Last week I wrote about a visit with my mother in Florida and how risk management practices became a focus during my stay.

One day at lunch my mother’s friend ordered hot tea. The water was served in a glass carafe with a plastic neck and no pour spout. After only a few seconds, her friend discovered the container was too hot to hold and it had to be put down. Remembering the famous spilled-cup-of-hot-coffee at McDonald’s, we recognized the potential for disaster.

A few days later after returning home, my mother called. She had been back to the restaurant—again her friend had ordered hot tea and again it was served in the potentially dangerous carafe. When they mentioned their concerns to the waitress, she shrugged, saying that while she realized the container was a hazard, that her hands were tied because management would not listen to her. The waitress then asked my mother to send an e-mail to the chain’s home office, hoping that might have an impact.

Mom obliged. In the e-mail she described the container and its potential for injury. She also said she hoped the e-mail would be forwarded to both their management and risk management departments. She later received a nice e-mail from the company saying the message would be forwarded to both departments.

End of story? Not at all. It sounds like this restaurant chain has a lot going for it.

I received an e-mail from my mother recently with this message:

“We visited [the restaurant] yesterday. I told the manager when she stopped to see us about my communication with the home office and how they had replied very caringly. [The manager] said, ‘Guess what? The carafes are being replaced nationwide. They are making molds for new ones and will replace these as soon as possible.’ I replied, ‘So I did make a difference!’”

This turn of events demonstrates that even though mistakes are made, many times they are inadvertent. In this case, the company was able to take an honest look at the situation and admit the potential for danger—and what’s more, do something about it! My hat is off to this company.

And sometimes one person can make all the difference. Here, it may keep someone from being injured and possibly prevent a lawsuit.

Earlier this month after the CICA conference in Orlando, I visited my mother, who lives in the area, for a few days.

Risk management, always a focus of mine, came up a several times. In fact, we had a few opportunities to witness first-hand the real meaning of risk management and its implications. First, during a heavy downpour, we stopped at a popular sea-side cafe for dessert. People were tracking water into the entryway and soon the staff pulled out a mop. The wet mop was ineffective and unfortunately the floors were made of potentially slick ceramic tiles—a recipe for disaster. Then they pulled out a standard bright yellow “caution, wet floors” sign. Good so far. But then they placed it in a location and angle that made it impossible to see when entering the restaurant. Not so good.

It was another instance where a potential and obvious danger was being overlooked. In this case, the wait and kitchen staff were left to make important decisions about safety—a decision that should have been anticipated and overseen by management. Unfortunately, scenarios like this are so commonplace they are taken for granted. But these are the things that can drive up insurance costs—liability and workers’ comp for starters.

The next risk management oversight was also in a restaurant, one my mother frequents. During a meal there, her friend ordered hot tea. When it was served, Mom observed it was a different type of container than usual. It was glass, with a plastic neck and no pour spout. After only a few seconds, her friend discovered the container was too hot to hold and it had to be put down.

Anyone remember the famous spilled-cup-of-hot-coffee at McDonald’s? We recognized the potential for disaster here and again had an opportunity to discuss risk management.

A few days later when I was back at home, my mother called me with an update. She had been back to the restaurant—again her friend had ordered hot tea and again it was served in the potentially unsafe carafe. When they mentioned their concerns to the waitress, she shrugged. She said she realized the container was a hazard, but that her hands were tied. She said any attempts to notify management would fall on deaf ears. The waitress hesitated and then asked Mom to send an e-mail to the chain’s home office.

Mom returned to her house, got out her Apple laptop and wrote an e-mail. In it, she said she described the container and its potential for injury. She underscored her point by saying she hoped the e-mail would be forwarded to both their management and risk management departments (like daughter like mother?). She later received a reply that her e-mail was being forwarded to the company’s upper management and risk management departments for review.

Will the e-mail help? Maybe, but it can’t hurt. This is another example of a small, seemingly inconsequential decision made by a large chain, probably without much thought to safety. Just one mishap, however, could mean possible injury to a customer and most likely a lawsuit.

It’s also unfortunate that the waitress felt her concerns would be ignored. This brings to mind the popular new TV show, Undercover Boss, which I’ve mentioned before. I think the show is doing a lot of good because, if nothing else, it’s pointing out how upper management is often clueless to the day-to-day operations—and the hazards present—in their companies.

First there were the snowstorms this winter—dumping up to three feet of snow on areas that weren’t prepared for such amounts. Meanwhile, Florida had a long run of freezing temperatures, ruining some of its citrus and strawberry crops.

Then there was rain. For days, torrents of rain drowned the East coast. Thousands of people were without power as soggy tree roots, loosened by soft, muddy soil toppled onto power lines, homes and cars. What a mess.

If there was ever a time for solid contingency plans, it is now. An earthquake, tornado or hurricane generally come to mind with disaster planning, but sometimes it’s the unexpected flood, snow storm or prolonged winds that can bring down a business or municipality.

I’m reminded of a study done in 2009 by Agility Recovery Solutions that found small to medium sized companies woefully lacking in their contingency planning.

This doesn’t mean, however, that risk managers of large companies should start celebrating.

Yes, it was found that 90 percent of smaller companies with more than 100 employees spend less than a day per month maintaining their contingency plans; and yes, one in five spend no time on their plans.

But while 32 percent of larger companies spend one-to-10 days per month updating their contingency plans, a huge 44 percent spend less than one day per month.

Importantly, the survey found that the same old issues persist. One of the biggest is still getting buy-in from the C-level, regardless of a company’s size. Executives continue their hesitation in acknowledging the importance of contingency planning.

So this is a predicament for risk managers, still trying to get the attention of the C-suite. They know that should a disaster strike, the company or municipality might not be prepared.

This is a tough position to be in, especially since the risk manager most likely will be a target for blame if the organization is not adequately prepared.

What do risk managers need to do to get the attention this issue deserves?

Anyone?

Wow, an outer space conference.

I’ve gotten a few e-mails lately about a meeting coming up in Dubai called World Space Conference 2010, which sounds, well, cool. And it’s taking place in Dubai—which advertises on the Space Risk Forum Web site that it’s 75 degrees there, and sunny.

Think about it, a whole conference devoted to outer space. It’s “2001, A Space Odyssey,” “Star Wars,” “ET” and “Wall-E” combined!

I went to the Web site to check out the conference program—one can dream.

The three-day program opens up with registration, followed by brunch, a welcoming coffee and an introduction speech. Next is the keynote speaker, Ramin Khadem, Ph.D., chairman of the board of the International Space University (ISU) in Strasbourg, France, and chairman of Odyssey Moon. Odyssey Moon, I read on the company’s Web site, was formed to “capitalize on commercial opportunities created by renewed interests in exploring the Moon.”

The organization said it is developing a “commercial lunar robotic transportation service to meet the pent up and growing demand for low cost, frequent access to the Moon supporting science, exploration and commerce.” So that should be an interesting talk.

After that is a two-part panel discussion on technical developments in the space industry, and later a cocktail reception. Nice.

Reading about the Tuesday morning program, however, reality began to set in with a panel discussion on the impact of the economy on the space industry. Even more so with the afternoon agenda, consisting of a panel discussion on the legal and regulatory environment within the space industry. They are to discuss whether the “space insurance product” does what it is supposed to do; improving the flow of underwriting information; claims handling; and future space insurance policy needs.

On Wednesday a panel is to focus on various topics, including satellite servicing, future satellite applications and private commercial space flight.

So there you have it.

While in reality the conference seems a little, well, mundane, I’m reminding myself that this is the case with any industry, space included. There are risk management, safety and training issues, liability issues, and insurance coverage and claims issues.

And while the movies may seem a lot more intriguing when it comes to outer space, the truth is, who wants to see a movie about whether or not an insurance policy will cover the crash of the starship “Enterprise”? While some of us might find this interesting, most would not.

So perhaps my expectations for a space conference were a little too high. After all, we’re not talking about a Star Trek convention here—it’s a conference dealing with a highly regulated industry. And like every other industry it is impacted by the economic recession—although the Dubai location speaks “up-and-coming industry with means” loud and clear.

And hey, at least the weather is nice in Dubai. Come to think of it, I wonder what the weather is like on the moon right now.

It’s the little things that can make or break a career—and it often comes down to risk management, or the lack of it.

Who would have thought that a snow storm could cast such a shadow over the career of Washington , D.C. Mayor Adrian Fenty? But when a storm dumps 22 inches on a city—the nation’s capital no less—that is not accustomed to such numbers, a good snow removal plan is critical. It appears, however, that the mayor didn’t adequately check into that aspect of D.C.’s preparedness before the snowfall.

As risk managers know, it’s the simple, most obvious things that are the easiest to overlook. For example, are there enough trucks? Are those trucks equipped to handle 22 inches of show? Are there enough drivers lined up to work around the clock—for days if necessary? Is there enough salt and salting equipment? Are the streets cordoned off so that they all get plowed?

“Well, it was such a heavy snow, why should the mayor be blamed?” you might ask. From media reports, snow plows repeatedly cleared some streets and not others. And at one point, 25 percent of the trucks were broken down, unable to handle the heavy snow. Scads of people still have their cars buried under snow—mountains of it. Yes, it was a record snowstorm, but not the first to ever hit the area and there was time to prepare.

The mayor made an appearance on “The Early Show” on CBS and from what I’ve read seemed to be making light of the situation. He promised the roads would be cleared over the long weekend, but this is little consolation to people who couldn’t get to work, or wherever they needed to go. And once all the streets are plowed, people will still have to dig out their cars from not only the snow piled around them, but also what the snowplows push to the side.

Like many in the “C-suite” in the private sector, perhaps some public sector bosses would also do well to pay attention to the recently aired reality series, “Undercover Boss.” In this show, a company’s leader works undercover in several lower level jobs within their organization to find out what is really going on, how workers are treated, how the public is treated and how they can make their organization stronger.

As for Mayor Fenty, people will forget any number of a candidate’s shortcomings when they vote. But memories like those from this snowstorm—that is still affecting so many on a personal level—will be difficult to overcome on election day.

Updates about the massive Toyota recall are coming out daily, sometimes hourly. There are more recalls and more concerns from drivers—a public relations nightmare of the worst kind. Not only are huge dollar amounts and a company’s reputation at stake, but potentially people’s lives.

Yesterday a statement in the media by Chris Gidez, director of risk management and crisis communications at Hill & Knowlton, a public relations firm, got my attention. He made this point: “Today companies have to be Johnny-on-the spot as soon as something hits,” he said. “We live in a Facebook world and you have to move fast to keep consumers informed.”

I contacted Mr. Gidez for an interview and posted a story on our Web site today at http://property-casualty.com. He made some good observations comparing the two cases.

In today’s world, for example, the Tylenol case, for years seen as the “gold standard” in risk management, might not fare as well. Tylenol waited about a week before recalling product from store shelves. In today’s world of blogs and Internet news sites—which means reporters often are churning out news 24/7—a week is an eternity. Organizations need to have a plan of action in place well in advance, detailing who is a spokesperson and the types of things that need to be said.

He observed that in our digital world, where even deleted e-mails can be resurrected, anything that went on within the Tylenol organization before the recall would have been discovered and most likely leaked.

While it appeared initially that Toyota has done a good job of responding, the auto giant is now coming under fire for not coming forward soon enough with potentially damaging information.

To make things worse, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood caused a stir on Wednesday when he advised that a Toyota car owner “stop driving it. Take it to a Toyota dealer because they believe they have a fix for it.” He later recanted the statement after Toyota shares began to drop, modifying it to, “if you own one of these cars or if you’re in doubt, take it to the dealer and they’re going to fix it.”

In the digital age, Mr. Gidez said, companies need to keep in mind that not only does word travel fast because of technology that didn’t exist years ago, but that details will be leaked, pundits will discuss every aspect of a situation, every crumb of information will be blasted over the Internet and blogs will be written.

We live in the “Google Age,” he said.

While the company will survive, what lies ahead are years of court cases and class action lawsuits and a “new normal,” for Toyota, Mr. Gidez observed.

You never know what you’ll learn from TV. While flipping through the channels recently, I became engrossed in a show about zoo risk management—leave it to me to find a risk management program on Animal Planet.

As you might recall, in 2007 on Christmas Day at closing time in a San Francisco zoo, a teenage boy was killed by a tiger—named Tatiana—who escaped from her enclosure. Another boy and his injured brother tried to get help and were also nearly mauled. This was the first deadly animal escape in American zoo history. The tiger enclosure, a grotto with bushes and a high fence, was considered escape-proof.

Tigers are considered to be one of the most dangerous animals in a zoo. They are endangered, with only 4,000 or so left in the wild, disappearing at a rate of one per day, according to the show. In fact, more Siberian tigers live in zoos than in the wild—only about 250 are left in the wild. These are sad facts, but they show the importance of these animals and their lure to zoo visitors.

Zoos, I learned, as part of their accreditation with the Association of Zoos and Aquariums, are required to perform annual drills—with the goal of always recapturing an animal unless a human life is at stake. The association has a 67-page manual which covers every aspect of zoo keeping and risk management.

As is the case with risk managers in any industry, risk managers of zoos must think of anything that could conceivably go wrong and develop a plan, just in case. They must look not only at the animal enclosures, but at the nature of each type of animal and what it is capable of.

Contingency planning for zoos involves creating a scenario, such as an escaped cheetah, and then responding to that scenario. The response team is equipped with a medical team and anything else that could be needed, such as tranquilization darts, although I learned that these darts are not always as responsive as believed. The darts can take five to 10 minutes to be effective, and sometimes they don’t work at all. The real danger is the unforeseen event and there is always something to be learned from a drill.

In this case the inconceivable did happen. This large, dangerous tiger, perhaps egged-on by the three teens that late afternoon (a partial shoe-print was found on top of the iron fence), jumped the high fence of her enclosure to get at them. She killed one teen and then stalked the other two, who were trying to get help. They called 9-1-1, which responded within minutes. Once on the scene, authorities found that the tiger had the two teens cornered.

Studies of the incident after the fact revealed that the first-rate care tigers receive may have contributed to the situation—again something that would be extremely difficult to recognize and plan for in advance. These large cats eat excellent diets and get a lot of physical exercise, which in effect turns them into athletes.

A large, athletic cat housed in an older zoo exhibit could have been the unforeseen element leading to the tiger’s escape. After the tragedy, according to the program, the tiger exhibit was closed and the outside area completely rebuilt. Among the renovations, foliage along the perimeter was removed, a higher fence was installed and an electrified hot-wire added to the fence.

This situation illustrates, to me, one of the biggest dangers of risk management–looking around the corner for potential risks, rather than going back and examining the situation with fresh eyes.

Risk managers, does this story sound any alarms?

Because I’ve worked as a reporter for the past 20 years or so, I’m used to asking the questions. That’s why it’s been such a switch for me to change hats off the job, where I’ve recently taken up the roles of both public relations rep and the person being interviewed by the press.

I’ve always been interested in the outdoors and more recently in birds and so I became involved with our local Audubon Society chapter. Last year I was elected to chair the publicity committee. Until recently this has consisted mainly of putting together and distributing brochures and flyers to publicize events. It also has meant working with the local newspaper to establish contacts.

But things really started to heat up when I got a call recently from a reporter at the newspaper. It turns out that a half-dozen or so bald eagles had taken up residence in the woods adjacent to a local shopping center and word had reached the newspaper. Since I was established as the Audubon group’s contact, the reporter called me with questions about why these very large birds would choose such a spot, so close to cars and people.

She interviewed someone from our organization, but still had questions. I made some frantic calls and lined up another board member for the reporter to interview. The result was a nice, page-one, above-the-fold article two days later.

That’s when the fun really began. I got a call that a TV news station was doing a story on the eagles and also wanted to interview someone from our organization. No one else was available and I was on vacation that day, so I volunteered.

I’ve had some on-camera TV experience, but it’s been quite a while. So I made a list of the dos and don’ts I could remember and prepared to put them to use again.

In a couple of hours I met the reporter at the site and answered her questions on-camera. The interview went well (and was short, thank goodness) and aired that evening.

It later occurred to me that as interviewer during my day job and as volunteer PR rep and interviewee on my own time, I can offer some tips for anyone preparing for a television interview—some of these points are applicable to print medium as well. Here are my suggestions:

• Find out in advance what the reporter wants to know, or needs to flesh out the story

• Ask yourself possible questions and rehearse the answers

• Try to take an interesting, unique approach if possible

• Think of any other possible related questions that could be asked

• Plan what to wear and keep it simple. No crazy plaids or neon colors

• Since your face is what will be featured, wear a flattering color (but not too bright) near your face, such as a tie or scarf. For example, since I was to be interviewed outdoors and would wear a black coat, I tied a bright tartan scarf around my neck

• Ask where you should be looking during the interview—at the reporter or the camera

• Remind yourself, often, to smile.

Recently I wrote about my sister’s saga when trying to her her home repaired for water-damaged floors and carpets. Because the house was being refinanced, the bank holding the mortgage took the insurer’s check and was wouldn’t release it (see previous blog). When the matter dragged on with no results, my sister became frantic. She contacted her insurance adjuster, Debbie Birkmeyer, who took over.

The adjuster, AKA “Wonder Woman,” obtained the check, placing it in my sister’s hands so work could finally begin.

Because of the extent of the repairs, everything on the bottom floor of the house was put in storage, meaning my sister and her two children had been staying in a hotel. What I didn’t realize, however, is how long they had been out of their house—six weeks in all!

My sister explained that once work finally began, the weekend was approaching, meaning the house wouldn’t be finished until the following week. Here again her adjuster interceded, knowing how desperate the kids were to sleep in their own beds. Ms. Birkmeyer brought in a larger crew that worked around the clock over the weekend. By Monday the work was done. She even arranged for reimbursement for the hotel tab.

And that’s what I call service.

My sister was so overwhelmed by her adjuster’s above-the-call-of-duty performance that she e-mailed a note to Allstate, her property insurer. As a result, it’s been confirmed by an Allstate spokesman, that the California property claims adjuster, Ms. Birkmeyer, was recognized for her outstanding customer service. Way to go!

Relieved to have her family back in their home, my sister summed it up: “It’s not about the money,” she said. “It’s about being safe. After six weeks out of the house, the kids were suffering.”

Great minds think alike. That was my first reaction, reading Maureen Dowd’s column in the esteemed New York Times. Maureen echoed my sentiments on the Tiger Woods debacle, expressed in my NoRiskZone blog on Friday, Dec. 4.

In her column on Sunday titled “The Lady and the Tiger,” Ms. Dowd discussed the public relations failures of Tiger Woods and Desiree Rogers, social secretary for President Obama. Rogers is at the center of a controversy involving alleged White House party crashers, Michaele and Tareq Salahi.

Of Woods and Rogers, she said, “trouble trespassed into their privileged worlds and both responded the same foolish way.”

Ms. Dowd continued, “They presumptuously put themselves beyond authority and, despite all the public relations support on earth, broke the first rule of scandal: Don’t stonewall. Admit your mistake before others piece together the embarrassing facts. Reflexive clampdowns don’t work in an era when privacy is passé and when some media outlets are out there giving cash incentives for true confessions and fake reality.”

You can read Maureen Dowd’s column at this link:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/06/opinion/06dowd.html?_r=1&th&emc=th