Intel Analysis: Executive Risk Fusion Center...

How often do you try and prove that a risk hypothesis is true? Is it possible that each piece of evidence that you collect or information you process is utilized to try and prove that your hypothesis is correct.

Analysis of executive Operational Risk Intelligence in your corporation is typically being processed within the organizational silos of your enterprise business units. How it is being shared, how often and then how it is being analyzed, compared and used to confirm or refute multiple hypotheses, can make the difference in your corporate business survival.

The ACH methodology developed by Richards J. Heuer, Jr., is a vital component of Operational Risk Management (ORM).  It can be utilized with your internal Executive "Risk Fusion" Center where the Board of Directors, Senior Management and corporate risk directors determine the correct strategic course for the future:

Analysis of Competing Hypotheses (ACH) is a simple model for how to think about a complex problem. It is an analytic process that identifies a complete set of alternative hypotheses, systematically evaluates data that is consistent and inconsistent with each hypothesis, and rejects hypotheses that contain too much inconsistent data. ACH takes you through a process for making well-reasoned, analytical judgments. It is particularly useful for issues that require a careful weighing of alternative explanations of what has happened or is happening. ACH can also be used to provide early warning or help you evaluate alternative scenarios of what might happen in the future. ACH helps you overcome, or at least minimize, some of the cognitive limitations that make prescient intelligence analysis so difficult; it helps clarify why analysts are talking past one another and do not understand each other’s interpretation of the data. ACH is grounded in basic insights from cognitive psychology, decision analysis, and the scientific method.

What is the likelihood that the General Manager, Global Security of your enterprise is looking at surveillance information on a rogue employee today to assess workplace threat and to help keep the company safe? Simultaneously, the Chief Information Security Officer (CISO) is analyzing the latest log data from various intrusion systems to determine if the "Advanced Persistent Threat" (APT) has changed it's cyber tactics to steal the latest software R & D architecture from the office suite business unit. The Chief Financial Officer (CFO) and Head of Internal Audit are analyzing the latest revenue reports with the Vice-President of Sales & Marketing to determine why the Asia Pacific team have been losing 8 out of 10 business deals in the forecast pipeline.

The likelihood is high. Each is formulating a hypothesis independently of each other and in most cases they will never know that there is a risk related nexus to the entire enterprise. The reason is that your Executive "Risk Fusion" Center does not exist or is unable to analyze competing questions that are being asked about potential areas of concern. So when do you use this approach and the ACH methodology?

Use ACH when the judgment or decision is so important that you can't afford to be wrong. Use it to record and organize relevant evidence prior to making an analytical judgment or decision. Use it to identify and then question assumptions that may be driving your thinking, perhaps without realizing it. Use it when the evidence you are working with may be influenced by denial and deception. Use it when gut feelings are not good enough, and you need a more systematic approach that raises questions you had not thought of. Use it to prevent being surprised by an unforeseen outcome. Use it when an issue is particularly controversial and you want to highlight the precise sources of disagreement. Use it to maintain a record of how and why you reached your conclusion.

The human mind needs modern software analytics, proven cognitive tools and vetted processes of thinking to arrive at the answer. While the answer may not be what you seek, it is the answer to the question, without a doubt. Live with it or discard it. This does not matter. What does matter is that the Executive "Risk Fusion" Center brought together the best of all these operational risk components and whether the human chooses to accept it or ignore it could be our corporate prosperity or peril. What do you think?