RE: [soa-rm-ra] Resend with readable jpg: My takeway (whilelistening in to another telecom)

["Estefan, Jeff A" <jeffrey.a.estefan@jpl.nasa.gov>]

Folks,

 

Certainly agree that Trust is perception, but I do feel comfortable with couching Risk is as perception since Risk is exposure (rather than perception) to something undesirable happening.  That level of exposure (i.e., risk exposure) requires analysis.  And we probably don’t need to go this far in the RA, but it is typically measured in terms of likelihood and consequence.

 

Ken, what do you mean by “and other factors” in your recent proposed definition of both concepts?  I think we need something more solid or at least provide examples; otherwise, we should just drop those words.

 

Finally, what was wrong with the Trust definition in the latest RA draft that is tied to RWE?  “Trust is an actor’s private perception of the commitment another actor has to a goal together with an identifiable set of real world effects associated with that goal.”  Perhaps we need a reprieve on RWE from the RM just like we did with Willingness.  Recall we said RWE (or set/series of effects) is the result of an interaction and an interaction is “an act” as opposed to “an object.”  We also said the RWE are couched in terms of changes to shared state.

 

Just trying to get some grounding here.  Seeing so many different proposals on how to model Trust these days, it’s getting quite confusing while fully recognizing it’s a very difficult concept to model.

 

 - J