"Risk paradoxIf an organization uses quantitative risk analysis at all, it is usually for routine operational decisions. The largest, most risky decisions get the least amount of proper risk analysis. [Moi ici: Recordei-me logo de "Lovaglia’s Law: The more important the outcome of a decision, the more people will resist using evidence to make it."]Trecho retirado de "How to Measure Anything - Finding the Value of “Intangibles” in Business" de Douglas Hubbard.
Over the years, in case after case, I have found that if organizations apply quantitative risk analysis at all, it is on relatively routine, operational-level decisions. The largest, most risky decisions are subject to almost no risk analysis—at least not any analysis that an actuary or statistician would be familiar with. I refer to this phenomenon as the “risk paradox.”
Almost all of the most sophisticated risk analysis is applied to less risky operational decisions while the riskiest decisions - mergers, IT portfolios, big research and development initiatives, and the like - receive virtually none (or at least not the kind that passes as real, quantitative risk analysis). Why is this true? Perhaps it is because there is a perception that operational decisions—approving a loan or computing an insurance premium—seem simpler to quantify but the truly risky decisions are too elusive to quantify."