Bearing in mind that quality management standards already incorporate the concept of "risk-based thinking", in my research I have promoted another such approach, which I have called "prevention-based thinking". Prevention can be defined as “the act or practice of stopping something bad from happening: the act of preventing something". This means that such thinking involves examining the concrete steps that can be taken to eliminate potential risks. In simple terms, risk is the possibility of something bad happening. This is the first phase of resolution and such “risk-based thinking" develops and fosters a culture of risk, a culture of continual improvement, as well as a culture of quality as a whole. The concept of "prevention-based thinking" is a follow up to any analysis of risk and thus enables an organization to be able to confront the risks it faces. If the worst comes to the worst, "crisis-based thinking", is a complement to "prevention-based thinking" and “risk-based thinking", and it leads to better and more decisive crisis management through preventive and corrective action. The concepts of "risk-based thinking" and "prevention-based thinking" form the basis for preventive action that allows the organization to more effectively and efficiently either prevent or manage a crisis. Do you agree with this idea?
The two concepts may overlap. Even preventive measures may carry the risk of failure or of unanticipated side effects.
Prevention is always the best way. Of course, when it is possible in the given circumstances. But, sometimes life surprises you, and then you have to take corrective actions. Crisis are usualy unpredictable and very hard to prevent.
If you don't live a life, then it is impossible for you to do any harm to society (or your bank).
If there is no single human being on this planet, then it is impossible for human beings to do harm to all other creatures or the physical environment.
Obviously, you, as a very wise person, should not eliminate yourself just in order to prevent bads that could happen as long as you live;
and you should not eliminate the entire human population just in order to prevent bads that could happen as long as there exist human beings.
There must be something that should be taken into account when we talk about prevention and risk.
A sane society needs very good reasons to eliminate certain lifes under the name of prevention.
Do you have any reasoning for your inevitable judgment that you should not eliminate yourself just to prevent bads that could happen? You cannot deny that YOU COULD bring harm to society, can you?
Aristotle argued we are responsible for being a rational person with rational thoughts and have a responsibility to use that reason to the best of our abilities, obviously, making predicting about future events is part of that reason. When done well, it can lead us where we actually want to go. In my many years of experience as noth a professor and a therapist, people are not particularly great at this part. But once pointed out, they get better and see results better and quicker because they’re handling themselves in a more rational manner. So yes prevention based thinking is vital to all of us— did I leave the stove on?
The two concepts may overlap. Even preventive measures may carry the risk of failure or of unanticipated side effects.
I believe that man is a being who creates crises and lives in them like a fish in water. For reference: in very clean water, fish do not live - they die
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Cognitive Science
- Thinking