In fact, these statements apply to both User Experience (UX) and Risk practitioners. Though these teams are typically in different organizational silos, rarely afforded opportunity to directly work together, there is strong shared focus between UX and Risk.
Risk and UX may leverage their discipline-specific strengths to the benefit of the other:
A Process Bridge may allow us to understand times when teams are most aligned through shared focus. These process points are often the best opportunities for collaboration.
|Risk||= OODA =||UX|
|Risk Monitoring and Risk Identification||Observe||Empathize and Define|
|Risk Analysis||Orient||Ideate and Prototype|
The above Process Bridge represents the process steps of the ISACA CRISC job practice ("Risk") and the NN/g variant of Design Thinking ("UX"). This Process Bridge was constructed using observed behavior process equivalence and a simple form of John Boyd's OODA Loop.
The above image shows alignment of Nielsen Norman Group's variant of Design Thinking to the ISACA CRISC job practice areas using the OODA Loop as a Process Bridge, as itemized in the table above.
Though execution tasks (the Act step in the OODA Loop) are typically discipline-specific or governed by rigid existing workflows, there are substantial opportunities for UX and Risk collaboration to generate value in observation, orientation and decision activities:
By building a bridge between UX and Risk, we enable our shared vision to more accurately identify problems, better leverage existing work products, and quantitatively drive improved organizational respect for its users.