Risk and Decision Making, Part 1

A friend reminded me recently of a vow I had made almost thirty years ago based on Henri David Thoreau's quote from, "Life in the Woods:"

 I went to the woods because I wished to live deliberately, to front only the essential facts of life, and see if I could not learn what it had to teach, and not, when I came to die, discover that I had not lived. I did not wish to live what was not life, living is so dear; nor did I wish to practice resignation, unless it was quite necessary. I wanted to live deep and suck out all the marrow of life, to live so sturdily and Spartan-like as to put to rout all that was not life, to cut a broad swath and shave close, to drive life into a corner, and reduce it to its lowest terms.

When it comes to faith-based decision making in risk and uncertainty, there are several key quadrants that must be paid attention to understand all of risk. Not paying attention to the following areas will result in less understanding of what is happening both from a global perspective as well as an individual perspective. The areas are complex and overlapping.

The following is a synthesis from both a Theology-of-Risk approach,(1) as well as utilizing and adapting the research from well over 1000 studies on the emotions and human behavior in risk.(2) 

Decision making in Cross-Cultural Risk and Uncertainty include awareness and analysis in four  broad categories:
       
      Spiritual Analysis

1. What does the Holy Spirit seem to be leading me, my family, and my team in - staying in and moving towards more risk or leaving? (Evaluate the 7 ways the HS often leads in risk)
2. The inner self in relation to God; Am I moving towards God or away from Him? What seems to be my core question of God in this risk situation?
3. The inner self in relation to others and self; Am I increasing in faith, love and hope?
4. In what ways do I/we see the heavenly realm participating in this risk situation? (i.e. Demonic opposition?)
5. What is the most strategic decision we could make right now? 

      Emotional/Psychological Analysis

1. What are my strong emotions in this risk situation and what about the risk is impacting me the most? 
2. How am I behaving in comparison to predicted behavior in risk? 
3.  Which of the 5+ biases are influencing my decision making?

     Stewardship and Information Analysis

1. Do I have enough and the right kind of information to make a decision in risk? 
2. Have I done enough evaluation of the data and my staff/families?
3. What have I identified that I cannot know or will remain uncertain?  
4. Based on the information I do have, what and how am I being called to steward?
5. What does "stewarding the information" look like in this risk situation?
6. Who should give input on the decision, who makes the decision, who can veto the decision? Who needs to be informed about the decision?  

      Benefits and Losses (Risk Framing and Prospect Theory)

1. What are the potential value of losses and gains using the analysis above?  
2. How is the risk being "Framed"?
3. What "mental models" is the person bringing to the decision-making? 
4. How is "confirmation bias" informing the decision-making? 
5. Group Decision-making

1. Hampton, Facing Danger. My book is necessarily brief on the topic of decision making, as it is geared to those in the middle of risk who often don't have time to wade through complex psychological research. I'll unpack the complexity in following blog posts.

2. Breakwell, The Psychology of Risk. Breakwell cites a lot of the research, and has the most comprehensive summary of decision-making and emotions on risk. However, other key researchers will be cited throughout.

Why Giving a Suffering Answer to a Risk Question Isn't Helpful Part 2

Conceptual Thinking Vs. Situational Thinking 

Cross-cultural Risk is an event, a situation with a great amount of uncertainty. It is a question asking about the calling and meaning of my life, my death, and my work.

In my book, Facing Danger, I've defined cross-cultural risk as: 

"Potentially losing my life for the sake of the Gospel."  However, I quickly realized I left out the other half of risk:   GAIN. 

When we risk, we have the opportunity for loss OR gain for the sake of the Gospel.  This is the definition we use in our RAM Training and will eventually make it into Facing Danger 2nd 2nd.


The longer definition is: 

We choose and are called to go or remain in a situation where we are willingly exposing ourselves to laying down our lives which we do for the advancement of God's kingdom. Faith-based risk refers not just to the external aspects of danger, but must include what is happening internally about God, others, and oneself.(1)

When we enter this type of situation, it is crucial to engage in what is termed, "Situational Thinking." In the West, we are used to primarily "Conceptual Thinking" to engage in problem solving. Please be clear - BOTH are needed in tension in the risk situation.


How are conceptual thinking and situational so different?(2) Conceptualizing a problem is not the problem itself and often distorts it. "It is one thing to entertain or comprehend a certain concept; it is another thing to experience an actual situation and to perceive a real problem"(3).

As Heschel himself says, 

Too often speculation becomes analysis-by-long-distance of sounds transmitted over a poor connection. We formulate and debate the issues while oblivious to, alienated from the experiences or the insights which account for our raising the issues. The predicament of much of contemporary philosophy is partly due to the fact that ongoing conceptualizations have so far outdistanced the situation which engender [theologizing] that their conclusions seem to be unrelated to the original problems.(4)

As a mom choosing multiple times to return to Afghanistan with my husband Neal and our little children, I needed to process what it meant for me to go to a place and a people group where foreign aid workers were under constant threat of kidnapping and being killed.

My problem was far beyond the concepts of risk, it went far beyond spiritual platitudes. My problem never got easier, only harder the more I knew and experienced the risks. Each time, an altar in my life was needed, and God gently led my through.

My problem of risk was deeply personal and extremely painful. It was isolating and lonely for both Neal and me. I rarely felt understood or empthasized with. My problem involved myself and those I loved the most. My problem involved making potentially life-shattering decisions for three little people who had no say in the matter but for whom I was (and am) 100% responsible.

Was I lacking eternal perspective? No. I knew the big vision of the unreached people groups, and the desire to see more people in eternity with God. And this is what keeps me going on the days I just wanted to go home.

But while the big picture is necessary, and is what gets us to the field, more is needed to help us thrive through risk, through the problem of the human situation, the ultimate questions, than simply the answers found in traditional dogma, creed, and the ultimate vision.

Conceptual Thinking is:

• Detached analysis; thinking about concepts rather than the situations that account for them; thinking about phenomena in a purely speculative way.

• An adequate way of dealing with intellectual questions, but not existential ones.  It is a detached way of viewing a problem. 

• Most discussion on risk only engages in describing risk as a phenomenon to be studied. And since most of those writing about risk have rarely experienced the risk of laying down their lives, the primary focus of their writings has been on the concepts of risk from a cognitive approach, utilizing a proof text or anecdotal approach of Scripture. 

• Too often, conceptual thinking wrongly is indifferent or personally unbiased to the situation, While conceptual thinking is needed, it must be balanced with careful reflection as part of situational thinking to understand and explore all aspects of the phenomena of risk. 

Situational Thinking: 

• Deals with situations by way of concerned involvement; thinking about situations not only the concepts that arise from them;  

• Risk is an existential problem (existence, and the meaning of existence). This is not to be confused with existentialism, but it is to be understood in terms of possibly being killed, martyred, the annhilation of existence, forces much more than thinking about a situation to the top - emotions, core questions, meaning of life, death, and work, are all issues that very often need to be acknowedged and addressed again, often right in the middle of the risk situation. 

• The situation of a risk situation forces us to face what we are willing to die...or not die for. In this way, Conceptual thinking only goes so far. It only addresses the problem from a rational and reductionistic viewpoint, and so does not minister to the heart and soul of the person in risk. 

 Our first goal then, in considering risk, is to place ourselves in the situation like I described risk was for me, and try to understand what the needs, the problems, the emotional, spiritual, and mental dilemmas are. But no one answer will suffice. Everyone's pain, past trauma, and core questions are different and unique.

We must engage with each unique personality without judgment, in order to empathize with them and understand them, so we can point them on the right path in risk.


1. Hampton, Facing Danger, 2016, Chap. 8, p.112.
2. The following are notes I've excerpted, paraphrased, and applied to risk from John Merkle's discussion of Heschel's Philosophy of Religion approach, found in Merkle's book, The Genesis of Faith, p.32.
3. Ibid., p.35.
4. Heschel, Who is Man, 1965, 1.

Why Giving a Suffering Answer to a Risk Question Isn't Helpful, Part 1

The simple answer is that suffering answers a question that risk is not asking.

Suffering is the the experience of real pain in my life through the medium of the body or the psyche (mind and emotions). The experience of pain in the body as the result of persecution, torture, or the pain of betrayal or psychological torture is the daily reality of Christ followers all over the world. All Followers will suffer - Jesus made that clear in Matthew 5:10-11.There is so much written about suffering, I won't begin here. Significant modern writers touching on three major aspects of suffering  include C.S. Lewis (intellectual), Joni Erickson Tada (physical), and Joseph Tson (persecution).

But risk is an entirely different concept. Risk is the threat of suffering, the threat of pain, the threat of persecution, torture, kidnapping, and death. Choosing to go to places where these threats are 24/7 reality, where the smell of death is inescapable, is an entirely different experience from suffering. Those verses that are a comfort in suffering are not automatically or necessarily a comfort in risk.

Giving suffering answers to risk questions demonstrates several things:

1. Not really listening to the heart of the person asking; 
2. Not really listening and understanding the problem being expressed; and
3. A lack of understanding what risk is, both as a concept and as an experience. 

I've received "suffering" answers so many times, that I'm very careful who I go to for advice and input as I work through my own risk dilemmas as a mom living in the Middle East.

The Bible reveals three significant concepts about risk:

1. It is always referred to as an event that requires action and response (Ex. 17; I Sam 19:5, Acts 15:26; Rom 16:4; Phil 2:30.)
2. When risk is referred to, it is only in the event of risking one's life for the righteousness of God and the sake of Jesus Christ. 
3. In all its uses in the OT and NT it is always related to the covenant relationship between God and man. 

Risk is an event, and the only way to truly understand risk is by balanced awareness of both conceptual thinking and situational involvement, because risk is an action, not primarily an intellectually abstract problem.

A Journey of Risk

It started when I was young, and my parents took me on numerous trips around the world. I developed the desire to see more of the world, and also saw it was possible to navigate the world without a tour agency or a group. God began working in my young heart, to give me a vision for the world.

In my early 20's, I went to Russia with a group, three summers in a row. The hunger for advenure propelled me.  I wanted to see where all the Ivan and Tanya books were written about, to see where my ancestors came from, the spiritual heritage of Russian Christians persevering through danger. Did I pray about going? Not much. The desire for adventure and danger was more important. God began to become real to me.

Then I was offered an all expense paid trip around the world. My job was to help lead.  But money drove me this time. Who could turn up an all expenses paid trip? God showed me suffering people, suffering discarded babies. I realized I was called by God to do something.

God grabbed my heart for missions, but this time, it was the desire to work with a specific individual which drove me. I worked with this godly man for six years.  Yes, I loved the work, the travel, but being with this fatherly man who provided healing in my life was the focus. Still, my interaction with risk in mission was more about surviving danger, than about praying about it. I remember choosing to go down into the middle of a demonstration in central Jerusalem, knowing that really, only my mom and dad would grieve my death if I should be killed in danger.

Then I met the man I'd marry. The desire to follow and serve, the willingness to go to a dangerous place, even with children drove me. Yes, our focus was on unreached people groups, but that was a side light to the primary work we were called to. Risk - that was something we didn't really think about. Of course it was a risk and dangerous.

Then I became a mother. My own mom died. But now I have children to live for. My drive, my goal, is to stay alive at least until the youngest is 18. Risk became something, finally, to pray about. Finally, home in God's hand, I pray about which risks He wants me to take for the sake of His kingdom.

Did He work in all the previous situations? Yes. He's protected me from being raped, at least twice. He's protected me in war, in life under the Taliban, from being kidnapped. He's protected my family when the 10 robbers held us at gunpoint and robbed us. He protected me from Russian police interrogation that time our bus was stopped by the police. He protected me from rocket attack in Israel during the 2nd intifada. He protected me when my friend and I were attacked in the bazaar with knives slashing at our purses.

He has used me, despite less-than-godly-desires throughout. The desire to see the world, the desire for adventure, danger, the desire to be with another person, the desire to follow --- He used me through all of these, and got me to various countries where He has used me to make a difference in the world for His kingdom and people's eternity.

No one needs to start out with perfectly godly motivation or understanding of a theology of risk.

Risk as Worship

How can cross-cultural risk be considered a form of worship? 

By attuning our ear to hear God’s voice speaking to us to move into or out of risk situations, by attuning our eyes to see His activity in the events surrounding our risk situation, and by increasing and sensitive awareness of His leading in our hearts, we demonstrate worship of Him. 

Worship – what or whom we place as of primary importance; we worship what or whom we love.

When is risk not worship?

When our whole focus and thought is on security – increasing security and minimizing risk.

When our primary focus is on risk itself, elevating its importance by our willingness to tolerate a lot…or a little risk.

Both security and risk are polar opposites, both are seductive in their own way.  Security is elusive. Risk leads to false pride…or death. Either way, when we stiffen our neck, dig in our heals, and attach our hearts and minds to either security or risk as a core value, we’ve become idolatrous. (Ps 115:4-8)

When is risk worshipful?

Worshiping God with our hearts, minds, and strength (Deut 6:5) means that we are prayerful and discerning when we continue on the path towards impending danger. It means we do not elevate “staying with the locals” or “being willing to be blown up” as the reason we stay. It means we have listened again to hear God’s voice that this is what He wants for us, and we listen to Him over and over again in each risk situation.

Moving away from risk as an act of worship is perhaps even harder. We may feel judged and compared to others as if we are not courageous enough. In this case, we elevate what man thinks, instead of God’s voice speaking. “Hear O Israel” is God’s voice to the nation (Deut 6:4).  The Lord is One, One Lord over all. We serve the same Lord whether He calls us into risk or away from risk.

Risk is worshipful when all of our relationships are moving towards greater love towards each other, greater faith in God and hope in Him. Risk is worshipful when the unity of His Spirit is preserved. Risk is worshipful when God is most glorified by our actions, pointing others to Him in our weakness. 

Risk can be worship even when we are afraid, for we know that courage is doing righteous action even when we feel fear. When we obey God’s calling into risk, and do not let fear paralyze us, and we cultivate joy in risk, we worship Him.

Let’s exhort each other to listen closely to God’s quiet still voice in all the ways He speaks in risk, let us "see His voice" (Rev 1:12), so that we can truly worship Him in all that we do in risk.

A Theology of Risk and Stewardship Cannot Be Separated

Risk and stewardship cannot be separated in Biblical teaching. Paradidomi is one of three Greek words translated for “risk” in the New Testament. It means “give over to” and the tense used in Acts 15:26 means that “these men have actively chosen to deliver over their hearts and souls and remain in that position.”  It’s like they aren’t just setting themselves up for the possibility of difficulty but have decisively placed themselves into the center of the difficult place. In contrast, it’s where they choose to live, so of course awful things may happen.   

This same Greek word, paradidomi, is used twice in Matthew 25:20 and 25:22 in the story of the talents. In the parable of the talents, the stewards who took calculated risks to increase the Master’s resources were commended. This seems to be one of two approaches to stewardship in the Bible in relation to risk for the sake of the Gospel.  

In this story, all the servants had the correct desire: to please the master. However, the

servant who hid the money and did not attempt to risk increasing the master’s money listened to his internal fear and buried the money. This servant had the wrong understanding of his master.

“I knew you to be a hard man,” he responded. His misunderstanding of his master resulted in wrong choices. “He misunderstood the essence of his master. The servant had good intentions, and the proper desire, but the wrong picture of his master, and so had insufficient vision to use his resource wisely.”   

What is especially uncomfortable about this parable are the consequences experienced by the one-talent servant. The servant lost everything, even to the extreme of being cast out of God’s presence. Stewarding is serious business!

We are to enter into risk with the right intentions and desire to please our Lord. But even more than that, our God desires us to know him as he truly is. He uses the circumstances of risk to remove the wrong pictures we may have of him. When we experientially know him deeper, we spiritually see how we are to steward ourselves and the other resources entrusted to us wisely  to bring him glory in that risk event. He wants us to steward his resources with a heart that loves and fears him, not with a heart that only fears him. 

But if we stop here, we will draw the conclusion that stewardship is all about increasing the master’s resources. If there is only one “right” answer, we’ll conclude that risk analysis and risk mitigation is imperative for we must preserve his resources at all costs. But this doesn’t seem to be the view of Scripture. 

            Stewardship of our Master’s resources in risk requires responsible risk mitigation. Some protest, and say this is acting out of fear.  Not so.  Jesus taught, “Behold, I am sending you out as sheep in the midst of wolves, so be wise as serpents and innocent as doves.” Risk mitigation is helping break “the terrorist cycle” and enabling us to live and serve Him another day.

There are several Biblical concepts in tension in risk:  calculated risk to push His kingdom forward; stewardship of the Master's resources, and protection and care of those He has entrusted to us. 

One of the most serious words is the teaching in the Bible regarding shepherds who do not care for their sheep. Both Jeremiah 23 and Ezekiel 34 convey God’s view of the bad shepherds of Israel who neglected and devoured the sheep. These shepherds caused fear and dismay and scattered the sheep. We are called to steward and shepherd our children and the teams under our leadership. 

• 1 Excerpts from Facing Danger: A Guide Through Risk, by Anna Hampton, Zendagi Press, September, 2016. 
• 2 Brad Young, Parables: The Jewish Tradition and Christian Interpretation (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 1998), Kindle Loc. 1533, 1542
• 3 Matt 25:24
• 4 Matt 10:16.