(Un)Known
Parsing knowns sounds like goofy business, but can be a smart way to identify, organize, and manage risk
In 2002, during the run-up to the US-led invasion of Iraq based on the justification of intelligence related to proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (later refuted by events on the ground), a quirky exchange between US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and reporters briefly caught public attention. In the exchange, Rumsfeld introduced the concepts of “Known/Knowns, Known/Unknowns, and Unknown/Unknowns” to the Pentagon press corps, and thereby the American public.
While these concepts might sound goofy to the uninitiated — and Rumsfeld’s delivery certainly didn’t help — they can actually be a huge help to operational professionals in their quest to identify, organize, and mitigate risk. In fact, the Project/Program Management profession was leveraging these concepts to great effect long before Rumsfeld stumbled into the dialogue. In this post I will steal-back from Rummy the concept of (Un)known, and examine it in a risk management context.
“This is a song Charles Manson stole from the Beatles. We’re stealing it back.” — Bono, Helter Skelter
Phraseological Structure
Before drilling into the intended meaning of each permutation, it may be helpful to understand the internal structure of the phrases, themselves. This granular examination may help to mitigate confusion downstream.
The phrase consists of two words, separated by a slash ( / ). I will refer to each word as being in a separate position in the phrase, denoted as positions 1 and 2.
The phrases generally refer to a Subject, and an Object. The subject is the person or group who is experiencing the (Un)known condition, and the object is the thing upon which the experience is focused. In the case of the Rumsfeld example, the American people were the subject, and postulated WMDs were the object.
The word in position 1 refers to awareness, in a general sense, of the existence of the object of the phrase. When this position contains the word “known”, we can infer that the subject in question is generally aware of the object’s existence. This knowledge may come through the subject being obvious, or publicly visible, or through the keen expertise developed by that subject over time.
The word in position 2 refers to the subject’s detailed and/or penetrative understanding of the object. This could include important attributes of the object, such as its likelihood of occurrence or potential impact, or it could represent adequate knowledge to construct or dismantle the object within specific constraints.
From a purely semantic point of view, it might make more sense to just utilize the words “awareness” and “understanding” in this aphorism. But that would take the fun our of the word play. Damn you logophiles.
The Four Permutations
Based on this shared structural understanding, let’s tear apart the multiple permutations and see how they can add value to our risk management.
Known/Known
In this most basic permutation, the subject is aware of the object, and also understands it. The majority of our daily lives are made-up of these kinds of intellectual interactions. “I am aware of the subway, and know how to utilize it to get to Union Square”, “I know of her aversion to puns, and try my hardest not to articulate them aloud when she is in the room”. In the context of risk management, known/knowns are at the bottom of the pile. While these objects might include risk, our knowledge and/or expertise allows us to exercise mastery over them. That doesn’t mean we never get tagged by a known/known, but we shouldn’t be surprised when it happens.
Known/ Unknown
In the known/unknown permutation, the subject is aware of the object, as well as her/his own ignorance as to its detailed composition. This may manifest in a grossly physical sense, such a, “I know there are alligators in southern Florida, but I can’t always see them camouflaged at the water’s edge.” In the world of technology, this often manifests as an awareness of the existence of a new tool or technique, paired with an understanding that its utilization is not clearly understood.
From a business and interpersonal perspective, this permutation is my personal favorite. “She knows what she doesn’t know” is among the highest complements I regularly utilize, describing a person with the self-awareness to recognize the boundaries of her own expertise.
From a risk management perspective, known/unknowns are our friends. They may be bad, but at least they’re clearly labeled.
Unknown/ Known
This one is a little loopy, and in fact often dropped from the set by many practitioners. While certainly an edge case, I still like to hold on to it because I’m a hound for context. In the Unknown/Known permutation, the subject is unaware of an object about which she wields substantial expertise. “How can this possibly be?” you may ask. My answer is tacit knowledge and contextual framework.
Have you ever discovered an affinity or talent for an activity you’ve never engaged in before? “Damn, that kid can drive off the tee! How longs he been playing?” “Actually, this is his first time golfing…” I have a friend who has a terrific ear for language, picking up phraseology and native accents in just a few days in a foreign land. Like the saying purports, most of us can hop on a bike and ride [Understanding], even if we haven’t thought about biking in years [Awareness].
The point of the Unknown/Known permutation in risk management, as in all of life, is to be aware of the context that might be at play in a dialogue, yet not explicitly stated by any of the participants. I’ve seen this trick of syntax and semantics cause seasoned professionals, in the same industry, to talk right past each other without even realizing the miss.
Unknown/Unknown
Here be dragons. This tight package of aphorisms hits its zenith with the Unknown/ Unknown. In this permutation, the subject is not aware of the object’s existence, and has no detailed understanding about it. These are the ones that pop out of the upsidedown to snatch Barb from the diving board without leaving a trace.
From a business and risk management perspective, operational professionals need to give these a wide berth. Since we can’t know where they are, however, the only way to do that is to create a general risk reserve and guard it jealously throughout the build. Developing keen sensitivity for anomaly is also helpful, in order to discern and identify unexpected circumstances as soon as they occur. Another technique for mitigating Unknown/Unknown risk is to sail only in familiar waters. Truth be told, most of our lives are spent engaged in activities with which we have intimate knowledge and understanding. While that might not always be possible, or exciting, it pays to recognize when we stray from the familiar and attach a healthy margin of reserve for the Unknown/Unknown that may await us out past the reef.
Aphorism in Action
The sins we commit in risk management are usually sins of omission. We effectively mitigate the risks of which we are aware, only to bushwacked by something we completely hadn’t expected. Thinking about and organizing risks can be difficult, especially for those new to the art. Utilizing the (Un)known aphorism can be an interesting and effective way to structure an analysis of the risks associated with any project or initiative, shedding light on the boogeymen likely to be lying in wait and recognizing that some boogeymen will be forever cloaked in darkness until the moment they pounce.
Organizing people, process, and tools for scalable delivery — Partner, Digital Practice Lead; NewVantage Partners
Originally published at https://www.linkedin.com on August 6, 2018.
