Riskidesse

Riskidesse is a relatively new term that has emerged in the fields of risk management and organizational behavior. It refers to the subjective, qualitative perception of risk that individuals or groups attach to a particular decision, project, or environment. Unlike traditional risk metrics – such as probability and impact – riskidesse captures the emotional, cultural, and contextual factors that shape how risk is anticipated, communicated, and acted upon. In practice, a high level of riskidesse might trigger caution or avoidance, even when objective hazard assessments suggest a low probability of adverse outcomes.

The concept was first introduced in a 2015 academic paper by researcher Elena Kovács, who coined the word from the Latin root *risus* (“laugh”) combined with the suffix *-desse*, to emphasize the performative and socially constructed nature of risk perception. Subsequent studies in the late 2010s and early 2020s have expanded the definition, positioning riskidesse as a bridge between quantitative risk models and the narratives that stakeholders use to make sense of uncertain futures. Some scholars link it to related notions such as risk culture and risk appetite, arguing that it offers a more nuanced framework for integrating diverse viewpoints into risk decision‑making.

In corporate settings, riskidesse is applied through workshops, scenario exercises, and storytelling techniques that surface hidden anxieties or overconfidence. Analysts often combine riskidesse scores with formal risk matrices to create a blended risk dashboard, enabling executives to see both numeric probabilities and the pulse of employee sentiment. Public policy makers also use riskidesse when designing communication strategies for crisis management, ensuring that messages resonate with specific audience concerns rather than relying solely on statistical data.

Critiques of the term point out that riskidesse can be ambiguous and difficult to quantify, which may lead to inconsistencies in its application across industries. Others argue that overweighting subjective perceptions can obscure objective risk signals and result in suboptimal allocation of resources. Despite these reservations, the discipline continues to refine measurable proxies—such as survey indices and behavioral indicators—to lend rigor to riskidesse analysis.