Are we ready for a High Reliability…Government?

Theoretically, I would love for my government to function like an HRO and successfully manages the unexpected highs and lows of our daily function as a nation. Wouldn’t it be nice to know that our government consistently detects weak signals of potential growing danger and neutralizes threats before they become major headlines? Wouldn’t we all rest easier knowing that our current administration, and all of the local governments and agencies subject to the administration, successfully applies lessons learned from previous mistakes and competently avoids future failure? The Obama administration’s response to the flooding in North Dakota and Minnesota provides a snap shot of what such a “High Reliability Government” might entail.

President Obama personally called Fargo, N.D. Mayor Dennis Walaker to offer a pledge of resources well before flood levels reached their peak. The New York Times’ Monica Davey reported that there were so many National Guard, U.S. Army Corp of Engineers, FEMA, and other resources dispatched to the area that the city administrator, Mr. Pat Zavoral, commented “they were getting in the way…But that’s the way we want it.” Since President Obama’s initial conversation with Mayor Walaker, 1,700 National Guard members have fought alongside hundreds of volunteers to fight the rising Red River, the acting FEMA director has dispatched to the area, active duty military aerial support has arrived, and President Obama has declared emergency and disaster declarations for both North Dakota and Minnesota.

Click here to watch a CNN iReport from a volunteer relaying her account of the flood preparation.

Nearly every American political campaign runs on the promise of change and better protection of and for constituents. I have often wondered what this would look like. Obama’s administration is clearly trying to avoid the type of delayed reactive response Bush’s administration was chastised for and instead implement a proactive model that builds on lessons from past administrative shortcomings. While this new approach seems to be welcomed in light of the public’s low expectations for government assistance, how long will the contentment last? Will the public begin to get uneasy with how quickly this administration steps up to help without invitation? Or will public memory of past administrations who were slow, or completely negligent, to anticipate and neutralize potential danger, remain long enough for our nation to be able to appreciate a new trend of a high reliability government? Look at the comments on this YouTube clip of Obama’s most recent public address before you decide.

I am not, in any way, trying to say that our current administrative is the perfect model of high reliability organizing. However, I am highlighting some of the HRO tendencies of the current administration and the questions they raise about what is, and what is not, ideal about high reliability organizing. Even if our country were to have an administration that consistenlty exhibited hro characteristics, we would never be satiated.

Click here to find out how you can donate to relief efforts in the affected areas.

The Financial Crisis: A Corporate Leadership Game-Changer?

Crises necessarily challenge assumptions. And certainly the recent turmoil on Wall Street has shaken many assumptions about economic and financial stability. Looking back on 2008, however, what can we learn about corporate leadership and management? In the Jan. 19 BusinessWeek cover story, titled “Managing Through a Crisis: The New Rules,” senior writer Emily Thornton suggests that current economic conditions have fundamentally changed how business leaders should make decisions, and that within economic turbulence resides new opportunities.

In the article, Thornton mentions several ways in which the decision-making milieu for managers has shifted, including reduced consumer confidence, tighter credit, the prospect of stricter regulations, and general ambiguity about both current conditions and future prospects. Furthermore, she discusses five specific sets of productive actions taken by chief executives in 2008, specifically:

• Change your mindset. Recognize that market conditions have changed, and that those changes should call into question many aspects of how you’ve traditionally done business.


• Get your financial house in order. Make tough choices, possibly including eliminating lines of business and issuing more stock, to strengthen your balance sheet and to secure your firm’s fundamental financial health.


• Make a move for market share. Focus on your core business and be on the lookout for newly available resources, both human and asset-related.


• Rethink your reward system. Avoid cutting compensation across the board; instead, find non-monetary ways to reward employees and improve morale.


• Dare to innovate. Taking the time and effort to innovate during the downturn could open new doors in the future. It’s risky, but may result in high returns.

The past year has forced us to think differently about what it means to undertake risk. Additionally, it seems that obtaining actionable information about potential risks is becoming increasingly difficult. It may not be a lack of information that fuels this difficulty; rather, it may be that managers today have such an abundance of information to process—via numerous financial reporting services, for example—that they cannot reasonably evaluate competing courses of action. Much of 2009 will be about figuring out what exactly happened to markets during 2008, but whether managers can use that information to guide their firms successfully remains to be seen.

This entry also appears at Stepping into the Void.