Jennifer Gaskin

I’m writing a feature on whether business risk is actually greater today or just feels that way. Some argue that globalization, speed and tighter margins have made companies more fragile. My working theory is more skeptical: The margins for error may have narrowed, perhaps because of features of modern capitalism and culture, but the fundamental nature of risk hasn’t changed much. I’m also curious who benefits when executives believe risk is uniquely severe (and requires specialized knowledge) and whether that belief feeds short-term thinking. I’m looking for a business historian (or economic historian) who can offer long-run context. Potential questions to explore: • Have there been earlier periods when business leaders believed risk had become uniquely dangerous? How did that play out, and do you see any relevant patterns re-emerging today? • What has genuinely changed about business risk over the past century or more (speed, interconnection, capital structures, shareholder expectations), and what has stayed the same? • Have margins for error narrowed? If so, what drove that? • Who has historically gained from a “risk is worse than ever” narrative (consultants, insurers, financial firms, others)? • Is there historical evidence that a heightened sense of risk pushes companies toward short-termism?