Handling money and flu transmission

Although I miss the Evening Standard newsellers in London, my all time favourite used to give me now and then a lobster or a brace of crabs caught from his lobster pots off Portland where he now lives, I recognise that if they have to be replaced by piles of free newspapers that this is a better time than most for it to happen.

How come? Well the Evening Standard was selling 250,000 copies 5 nights a week. Money changed hands each time, often the only time in the day that people handled money. If you want to spread influenza quickly it is a good way to do it. So perhaps the unintended consequence of the loss of Evening Standard newsellers is a slowing of the transmission of the H1N1 flu virus.

"Fashion is Risk"

The quote that provides the title of this blog comes from Sir Philip Green, the owner of Arcadia.
It is a good example of marketing as a risk management tool for upside risk. Fashion is about understanding and creating trends in the market place, about limiting the downside by not ordering too much stock , by offering at the right prices for the target market and by playing safe for at least part of a company's range when they are as big as the Arcadia Group.

But it is also about taking risks, like starting up in New York where Top Shop is a new, unknown name. How does Sir Philip mitigate the risk? By linking with Kate Moss who is a well known fashion icon in New York, by careful research as to what will sell at what prices and in what sizes and colours, by choosing a store in a great location so that it gets maximum visibility and by revving up the publicity machine.

Yes fashion is risk but a smart operator like Sir Philip knows how to manage the downside so he gets the upside benefit.

Suicide risk

France Telecom has experienced 24 suicides in the last 18 months amongst its 100,000 employees. Several of the employees have left notes blaming the company's culture change since it was privatised for their action.

The French put great store by solidarity with their fellow workers, far more so than in the UK. Yet the suicide rate was 17.6 per 100,000 people in France in 2005 (the latest date WHO data available on wikipedia) against the UK rate of 6.8 for a similarly sized population. In real lives this is a difference of over 6000 a year.

I do not have a simple answer for this difference.

Low tolerance of ambiguity

For those amongst us who have low tolerance of ambiguity, who are only really comfortable when they have certainty in their lives, petty rules are a great comfort. They take the place in a secular society of the religious certainties.

The recent story of two policewomen who were adjudged by Ofsted of having broken the law because they were taking turns looking after each others children is a case in point. The people at Ofsted appear to have abandoned discretion and common sense because they want certainty and the comfort that they cannot be blamed if something then happens to one of the children.

Fact is that by such rigidity they have been blamed for being petty. You have to learn to live with risks and to distinguish which are really important. It is not easy but it is very necessary.

Unremitting vigilance

We are currently in a lull regarding H1N1 influenza cases. Is the virus mutating and wilkl it come back as it did in 1918 far more virulent. No one knows for sure. In them meantime to paraphrase Margaret Chang of the WHO "Rather than blind panic or compacency in the face of the H1N! threat what is required in unremittiong vigilance.

The blunted edge

It was pointed out to me yesterday by a real estate agent from the Pacific North West that the US is taking its lead from Europe on sustainable building methods all because the penalties for developing new systems and products are far more severe in the US if they go wrong in some way. This threat of litigation is blunting the edge of innovation, the desire to take risks in new areas. It is as though they have signed up en masse to the Hippocratic oath - "above all do no harm".

View from the plinth

On Monday this week I went to Trafalgar Square to watch my friend, Lawrence Reed conduct his composition "The Ebb of Acrophobia" from the fourth plinth, the empty one. There was a "flash" orchestra summoned by Lawrence and the Internet of some 30 people, playing a wide variety of instruments and singing lustily when required.

Lawrence suffers from Acrophobia which is the fear of heights - a fear sometimes so intense that it sparks a panic attack. The music reflected his anxiety at being perched up on the plinth.

He risk managed the problem of standing up on the relatively narrow plinth and waving his arms around in order to conduct by sitting down in a camp chair and directing operations most expressively. In the course of the hour he had only one moment when he looked as if he was becoming apprehensive.

The consumption of alcohol after the performance by performers and onlookers was sufficient to alleviate any panic attacks brought on by height, some of us were almost horizontal .

The Liabilities for camera surveillance

With video camera surveillance comes liability. There are three liability issues to be considered.

1 Does the device create a false sense of security? Particularly important when dummy cameras have been used. Also it raises an expectation that the output is being monitored real time and that, in the event of an incident, remedial action will be swift. This could be an issue when school activities are being watched. Lack of attention by the operator, or not having an operator could create liability.
2 Is privacy being invaded? There are cultural norms at work here. Harrah's has cameras in its UK casino restrooms but not in its US ones, yet the drug and terrorist threats being monitored are relevant to both societies.
3 Is there a written policy that explains why video surveillance is needed and identifies how it will be used? If there is not then a challenge to its use may be hard to defend.

Michael Jackson and supply side risk

Michael Jackson was paid advance fees for his sold out concerts. His estate is estimated to be $400 million dollars in debt, so it is unlikely that AEG Live, the promoters, will be seeing any recovery from that, unless the posthumous sales of his back catalogue can provide the necessary boost to the bank account. The evidence to date is of only minimal insurance cover, because Jackson had a history of not making many of his promised appearances and his health was known to be suspect.

Whoever scheduled such a big series was clearly taking a significant risk. They had accurately determined the demand, but had failed to consider adequately the supply side risks. The contract between AEG Live and the artist will make interesting reading as to how certain risks were provided for. As for risk mitigation startegies ,will there be a series of memorial concerts which could fill the O2?

The pigeon's revenge

"Do you eat pigeon?" asked my dentist from Tipperary." They keep dentists in business, because the lead shot wrecks havoc on the molars."

Just one more risk to be aware of.