前兩天我讀了一篇名為Can-do Thinking Makes Risk Management Impossible的文章。 我邊讀邊笑，覺得講得真好，所以隨手寫了一些感想，另外也把那篇文章在文末轉錄給大家看。

那文章談的主題是風險管理無法在企業中落實的原因。 無法落實通常跟成員風險管理的知識與流程無關，而是因為公司文化的影響 - 若高階主管缺乏解決問題的同理心，同時又過度樂觀下，這公司就將逐步淘汰掉願意說真話的人。 最後誰也看不到未來可能的危難在哪裡，當然也就不可能有效的排解這些危難了。

文中提到一段我非常拍案叫絕。

他提到在某些組織中，PM提出專案的可能問題、或問題的潛在影響時時，有些高階主管會回應說：“Unacceptable, fix it, make the numbers work out!”, “Or I’ll get someone who can.” 然後寒蟬效應就會發生。

這類現象我也在很多企業中親眼看過。 像我與Bryan常常會Coaching一些PM做Schedule規劃。 合作方法通常是先由PM把他打算的做法或是專案現況告訴我們，我們則透過排程軟體幫他排出整個專案全貌，並幫忙分析問題。

就常常會有下面這樣的對話…

我：『照這樣看來，接下來幾個Milestone都會延遲三到五天。』

對方PM：「Joe，這樣不行啦。 所有Milestone的日期都是不能變的！ 你看，合約規定這幾個里程碑是要在X月X日完成！ 你能幫我把所有Milestone都固定住嗎？ 無論前置工作如何延遲，讓排程軟體都不去改變里程碑的日期。」

我心想，我當然知道Milestone要在X月X日達成，但現在你的專案「就是會延遲」。 日期跑掉並不是我故意放錯的日期，而是在既有工作與工期的推動下，那些里程碑就是很可能會來不及。 這不就是一開始你們打算導入排程工具的原意？ 想要讓問題提早彰顯，並有更多處理時間？ 所以我通常也都會耐心解釋為何Milestone會跑掉，以及後續該分析甚麼來做矯正計畫。

但有意思的是，很多PM的回覆卻讓人啼笑皆非但卻非常耐人尋味。

他們會說：「我懂！ 可是我老闆不懂，如果他看到里程碑日子不對了，我就慘了。」

我往往還會做最後的掙扎：『可是… 本來專案進行中里程碑就會隨著進度變動。 看到落差，才能對大家示警吧！』

但有很大一部分比例的PM終究會選擇不敢這麼做，非要我教他怎麼死定住里程碑日期的方法。 原因很簡單：他的老闆只要看到里程碑日期不對，就會開幹。 老闆沒興趣知道問題在哪裡，更不打算撥出多的資源甚至時間一起解決問題。 老闆只覺得原來怎麼預估，事情就該怎麼發生。 至於別的任何問題都別來找我，那是你PM該管好的事情。

當組織是這種氛圍時，PM撞了幾次陷阱，會開始打的算盤也就不難理解。 他們會想說，反正預警也沒幫助，只會被不分青紅皂白的K一頓。 甚至太常揭露專案問題，老闆還覺得你很無能。 若想保住飯碗，就根本別中途揭露問題、自己想辦法趕工或加班就是。 如果哪天真的紙包不住火時，再一次提出被罵個夠。 中間過程自己能Cover就Cover，不能Cover那最多開就上網104… 反正若先提後提都被罵，那還不如流到最後讓你罵一次。 伸頭縮頭都是一刀，那就等避不可避時再說吧~~

你看，這種勞方與資方的矛盾，跟PM有沒有學過風險管理或組織導入甚麼流程毫無關係，完全是文化問題。 改善的機會完全取決於老闆是否在管理上能展現務實的態度。 如果他願意參與專案的管理，了解專案有可能遭遇各類意外與風險的打擊，並願意支持PM提供他層級位階能給的幫助，這樣才有可能讓專案透明度真正出現，也才真的有可能預見風險，並排除風險。

另外文章中段提的另一句話也很發人深思。

他說effective risk management begins with a culture in which reality isn’t overwhelmed by hubris.

我自己也碰過類似狀況。 在客戶某個重大案子開案前，我協助客戶分析了可能的問題，並告知這案子繼續下去有數個可能的大風險。 比方說其中一個是該部門的人力支援明顯不足，並建議與會的幾位高階主管該認真討論一下這該怎麼辦。

會議上對方其中一位高階主管冷冷地回了一句：「你這樣太悲觀了。」 「我們應該著眼在這案子的機會上面。 至於人力不足的部分，就之後慢慢找人嘛~ 只要大家有心，問題一定都能解決的。」

(我心想，我當然知道「問題都有可能」解決。 但照目前資訊而言，這問題極可能解決不了，並會發展成大慘劇。 但若大家當下對潛在問題避而不談，只訴諸樂觀的盤算，那屆時一旦真解決不了，大家是打算怎麼辦呢？ )

所謂風險管理，就是在樂觀中保持悲觀；在歡樂中保持冷靜的一種處事態度。 可能問題都想過一遍，覺得所有問題都有極高的解決機會，這才是正面積極。  這世界可不是所有事情都能船到橋頭自然直。 否則等船不直時，公司可就慘啦。

換言之，如果組織不打算腳踏實地去分析前面可能的問題，只把提出這些不確定性的人歸責於「沒心」、「悲觀」、「不夠積極」。 只把「只要大家努力，一切問題都不是問題」這樣的樂觀氣氛當成企業文化時，就會把預警與提醒的人當成唱衰者。 最後就再也沒人想當這個角色，而所謂風險意識將消失無蹤。

這兩者是很值得有心想強化組織「預見能力者」要好好注意的喔！

原文請繼續閱讀：

Can-do Thinking Makes Risk Management Impossible

By Jim Highsmith

“Can-do thinking makes risk management impossible. Since acknowledging real risk is defeatism, the risk management function in a can-do organization is restricted to dealing with those smallish risks that can be mitigated by quick action. That means you confront all the risks except the ones that really matter.” (Tom DeMarco, Why Does Software Cost So Much? Dorset House 1995)

Of the many, many quotes from Tom DeMarco that I’ve used over the years, this one is near the top of my favorite list. I’m reminded of a major airline that launched into a comprehensive—hotel, car rental, etc.—reservation system long ago. After a $100 million expenditure, the project was cancelled and a half-dozen project managers were fired, for “lying” about progress. I have always wondered whether or not the company “culture” forced the project managers into an untenable situation in which “shading” the truth became the only escape.

“We’re going to be over budget by about 10% and will need an additional 4 months to get this project finished,” states the project manager in a status meeting. “Unacceptable, fix it, make the numbers work out!” the executive in charge shouts. “Or I’ll get someone who can,” he rages as he stalks out of the room. Now, as a project manager, even the most dedicated and ethical one, how many times will you be willing to endure this kind of tirade? Who is at fault here, the project manager who begins to shade the truth of a project’s progress, or the executive who refuses to listen to reality? I can imagine a similar conversation going on in the halls of Enron.

In working on a project plan at a major software developer, a young, gung-ho project manager responded to a suggestion to develop a risk management plan, “We don’t need a risk management plan,” he emphatically stated, “because this project can’t be allowed to fail.”

Project teams and project managers are loath to admit to uncertainty and not knowing, because the prevailing culture in many organizations doesn’t allow for it. Voicing concerns is tantamount to negativism, concerns are seen as a failure of willpower, as if will alone could overcome all obstacles. Again, it seems that Enron’s executives suffered from the hubris of thinking that they could make anything happen by sheer force of determination and will.

Risk management is a critical part of good project management, as experts like Tom DeMarco vividly explain. But effective risk management begins with a culture in which reality isn’t overwhelmed by hubris. No project manager can be a good risk manager in a political environment where executives are so gung ho that it blinds them from the reality. Effective risk management requires that executives and project managers make hard trade off decisions as the speculative hypotheses we call plans are smashed against the reality of the rough and tumble real world. If the seventh largest company in the country (well, maybe even this rating was the result of accounting tricks) can’t “control” events, it’s unlikely that your project team will be able to either. When actual performance doesn’t conform to the plan, when unforeseen (or foreseen for that matter) risks attack your project, the ability and will to acknowledge reality and make good trade off decisions will ultimately determine success.

Risk management and politics go hand and hand. Trying to implement sophisticated risk management practices in organizations that refuse to accept reality are an exercise in futility.

原文出處

http://jimhighsmith.com/2012/01/09/can-do-thinking-makes-risk-management-impossible/