By: Sthimbila Mnengela, Artistic Director at Zutari
No infrastructure project in history has been without risk and uncertainty. All projects involve some level of risk that engineers are well-trained to anticipate, manage and minimize.
Risk management is an inherent part of infrastructure engineering, so much so that almost every design manual includes factors and procedures aimed at minimizing risk.
Relying on these design and implementation guides, engineers tame rivers and turn them into concrete dams. For centuries, engineers have successfully delivered infrastructure projects by mitigating a wide range of risks.
But the question today is: If engineers are so good at risk management, why are risk management becoming more difficult, and risk registers ever longer?
The answer is: Change.
The dynamic nature of the risks engineers face today is very different from those they were trained to deal with in the past.
Familiar clues help avoid classic design mistakes, such as synchronizing green traffic lights for two opposing movements, or bridges collapsing under uncalculated weights.
But this evidence does not help engineers in the face of rapid climate change, or sudden funding crises resulting from distant events that may slow down or stop projects altogether.
Nor does it help in dealing with the objections of stakeholders who were not involved in the pre-planning.
Engineers are typically analytical, methodical and meticulous, which is why infrastructure projects often last longer than their intended lifespan.
But risks are not as systematic, and in a rapidly changing world, unforeseen risks emerge that can bring projects to a screeching halt.
As soon as one risk is addressed, another emerges. Although engineering training tends to remove the risk completely before moving forward, risks cannot be completely eliminated - they can be contained and the opportunities they create can be capitalized on.
However, the idea ofEmbracing risk"It goes against the conservative nature of engineers. No engineer would say: "Let's embrace risk!"
But there are industries that do - such as the tech sector, which thrives in dynamic environments with a "try, fail, learn" methodology.
Of course, this approach cannot be applied strictly to infrastructure projects, as the cost is prohibitive, but engineers can utilize Agile Thinking when planning, executing, and managing projects.
There are already "agile" approaches applied in project management that engineers can adopt to develop more flexible approaches to risk management.
Infrastructure projects typically go through three critical phases for "Go/No-Go" decisions:
Feasibility study, planning, design.
However, during the implementation phase, the approved design is often adhered to with only minor modifications.
In today's world of sudden risks, is it necessary to add more stages of decision-making and risk review?
Can financing risks be anticipated in advance by preparing scaled-down alternative designs alongside the original designs?
Can engineers truly engage with communities and stakeholders instead of just "winning them over"?
These questions require a mindset shift, where risks are capitalized on rather than avoided, user involvement in the design stages becomes the norm rather than the exception, and all parties - from funders to local communities - are seen as true partners in decision-making.
Universities play a crucial role in shaping young engineering minds. New minds, not yet constrained by the "fear of risk" complex, have a creative energy that can be channeled into more agile approaches to risk management.
Universities are turning out competent engineers, but there is a lot of room for mental resilience in this field.
Today, the modern engineer is required to capitalize on the opportunities created by risk, because this changing and uncertain world demands it more than ever before.
comments