Accendo Reliability

Your Reliability Engineering Professional Development Site

  • Home
  • About
    • Contributors
    • About Us
    • Colophon
    • Survey
  • Reliability.fm
    • Speaking Of Reliability
    • Rooted in Reliability: The Plant Performance Podcast
    • Quality during Design
    • CMMSradio
    • Way of the Quality Warrior
    • Critical Talks
    • Asset Performance
    • Dare to Know
    • Maintenance Disrupted
    • Metal Conversations
    • The Leadership Connection
    • Practical Reliability Podcast
    • Reliability Hero
    • Reliability Matters
    • Reliability it Matters
    • Maintenance Mavericks Podcast
    • Women in Maintenance
    • Accendo Reliability Webinar Series
  • Articles
    • CRE Preparation Notes
    • NoMTBF
    • on Leadership & Career
      • Advanced Engineering Culture
      • ASQR&R
      • Engineering Leadership
      • Managing in the 2000s
      • Product Development and Process Improvement
    • on Maintenance Reliability
      • Aasan Asset Management
      • AI & Predictive Maintenance
      • Asset Management in the Mining Industry
      • CMMS and Maintenance Management
      • CMMS and Reliability
      • Conscious Asset
      • EAM & CMMS
      • Everyday RCM
      • History of Maintenance Management
      • Life Cycle Asset Management
      • Maintenance and Reliability
      • Maintenance Management
      • Plant Maintenance
      • Process Plant Reliability Engineering
      • RCM Blitz®
      • ReliabilityXperience
      • Rob’s Reliability Project
      • The Intelligent Transformer Blog
      • The People Side of Maintenance
      • The Reliability Mindset
    • on Product Reliability
      • Accelerated Reliability
      • Achieving the Benefits of Reliability
      • Apex Ridge
      • Breaking Bad for Reliability
      • Field Reliability Data Analysis
      • Metals Engineering and Product Reliability
      • Musings on Reliability and Maintenance Topics
      • Product Validation
      • Reliability by Design
      • Reliability Competence
      • Reliability Engineering Insights
      • Reliability in Emerging Technology
      • Reliability Knowledge
    • on Risk & Safety
      • CERM® Risk Insights
      • Equipment Risk and Reliability in Downhole Applications
      • Operational Risk Process Safety
    • on Systems Thinking
      • The RCA
      • Communicating with FINESSE
    • on Tools & Techniques
      • Big Data & Analytics
      • Experimental Design for NPD
      • Innovative Thinking in Reliability and Durability
      • Inside and Beyond HALT
      • Inside FMEA
      • Institute of Quality & Reliability
      • Integral Concepts
      • Learning from Failures
      • Progress in Field Reliability?
      • R for Engineering
      • Reliability Engineering Using Python
      • Reliability Reflections
      • Statistical Methods for Failure-Time Data
      • Testing 1 2 3
      • The Hardware Product Develoment Lifecycle
      • The Manufacturing Academy
  • eBooks
  • Resources
    • Special Offers
    • Accendo Authors
    • FMEA Resources
    • Glossary
    • Feed Forward Publications
    • Openings
    • Books
    • Webinar Sources
    • Journals
    • Higher Education
    • Podcasts
  • Courses
    • Your Courses
    • 14 Ways to Acquire Reliability Engineering Knowledge
    • Live Courses
      • Introduction to Reliability Engineering & Accelerated Testings Course Landing Page
      • Advanced Accelerated Testing Course Landing Page
    • Integral Concepts Courses
      • Reliability Analysis Methods Course Landing Page
      • Applied Reliability Analysis Course Landing Page
      • Statistics, Hypothesis Testing, & Regression Modeling Course Landing Page
      • Measurement System Assessment Course Landing Page
      • SPC & Process Capability Course Landing Page
      • Design of Experiments Course Landing Page
    • The Manufacturing Academy Courses
      • An Introduction to Reliability Engineering
      • Reliability Engineering Statistics
      • An Introduction to Quality Engineering
      • Quality Engineering Statistics
      • FMEA in Practice
      • Process Capability Analysis course
      • Root Cause Analysis and the 8D Corrective Action Process course
      • Return on Investment online course
    • Industrial Metallurgist Courses
    • FMEA courses Powered by The Luminous Group
      • FMEA Introduction
      • AIAG & VDA FMEA Methodology
    • Barringer Process Reliability Introduction
      • Barringer Process Reliability Introduction Course Landing Page
    • Fault Tree Analysis (FTA)
    • Foundations of RCM online course
    • Reliability Engineering for Heavy Industry
    • How to be an Online Student
    • Quondam Courses
  • Webinars
    • Upcoming Live Events
    • Accendo Reliability Webinar Series
  • Calendar
    • Call for Papers Listing
    • Upcoming Webinars
    • Webinar Calendar
  • Login
    • Member Home
Home » Articles » on Risk & Safety » CERM® Risk Insights » Drivers of Positive ‘Risk Culture’

by Greg Hutchins Leave a Comment

Drivers of Positive ‘Risk Culture’

Drivers of Positive ‘Risk Culture’

Guest Post by Patrick Ow (first posted on CERM ® RISK INSIGHTS – reposted here with permission)

People conclude what is expected of them is based on cues received from the forces that they face daily. These forces drive what they believe and how they should behave – in either constructive or defensive ways. These behaviours can either enables or inhibits effective risk management.

These forces also influence how people:

  1. View, identify, manage, and report risks.
  2. How do they use risk management processes to create value, make decisions, and set and achieve objectives.
  3. Improve organisational performance.

The attitude towards risks and risk management varies from person to person, from unit to unit, and from stakeholder to stakeholder. It can also be influenced by social context and surrounding culture.

How individuals perceive risks forms a significant part of ‘risk culture’ outcome. The attitudes of individuals may have a notable impact on the attitude of the whole organisation.

People can be more loss averse than others, have different attitudes towards different types of risks, or perceive many aspects of risks (e.g., whether the risk is known or unknown) in different ways. Experts may perceive certain risks in a completely different way than non-experts.

What drives behaviours and decision-making?

Based on an analysis of 25 perspectives, theories, and models that focus on decision-making and behaviour, the Behavioural Drivers Model seeks to answer the question, “Why do people do what they do?” ( Petit, 2019)

The conceptual model consists of a total of more than 130 possible drivers of behaviour, grouped into the following three categories:

  1. Psychology – Gathering individual cognitive and emotional drivers such as cognitive biases, interest, attitude, self-efficacy, intent, limited rationality, and personal characteristics.
  2. Sociology – Determinants related to interactions within organisations, groups, and society at large such as social influence, meta-norms, and context.
  3. Environment – Structural elements such as public sector institutions, government policies, infrastructures, and information.

Risk management can specifically be perceived in two ways under the sociology category:

  1. Perceptions of organisational practices (i.e., How we do things around here) that impact risk management.
  2. Perceptions of risk management (i.e., How risk management is practised around here).

How we do things around here

Perceptions of organisational practices, or how we do things around here, can either have a positive or negative impact on how risk management is practised, and risk is viewed in organisations.

Organisational practices that impact positive ‘risk culture’ and the risk management maturity:

  • Strategy and objectives – The extent to which the organisation can clearly articulate and implement its strategy and related objectives across all organisational layers, right down to each individual, to satisfy customers’ requirements and be successful. Every individual, team, and workgroup must be clear as to what success looks like and how success will be measured and rewarded. The appropriate organisational structures and design – vertically and horizontally – set the right foundation for strategy execution and achievement of objectives.
  • Structures – The extent to which the organisation is arranged, controlled, and operated with the appropriate structures, mechanisms, and arrangements by which:
    • Strategies and plans are formed and executed.
    • Communication and decision-making processes are implemented.
    • Accountable individuals, teams, and workgroups are empowered and involved to make decisions, perform at their best, and be held to account with the available resources and support.
  • Performance management – The extent to which the organisation monitors and reinforces individual performance.
  • Individual goal setting – The extent to which individual, team, and workgroup goals are designed to be positive, empowering, and motivating to achieve organisational goals and objectives.
  • Individual job design – The extent to which job design can transform inputs into outputs.
  • Communications – The extent to which people communicate and interact with each other. There are open and planned channels of communication outlining the ‘what’, ‘why’, and ‘how’ in all directions. Informal lines of communication are vital in underpinning the more formal organisational structures that supported risk management.
  • Leadership – The extent to which organisational leaders and managers demonstrate positive leadership and management behaviours and become aware of their behaviours.

How risk management is practised around here

Attitudes, perceptions, and feelings derived as an outcome of organisational cultures can influence how risk is viewed and how risk management is practised in organisations: (Paalanen, 2013; Park, 2019)

  1. Formality – This relates to how the business is managed; how flexible or rigid organisational processes are; what is the attitude toward adhering to or bending rules, policies, and regulations; and how much intuition or judgement can be used. The two extreme ends of the formality spectrum:
    1. Formal – Formal rules, procedures and processes are used extensively in daily operations and the running of the business; risk management relies heavily on compliance with rules and procedures; processes are followed in the same way in all situations; there are many formal controls, checks and decision making; focus on risk management for compliance. Legislation, regulatory requirements, corporate codes, and professional codes of conduct have a direct effect on attitudes and practices about risk management.
    2. Informal – People rely on intuition and judgment in daily operations; risk management is intuition-based where there is accountability, agility, and freedom to decide; processes are flexible and situations are assessed case-by-case to create or protect value; there are only a few or minimal formal controls, checks and processes; focus on risk management for decision-making. Discussions about risk are more likely to focus on the exploitation of upside opportunities and connect strategy and risk in an implicit and unstructured way, potentially leading to inconsistent risk management decisions.

A range of formal and informal risk management mechanisms for organising risk management activities is listed in the table below. (ACCA, 2019)

Despite the importance of having both formal and informal mechanisms, organisations often favour and focus on establishing formal mechanisms, while underestimating the value of informal mechanisms. There is a tension between formal and informal risk management, where both do not co-exist easily in practice.

  1. Decision-making – This relates to how much effort is spent to prepare for decisions, how fast decisions are made, how detailed decisions are, and when decisions are made. The two extreme ends of the decision-making spectrum:
    1. Deliberate – Gather as much information as possible for extensive analysis and decision-making; decisions are pushed up the hierarchy or made when planned.
    2. Dynamic – Decisions are made fast or even if there are large uncertainties; decisions are based on intuition or rules of thumb.
  2. Risk acceptance – This relates to how risk is understood whether a risk is seen as an acceptable or unacceptable part of life, or is seen as a threat or variance. Every individual comes to an organisation with their perception of risk. The two extreme ends of the risk acceptance spectrum:
    1. Avoiding risk – Risk is something ‘bad’ that should be avoided; risk is seen as a threat; risk is quantified as actual values.
    2. Accepting risk – Risk is something that must be accepted as part of daily life; risk is seen as a deviation or variation; risk is qualified as an order of magnitude.
  3. Focus – This relates to the primary focus of management and operations concerning risk and risk management. The two extreme ends of the focus spectrum:
    1. Technical – The focus is on technical factors and numeric parameters such as profit or production; risk management focuses on technical risks.
    2. Behavioural – The focus is on soft parameters and behavioural factors such as motivation, competence or reputational; risk management focuses on human factors (e.g., safety, reputation, competence).

Both formal and informal risk management is required

A risk register provides a formal risk management mechanism for reporting on the organisation’s risk profile. But the register may produce inaccurate or incomplete information if organisational members do not fully understand how to use it or may perceive it as bureaucratic, or purely for compliance purposes.

This is where informal mechanisms such as social networks and risk conversations come into play to complement formal mechanisms.

While formal risk management mechanisms can be used to provide a visible and stable structure and defined methodologies and governance, it is the informal risk management mechanisms that support the execution of these formal mechanisms and help to fill in any gaps, especially knowledge and application gaps.

People may even say that the important stuff is not the bit of paper with all the output on it. It is the conversations, understanding, buy-in and commitment that you have to fill that bit of paper in that matters most!

References

The Association of Chartered Certified Accountants (ACCA) (2019) ‘Risk and performance: Embedding risk management’. Available at: https://www.accaglobal.com/content/dam/ACCA_Global/professional-insights/embedding-risk/pi-embedding-risk-management.pdf

Paalanen, A. (2013) ‘Risk Culture – a descriptive model’, Masters Thesis, Aalto University – School of Business.

Petit, V. (2019). The Behavioural Drivers Model: A Conceptual Framework for Social and Behaviour Change Programming. UNICEF. Available at: https://www.unicef.org/mena/reports/behavioural-drivers-model

Professional bio

As a Chartered Accountant with over 25 years of international risk management and corporate governance experience in the private, not-for-profit, and public sectors, Patrick helps individuals and organizations make better decisions to achieve better results as a corporate and personal trainer and coach at Practicalrisktraining.com.

Given that improving risk culture and maturity has become a top of mind for many executives and risk professionals, he has conducted in-depth research into the topic and written several articles, which can be found at https://practicalrisktraining.com/risk-culture.

Patrick has authored several eBooks including Strategic Risk Management Reimagined: How to Improve Performance and Strategy Execution.

Filed Under: Articles, CERM® Risk Insights, on Risk & Safety

About Greg Hutchins

Greg Hutchins PE CERM is the evangelist of Future of Quality: Risk®. He has been involved in quality since 1985 when he set up the first quality program in North America based on Mil Q 9858 for the natural gas industry. Mil Q became ISO 9001 in 1987

He is the author of more than 30 books. ISO 31000: ERM is the best-selling and highest-rated ISO risk book on Amazon (4.8 stars). Value Added Auditing (4th edition) is the first ISO risk-based auditing book.

« Getting the Right Parts
Contents of a Reliability Improvement Policy »

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

CERM® Risk Insights series Article by Greg Hutchins, Editor and noted guest authors

Join Accendo

Receive information and updates about articles and many other resources offered by Accendo Reliability by becoming a member.

It’s free and only takes a minute.

Join Today

Recent Articles

  • Contents of a Reliability Improvement Policy
  • Drivers of Positive ‘Risk Culture’
  • Getting the Right Parts
  • The Biggest FMEA Mistake You Can’t Afford to Make!
  • Team Building: Strengthening Connections for Success

© 2025 FMS Reliability · Privacy Policy · Terms of Service · Cookies Policy

Book the Course with John
  Ask a question or send along a comment. Please login to view and use the contact form.
This site uses cookies to give you a better experience, analyze site traffic, and gain insight to products or offers that may interest you. By continuing, you consent to the use of cookies. Learn how we use cookies, how they work, and how to set your browser preferences by reading our Cookies Policy.