Last week, my lovely and talented colleague Vlad wrote about three steps to eliminate/mitigate risks in strategy – understand, assess, neutralize – and offered a chart that caught my eye. Vlad adapted a piece of HBR chartery that was fundamentally similar to a Boris Cube, something used by aerospace engineers to
Last week, my lovely and talented colleague Vlad wrote about three steps to eliminate/mitigate risks in strategy – understand, assess, neutralize – and offered a chart that caught my eye. Vlad adapted a piece of HBR chartery that was fundamentally similar to a Boris Cube, something used by aerospace engineers to assess, quantify, and make decisions about process and design.
This is a slide from a deck by Boeing – surfaced by Flightblogger – that was used in the development of a second production facility in South Carolina. Interesting that the axes are transposed from Vlad’s chart.
And here’s a slide from a Northrop Grumman tutorial on risk cubes, why they should be used, and how/when to implement them. Note that Northrop’s generic risk cube represents a higher tolerance for risk than does Boeing’s, which considers Likely + Minor Consequence a Moderate Risk.
(Aside: I love finding shit like this.)
Same deck. Same level of fascination on my part. Good strategists, as far as I’m concerned, are thinking like engineers and cost analysts when they’re developing their recommendations.
Challenges facing creativity; owning ideas from beginning to end; opinionated palettes; are we doing zines again?; randomness that didn’t fit in the first four categories
4 ways to use Pace Layers in strategy and OD work: 🚀 As a career planning tool; 🎓 As a strategy tool; 🔬 As a diagnostic or sense-making tool; 🎨 As a design tool for value-adding layers.
Last week, my lovely and talented colleague Vlad wrote about three steps to eliminate/mitigate risks in strategy – understand, assess, neutralize – and offered a chart that caught my eye. Vlad adapted a piece of HBR chartery that was fundamentally similar to a Boris Cube, something used by aerospace engineers to assess, quantify, and make decisions about process and design.
This is a slide from a deck by Boeing – surfaced by Flightblogger – that was used in the development of a second production facility in South Carolina. Interesting that the axes are transposed from Vlad’s chart.
And here’s a slide from a Northrop Grumman tutorial on risk cubes, why they should be used, and how/when to implement them. Note that Northrop’s generic risk cube represents a higher tolerance for risk than does Boeing’s, which considers Likely + Minor Consequence a Moderate Risk.
(Aside: I love finding shit like this.)
Same deck. Same level of fascination on my part. Good strategists, as far as I’m concerned, are thinking like engineers and cost analysts when they’re developing their recommendations.
Read Next
Five Org Design Things N° 10
Pattern languages and org analysis; RTO is bad, even if offices are good; old maps made 3D; diverging values worldwide; exit interviews
Five Creativity Things
Challenges facing creativity; owning ideas from beginning to end; opinionated palettes; are we doing zines again?; randomness that didn’t fit in the first four categories
How to Combine Pace Layers, Org Design, and Strategy
4 ways to use Pace Layers in strategy and OD work: 🚀 As a career planning tool; 🎓 As a strategy tool; 🔬 As a diagnostic or sense-making tool; 🎨 As a design tool for value-adding layers.
Five Org Design Things N° 9
Organizational health essential for firm performance; Avinsa; the heat death of Google; team performance research; platform teams @ PepsiCo