Project risks are often ignored, and this issue extends beyond projects to larger, catastrophic events. On March 11, 2011, an earthquake and tsunami struck Japan, triggering a triple core meltdown at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant. Over six years later, former top managers of Tepco, the plant’s operator, stood before a criminal court for the first time. They were accused of ignoring warnings about the risk of a massive tsunami, which led to the catastrophic events of March 2011. Despite the allegations, the managers were acquitted in September 2019. Here’s why this happened.
Internal Warnings Were Ignored
“It was impossible to predict the accident,” the plant managers at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant claimed in court. “A tsunami of this magnitude could not have been expected.” Yet they must have been aware of expert reports warning the Japanese nuclear industry about such earthquakes and killer tsunamis.
In 2005, Professor Katsuhiko Ishibashi of Kobe University warned a parliamentary commission of the exact risks that later materialized in Fukushima. “An earthquake and its consequences, such as a tsunami, could destroy several parts of a nuclear power plant. This would make it impossible to cool the reactor. The fuel rods would begin to melt, leading to a core meltdown or even a nuclear explosion. Hydrogen explosions would also be possible,” Ishibashi stated. Additionally, he noted that aid to earthquake victims could be hampered by radioactive contamination. This is exactly what happened in Fukushima.
The nuclear disaster in Fukushima in 2011 is, of course, not an isolated case of ignored warnings. The same applies to project risks. Why are these risks often ignored, even when attentive team members have raised concerns for a long time?
A Network of Relations Between the State and the Nuclear Lobby
The disaster was described as a “human-made catastrophe,” attributed to the close network of relations between the state and the nuclear lobby. In July 2017, a court found that the state was also at fault. Both the state and Tepco were found guilty of negligence, as Tepco should have been required to take precautions against tsunamis.
In September 2019, the Tokyo District Court acquitted the former executives of the energy company Tepco. According to the ruling, no one was to blame for one of the largest nuclear accidents in history. The meltdown of three reactors at Japan’s Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant in 2011 was deemed an act of “higher powers.”
The prosecution argued that Tepco should have known that reactors located on Japan’s earthquake-prone coast faced significant risks from giant waves. However, the court stated that such risks could not have been foreseen. It even declared that it was unreasonable to expect a nuclear power plant operator to predict every whim of nature.
The core meltdown in three reactors was a work of “higher powers”.
The Volkswagen Emissions Scandal
On September 18, 2015, it was revealed that Volkswagen AG had installed illegal software in the engine management system of its diesel vehicles. These systems met U.S. emission standards only in special test bench mode. During normal operation, much of the exhaust gas purification system was effectively turned off. VW had promoted these vehicles as “clean diesel” through large advertising campaigns to increase sales and market share in the U.S.
An article in the “Süddeutsche Zeitung” on July 27, 2017, revealed that Audi engineers had flagged concerns as early as October 2013. Internal documents show that they warned of the consequences of exposure and recommended that the manipulation software be modified. However, no action was taken.
The Early Warners are Rarely Taken Seriously
Early warners are often dismissed, mocked, or labeled as crazy. People tend to think, “That could never happen!” However, when such warnings are proven correct, panic ensues, and it is often too late to act effectively. Humans are wired to ignore or deny potential problems until directly confronted with them. By then, meaningful action is usually no longer possible.
Listen to Early Warners!
While your project may not carry risks as severe as the Fukushima disaster, it is still important to pay attention to warnings about seemingly incredible or unlikely risks. Laughing at those raising concerns or dismissing them as crackpots is the wrong strategy. Include such risks in your analysis and discuss them, unless they are completely implausible, such as “a meteor might hit our site.” While unlikely risks can often be dismissed, the discussion itself raises awareness and may help identify related, more realistic risks.
Why Are Certain Risks Ignored?
Have you ever heard these comments during risk identification?
- “This risk is so unlikely—forget it!”
- “If we list this risk, it will cause trouble with management.”
- “This risk will make us look foolish.”
- “Adding this risk to the list could get the project canceled.”
Unpleasant or improbable risks are often identified but then ignored or removed from risk lists due to:
- Political or personal interests
- Pressure from management
- Profit-driven motives
- Fear that the project may be stopped
- A failure to imagine such events could occur
- Arrogance (“It won’t happen to us!”)
These attitudes contributed to disasters like Fukushima Nuclear Desaster, the the Challenger space shuttle crash, the Deepwater Horizon explosion and the Volkswagen Emissions Scandal.
It won’t happen to us!
Here You Can Find More Knowledge
Would you like to learn more about how to make your projects more successful with Project Risk Management? My book Project Risk Management – Practical Guide takes you an important step further!
Do you know somebody who might be interested in this article? Then simply forward it or share it. Thank you!
