Earlier in this blog, I wrote a little in a post called Subjectivity in Risk Assessment about research showing that we accept greater risks from voluntary hazards than from involuntary hazards. I would like to expand on that topic because I think it is important in understanding how members of an organization respond to efforts to innovate.

Consider the following list of voluntary and involuntary hazards:

Voluntary Hazards

• driving or riding in a car
• recreational risks – such as cycling, motorcycle riding, white water rafting, rock climbing. SCUBA diving
• entertainment risks – amusement park rides, bungee jumping
• alcohol consumption
• smoking
• sun exposure
• flying in a plane

Involuntary Hazards

• air pollution
• hurricanes, tornados and earthquakes
• hydraulic fracturing (fracking)
• communicable diseases
• second-hand tobacco smoke

If you are like most people, you consider many of the involuntary hazards to be a more significant that the voluntary ones. A great deal has been written about the statistically verifiable impact of all the hazards listed. For this discussion, it is not necessary to discuss at lengthy the relative impact of each hazard. The point is that hazards that are imposed on us are commonly perceived as more significant or threatening than those we take by choice.

One example it sun exposure. Many people actively seek to enjoy the warming rays of the sun. Yet it can be readily proven that doing so brings with it significant negative consequences.

How does this apply to encouraging innovation in organizations? The clear message is that you will be more successful if you create incentives as opposed to requirements. It is as simple as seeking action with a figurative “carrot” versus “a stick.” Whether it is change, uncertainty, temporary discomfort or hazards, people do not like them to be imposed upon them.

​When I saw this article recently on the front page of the Wall Street Journal, I thought it was a joke. Unfortunately, it was not April 1st and the article was for real.

Here is the title: “Safety Cops Patrol the Office For High Heels.” Seriously? You can see why I thought it was a joke.

The article tells us that employees at some companies now have to document daily safety risks including “walking across the street, entering restaurant, sitting down and eating meal.” I’m not kidding.

At some companies, employees are required to document at least two safety infractions each month – like holding open an elevator door for a colleague. (How horrible!)

The article goes on to say that employees at Exxon Mobil Corp. in Irving, Texas recently positioned themselves in the stairway to determine if people were using the handrail. (Really? This was the best use of their time?)

Please understand that I do not mean to make light of workplace safety. It is a very real issue – for people operating wood chippers and stump grinders. These are office workers.

Now think for a minute about the message this sends to people in an organization with these ridiculous safety policies. That’s right – whatever you do, don’t take a risk. Don’t take initiative. Don’t do anything differently than in the past. Don’t step out of “the box”. And above all, don’t even think about innovating.
​
Someone in these organizations who sees the bigger picture needs to intervene.

There is an interesting study published in the journal Injury Prevention on behavior change among skiers and snowboarders when they wear a helmet.

What would you guess?

• Option A:  Would you think that a person who wears a helmet would think they are better protected from injury and be more risk inclined?
• Option B:  Or would you think their decision to wear a helmet suggests they are more safety conscious and less risk inclined?

If you guessed Option B, you are correct. The study tells us that helmeted skiers and snowboarders appear to ski or snowboard more safely.

So, what does this tell us about human nature and intelligent risk-taking in an organizational setting?  The logical conclusion is that the better you prepare for the risk or initiative you are pursuing, the more comfortable you will be going forward.

The lesson:  prepare well before getting started.  One thing you can do is utilize the six steps of intelligent risk-taking presented in my books The Power of Risk (Maxwell Press), Business Lessons from the Edge (McGraw-Hill) and The First-Time Manager (AMACOM).

The second lesson:  Preparing well and proceeding intelligently is not likely to make you more risk-inclined and more prone to lapse into poor decisions.

Both good outcomes.
​
===
The study was conducted by researchers at San Diego State University.  The full paper on the study is available on the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) website at:  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2598370/pdf/173.pdf.  (The NCBI is part of the U.S. National Institutes of Health.)

We all know that meetings are necessary … and at times significantly longer than necessary or productive.

Andy Kessler had a brilliant piece recently in the Wall Street Journal that offers that some excellent insights and suggestions for making meetings more productive and shorter. His ideas are too good not to share. Here are some.

• Apparently some executives at Twitter and Apple allow meetings only on Mondays. The rest of the week is meetings free. (I will bet that this results in a lot of issues that surface on Tuesdays and Wednesdays being resolved without meetings.)
• The president of BuzzFeed is a little looser. He dictates that meetings are prohibited on Tuesdays and Thursdays.
• An innovative tech entrepreneur running a start up limits meetings to a single topic, does not allow any electronics (computers, projectors, PowerPoint), and limits them to ten minutes.
• Kessler reports that Amazon chief Jeff Bezos starts executive meetings with thirty minutes of silence while all read a “carefully crafted six-page report.” (I love the idea of the person who called the meeting being subjected to the discipline of presenting his or her ideas in writing.)
• Another creative executive has all meetings recorded on video with the videos available all in the organization indefinitely. (I think we would all be a bit more thoughtful and measured in our comments at a meeting if we knew all we said would be available to all indefinitely.)
• Finally, my favorite. One clever executive has had all the conference tables and chairs removed from the conference rooms. They have been replaced with bar-height tables but no chairs. (Does anyone question that meetings will be briefer when all have to stand?)

​Kessler gave us some wonderful ideas. I encourage you to try some to see what results you get.