Incorrect assumptions are one of the major causes of problems in organisations. Even if the assumptions are challenged, the challenger rarely probes deeply enough. So, how do you challenge assumptions effectively? 

Assumptions are sometimes necessary to carrying on business. We may need to make assumptions in some circumstances where certain facts are not available and cannot be readily obtained – for instance where the company is entering innovative new territory and there are simply no clear facts available.

However, assumptions are all too often made in circumstances where a few simple questions would identify the facts, or would identify a risk that is otherwise hidden to those not directly involved in the operations. Such appears to have been the case with National Australia Bank (NAB) in 2003 when the top echelons of the bank assumed that the bank’s currency trading was being conducted within appropriate risk parameters.

From my experience working with companies around the world, I can say with certainty that it is common that critical procedures are not followed in organisations. The assumption is usually made that procedures are being followed, even to the point where obvious non-compliance is not noticed. It seems that the mind often deletes information that is inconsistent with one’s beliefs and expectations.

For example, some years ago I was investigating the assembly of a medical device on behalf of a company that distributed the device globally. One of the company’s clients had alleged that the device had nearly killed a new born child. The issue was whether a micron filter fitted into the device was defective. All the executives, managers and staff swore that the company’s quality procedures were adhered to – even the person who inserted the filter in the device – and produced all the necessary testimonies and documents (with boxes ticked) to prove it – until I asked for a specific demonstration of how the filter was inserted. It then became apparent that short cuts were being taken which damaged the filter, placing patients at risk.

The interesting thing was that the person who performed the demonstration had not consciously recognised that he had not been following proper procedures.

A lot of people had made assumptions in that company. Some Executives asked “Are we following QA procedures?”. The answer was ‘Yes”. No one asked the critical next level of questions: “How do we know” or even better “Show me.”

Most enquirers stop asking when they hear “Yes”. They are often concerned that asking the follow-on questions will suggest that they don’t trust the person who is answering. If the issue is important, you must ask for the next level of evidence. In most cases, that one extra question will identify the real position. Don’t assume that the person who states that the critical procedures are being followed actually knows that to be the case from their observation. They have more often than not been told the ‘facts’ by someone else and are merely repeating what they have heard. Bring higher accountability to the table. Ask “How do you know?” and if possible “Show me”.

For instance, if the answer to “Are we working within our risk management guidelines?” is “Yes”, then ask “Show me the risk position that we currently hold”.

If the answer to the question “Can we afford this?” is “Yes”, ask “Show me the current cash position” or “Show me the debt maturity schedule”.

Facts are what can be seen, heard, felt, smelt and tasted. Anything less is someone else’s interpretation or filtering of the actual facts.

In many cases, the right questions will identify an area for improvement to a strategy or a decision, or will expose a potentially serious and costly problem. There’s nothing to lose by asking the right questions in the right way, and everything to lose by not doing so.

 Asking the right questions saves companies millions of dollars, and they cost only a few seconds or minutes of time to ask.

When you next hear a factual statement on a critical issue that is not supported by sensory data (i.e. by what the person saw or heard or read that verifies the statement) ask the following:

• How do we/you know that to be the fact?
• What did you see/hear/read that tells you that?
• Show me the evidence.

Then, when you have the so-called ‘evidence’, ask the same questions about how the evidence was collected and compiled.

If there is a weakness in the data, those questions will soon point the way to what other data is required before you can make an informed decision or reduce risk.

By Christo Norden-Powers          Copyright 2006 Spandah Pty Ltd