Culture and Behavioural Risk as Emergent Properties
Paterson argues that calling a failure a culture problem does not finish the causal analysis. Investigate how goals, incentives, processes, resources, and external pressures produced the behavior being described.
THE IDEA
Considering ‘Culture’, ‘Tone at the Top’ and ‘Behavioural Risk’
Human Factors thinking is mainstream in aviation and other high-reliability organizations.18 However, in the financial services sector and some other contexts, you will hear managers and regulators refer to the causes of problems using terms such as ‘poor culture’,19 ‘a poor tone at the top’20 or because of ‘behavioural risk’.
Thinking of causes in terms of organisational culture encourages us to think more broadly than just what goes on ‘at the front end’ (e.g. in the cockpit or control room). But I would like to emphasise that it's very easy to think a ‘toxic culture’ or ‘poor tone at the top’ can explain the root cause of failings. But, there is more to it than that. After all, if we have a ‘toxic culture’, a ‘fear culture’ or a ‘poor tone from the top’, do we understand the root causes of why the culture etc. has become like that?
A systems thinking approach tells us that the behaviour and culture of an organisation don't ‘float’ freestanding from the organisation and its context. Instead, behaviour ‘emerges’ from organisational goals, processes, organisational structure, alongside external factors (such as pressure from competition or stakeholders or budget constraints) as well as human factors (such as stress levels, resentments about pay, etc.).21
The increasing interest in behavioural science and behavioural risk links closely to the discipline of Human Factors. And the question becomes; did we adequately think about behavioural risks when we were designing systems, policies, processes, roles, responsibilities, etc.?22 So, it's an organisational, management‐level problem if human factors and behavioural risks are not adequately considered. An attributed statement by W. Edwards Deming emphasizes the role of systems:
‘94% of the results we experience in the workplace, both good or poor, is a function of the systems and processes in which people work, not the efforts of people.’23
When to use it
Investigating a corporate failure to avoid superficial attribution and identify systemic flaws.
Designing organizational change initiatives that address root causes rather than just symptoms of cultural issues.
Regulatory reviews of financial institutions where 'culture' is a focus, but deeper system-level factors must be considered.
Developing safety programs in high-risk industries that go beyond blaming individuals and look at system design.
FROM THEORY TO EVERYDAY LIFE
In practice
Financial Scandals
After a sales scandal, an organization describes its culture as toxic. A systems review asks how targets, incentives, oversight, and competitive pressure influenced the conduct. The label identifies a concern; the investigation seeks the mechanisms behind it.
Safety Incidents in High-Risk Industries
A 'poor safety culture' in an airline or nuclear plant might be cited after an incident. But deeper analysis often shows that cultural issues are emergent from resource constraints, conflicting priorities, and design of procedures.
A MOMENT TO REFLECT
Put it to work.
When you hear a problem blamed on 'toxic culture,' what questions should you ask to uncover the underlying systemic causes?
How might the design of performance metrics and incentives be influencing the observable behaviour and culture in your organization?
In what ways are external pressures (competition, regulation, budget) shaping the culture of your team or company?
References
- Unknown (attributed) — W. Edwards Deming
CONTINUE THE CONVERSATION
Source texts
- Beyond the Five Whys Root Cause Analysis and Systems Thinking (James C. Paterson)