Bernard Kahn
Fascinating question and highly relevant.
The idea of a “noise audit” is not only timely, but potentially transformative for project risk assessment.
Daniel Kahneman, in Noise: A Flaw in Human Judgment, draws a key distinction:
- Bias = systematic deviation
- Noise = random variability in judgment
In projects, this “noise” can surface in:
- Risk assessments that vary wildly depending on who’s in the room
- Inconsistent stakeholder scoring in prioritization sessions
- Fluctuating interpretations of qualitative indicators
A noise audit in a project or PMO context could involve:
- Comparing how different team members assess the same risks
- Identifying non-relevant factors influencing judgment (e.g., mood, context, presenter)
- Using Delphi techniques or even AI-based consistency checks to reduce subjectivity
Seen this way, “noise” becomes a meta-risk an invisible layer that distorts how we perceive and act upon actual risks.
Addressing it might just be a critical next step in maturing our risk management culture.
I’d love to hear from others:
- Have you tried any structured techniques to reduce judgment variability in your risk assessments?
- Have you observed “noise” in action and how did you respond?
Community Champion
