Theatre Design & Technology - Fall 2021 - 16

understand how we react in the face of
a risk, it would be helpful to understand
the kinds of things that trigger our risk
response system.
In 2011, Harvard Medical School
published an article titled " The
Psychology of Risk Perception, " that
listed 14 factors that influence how
humans perceive risk: Trust, Control,
Choice, Nature, Scope, Awareness,
Imagination, Dread, Age Affected,
Uncertainty, Familiarity, Specificity,
Personal Impact, and Fun factor.
Of these 14, Control, Choice, and
Uncertainty, and Personal Impact have
the most relevance here.
Control: When achieved and managed
correctly, control is a good thing.
However, when control is illusory, it is
not. For context, let's define control as
the degree to which shop managers
have both agency and authority to act
on their findings. If the response to their
projections promotes productive conversations
leading to consensus, collaboration,
and artistic partnership, then we
can say a certain amount of control has
been achieved. But in situations where
the shop managers are not heard, and
subsequently directed to move forward
with a project that exceeds the stated
scope, the word control becomes hollow
and meaningless. Control can only
exist when you have both authority and
responsibility. Having " control " over an
underfunded or ill-conceived project
leads to heightened stress and primes
our risk response system. In studies
asking subjects to rate their optimism
about positive or negative events in
terms of controllability, the results
showed that the more control the respondents
felt, the less afraid they were
(Ropeik 2010, 63). " The more control
we think we have, the safer we feel. The
less we think we have, the greater our
fear " and fear triggers our limbic system.
(Ropeik 2010, 84).
Choice and Uncertainty: The more
deliberately all sides take part in the
conversation about the scope of a project,
the more all sides are making informed
choices about how the project
should move forward. When we choose
to take on a risk, we feel empowered.
When directed to take on risk, our
stress
levels
increase.
In
situations
where department heads are instructed
to move forward without addressing
16 | THEATRE DESIGN & TECHNOLOGY | FALL 2021
the underlying concerns, there is no
choice and, subsequently, no conscious
decision on the part of the risk taker to
move forward.
All aspects of producing theatre contain
a level of uncertainty. Still, in cases
when (we have reason to believe that
the) project scope exceeds the available
resources, that sense of uncertainty
increases, causing us to experience a
stronger sense of fear. Uuncertainty
may seem like an odd word since, based
on our review of the project documents,
we have concluded it will be highly likely
the project's outcome will be unsatisfactory.
However, uncertainty in this
case refers more to how to successfully
navigate the build process without the
required resources and not to the predicted
unsatisfactory outcome.
This type of uncertainty is much
harder to manage than those associated
with a healthy production process. In a
process existing within the agreed-upon
parameters, shop managers can appropriately
assess risk and reallocate resources
as needed. However, when we
do not have enough resources, but continue
without revising the constraints
(budget, schedule, or size), a different
kind of uncertainty arises, and with it,
increased feelings of powerlessness.
For the production process to work
efficiently, all the stakeholders must
agree to the project's scope. Without
consensus at all levels, the uncertainty
and subsequent stress will increase to
unhealthy levels. Obviously, it is impossible
to eliminate all the uncertainty in
a project, and that is not the goal. The
goal is to create a shared understanding
of the identified and communicated
risks, and the stakeholder's level of
comfort regarding those risks. Once
the organization achieves a level of mutual
understanding, it can tackle the unknowns
from a stronger position.
Personal Impact: Research confirms
that risks that affect us personally
concern us more than risks to other
people. As managers, the idea of personal
impact can be extended to those
in our charge. If we believe members of
our staff are being (or will be) affected
adversely, our risk response systems
are likely to become primed. Though
the validity of this risk perception factor
is known, it can still be difficult for managers
(especially young ones) to act on
concerns stemming from protecting our
personal needs. There is a mystique in
the theatre that the needs of the production
should take precedence over everything
else. Therefore, putting our needs
ahead of the production is anathema to
many of us in the theatre and can even
cause feelings of guilt and even selfishness
to arise when we attempt to enforce
the originally stated constraints.
There is a fluidity between these
risk perception factors, and they can affect
us in no specific or defined order.
The goal is to become more aware of
the warning signs related to oncoming
hijackings. Each of us needs to learn
to recognize our triggers and work to
bring ourselves back from the precipice
in order to keep our equilibrium, so we
can effectively communicate the identified
risks.
Communicating Risk: Once we've
identified the risks, we must then communicate
our findings to the rest of the
stakeholders. Describing risk is a difficult
process because we all view risk
differently; what seems risky to one
person may not seem risky to another.
Additionally, we are limited by our different
styles of communication. Many
years ago I responded to a preliminary
design presentation that I thought exceeded
our capacity, reminding the
designer that the set had to work in
repertory with another show. I thought
my meaning was clear: The set was too
big for us to efficiently move in and out
during the changeover. In my mind, my
concern would also indicate that the design
needed to be scaled back. When he
came back with the final design, it was
even bigger. When I asked him about
the increased size, he said, " I thought
you meant you were going to figure
that out. " I should have been more direct,
but as these were very preliminary
sketches, I had no evidence to back up
my gut feelings about the show, and I
was not clear enough in the way I voiced
my concern. By the time the final designs
arrived (a little late) there was no
time to make any significant changes.
There are many kinds of communication
models. Much of my early career
was spent working within a hierarchical,
or linear communication model, which
focuses on transmitting information
rather than ensuring the recipient understands
the message. Unfortunately,
Theatre Design & Technology - Fall 2021

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Theatre Design & Technology - Fall 2021
