Failure of Imagination
Failure of imagination leaves planners unprepared for scenarios they have not seriously considered. The source uses the Titanic’s design and the 9/11 attacks to discuss the limits of a reasonable worst-case scenario.
THE IDEA
Recovery Measure: The Design of the Titanic's Bulkheads
There were many aspects of the Titanic's bulkheads that were state of the art, including electrically operated doors that could be (and were) closed in the event of a breach of the hull (to stop water passing from one watertight compartment to another). The Titanic was also designed so that, if it was damaged, it could stay afloat with four compartments breached.51 The decision about the number of bulkheads that could be safely breached without the Titanic sinking was based on a reasonable worst‐case scenario that there might be damage to the hull because of a strike from another ship.52
The source connects this problem to the ‘failure of imagination’ discussed after the 9/11 attacks of 2001: inadequate preparation for commercial aircraft being used as weapons.53 Blocking out severe scenarios can leave people unprepared. The source also points to the financial crisis of 2007–2008 and the period before the COVID‐19 pandemic. Flight simulators address this planning problem by exposing pilots to unusual challenges, sometimes in combination, to keep unlikely but perilous possibilities in mind.
One more design point about the bulkheads is worth highlighting (which played a role in the rapid sinking). The bulkhead design did not extend all the way from the keel to the outside deck but rather to decks D and E instead.54 This was because having 15 bulkheads, rising upwards all the way to deck level, would have cut across key passenger areas, especially the first‐class lounge, smoking room, dining room, etc.
So, we have a dilemma in the requirements for the bulkheads; on the one hand, we want watertight compartments to protect against flooding, but on the other hand, we need to meet the expectations of first‐class passengers who are looking for unrivalled luxury and space, not smaller rooms separated by heavy metal doors.55
When to use it
Risk assessment in engineering projects: Ensure that plausible worst-case scenarios are not dismissed as too improbable.
Business continuity planning: Regularly test and update plans for rare but high-impact events like cyberattacks or supply chain disruptions.
Personal financial planning: Prepare for job loss, medical emergencies, or market crashes rather than assuming stable conditions.
Aviation safety training: Use flight simulators to expose pilots to unusual combinations of challenges, reducing the risk of failure of imagination.
FROM THEORY TO EVERYDAY LIFE
In practice
Titanic Bulkhead Design
The Titanic's bulkheads were designed to handle a worst-case scenario of four compartments breached from a collision with another ship. However, the design did not account for an iceberg slicing multiple compartments, and the bulkheads did not extend high enough due to passenger space requirements. This failure to imagine a more severe scenario contributed to the rapid sinking.
9/11 Attacks
The failure to imagine an attack using commercial aircraft as weapons led to inadequate security measures at airports and on planes. This exemplifies how blocking out worst-case scenarios can result in catastrophic unpreparedness.
A MOMENT TO REFLECT
Put it to work.
How can you actively avoid blocking out worst-case scenarios in your own planning and decision-making?
What historical or personal examples of failure of imagination can you identify, and what lessons can be drawn from them?
In what ways can you use simulation or scenario planning to keep unlikely but perilous possibilities 'alive' in your mind?
CONTINUE THE CONVERSATION
Source texts
- Beyond the Five Whys Root Cause Analysis and Systems Thinking (James C. Paterson)