The good work of evaluating comparative risk can be undermined by basic human frailty. Today’s article takes another look at the challenge of choosing.
|
The good work of evaluating comparative risk can be undermined by basic human frailty. Today’s article takes another look at the challenge of choosing. Though cost-based accounting methods can be credited with advancing organizational ability to dissect operating processes and analyze where change might be most beneficial, cost accounting also has a downside. The very process of apportioning costs applies component-based to thinking to system-wide problems. Does this mean that cost allocations are bad and should not be done? Definitely not! (though I have discovered that this topic has a strange knack for bringing out the argumentative extremist in far too many businessmen). The solution is to recognize that component-based thinking creates a certain type of bias, and that bias can be offset by approaching the same problem (or, ideally, set of problems) with system-based thinking. Here’s an example of an actual problem |
||
|
Copyright © 2010 thinking/critical - All Rights Reserved |
||