Immediate Vault Immediate Access

Ken Feinberg on the “Two Types of Risk”

Ken Feinberg, the "claims czar," says there are two types of risk that challenge leadership.

Ken Feinberg just might have the most difficult job out there. He has worked as mediator/administrator in the wake of tragedies and natural disasters such as 9/11, the shootings at Virginia Tech, Hurricane Katrina and the Holocaust slave labor litigation. He is currently serving as the administrator for the $20 billion BP oil spill claims fund.

It is Feinberg’s job to sit with victim’s families and to sift through claims from each disaster in order to figure out how much their personal and financial loss is worth. It is a job few envy.

But through his years of experience with mediation and dispute resolution, he has learned that there are two types of risk that challenge leadership:

  1. Risk as defined by the assignment that you’ve undertaken
  2. External risk — or in other words, the external pressures on you or the stress level factored into how you perform

“You have to define risk with each situation [you’re presented],” he said. “When I pay a fisherman, I find a payment that ends their concern, but what is the likely risk that the Gulf is safe? Have I factored into that reward a good understanding of future risk to fishing in the Gulf? Inherent is the notion of a substantive definition of risk.”

In relating that knowledge to his recent tasks as administrator of the 9/11 victim’s compensation fund and the BP oil spill claims fund, he noted:

“When administering the 9/11 fund, it turned out that my evaluation of risk was poorly done — I underestimated the support of the victim’s families and the public in general. I evaluated correctly with the BP case — I’m a human pinata.”

More so than knowing and incorporating the two types of risk that challenge leadership, those in charge should also incorporate certain characteristics. The following are those Feinberg truly believes in and which he has incorporated during his challenging assignments:

  • Convey a sense of certainty
  • Be transparent — “The more sunlight I let into the room, the easier it is,” he said.
  • Consistency — no bias or favoritism
  • Flexibility — keep an open mind
  • Use sound judgement — “Give the people impacted by your decisions a say.”
  • Delegate to good people — “Staff is the key.”

Feinberg’s job is not easy, but it has taught him a lifetime worth of lessons regarding leadership, risk and fairness.

Check back over the next several days for more posts relating to the amazing speakers I was fortunate enough to hear at the Wharton Leadership Conference, including Jane Golden, executive director of the City of Philadelphia Mural Arts Program; James Quigley, author of As One; and senior partner at Deloitte; and Colonel Jack Jacobs, NBC analyst and recipient of the Medal of Honor.

Weather Variations Cost Nearly $500 Billion Per Year

Major disasters rightfully receive vast coverage. When the earth shakes like it did earlier this year in Japan or the entire Midwest is ravaged by spiraling winds as it was all spring, the devastation makes it easy to comprehend the magnitude of the loss.

But it turns out that the United States also loses nearly half a trillion per year from less drastic weather events. Subtler causes, such as rain and mild cold fronts, are a not-at-all-subtle drag on the economy.

New research indicates that routine weather events such as rain and cooler-than-average days can add up to an annual economic impact of as much as $485 billion in the United States.

The study, led by the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR), found that finance, manufacturing, agriculture, and every other sector of the economy is sensitive to changes in the weather. The impacts can be felt in every state.

buy cytotec online healthymomsandbabes.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/jpg/cytotec.html no prescription pharmacy

“It’s clear that our economy isn’t weatherproof,” says NCAR scientist Jeffrey Lazo, the lead author. “Even routine changes in the weather can add up to substantial impacts on the U.S. economy.”

A University Corporation for Atmospheric research (UCAR) release reports that this is the first study to apply quantitative economic analysis to estimate the weather sensitivity of the entire U.S. economy. The research could help policymakers determine whether it is worthwhile to invest in enhanced forecasts and other strategies that could better protect economic activity from weather impacts.

buy minocin online healthymomsandbabes.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/jpg/minocin.html no prescription pharmacy

Maybe this will provide a little perspective the next time you think your day has been ruined just because you forgot your umbrella at home and got a little damp on the way to work.

At least precipitation didn’t cost you $485 billion.

(UPDATE: You can find this and other great risk-related posts in the latest edition of The Cavalcade of Risk.)

Generational Challenges in the Workforce

Jennifer Deal earned her Ph.D in industrial/organizational psychology and currently serves as senior research sceintist for the Center for Creative Leadership.

As I mentioned in yesterday’s post, there were eight amazing speakers at the 15th Annual Wharton Leadership Conference — one of them being Jennifer Deal, senior research scientist at the Center for Creative Leadership (CCL). Deal’s work focuses on global leadership and generational differences, especially within the workforce. In fact, Wharton uses her research in many of their MBA classes to prepare future business leaders for the generational challenges.

It is known that currently there are four generations within the workforce: Silents (those born between 1925 and 1945), Baby Boomers (born 1946 to 1964), Generation X (born 1960 to 1981) and Millenials (born 1982 to 2001). It is also known that each generation differs greatly and trying to manage all four (or even two, for that matter) within the workplace is a challenge for anyone.

Deal stressed the following:

  • Newer generations (some Xers and most Millenials) struggle with the ability to take direction from authority. According to Deal, this personality trait stems for the way most of them were raised — their parents played more of the “friend” role than the “authority figure” role. It is, therefore, natural for them to “dislike being told what to do,” Deal stated
  • Older generations (Silents and Baby Boomers) are challenged by the ever-evolving technology landscape
  • Newer generations (mostly Millenials) expect immediate gratification and acknowledgement, meaning they desperately want their achievements to be recognized, and recognized immediately
  • Newer generations (mostly Millenials) are desperate for feedback. They want to know what to do to succeed.

Encouraging each generation’s strengths and working to improve their weaknesses is what any good leader or manager must work towards.

In closing, Deal reminded us of three key points:

  • The environment affects the employee landscape
  • People of all generations want respect and are pretty much equally committed to their organization
  • Conditions change

Check back over the next several days for more posts relating to the amazing speakers I was fortunate enough to hear at the Wharton Leadership Conference, including Jane Golden, executive director of the City of Philadelphia Mural Arts Program; James Quigley, author of As One; and senior partner at Deloitte; and Colonel Jack Jacobs, NBC analyst and recipient of the Medal of Honor.

Words of Wisdom from Bill McNabb, President and CEO of Vanguard and Born Leader

Vanguard President and CEO Bill McNabb does not believe in competing departments.

We are living in a changing economy where even the experts are unsure of what’s to come. It is imperative now more than ever before to have effective leadership in the next generation of managers as well as among those currently serving in managerial roles. With that in mind, it makes sense that the Wharton Business School would title their 15th annual leadership conference, “Leading in a Reset Economy and Uncertain World.”

I was able to attend this one-day conference yesterday, which was held on the Wharton campus in Philadelphia, and I must say, it was the best conference I have ever attended thus far. The first of eight speakers was F. William (Bill) McNabb III, head of The Vanguard Group, an investment company with $1.8 trillion under management, making it one of the largest investment management firms in the world.

McNabb didn’t land the job of president and CEO of this mammoth money managing machine by relying on luck. He knows a thing or two about leadership and he shared his wisdom with the 200 or so in attendance, starting off with what he calls “the leadership standard,” which entails:

  • Managing crew
  • Developing crew
  • Relationship management
  • Leadership impact
  • Business results
  • Conceptual thinking
  • Business acumen

Using a military analogy, McNabb asked the crowd if they would chose to be in a fox hole with those they manage. “You have to have total trust within your team,” he said. “This is the most important element to building a high-performing working group.” McNabb is adamant that complete trust within a team inevitably equals effective production and superior performance. Seeing the success of Vanguard, it’s hard to argue with the man.

One thing people may find interesting, and maybe a bit peculiar, is that McNabb does not believe in competition across different areas of the organization. “There are no competing departments,” he said. “We measure results holistically — actions are tied to the firm’s results, not individual results.”

When asked about how he measures the success of the firm, he quickly replied, “The only thing that matters for us at the end of the day is if we’re making money for our clients. We have no formal measurement of success — [the client’s success] is what we go on.”

Another audience member questioned the fact that he failed to mention the hot button term “innovation” during his entire presentation. Good question, I thought. But that thought vanished after listening to McNabb’s response:

“We don’t want to be innovative because we don’t want to play around with people’s money,” he said, adding that innovation should be left to research and development and manufacturing companies, not firms that handle other people’s money and act as fiduciaries.

Well put, McNabb.

Check back over the next several days for more posts relating to the amazing speakers I was fortunate enough to hear at the Wharton Leadership Conference, including Jen Deal of the Center for Creative Leadership, James Quigley, author of As One and senior partner at Deloitte and Colonel Jack Jacobs, NBC analyst and recipient of the Medal of Honor.