I'm in the process of hiring in a service from an external
supplier. I'll not say what the supplier is for reasons that will be apparent but
it's caused me to make an observation. I may be wrong in my observation but I'll
let you decide.
On phoning the reception I was told that I'd be put through
to the woman's voicemail as she was not immediately available. I asked for her
name before I was put through as I often forget to ask for a name in an
introductory conversation and end up putting the phone down without any record
of who I've spoken to. Now bear in mind that this is a service where I'm likely
to be paying a four figure fee so I expect to do business on some sort of
professional basis. However I was told that the company have a "no names
policy on reception." Reluctantly I left a message and made my note of the
company name with no idea of who I needed to chase if I have to call back. That,
in itself, may be a factor in my decision of which supplier I choose to do
business with.
weirdoes
Of course I understand why they have this policy. I'm
guessing that they are concerned about weirdoes, stalkers, hawkers, all sorts
of undesirables and general ne'er-do-wells. I understand that there are risks
in the modern world but I wonder if there is a parallel here. The common
comparison when we talk about risk management is often that of crossing the
road. "Of course we take a risk every time we cross the road but we don't
stop crossing the road do we." Well actually we did experiment with not
crossing the road and since then we've seen the consequences of that
experiment.
In the nineteen sixties, as traffic and pollution began to
increase, we started to experiment with urban planning schemes. We saw
pedestrian precincts, elevated walkways to remove people from traffic, and all
sorts of great ideas to mitigate the risk of people and traffic being in the
same environment. But what has been the result of those mitigations thirty
years later? Housing estates with pedestrianized centres have become empty soulless
places that people scurry through as quickly as possible, raised walkways have become
muggers' paradises and pedestrian shopping precincts have become dangerous
places to walk once all the shops have closed. In many situations it's even
lead to the total separation of cars from people that has spiralled into the horrors
of urban motorways running right past peoples' homes while pedestrians are reduced
to subterranean dwellers in tunnel complexes beneath while the pollution it was
supposed to resolve has increased consequentially
ne'er-do-wells
Of course protecting ourselves from stalkers and ne'er-do-wells
is important. I've personally been the target of someone using the anonymity of
the Internet to get information out of me and it was a horrible experience. But
we have to ask, as we build further walls around ourselves, what will be the
consequence of this increased security? If we want to cross the road safely perhaps
we should remember to look both ways, judge the danger and speed of the
traffic, in short train ourselves to deal with the new dangers. Where those
dangers can't be mitigated install crossing points. In the same way, if we are
concerned that we don't trust every individual who phones reception perhaps
there are ways we can manage those new relationships rather than moving towards
a situation where we are more cut off from each other than ever before.
