Part 14 - Decision-making under uncertainty/risk profiling

The term “unknown – unknowns” is now ubiquitous, albeit the vast majority of future uncertain events do not fall into this category. However, it has been used to absolve decision makers from criticism post-event, whereas poor foresight is the prime culprit. Since the start of the 21st century there is increasing talk about uncertainty – particularly in political, economic and social circles – not surprising really, as in the two first decades we have seen waves of events that appear to have taken many people by surprise, including politicians, experts, academics, the media, so-called informed pundits, let alone the rest of us. “Uncertainty” is no longer a conceptual slogan but a reality we are living through. Events from 9/11, Covid 19 to the drip-drip-drip of climate change, have elevated the term “uncertainty” much more into the public domain. Or rather the term is exhorted to justify (often in reaction to inadequate responses to earlier events by decision makers) poor performance post event. In other words, the term is too often applied retrospectively to an event that has already occurred so that the impossibilities of yesterday have morphed into today’s challenge: “it is one thing to be caught out by a wholly novel threat, and quite another to be toppled by something we knew about all along”. A framework for supporting management to address uncertainty has been developed by specialists within the SCNiiC team. The framework dissects the main elements of uncertainty so as to inform management and policy makers where the core drivers lie and to reveal how uncertainty can be better recognised and mitigated. Information relating to Uncertainty is highly dispersed with all sorts of different inputs and interpretations. This framework consists of three core axes which allows for a better understanding of uncertainty and how to mitigate its worst impacts.