The Risk of Certainty and How to Manage It

The Risk of Certainty and How to Manage It

by | Jul 19, 2016 | Leadership

Even after evidence indicates we are wrong, we find it hard to change. Often it is because we are certain we are right. This risk of certainty is perhaps the most costly form of risk and the most manageable.1

Even after evidence surfaced that cigarettes contain toxic chemicals that kill, many intelligent, aware people keep smoking.

Even after manufactures started admitting that their “knock-off” brand contained exactly the same ingredients, many people keep buying the more expensive option.

Even after new technology made the old way of doing things absurd, many people refuse to embrace new technology.

And I could go on and on.

One of the reasons we do this is that it works. Certainty makes life more efficient. We don’t have to stop and ask a lot of questions or read or do research with each step we take. Once something proves effective, we do it again. Once someone proves trustworthy, we trust them again.

But There Is A Turn

But people do stop smoking. People do change brands and people do embrace new technology. At some point, evidence overwhelms us to the point we change.

The risk arises when we are so certain that the evidence has to not just prove that something or someone is better. It has to be overwhelming enough to prove we are wrong.

And who does the evidence have to overwhelm? A judge? No. A jury? No. This evidence has to overwhelm the harshest trier of fact, us. It has to convince us that the new way is better AND that we are wrong to hold onto something or someone we are certain is right.

The Risk

The distance between what the relevant evidence proves and what we are certain of is risk. It is in this space that competitive advantage is lost, betrayal matures, and cancer metastasizes.

Managing the Risk of Certainty

The way to manage the risk of certainty is to hold belief loosely. Be willing to be wrong. Rather than openly committing to a position that may one day prove incorrect, commit to a process of improvement. What does this look like?

It is the difference between saying, “this is how we do it” and “this is how we do it until a better way comes along.”

It is the difference between saying, “I trust him implicitly” and reconciling your bank account.

It is the difference between certainty and occasional verifying, even in long-term relationships.

Isn’t This Risky

There is some risk that comes with questioning. If questioned, a long-term friend may feel like you are not as close as they thought. There is some risk that comes with change. New technology almost always introduces new challenges into a process. But these risks are different. We anticipate the risk and manage the risk as they appear.

This is different than the risk of certainty that strikes when we are not anticipating it and are usually in the worst position to respond.

If risk is inevitable – and it is – it is best to trade the risk of certainty for a risk we can manage.  

###

Brandon Blankenship
Latest posts by Brandon Blankenship (see all)
Brandon Blankenship
Latest posts by Brandon Blankenship (see all)
  1. Thanks to Seth Godin, The Flip Is Elusive, on which this post is roughly based. ↩
Law Firms of Endearment

Law Firms of Endearment

by | Mar 4, 2016 | Law, Leadership

Is there such a thing as Law Firms of Endearment? The authors of Firm of Endearment define a firm of endearment as a firm that is reorganizing and optimizing in response to the new age we live in, the Age of Transcendence.1 An example of a non-legal Firm of Endearment would be Whole Foods.

Age of Transcendence

In essence, the Age of Transcendence emerged around 1990 as the adult majority started getting over 40 years old and the internet started making information readily accessible to the masses. With the shifting maturity of the population, views about business started shifting away from materialism and toward meaning. One manifestation of this shift is a consumer who is now motivated more by experience than materialism.2

Law Firms of Endearment

A Firm of Endearment “…strives through their words and deeds to endear themselves to all their primary stakeholders.”3 For law firms, primary stakeholders are clients, benches, bars, clients, employees, suppliers, communities, and partners. “By aligning the interests of all in such a way that no stakeholder group gains at the expense of other stakeholder groups … they all prosper together.”4

Do They Exist?

The answer is, we don’t know yet. Converging market trends seem to indicate that law firms of endearment must emerge for the legal profession, as we know it, to survive. Today, however, no qualitative or quantitative standards have been established to qualify law firms as law firms of endearment. Who will step up and establish these standards? Will it be regulatory agencies like state bars? Trade associations? A consortium of law firms and organizations? More importantly, what role will you play?

###

Brandon Blankenship
Latest posts by Brandon Blankenship (see all)
  1. ©2016 Brandon L. Blankenship. ↩
  2. See generally, Wolfe, David B., The Third Cultural Age of Modern Times (Retrieved 4March2016). ↩
  3. Sisodia, Raj; Sheth, Jag; Wolfe, David B., Firms of Endearment, Second Edition, p. xxiii. ↩
  4. Supra. ↩