Or “riskuirements”?
In this nice Country of mine, there are increasing areas – not only geographical, unfortunately – in which even the simplest, most innocent question is looked at with suspicion.
The most common answer to any question has become “why do you ask me that?”.
And I’m not only thinking of Regions led according to conspiracy of silence rules; I also think of – let me say – more socially and economically developed Regions. To the point that, seeing a car accident, a girl fleeing from a man running after her, let alone a murder, one turns the head the opposite direction, pretending not to have seen.
The three Apes have been genetically modified into one: don’t hear’, don’t see, don’t speak – first and above all.
May be that after millennia of proud walking above ground and meanwhile making a big mess of Earth, we’ll turn back to sea as jelly, venomous beings.
Let’s carry on with our risk-based questioning or requiring: on September 22, 2013, Mr. Schettino, former commander of the well known cruise ship Costa Concordia entered his trial room, and, after having sworn to say truth, all the truth, nothing but the truth, he came out by saying that the accident was due to his steer-man (an Indonesian engineer) not having understood his command to steer left. The steer-man steered right, instead, making happening what happened.
A few considerations:
One: Is it reasonable – at least – that such an important fact comes to the Commander’s mind only two years or so after the mis-feat?
Two: Is it reasonable that a cruising company like Costa employs in such fundamental roles like ship commander and ship steer-man people who do not understand each other?
Three: My own knowledge and experience of weighing reactions and answers is very limited, and is limited to audits, only. I was trained that – in case I was doubtful of the auditee’s answer – I should ask in reply “I understand that you are meaning so and so: am I right?” I’m a fan of airplanes and ship and whatever technologically moves, and I watch a lot of films and read a lot of books: there’s a basic leit-motiv, in all of them, I guess it was so since Man first went to sea: the commanders’ orders are replied him by his men to make him sure they understood his orders correctly. If Mr. Schettino did not receive any feed-back from his steer-man, the latter cannot be held entirely guilty, Mr. Schettino should have repeated or urged his orders – and waited for a positive answer.
In business, we know that any seller tries to cheat his buyer, and vice-versa; sellers are trained to cheat buyers, buyers are trained to cheat sellers. Sellers’ and buyers’ bonuses are mainly driven by this capability. The principle Homo Hominis Lupus holds true since well before the Latins.
Beyond being aware of such risky interactions, we, risk professionals, what arms have in our hands?
When we subscribe an insurance policy or a bank contract, there are so many pages to be signed, so many clauses, most of which written in a language that we barely understand, that we give up and just sign, may God guide our hand. The very small written clauses are not used anymore, since privacy’s requirements, but dignified languages are an even more unsurmountable barrier.
A further example can help me hit my point, and it tells how difficult it is to win over un-logical trenches when they are not defended by soldiers fighting for their homeland, but for the pure pleasure of hurting you. I did not mean to go so deep, in the first place, but having read T.S. Eliot The Waste Land for the first time, the mental images are very hard to forget.
A relative of mine – let’s call him Mirko – was born in Croatia and he’s now more than 50; he came to live in Italy when he was 4, and – since he was 18 – started asking for Italy’s citizenship. Literally everything was done, from translating his croatian documents into italian for submission to official bodies, until he received the first blow, when he went to Italy’s Rome Immigration Department, 600 miles far from where he lives. When asking “Why don’t you recognize me as an italian citizen?” he was answered “For the very same reason that you ask for italian citizenship”. That was all; nonetheless he pays taxes to italian official bodies since he’s 18.
Mirko and a lovely sicilian lady – an italian citizen – married in July, 2013; they are very religious, so they went to some french and spanish sanctuaries to honeymoon. Now they want to go pilgrim to the Holy Land but to enter it one must hold a valid passport older than six months, which Mirko has not, since he’s no italian citizen and Croatia became a Nation after he was born. By italian law, when a foreigner marries an italian partner, he or she is automatically granted the italian citizenship after two years marriage. He thought this marriage would reinforce his request: no thought could ever be wronger. So he’s still at stalemate; my wife (who was born in former Yugoslavia but was granted her croatian nationality by italian officials) spoke at length with a nice lady at the Croatian Embassy in Trieste: she was very involved but could not do anything, everything is in Italy’s Foreign Ministry hands, she suggested to keep asking, to water torture italian officials.
But this proceedings may act against Mirko: once they hear his name, they may shut the doors in front of him, maybe forever.
A few examples, and they all seem to point in the same direction: that of the water stream running from the wolf above to the lamb below, and the wolf complaining for the lamb to pollute his water.
Either we ask or answer, we, risk professionals, have to make sure what our words will imply.