Skin in the Game

Which brings us to the largest fragilizer of society, and greatest generator of crises, absence of “skin in the game.” Some become antifragile at the expense of others by getting the upside (or gains) from volatility, variations, and disorder and exposing others to the downside risks of losses or harm. And such antifragility-at-the-cost-of-fragility-of-others is hidden—given the blindness to antifragility by the Soviet- Harvard intellectual circles, this asymmetry is rarely identified and (so far) never taught.

Being exposed to the benefits and downsides of taking risks. Lack of skin in the game is an asymmetry in risk-taking where the upside (antifragility and optionality) is kept but the downside is outsourced.

The worst problem of modernity lies in the malignant transfer of fragility and antifragility from one party to the other, with one getting the benefits, the other one (unwittingly) getting the harm.

Reference

Antifragile by Nassim Nicholas Taleb

Skin in the Game by Nassim Nicholas Taleb