A framework called CODN (Cost of Doing Nothing) uses risk analysis to compare the dangers of staying put against the dangers of change. By running the same risk assessment on both options, most organizations find that doing nothing actually costs more than acting. The data helps leaders push past fear and excuses to move forward.
I use the acronym CODN in my work, which is cost of doing nothing. And another tool I use is the FMEA, the failure modes and effect analysis, which is essentially saying what could go wrong and how serious is that? What's the risk and what could we do to make sure it doesn't go wrong? But I do the FMEA not just once on the changes we intend to make. What's the risk of making these changes? But I'll get a team to say, what are the risks of not making the changes? And 9 times out of 10, probably 99 times out of 100, the risk of not changing is higher than the risk of changing. So it's a way to win support and gain commitment from senior executives who have the yeah, but, you know, problem with respect to fear. Yeah, but if we do that, you know, the wheels could fall off, or this isn't really a good time. We should probably put that into next year's plan and budget. And And excuses to resist or say no to this team because you've commissioned them to figure out this problem and solve it. And they have, and they're aligned and they're very bright and they've got facts and data and analysis. And you're gonna say, no, we're not gonna do that. Mm-hmm. That's not, that's not wise leadership.
