Risk Assessment: Hillary vs. Donald

Two weeks before the election I knew that Mrs. Clinton was in trouble. I’m no political oracle, but I can read the signs.

Or the lack of signs, as the case may be.

I live in an overwhelmingly Democrat area. Normally, in our small town, political signs do not appear on lawns until just before the election. This year none appeared. There were NO Trump OR Clinton signs anywhere to be seen.

The absence of Trump signs was easy to explain. Our local Democrats were obviously not rooting for ‘the Donald’. Even the few Trump supporters were probably afraid to put Trump signs anywhere near their homes (See below). But where were the Hillary signs? None, nada, zilch.

My conclusion? Our ‘loyal’ democrats were really closet Trump sympathizers or perhaps only casually pro-Hillary. They were far too tentative about Hillary to put out campaign signs.

Today, we know the results of the election.

But I saw this coming back then…

The Three Easy Steps of Risk Assessment:

Trump supporters performed a classic risk assessment in considering whether to put out signs.

    • of the environment including the risk criteria which is tolerable or acceptable (i.e. no damage to life or limb)
    • Identify the risk and its positive and negative consequences
      • Risk of broken windows (negative)
      • Risk of fist fights (negative)
    • Risk Analysis
      • Analyze the severity of consequences (medium to high)
        • Likelihood (very high)
        • Consequences (severe)
    • Risk Evaluation
      • When evaluating the fully identified level of risk against the pre-established risk criteria, we determine that the risk is above our tolerance level
    • Not placing Trump signs will prevent the negative consequences of fist fights and property damages.


LEARN MORE ABOUT ISO 31000 at www.erm31000.com

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.