial air travel, the existence of risk is minimized in the first place. After its minimization, it is not a case of risk management that is practiced as much as it is a case of safety protection. It is not a case of a mere shift in wording, because if we employ the language of safety we will be reminded of the ethical priority of the preciousness of human life (together with its corollaries of future generations and the health of the planet). The risk of airplane travel is minimized with proper attention to mechanical safety, pilot training, etc. *The airplane pilot has the right to make the decision not to fly when she or he decides weather conditions are not safe. Such an important decision is placed in the commercial pilot's hands. The judgment as to whether it is safe to fly and therefore to risk lives of the crew and passengers is given to the most experienced and most expert person among the primary actors who will be actually taking the risk.* 

To make a brief shift to another example to ensure that the problems with the concept of risk management are not confined to the case of the *Challenger*, many years ago, the author of this chapter personally recommended to cruise ship management, that all commercial cruise ships be outfitted with cockpit voice recorders (black boxes) as are airplanes. Originally, when the author made this recommendation, this author was told it was against strong, naval customs. It is refreshing to learn that strong customs can be changed. This provision of a black box is, of course, strictly speaking, a device that serves as a prevention of future disasters rather than a safeguard for the sail in question.

Whatever we do in life, we cannot close our eyes and pretend that we can remove all dangers from any human endeavor. But a step forward can be made if we consider safety protection as our highest priority. In doing so, we must pay attention to the *taking* of risk in the first place and not be content with *managing* risk that need not exist in the first place. When we do take steps that minimize risk, we should not consider these steps to be "managing" risk, but rather as steps that *reduce the consequences of risk*. While cruise ships are now required to have enough life boats to accommodate 100% of their passengers, the diesel engines with which they are equipped can only power them up to 6 knots and cannot carry passengers to a faraway shore if harsh wind and sea conditions exist.

The idea of "risk management" implies that risk must be present. We must ever guard against complacency. If we keep uppermost in mind that the preciousness of life is our highest priority, we will ensure that the presence of the possible incidence and the consequence of risk is kept at the lowest possible point. *If we change our language from the language of "risk management" which implies that somehow there must always be a risk present, and it is our task to manage it, to risk taking, we will be more alive to the ethical responsibility which is involved in taking risks with our own or other people's lives.* We will be more inclined to work sincerely to minimize the possibility of risk and to reduce the effect of the consequences of risk.

The notion of providing enough safety boats for half of the passengers (the model of the *Titanic*) fits perfectly into the concept of "managing risk". When we do this, we have performed some kind of cost-benefit analysis, or, to speak more strictly, some kind of probability-benefit analysis, and have reached a decision that by providing life boats for only half of the passengers we are fulfilling the responsibility of "managing risk". It is not clear how this decision was reached. Perhaps, it was reached by assuming that only half of the passengers would make it to the life boats, hence, by providing half of the needed boats, we have "managed" the risk.

In conclusion, if we use the language of risk taking, the provision of life boats for half of the passengers on board is still a case of *taking risk with half of our passengers' lives*. On the other hand, if we take the language of risk taking seriously and consider that human life is precious, we would not sail, that is, we would not take risk, unless there were enough life boats provided for 100% of the passengers. (If we rely upon life preservers, for example, those in ocean waters would only live for a few minutes because of the icy temperature of the sea).

*Everything in the area of risk management is a matter of ethics*. Do we value human life? What do we mean by the phrase 'acceptable risk'? Such a concept can only be tolerated if there are safety provisions that will fully protect and preserve life if the consequences of the risk taking threaten human life. Otherwise, there is no such concept as an 'acceptable risk'. Was the decision to provide life boats for only half of the passengers aboard commercial vessels based on past performance data? In the case of the *Titanic*, lifeboats for only half of the passengers were provided and, as a result, the lives of 1,523 men, women and children were lost.36 1,523 men, women and children were killed based on risk management. The *Titanic* disaster was in 1912. Now, 100 years later while the custom is to provide enough lifeboats for all passengers, the lifeboats are prepared with engines that will leave their occupants at the risks of the high seas.

It is hoped that this introduction to the new idea of risk taking as opposed to risk management will create reflection and commitment to a greater ethical sensitivity when we consider how our decision making may affect other people's lives. Do we ever have a right to take decisions that risk other people's lives? If the message of this chapter is heard, then we do not ever have the right to risk other people's lives unless we provide full and adequate protection for the consequences of the risk that we are taking with other people's lives. If we change our language habits from commonly using the phrase 'risk management'

152 Risk Management – Current Issues and Challenges

*"manage" it.* 

**15. In conclusion** 

thinking would have been, 'the weather is not good; we are not going to *take* the risk'. *When we frame the decision to be taken in term of risk taking rather than risk managing, it is far more likely that we will act not to take the risk rather than to act to take the risk and then attempt, somehow, to* 

It is therefore worthwhile to consider abandoning the concept of risk management and replacing it with the concept of risk taking. When one removes the euphemism of risk management and replaces it with risk taking, it becomes abundantly evident that it is actual human life with which one is taking risk. One is playing G-d with human life. *The very concept of risk management is itself too risky*. The seemingly objective social science language of

Whenever, under whatever circumstances, risk management is being considered, one must first consider whether any risk must be in existence in the first place. In a condition of great advantage, such as commercial air travel, the existence of risk is minimized in the first place. After its minimization, it is not a case of risk management that is practiced as much as it is a case of safety protection. It is not a case of a mere shift in wording, because if we employ the language of safety we will be reminded of the ethical priority of the preciousness of human life (together with its corollaries of future generations and the health of the planet). The risk of airplane travel is minimized with proper attention to mechanical safety, pilot training, etc. *The airplane pilot has the right to make the decision not to fly when she or he decides weather conditions are not safe. Such an important decision is placed in the commercial pilot's hands. The judgment as to whether it is safe to fly and therefore to risk lives of the crew and passengers is given to the most experienced and most expert person among the primary actors who will be actually taking the risk.* 

To make a brief shift to another example to ensure that the problems with the concept of risk management are not confined to the case of the *Challenger*, many years ago, the author of this chapter personally recommended to cruise ship management, that all commercial cruise ships be outfitted with cockpit voice recorders (black boxes) as are airplanes. Originally, when the author made this recommendation, this author was told it was against strong, naval customs. It is refreshing to learn that strong customs can be changed. This provision of a black box is, of course, strictly speaking, a device that serves as a prevention of future

Whatever we do in life, we cannot close our eyes and pretend that we can remove all dangers from any human endeavor. But a step forward can be made if we consider safety protection as our highest priority. In doing so, we must pay attention to the *taking* of risk in the first place and not be content with *managing* risk that need not exist in the first place. When we do take steps that minimize risk, we should not consider these steps to be "managing" risk, but rather as steps that *reduce the consequences of risk*. While cruise ships are now required to have enough life boats to accommodate 100% of their passengers, the diesel engines with which they are equipped can only power them up to 6 knots and cannot carry

'risk management' is in reality a license to treat human life lightly.

disasters rather than a safeguard for the sail in question.

passengers to a faraway shore if harsh wind and sea conditions exist.

<sup>36</sup> *Ibid*., p. 87.

to never using this term, but rather replacing it with the phrase, 'risk taking', we may have a more ethically responsible world.

**Section 2** 

**Risk and Supply Chain Management** 
