When it comes to decision-making, a common approach is to work forwards—to start from a problem and try to figure out the steps toward a solution. However, there is a lesser-known, yet profoundly effective mental model that turns this logic on its head: inversion. Coined by the German mathematician Carl Gustav Jacob Jacobi, the idea is encapsulated in the phrase "Invert, always invert" ("man muss immer umkehren"). The inversion mental model asks you to work backward from an undesirable outcome, rather than from a goal, to ensure success. If you can identify everything that could go wrong, you can avoid it. This approach is especially powerful in compliance, where the stakes of failure—whether in regulatory, ethical, or legal terms—are high. The Inversion Mindset: "Where I’m Going to Die, So I’ll Never Go There" Warren Buffett's longtime partner, Charlie Munger, succinctly captured the essence of inversion when he said: “All I want to know is where I’m going to die, so I’ll never go there.” This simple, almost humorous statement is deceptively profound. It suggests that avoiding failure is sometimes more effective than actively pursuing success. In compliance, the consequences of failure—fines, reputational damage, loss of trust, or even business collapse—are often more salient than the benefits of success. Therefore, by identifying potential failure points and systematically working to prevent them, businesses can enhance compliance outcomes. Inversion in Action: How to Apply it to Compliance Success Let’s explore how the inversion mental model can be used in compliance to achieve effective management systems and prevent costly missteps. 1. Identify the Worst-Case Scenario Start by asking the question: "What does complete compliance failure look like?" This step forces organizations to imagine worst-case scenarios such as regulatory fines, legal liabilities, fraud exposure, or reputational damage. By visualizing this end state, it becomes easier to define what exactly needs to be avoided. For example, a financial institution might define complete failure as being caught in a money laundering scandal. Once this is identified, the next step is to prevent it by putting stringent controls and risk measures in place. 2. Work Backwards to Pinpoint the Causes Once you have a clear picture of what failure looks like, work backward to identify the factors or decisions that could lead to that outcome. What behaviours, systems, or processes, if left unchecked, could contribute to compliance failure? If you think about a company being fined for non-compliance with anti-corruption laws, you would analyze what activities might trigger this failure. These could include lack of internal reporting, unclear policies on gifts or entertainment, or failure to conduct due diligence on third-party vendors. 3. Remove or Mitigate Potential Pitfalls Now that you’ve identified the causes of failure, the next step is to eliminate or mitigate these risk factors. This could mean revising internal policies, improving risk programs, conducting more control effectiveness assessments, or implementing predictive measures. To continue the financial institution example, once the risk of a money laundering scandal is identified, steps to mitigate it might include establishing more rigorous customer identification programs (KYC), improving transaction monitoring systems, and ensuring employees receive regular anti-money laundering (AML) training. 4. Create a Feedback Loop Inversion is not a one-time strategy but a continuous process. Regularly revisit the question: "Where could we fail?" This creates a feedback loop where potential issues are constantly identified and addressed. By staying vigilant, businesses can adapt to changing regulations and internal weaknesses that might arise. This loop is critical in industries like healthcare or finance, where regulatory landscapes are continually shifting. The ability to foresee potential failures before they happen gives businesses a proactive advantage in compliance management. Why Inversion Works So Well in Compliance Compliance success increases the probability of mission success. However, the reverse is almost always true: compliance failure leads to mission failure. The regulatory environment is complex, and failure to meet all your obligations can often arise from blind spots or unforeseen circumstances. The power of the inversion mental model is that it forces organizations to consider these blind spots and address them head-on. Moreover, effective compliance frameworks rely heavily on preventative controls—governance, programs, systems, and processes designed to reduce the likelihood of non-compliance. The inversion method aligns perfectly with this focus. By working backward from a failure scenario, companies can enhance the design and effectiveness of these functions. Avoiding Failure is Success in Compliance Achieving compliance success can be challenging for many to conceptualize. The inversion mental model offers a valuable approach by shifting focus to failure prevention. Rather than solely pursuing an idealized compliant state, this method emphasizes systematically identifying potential failure points and taking steps to avoid them. In essence, compliance success often stems from a thorough understanding and mitigation of possible pitfalls. In the end, Munger’s advice rings true: "All I want to know is where I’m going to die, so I’ll never go there." In compliance, this means that knowing where your business is vulnerable and proactively avoiding those pitfalls is often the key to long-term success.

In this article we consider how both compliance and engineering have changed and why a new kind of engineering Professional engineering is defined in the Professional Engineers Act in Ontario, Canada where I practice Nature of a Compliance Engineer Compliance needs to be engineered. Systems Engineering (goal-seeking, purposeful, full stack systems) Computer Engineering (algorithms, We need to engineer our compliance not just audit our conformance. We need Compliance Engineers.

The sequence matters: proper engineering design must occur before deployment, not afterwards. by Raimund We currently lack enough licensed professional engineers with AI expertise to provide the engineering Professional engineering licensing ensures accountability for proper design practice. Engineering design can’t be an afterthought. Deploying systems first and then engineering them is a risk we simply can’t afford.

One of the areas being overlooked is the role of Professional Engineers. Professional engineers bring a wealth of benefits to the table. Provincial regulators must act now to elevate engineering's role in the AI landscape. Professional engineering associations should develop and deliver training programs that equip engineers Provincial engineering regulators, in collaboration with professional engineering associations and stakeholders

increasingly deployed without the systematic design approaches that have proven effective in other engineering This represents a significant challenge for the engineering profession as AI systems take on increasingly Lessons from Engineering Disciplines Other engineering fields offer instructive examples of how systematic Process Engineering Excellence Chemical engineers approach new processes through systematic analysis. Only then does detailed engineering and construction begin.

AI Risk Containment Architecture Industrial leaders in safety-critical, highly regulated sectors like energy, chemical processing, oil&gas, and nuclear face an important challenge: how to harness the transformative power of A I—such as predictive maintenance, process optimization, and deep analytics—without compromising the safety systems, regulatory compliance, and operational integrity that protect people and infrastructure. Direct integration of AI into operational or enterprise systems introduces unacceptable risks, as even minor algorithmic errors can lead to regulatory violations, safety incidents, or catastrophic disruptions. To address this, industries can draw from proven frameworks like ICH Q8 in pharmaceuticals and ISO PAS 8800 in automotive safety, which emphasize containment and isolation of experimental technologies. This paper proposes a similar architecture for AI: one that separates Artificial Intelligence Technology (AIT) into bounded domains with controlled interfaces to Operational Technology (OT) and Information Technology (IT), enabling innovation while preserving compliance and operational excellence. Download our free white paper here:

Process and pipeline safety programs that manage change will include steps where engineering is required To various degrees, these activities will include: engineering design, oversight, and technical support to waste in engineering projects including design changes during management of change (MOC) processes Programs" calls out seven (7) sources of waste found in engineering processes: Each of these can What impact would reducing or eliminating them have in achieving your engineering outcomes?

Engineers and more broadly the engineering profession have for years applied scientific knowledge for However, what would a computer engineer do with a professional engineer's stamp? We need to find an equivalent of the engineer's stamp for all of engineering. The stamp represents that the engineer takes responsibility for the engineering work and will be held So yes, there is still a role for professional engineers and we need more of them in every field of engineering

of the engineering method in compliance. By highlighting the potential of the engineering method and its benefits, we hope to encourage more engineers The Scientific and Engineering method The scientific method and the engineering method are two distinct What is the Engineering Method? Why the Engineering Method is Important to Compliance Here are some of the benefits of the engineering

It is engineered in, by design. None of it establishes that the work itself was done to engineering and regulatory standards. Engineering is how the gap closes We provide consulting services to help you establish engineering practice Three disciplines, working together → Engineering Methodology — how AI systems are engineered for the Organizations pursuing licensed engineering practice or a Certificate of Authorization.

And engineering is not a set of internal management controls. It governs the controls an organization runs for itself, and for the engineering it points outward — Those are properties built into a system through engineering. When AI carries real hazard, the law is naming what engineering has always required — engineered systems Engineer the AI you build. One is internal management.

Engineering applies it. The engineer applies it, and answers for whether the bridge stands. Applying it to your business follows the engineering method. This engineering cannot be left to the AGI provider. It is true that they engineer, and heavily.