How Organizations Can Confront Ambiguous Threats by Empowering Employees to Speak Up Early

Organizations face both clear and ambiguous threats. Clear threats are straightforward, like a gas leak triggering alarms in a chemical plant—actions such as evacuation are immediate and obvious. Ambiguous threats, on the other hand, are much harder to detect and define.

An example is a faint odor that some employees suspect might be harmful, yet sensors show no issues, and symptoms are mild. These situations present uncertainty and mixed signals, often leading to delayed or no action, even though the risks may escalate over time.

The Challenges of Ambiguous Threats and Employee Silence in High-Risk Environments

Ambiguous threats are typically complex, unpredictable, and unprecedented. This makes it hard for employees to judge their seriousness or respond effectively. Research shows that most threats in organizations are not entirely clear, but exist on a spectrum of ambiguity. In interviews with employees across industries, clear threats led to swift collaboration and problem-solving. But when threats were ambiguous, uncertainty led to hesitation, debate, and often inaction—sometimes until the issue became a crisis.

Ambiguity tends to increase employee silence. In high-risk industries like oil and gas, ambiguous warning signs are common, yet employees often stay quiet due to uncertainty or fear of being wrong. Psychological experiments show that employees facing ambiguous situations tend to defer to leaders rather than take initiative. They focus on clearer tasks and expect managers to handle unclear problems, partly due to cognitive overload and entrenched hierarchies that discourage questioning authority.

This passivity is risky because leaders, despite their authority, can overlook ambiguous problems. Employees on the ground often have the best insights into early warning signs, yet they may hold back due to fear, uncertainty, or a belief that it’s not their role to raise concerns. The very moments when their input is most critical—when threats are unclear—are when they tend to withdraw, leaving the organization blind to developing issues.

Overcoming Ambiguity in Organizations to Identify and Address Unclear Threats

To counteract this, companies must act on three levels. At the organizational level, they can create a culture of constant alertness, encouraging attention to minor issues before they grow. Toyota’s andon system, which lets any worker stop production at the first sign of trouble, exemplifies this proactive culture. Recognizing and analyzing near-misses can help companies identify risks early, even when they seem minor or uncertain.

Leaders should train employees to recognize and respond to threats through stress tests, simulations, and failure scenarios. Netflix’s Chaos Engineering, which intentionally disrupts systems to prepare employees for real-world issues, is a prime example. Lastly, employees themselves must feel empowered to challenge leadership when necessary.

Companies like NVIDIA foster this with a culture of intellectual honesty and open feedback. Ultimately, organizations that encourage curiosity, early warning, and proactive problem-solving at every level are better equipped to navigate ambiguous threats and stay ahead in uncertain times.