Black Swans: A Corporate Governance “blind spot”


“FIT FOR RANDOMNESS” is all about accepting that complexity adds to the uncertainty – and, therefore, risk – of modern living. We CANNOT predict what will happen but that does not mean that we should not prepare, as best we can, to survive the unforeseen by building robustness [resilience or anti-fragility] into the complex, dynamic, systems upon which we depend.

Dr. James Carafano of the Heritage Foundation spoke to this issue at a congressional hearing on resilience in the homeland in 2008. He said, “The current paradigm of ‘protecting’ infrastructure is unrealistic. We should shift our focus to that of resiliency. Resiliency is the capacity to maintain continuity of activities even in the face of threats, disaster, and adversity.”

Any, self-respecting, C-Level Executive (or non-Exec.) worthy of the office, should assess and detail their strategy for corporate survival. Failure to do so is to expose the business, its stakeholders, professional reputation and with it, personal wealth, family and community stability to undue risk. From that perspective (alone) I tend beyond the questions (shown below) from the International Federation of Accountants.

I am used to getting “funny looks” when I suggest that QUANTITATIVE COMPLEXITY MANAGEMENT [QCM] from Ontonix is more than a means for an organisation to extend its “risk horizon” – beyond the scope of conventional ERM. QCM, or Advanced Risk Management, facilitates better, more consistent and robust, business [risk] decisions. In the process, securing that most precious of commodities, “competitive advantage”.

Here are some complexity facts from Ontonix.