National Association of Counties *
Washington, D.C. Vol. 32,
No. 14 * July 31, 2000
Previous story | Table of
Contents | Next
story
Foreseeability
Analysis
The HR Doctors favorite poem is Maud Muller by Whittier. Near the
end of the poem are the famous lines Of all sad words of tongue or pen,
the saddest are these, It might have been.
When things dont
turn out the way we expect or when unanticipated events, mistakes, or
disasters intervene and cripple our plans, we all have a tendency to say
to ourselves or to others words like those written by Whittier. If we
could only have demonstrated the same wisdom before the fact that we apply
afterwards, our careers as stewards of the public trust would be far more
successful.
There is one common characteristic in every crisis.
That characteristic is the search for a scapegoat. We see demonstrations
of how effective we have become as individuals and as a nation in
searching for scapegoats by tuning into the many congressional committee
hearings. In our own agencies we employ auditors who, as the old saying
goes, come on to the field after the battle and bayonet the wounded. The
HR Doctor recognizes the importance of after-the-fact analysis of events
so that we can learn from mistakes and benefit from them. In fact, in the
hard sciences such as physics and chemistry, the real key to learning and
advancing can be found in learning from our mistakes, not our successes.
In Public Administration, however, we apply due diligence more
often than not in after-the-fact inquiries than in initial work, trying,
as well as we poor humans can, to see into the future.
The HR
Doctor calls for more attention to a concept called foreseeability
analysis. For example, in the very serious challenge of preventing and
reducing the risks of workplace violence, the entire process should begin
with the question What dangers and risks can we reasonably foresee or
predict? From the pro-active assessment of a team can come a list of
hazards or possible outcomes that can focus the organizations attention
on needs and lead to productive policies and actions.
In the
workplace violence example, the team may identify possible future
incidents such as parking lot assaults. That may lead to identifying
physical security weaknesses such as the need for more lighting. By
improving visibility in the parking lot, the agency can get in front of
a realistic threat scenario. The foreseeability analysis may identify the
fact that there are no controls or mitigation measures present at all in
the organization. In other words there is no policy. This recognition can
lead to creation of a pro-active policy, training for employees and
managers, the banning of deadly weapons, and other steps that can render
the agency far safer from the threat of violence standpoint but also from
a litigation liability and defense perspective.
Every agency would
be well served by beginning a public policy debate with a foreseeability
analysis. This is certainly true in human resources management, where
concepts such as liability control and projecting ahead to try to identify
agency needs is critical. Asking the what if question opens doors to
more effective administration. When we dont focus on diligent forward
thinking, we run the risk of stumbling ahead right into a sliding glass
door we didnt see or falling off the edge of a cliff we didnt expect to
find.
The absence of foresight is either short sight or no sight.
Neither of the latter two options is appropriate in modern HR management
or in administration in general. Foreseeability analysis is one powerful
tool in an agencys tool kit. Please know however, that it can also be a
powerful tool in our personal lives as we look ahead to the growth of our
family, our own retirement, or our dreams for a bright future.
The
HR Doctor foresees all the best for you. Dont forget to visit at http://www.hrdr.net/.
(Rosenberg is the Human Resources director for Broward
County, Fla.)
Previous story | Table of
Contents | Next
story |