GovLoop - Social Network for Government

Gwynne Kostin

2 Wrong & 1 Right Response to "What Are You Afraid Of?"


New things make people nervous. They just do. New things don't have track records. They are hard to predict. We don't know what to expect.

New things are also very exciting. They can be rejuvenating, making old folks feel young again. New things have the potential to be game changing. The unknown has it's own thrill.

So, it makes sense that some people avoid new scary things and roll up into a safe little ball. Other people walk right into their scary zone, headlong, refusing to be cowed by fear.

Neither is a very good idea.

The scary part of the new venture has a name. It's RISK. And blindly avoiding risk is as bad an idea as blindly embracing risk.

Let's start with the first response: blind avoidance. In the dot-gov and social media space, the idea of losing control of "message," of employees talking directly to the world without hierarchical sign-offs, of potentially causing citizens chaos or danger or confusion, of not understanding the unknowable consequences, of maybe potentially somehow breaking a law or regulation, of being dragged in front of a committee for a hearing, of making things worse, or of exposing your current embarrassingly whack procedures is enough to stop agencies cold.

Down side of avoidance? You lose opportunity for growth, innovation and, even, success. You are stuck using a manual typewriter and paper and finding information by searching through file cabinets while the rest of the world is using voice recognition to search and contribute to an entire world's worth of information. Oh, and people talk about you and your program and you are not part of the dialogue.

Turning to the second response: blind embrace. The allure of the new and the exciting can cloud judgement. There are slick promises that all needs will be met by the snake-oil salesmen and goading jeers from the outside critics who see how "easy" this is in the private sector (where private is a term filled with magic). And so it must be easy--especially since Facebook and Microsoft were started in college dorm rooms. Hire some college interns and turn on the spigot. Get out of the way of the wise crowds, they will reveal the path.

Down side of blindly embracing? I like to say pets.com or Skittles or Enron or all those friends jumping off a bridge that your mom told you about. There are bad ideas and bad approaches out there. The pressure can be hard to resist. And for government, the outcome can be much worse than embarrassment given our public safety missions, privacy requirements, and data holdings.

What to do? Take off the blinders.

You don't have to be an expert in technology to identify, assess and manage the risks in projects and approaches.

While there are tomes, certifications and degrees, you can make better decisions about program, project or enterprise risk by analyzing the risks.
  1. Identify the threats. What could go wrong?
  2. Identify the impact. How bad would it be?
  3. Identify the likelihood. Should I expect this or is it rare?
  4. Identify strategies to manage the risk. What can you do about it? How is your mission affected?
What you do about the risk depends on the first three steps in the analysis. Four common management strategies are to
  • Avoid the risk--if it is too big and too likely to occur, this might be one to skip.
  • Reduce the risk--via policies, procedures, controls, staffing, training.
  • Share the risk--usually by purchasing insurance.
  • Retain the risk--deal with it, budget for it, prepare contingency plans.
Not to short circuit the formal risk management process, assessing risks should be part of your decision-making process. Identifying risks and what you would do about them can help move projects forward by clarifying the actual impact--exposing the figurative fear to reality and analysis.

How does this work?

Let's say an agency was considering running a public dialogue on a important agency issue. In the blind avoidance method, you can work up all the reasons why that is a TERRIBLE idea. You don't know how to do it, no tool, it'll never pass legal, what do you do when participants type in the F-word, nobody will participate, everybody will participate and overwhelm us, what if we can't do what they ask, etc. Forget about it!

In the blind embracing method, you implement a cool tool that you read about in TechCrunch and see what happens. And you experience all the bad things that blind avoidance predicted above.

In a managed risk model, you analyze the risks blind avoidance identified and decide what to do about them. America Speaks put together a terrific risk matrix (PDF) for using online dialogue tools for the Open Government Dialogues. The matrix identifies the risks, what to do to prevent them and what to do if it happens anyway.


So, don't be very, very afraid or foolishly brave. What are you afraid of? Success?


Read more: http://www.ondotgov.com/#ixzz0qmc5N8m6

Views: 0

Comment

You need to be a member of GovLoop - Social Network for Government to add comments!

Join GovLoop - Social Network for Government

Dannielle Blumenthal Comment by Dannielle Blumenthal on June 15, 2010 at 10:09am
Bill - general observation, many agencies, based on personal experience and anecdotes. Any kind of communication. And though policy not same issue, fear is in private sector too...pervasive.
Bill Brantley Comment by Bill Brantley on June 15, 2010 at 9:59am
@Dannielle - Is it communicating to the public that is causing the anxiety? Or is it engaging the public in a dialogue? One-way communication versus two-way communication seems to be the issue for your execs.
Philip L. Hoffman Comment by Philip L. Hoffman on June 15, 2010 at 9:17am
hum . . . Well if the WH staff can all get iPads and use them daily . . . one would think we could get this rolling. More noodling to come . . .
Dannielle Blumenthal Comment by Dannielle Blumenthal on June 15, 2010 at 9:07am
I get it. Its just that I haven't found things to work quite that way when I try the empathetic approach...execs want me to do what they want, nothing else, because they are busy and exhausted themselves. My goal is to legitimize social media for them as just another tool, so that I can help them without their fears getting in the way. The issue from my perspective is that communicators in govt need much more support when it comes to social media tools, and that this can easily happen if there is a desire for this on a high level policy side. Agency execs fears about social media make sense given the current lack of a safety net. And I think the reason we don't have a governmentwide social media policy is due to policy disagreements over how the govt should communicate. That is something only a very senior level leader and/or task force can address and resolve. It just irks me when we blame communicators, and agency execs, for refusing to pu themselves in what they perceive to be harms way.

Empathy still good though. Exhaustion definitely a side effect, true, but also worth it.
Philip L. Hoffman Comment by Philip L. Hoffman on June 15, 2010 at 8:47am
Dannielle,
My poitns about empathy were trying to bridge the status gap you identified. To make your managers successful, you have to make them both look good to their managers, and feel good themselves. Sometimes its exhausting, but in the end its worth it.
Dannielle Blumenthal Comment by Dannielle Blumenthal on June 15, 2010 at 8:43am
Philip - thanks and I think you make a good point about empathizing. I also liked the earlier point about balancing top down and bottom up approaches to risk analysis, and generally think Gwynnes approach (logic, managed risk) makes sense. I guess I am still searching though for answers that work "in the trenches" where logic does not rule, the communicator is lower on the chain of command than the exec they are advising, the rules aren't clear, etc.

One thing I think would immeasurably help govt communicators is a standard social media policy vetted thru the Exec Office of the President, that explains in simple terms what is OK and not OK to use, say, do, etc. Resolve fifty million intra-agency social media squabbles in one fell swoop, save taxpayer money wasted on duplicated effort, end cultural and political wrangling, empower communicators and set appropriate limits at the same time. Not to mention incredibly enhancing the service we can provide to the public.

Again great discussion, thanks Gwynne and everyone.
Philip L. Hoffman Comment by Philip L. Hoffman on June 15, 2010 at 8:19am
Danielle,
We're facing this a lot in my work place - mostly focused at present on expanded telework. These type of responses are almost always rooted in teh emotional or fear side of the response. That emotion won't answer well to reason or logic or even a carefuly done risk analysis. You should still do those things as others have suggested.

Then, put yourself in the leader's shoes. Ask yourself what they might be fearful of. Think through the cultural and intellectual positions they might have internalized over their careers. Empathize. then round out your proposal with communication that matches their fears and offers emotional reassurance.

Tough to do - you bet. But in the end it may well be the best and only way to proceed.
Dannielle Blumenthal Comment by Dannielle Blumenthal on June 15, 2010 at 7:37am
I agree with the general idea of a risk assessment. What I am asking is how to deal with execs irrational fears or objections that don't respond to logic. What I am suggesting is that for innovation to be implemented a very senior leader has to greenlight it and bear the burden if there is any roadblock in implementation.
Peter Sperry Comment by Peter Sperry on June 15, 2010 at 7:05am
@Dannielle -- A well thought out risk assesment should be part of the proposal frontline communicators present to leaders. An executive juggling 6 to 10 projects does not have time to analyze the details (which is where risk hides) of every new idea. Put them in your proposal upfront, describe how to deal with them and leaders will be more willing to consider greenlighting your ideas.
Gwynne Kostin Comment by Gwynne Kostin on June 14, 2010 at 11:33pm
@bill Agreed!

Tools & Resources

© 2012   Created by GovLoop.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service