I came across the above sign at the back of a truck. First it seemed obvious however in the implications are quite monumental.

This was seen at the back of the truck but it is a representation of what has become endemic to human behavior. The technology has moved in leaps and bounds since the first time the sign was used and cameras (that can make the sign redundant at inexpensive) with microscopic costs compared to the cost of truck are now readily available. The usage of these signs still persists or rather commonplace.

The mindset prevails in business and in the use of technology. It may be an attempt to minimize, mitigate or migrate the risk to a potential victim however we can consciously understand the logic and work through a process to make technology better for everyone.

The questions we need to ask is “Are we ignoring an action just because we don’t want to measure it?

The onus of inability of one to see is instantly shifted as a risk to the one who can see or gets in the way. Have you come across this situation in your sphere?

It is like you visit and expert and you are told by him or her that don’t blame me if I don’t know all facts and I may not be aware of some of the very fundamental facts in the the domain in which my expertise is claimed.

Let us try and dig a bit deeper.

Let’s say there is an issue or situation out of the norm, impacting the norm or a challenge akin to the rear mirrors of truck; We need to inspect the circumstance by taking a dive into who, what, why, where, when how questions ( Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics are considered the source of the elements of circumstance or Septem Circumstantiae) to occurrence of incidence (or accident).

Marries up the issue and circumstance together will give you the ability to stitch issues and circumstance then we are able to be more predictable.

It is like saying that roads are more likely to be slippery when there is rain. Or smoking enhances the risk of cancer.

That said some advertisements around 1965 said sugar is healthy. Perhaps they did not take into consideration the third pillar of facts which is also required. For example in a study of 200,000 people, published in BMC medicine, found that about 67 percent of smokers perished from smoking-related illness

Facts can be personal or can be a superimposition of consensus however the facts are verifiable. Facts can be explained or has consensus where multiple independent explanations coincide and can it be reached by eliminating what did not happen for sure.

Perhaps we need to expand our reach and have multiple sources of facts around an issue that can corroborate to creates a version of truth; combine multiple versions of truth to create a reality

To ensure we are not relinquishing the onus which should be taken for granted

• take responsibility instead of pushing the risk on to others. If it is a truck that can harm someone while reversing, add some cameras that can do the job. In a construction firm ensure everyone is aware of safety procedures, In case of software ensure it is rigorously tested. Don’t ignore the obvious .

• Express willingness to find new ways to resolve the challenge including the keeping the onus of risk mitigation / minimization. For example on October 11, 2016 Samsung stopped production of the problematic Galaxy Note 7. It had to recall the phones because they were catching fire.

Ultimately It is about making decisions that serve humanity. If you forget that, sooner or later it will catch up with you.

(c) Sameer Babbar