About Jared Wade

Jared Wade is a freelance writer and former editor of the Risk Management Monitor and senior editor of Risk Management magazine. You can find more of his writing at JaredWade.com.
Игроки всегда ценят удобный и стабильный доступ к играм. Для этого идеально подходит зеркало Вавады, которое позволяет обходить любые ограничения, обеспечивая доступ ко всем бонусам и слотам. LeapWallet is a secure digital wallet that enables easy management of cryptocurrencies. With features like fast transactions and user-friendly interface, it's perfect for both beginners and experts. Check it out at leapwallet.lu.

Vote for the Best Commercial Insurance Companies

Today is your last chance to weigh in on Business Insurance‘s 2010 Readers Choice Awards for the best in commercial insurance. They have been doing the awards since 2005 and they always receive a lot of debate.

Vote now or forever hold your peace.

These were the 2009 recipients.

Do you agree with these?

Or are you looking for change in 2010?

The Risks of Social Media: Decreased Worker Productivity

To me, the biggest concerns companies should have about social media revolve around reputation damage, legal liability and workplace issues (cyber-stalking, sexual harassment, etc.). These are the issues that can hurt the most, with some other things to watch for being improper disclosure of confidential/financial information, data breaches, viruses/malware and any other general network security concerns.

We have been covering such concerns throughout the year in our Risks of Social Media series (something we will be bringing to print in Risk Management magazine in our October issue. Look for that next week. And see the pretty cover our designer created for the story here.)

Another issue that comes up constantly whenever I discuss social media risks with executives is decreased worker productivity.

To many, this seems to be the largest drawback to social media. In their eyes, workers who previously toiled away for the duration of their eight-hour shift are now so enthralled by Facebook and Twitter that they simply cannot help but peruse the sites constantly throughout the day. While they are doing that, of course, they aren’t getting any work done. Less work equals less production, which equals lower profits.

The way they see it, that is the grand downside of Facebook: it compels people to not work while they are at work.

The way I see it … that’s a crock.

Sure. It happens. Some people do spend a lot of time on social networks. They chat with friends, they look at family vacation photos and play Farmville. They waste a lot of time.

But this is really nothing new.

The internet is full of distractions, and if someone doesn’t want to work, they will find a way to not work. Facebook and Twitter did not create a new wave of malaise and boredom among those with dull jobs. People trapped in boring jobs — or just poor workers employed in good jobs — have been finding ways to be unproductive at work since well before the internet was even used at most companies.

Cigarette breaks and the water cooler have existed for a long time. Watch Mad Men and you will see how even the high-powered execs of the 1950s and 60s wasted time boozing and socializing at the office. The Super Bowl, March Madness, fantasy football, Survivor, American Idol, the Oscars and a seemingly limitless amount of other distractions may take up a substantial part of any given employee’s attention while at work.

Or take this fictional exchange between “efficiency expert” Bob Porter and data processor Peter Gibbons in Office Space, a cinematic lampoon of the modern workplace:

Bob Porter: We’re trying to get a feel for how people spend their day at work … So, if you would, would you walk us through a typical day, for you?

Peter Gibbons: Yeah. I generally come in at least fifteen minutes late, ah, I use the side door – that way Lumbergh can’t see me, heh heh – and, uh, after that I just sorta space out for about an hour.

Bob Porter: Da-uh? Space out?

Peter Gibbons: Yeah, I just stare at my desk; but it looks like I’m working. I do that for probably another hour after lunch, too. I’d say in a given week I probably only do about fifteen minutes of real, actual work.

The point here is that if your workers don’t like their jobs, they can find many ways to not get any work done. And if they do like there jobs, the allure of Facebook — despite all the buzz you hear about its unprecedented ability to connect millions — is not nearly great enough to force quality employees to ignore their responsibilities.

Facebook Productivity

(The comical part about this whole post is that I myself was on Facebook prior to writing it — and then Facebook had a major, extended service interruption, which prompted me to actually do some work and write down my thoughts on the matter after seeing the satirical tweet above from @OPB. Yes, I’m a hypocrite. I know.)

This isn’t to say that companies should not explain to employees in a social media policy that they are not to waste time on Facebook all day. They should do exactly that.

But it’s not some new-age problem. Workers should not be wasting time doing anything. That’s the message. Rolling out some draconian policy that applies to the employee’s social media usage, however, is more likely to be alienating and de-motivational than it is to make employees want to do more work. At least that’s how I see it.

Besides, most people today who use Facebook and Twitter extensively can do it on their smartphone anyway. So if you implement controls on their desktop computer, they can just sit in their cubical and twiddle away on their iPhones and Blackberrys. Or, ya know, just sorta space out for about an hour after lunch.

For more on the topic, Gini Dietrich of the excellent blog Spin Sucks seems to share my view, calling worker productivity a “management issue” not a social media issue.

Nike Has Bedbugs — And Is Telling Everyone About It

The above video features an AP news report about how the Niketown store in chic SoHo New York has become infested with bedbugs. Just like a lot of other places in New York. But rather than try to duck the issue, the store let everyone exactly why it is closed, simply by posting a note on the door.

The note reads as follows: “Nike has proactively closed 21 Mercer because of a discovery of bedbugs at the store. Our primary concern is the well being of our consumers and sales associates. We are taking all proper steps to eradicate the problem and we expect the store to reopen shortly. We apologize for any inconvenience and for more information please call 1-888-224-6453.”

According to New York magazine’s Amy Odell, this openness stands in stark contrast to the way other retailers have handled the same issue.

Now this is the proper, good way to handle a bedbug attack on a retail establishment. Unlike Abercrombie and Hollister, who never used signage to inform shoppers of their bedbug problems, and just thrust the half-naked people back into the doorway as soon as they could as though to flaunt their bite-free flesh. Of course Nike’s sign still fails to answer the Big Questions here, such as where their bugs came from. If the vermin are holding court in a Nike warehouse somewhere, that would be a terrifying prospect.

Good on, Nike. But … hmmm … terrifying indeed.

I am actually currently in the market for a new pair of basketball sneakers, too. Maybe I’ll wait another month — just in case it was the source of bedbugs that Mars Blackmon was talking about when he told Michael Jordan that “it’s GOTTA be the shoes.”

NikeLogo

The Risks of Climate Change: Christiana Figueres Wants Improved Resiliency and Insurance Solutions

christiana figueres

Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, speaks at Climate Week NYC 2010. (Photo: Swiss Re)

Yesterday, I looked at the difference between mitigation of climate change and adaptation to it — a topic broached during Climate Week NYC 2010 on Monday during Swiss Re’s “Risk & Resiliency” panel.

Fortunately, it was such an insightful event that we still have more to talk about.

Walter Bell, chairman of Swiss Re American Holding Corp, kicked off the discussion, mentioning that his company has had a deep interest in climate change ever since Swiss Re identified it as an emerging risk two decades ago in the mid-80s. “Swiss Re’s approach is to first understand a risk then try to determine how to manage it,” he said. “We want to look not just at the risk, but at the solutions.”

Along these lines, he — and just about everyone else in attendance — touted the Caribbean Catastrophe Risk Insurance Facility (CCRIF) as a prime example of a way to not just help illuminate the problems — but help solve them.

“The CCRIF is a cutting-edge risk management solution,” he said. “The CRIF is not just a model or a concept. It works. Those member countries have received checks after a disaster.”

For the uninitiated, CCRIF is a risk pooling mechanism that is owned and operated by sixteen member countries in the Caribbean. And the best part is that the fund has a “parametric trigger” that helps nations struck by a disaster get relief money immediately. What this means is that there is no lengthy, complicated claims process after an event. If an earthquake of a certain magnitude strikes or if a hurricane with winds of a certain speed makes landfall, the payouts begin instantly. (More info here.)

The panel’s headliner, Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, built on this momentum, highlighting the disasters we have seen this year, both in the Caribbean and elsewhere across the globe, that may be a precursor to the erratic weather we will see in a future affected by climate change. “This year, as you know, has seen no shortage of extreme weather events,” said Figueres. “The bottom line is that these events illustrate what could happen in the future.”

To help combat climate change and lessen the blow, she believes the world needs to — quickly — do three things simultaneously: (1) reduce emissions, (2) adapt to the already-inevitable effects so as to minimize the loss of life and livelihoods, and (3) increase resiliency to better deal with the effects of the future.

For developing nations, she categorized progress in these areas as “critical” to not just meeting the Millennium Development Goals outlined by the UN for all of the world’s 192 countries, but to preventing an acceleration of the endemic poverty that exists in so many areas. Without progress, standards of living in some countries might become even worse than they are today.

She listed three major areas in which resiliency must be prioritized: health, agriculture and water. For health, the first step needs to be creating solutions to better deal with climate-sensitive diseases. Figueres noted the increase in tropical diseases throughout the world. Even in the United States, she revealed, “dengue fever-transmitting insects can now be found in 28 US states.” Troubling indeed.

In terms of agriculture, she said that there have been improvements. In Ethiopia, more farmers are switching to more drought-resistant crops with good results. Dupont, too, she said has made strides in developing drought-resistant solutions for rural crop-growers.

The biggest issue, however, is the one that affects both of those issues — and everything else: water. “Climate change will affect all aspects of the water supply,” said Figueres. And it’s not only adapting to the future that is a challenge. Even today, she says, things are below par. “To make matters worse, water is already being badly managed in many locations.”

In order to better manage the future risks of climate change, Figueres stressed that the private sector needs to become more involved. And not just because corporations should be better global citizens — but because they need to protect themselves. “No sector will be immune to climate change … Sooner or later, all businesses will need to climate-proof themselves.” she said. This, she stresses, means protecting everything from supply chain to point of sale to place of investment to water supplies.

But with great downside comes great upside. “Business needs to adapt itself,” she said. “And adaptation holds investment opportunities.” ”

“Money spent on adaptation today will be money well spent for our future,” said Figueres. “Aggressive adaptation today needs to become the societal … insurance program of the 21st century.Money spent on adaptation today will be money well spent for our future,” said Figueres. “Aggressive adaptation today needs to become the societal … insurance program of the 21st century.”

Some of these investment opportunities include new agricultural products, improved water management and green construction. And, of course, we have all heard about the new “green economy” of renewable energy development that President Obama has continued to assure is just over the horizon, ready to lift the country from dreadful unemployment numbers and put America back at the front of global manufacturing and innovation.

The other opportunity lies in insurance. “Even when all adaptation measures have been taken, the risks … will not be ruled out,” said Figueres. “The insurance industry is already developing insurance products and must proceed quickly.”

Swiss Re will be one of the companies trying to make sure that happens, but there are plenty of others. Just look at all the insurance company initiatives underway. Too few of these are about actually creating policies, but much of the heavy lifting and relationship building has already been done, so some innovative products should not be far off. (We’ll talk more about the progress on that in a later post … stay tuned.)

Figueres thinks all innovation will pay off ultimately. “Money spent on adaptation today will be money well spent for our future,” said Figueres. “Aggressive adaptation today needs to become the societal … insurance program of the 21st century.”

And the time to start is now, she says, even if getting everyone on the same page is still a challenge. “The momentum needs to be lead by science,” she said. “It needs to be lead by business. It needs to be led by civil society. How do we get them all moving in concert?”

That, as everyone participating in Climate Week NYC 2010 already knows, is the $64,000 question.

We welcome your suggestions below.