Home > Americas, English, Special Reports > Rethinking corporate risk

Rethinking corporate risk

A new risk typology is gradually decimating firm profitability amidst the ongoing economic crisis. Even though individual risks taken separately can be handled with a relative effectiveness, different risk management paradigms need be implemented to curb their cumulative adverse impact.

by Marquis Codjia


Lire en Français

An important staple in corporate affairs management lies not only in the intricacies of the external environment and its potential impacts – deleterious or favorable – on firm profitability but also in factors endogenous to the entity. A business entity has to panoramically gauge in permanence all elements that are part of its ‘quality chain’, that is, its supply chain and distribution channels taken in conjunction with its corporate brand rating within the market.

Uncertainty is at the heart of every business venture. The adventure of a venture is what epitomizes every undertaking that has profit seeking as its core ethos. Decision-makers are keen not only to seek the best ingredients for strategic success but to derive systemically the most cost-efficient modus operandi that will perennially heighten overall financial competitiveness and shareholder value.

Uncertainty can be viewed as the inherent dichotomy that exists in day-to-day decisions regarding core utility and chance; in other words, uncertainty is the big question mark that hangs on the shoulders of most corporate executives, asking them whether they’re making good decisions and whether these decisions will yield good outcomes.

Good outcomes are vital to immediate, short-term firm success in the marketplace; however, good decisions are preeminent in the long-run strategic standing of most corporations because a framework that structurally fosters the emergence of the best ideas and the most efficient and effective procedures uniquely positions these entities for a relatively perennial competitive dominance.

The current risk literature emphasizes that risk, that is, the unknown from uncertainty, can be construed in two ways: aleatory and epistemic. Aleatory risk refers to a situation of pure chance whereas epistemic risk is a conflict circumstance where the resolution depends on the experience level of the decision-maker and their judgment. The latter risk is customarily encountered in business dealings but the former is more a product of probability. For instance, Tony Merna and Faisal F. Al-Thani (2008, page 14) qualified the discovery of Viagra as aleatory because the drug was originally for angina but was found during clinical trials that it could be used to prevent erectile dysfunction syndromes in males.

Corporate risk officers need to continually devise a structured framework to systemically address risk at all levels of the strategic continuum, be it at the executive and project levels or lower echelons. Uncertainty is an indissoluble nexus in business; therefore, risk can never be integrally eradicated. This heightens considerably the criticality of a sound mode of operation that places due interest on the detection, the analysis and the mitigation of all risks across the firm.


Diverse risks but a single risk management framework

(Risk chart courtesy Astral Computing, Inc.)

Many types of risk are found in business entities nowadays, both exogenously and endogenously, depending on the economic sector, the market situation and position (monopoly vs. oligopoly, monopsony vs. oligopsony, or perfect competition) and the strategic direction corporate executives are disposed to spearhead.

To a majority of corporate leaders, the conventional risk typology addresses three key areas which are quintessential to business processes, firm profitability and monetary viability: operational, market and credit. These risk areas were redefined and enhanced through the Basel II banking regulation although the precepts of the latter regulatory corpus can be applied effectively to any business sector.

Operational risk lies in the execution of a company’s business functions and thus covers an incredibly large span of functions, from internal processes to human resources and IT systems. An example of such risk may be a theft of information or a loss due to internal fraud (asset misappropriation).

Credit risk refers to the unfavorable event when a debtor is unable to repay a loan or other line of credit due to bankruptcy or temporary liquidity problems (the epithet “country risk” is preferred when the defaulting party is a country or any other sovereign entity).

Market risk is the risk that market factors (stock prices, interest rates, foreign exchange rates, and commodity prices) may have individually or communally an unfavorable pecuniary effect on a corporate investment or trading portfolio.

Another risk – political risk – is present within a firm’s external environment and emerges concomitantly with a move into the international sphere. This relates to the financial peril that a country may suddenly change its policies and explains, in part, why many underdeveloped countries lack foreign direct investment.

Managing new types of risks

Admitting that risks are inherently the Achilles’ heel in most corporate functions makes accordingly easier the argument that an effective risk management program is pivotal to avoiding potential financial losses or brand damage. Risk officers need to utilize an effective and efficient toolkit in order to detect, analyze and mitigate or eradicate potential risks at all levels of corporate strata, and risk modeling via computer simulation has proven relatively effectual at mapping organization “risk cloud”. Chapman and Ward (1997, page 169) also identify more exhaustively eight phases in the risk management process: define, focus, identify, structure, ownership, estimate, evaluate and plan.

There exists at the moment a complex panoply of methods and systems to address risks, and that list is correlatively associated with the magnitude of the underlying events when they occur (high, medium, low). It can also be affected by the extent to which the probability of the likelihood of occurrence of such events cannot be evaluated with a comfortable degree of accuracy (Lifson and Shaifer, 1982, page 133)

New types of preeminent risks have surfaced the past few years in the marketplace, and at the moment these areas of uncertainty are eerily ignored or underrated by risk specialists or academic experts. Although some of these threats have been tracked with a fluctuating degree of thoroughness over the years, their stratospheric increase in the last decade and the resulting financial havoc on corporate cash accounts have catapulted them into the “high risk” category.

These risks are shareholder activism risk, reputational risk, and regulatory risk.

Tony Merna and Faisal F. Al-Thani still posit that the entire risk universe can be divided into 3 sections: known risks, unknown risks, and unknown unknowns. The latter category is of preeminent import in the current analysis because it encompasses the emerging threats named earlier.

Shareholder activism, an erstwhile epiphenomenon, has metastasized lately into a increasingly frequent and potentially deleterious incident within the economic landscape. Of course, the nuisance here is gauged from the vantage point of a corporate executive whose position or policies can be potentially annulled by outside activists.

This type of activism utilizes the conduit of equity stake in a corporation to put pressure on its management and reach the goals and strategies at the core of activist shareholders’ mission. Although shareholder value creation is one momentous ethos for corporate leaders, shareholder activists do not necessarily pursue a community of interests with other shareholders or business leaders. The dichotomy arises because the former group customarily seek short-term goals that are of utmost importance only to them and usually of a pecuniary nature, while the latter aspire to longer-term strategic goals that will enhance firm market standing and competitive status.

Magnifying investor activism risk is the economic observation that it is relatively cheap from the investor’s standpoint – a small ownership of 5 – 10% is sufficient to launch a fruitful campaign – compared to other more costly takeover undertakings within the economic sphere. In practice, stockholder activism can be found in several circumstances: proxy battles, publicity campaigns, shareholder resolutions, litigation, and negotiations with management.

Carl Icahn and T. Boone Pickens, both billionaire US investors, have proven very adept at successfully bringing about change within their target companies and in that process amass gargantuan profits once the desired restructuring, merger or takeover is completed. Mr. Icahn has parlayed his unique business acumen, strategic thinking and huge checkbook into The Icahn Report, an effective pedagogic resource that fosters his views on governance and economic matters.

From a corporate perspective, risks of this category can be extremely prejudicial because a takeover or board turnover can beyond a shadow of a doubt derail the medium- to long-term goals that managers set, which in turn can affect profitability and market leadership while costing the firm unnecessarily millions of dollars in litigation and public relations campaigns.

Reputational risk arises when adverse events affect the brand or social standing and image of a business concern as a result of actions undertaken by the media, firm employees, senior management, and government bodies or industry overseers (the latter group is the source of regulatory risk).

Corporate managers need to heed the aforementioned new risks in a different manner than ordinary risks due to their intense asymmetry (low cost vs. sizeable financial damage). Obviously they must apply the best practices dogma of good financial decision making in corporate finance to this risk typology: present value, financial statement analysis, and risk and return but also option pricing and governance code (Damodaran 2006).

In addition to a solid IT infrastructure aimed at capturing these risks, corporations need to create a new consolidated function, working under the aegis of the Chief Risk Officer, to synergistically address these areas of uncertainty. This role must have overall responsibility for the development and implementation of a detailed business risk management framework and advise senior leaders on sound corporate governance practices. The future of solid firm profitability is at stake.

  1. rorh_ri23
    February 14, 2010 at 8:05 pm

    I luv ur analysis. I think also that lawsuits in the international arena are key to corporate riks. thx

  2. mcalbra
    February 14, 2010 at 8:10 pm

    Good article. There are LOTS of risks in other areas that are increased by identifying previously undiscovered stuff. Prime example: The whole 09/11 thing. Before September 11th, the idea of someone hijacking a plane and crashing it into buildings, wasn’t contemplated as a risk. Afterwards, a slew of cities had “issues” finding insurance coverage for the tallest buildings in each city – as overnight, they were now a target for potential terrorist attacks. Some companies flat out stopped writing coverage on buildings over six stories tall.

    • jay46
      February 14, 2010 at 8:12 pm

      Undiscovered risk may only be to the company, but it may or may not be reversible or controllable.

      If there is non in place, is it inherent risk or caused by external factor ? If inherent, evaluation could be placed on whether is that a currently in place control mechanism over it ? If control exist, then how strong is the control ? That will determine the risk level.

      If external, is there probable preventive measures ? If yes, the risk is lowered upon preventive control imposed. If no, what is the chances of recurrence ?

      If adhoc, preventive should be noted ? If no preventive measure, what is the remedial?
      The risk level depends on the control available or enhanceable.

      • cross_rire39
        February 14, 2010 at 8:13 pm

        If I were you, I would uncover the risk and then further cover the newly discovered risk by explaining how it was uncovered. Better to have ethical intent in dealing with newly discovered risk then for it to appear as though something had been covered up.

  3. cross_rire39
    February 14, 2010 at 8:16 pm

    good work, i’ve used the following outline at my job for years and wanted to share.

    Identify the risks
    Evaluate them (worst case analysis)
    Rank them based on potential impact
    Determine how each risk can be reduced
    Create a plan to reduce each risk in turn
    Execute plans

  4. oar_er23
    February 14, 2010 at 9:52 pm

    Carl Icahn is a my hero, he makes $ restructuring many companies he took over and turned them around to make profitable companies. T Boone is the 2nd best man on wall street ever.

  5. hinti43
    February 14, 2010 at 10:06 pm

    nternal controls must be implemented also, they are the checks and balances in place to minimise operational risks. Risk management is the determination of policy and quantification is also key. good analysis.

  6. lee_reaaccot
    February 14, 2010 at 10:08 pm

    Assessment of control risk and testing of internal controls?
    Are the assessment of control risk and testing of internal controls the most important parts of a modern audit?

    • rarthat
      February 14, 2010 at 10:14 pm

      In a word, yes.

      Those two elements make up the lion’s share of an audit to make sure that the financial statements are not materially mistated.

      First, you get the engagement – which includes a letter where the auditee will essentially represent the truth to the auditors.

      Second, an audit assess the risk of the companies internal controls. If the controls are weak, more testing is needed to gain assurance. If the controls are strong, then less. The level of controls determines the testing based on statistical formulas so that I can and should catch errors.

      Third, an auditor begins testing the financial statements, either on a trial basis (e.g. look at individual invoices when testing the accounts payable balance) or on an analytical basis (e.g. receivables should be low in an ice-cream stores since it is an all cash basis, so it probably not mistated if it is low).

      Fourth, the footnotes are combed through to make sure that they have proper disclosures.

      Fifth, the “management discussion and analysis” is reviewed (but not audited) to make sure it “jives” with the financials.

  7. crlors
    February 15, 2010 at 12:09 am

    Corporate inner workings also can affect the risk profile of a firm assuming that it evolves in a standalone market. in other words, it’s an interdependent relationship between the external and internal environments.

  8. February 15, 2010 at 8:46 am

    This is a brilliant overview – worth a book! Thanks.

  9. risk_guru
    February 15, 2010 at 9:28 am

    Great work here, a lot of good stuff in this. One thing I may add is that companies nowadays use derivatives to also prevent some of the reputational risks and other hazards. That’s why that market has grown so fast since 2000. Risk metrics can be used more effectively nowadays. Keep up the work. It’d be good if you reply to the mail I sent to you privately.

  10. lrs340
    February 15, 2010 at 9:31 am

    good goin. ‘m suscribing to this blog.

  11. rugb30
    February 15, 2010 at 9:34 am

    risk is everywhere, everyday and everynite. for individuals and companies, and i thank you for making me learn a lot here.

  12. gordo_rsist
    February 15, 2010 at 9:43 am

    sign me up 4 this blog. good work!

  13. ny10001
    February 15, 2010 at 9:57 am

    another brilliant article. man i love this blog, rite on target. ‘m subscribing and pls respond to my private mail. thanks u

  14. risk_trends
    February 15, 2010 at 1:27 pm

    Risk when it pertains to corporations is always a key concern which is why we must always invst significantly in it. ‘ve worked for more than 32 years in all types of risk and it’s refreshing 2 see it’s coming back at the center of the debate. thx for a good analysis.

  15. thnkier_30_ab_20
    February 15, 2010 at 1:34 pm

    great sharing this analysis. i can attest to the criticality of reputational risk because it destroys all a company has spent years in building. it’s so costly to improve one’s brand name once it’s desroyed.

  16. Rfer
    February 15, 2010 at 2:03 pm

    What’s the government doin for risk in general at the federal level? it seems it’s just plain silence at that level. the country needs to think a bit deeper about political risk or security risk.

  17. rsa_thij
    February 15, 2010 at 2:06 pm

    how is Wall Street assessing risk anyway today? it seems they’re more interested in payin out $$$ millions to bad traders and leaders rather than focusin on to manage their bzness.

  18. rsla_armel
    February 15, 2010 at 2:29 pm

    where I can please find the french article of this article? thanx, google translate is not giving good translation

  19. RJ49
    February 15, 2010 at 5:24 pm

    A company needs to be systematically looking for risks also in its senior leaders. Conflicts such as insider trading and all can be damageable to the company if regulators know.

  20. corp_greed
    February 15, 2010 at 7:58 pm

    Most companies don’t have the right risk presence to tackle current threats and cybersecurity is a big part of that.

  21. fr29043
    February 15, 2010 at 8:02 pm

    I like this analysis. risk is everywhere and firms are getting better with time but more work needs to be done to get to a risk free environment. thx

    • rarlta
      February 15, 2010 at 9:25 pm

      the risk environment is always evolving and can’t be controlled 100 percent. i like the idea of the author that there must be a single person in charge of risk.

  22. largerthink
    February 16, 2010 at 8:32 am

    corporate risk you bet, what abt country risk or cybersecurity first? if our systems ain’t secure at the IT level, or will be lost. get back to cybersecurity guys.

  23. rosargl
    February 16, 2010 at 8:41 am

    gd article guys.

  24. vilirsa
    February 16, 2010 at 8:46 am

    risk is crucial for everyone even in our personal lives.

  25. riskexpert63
    February 16, 2010 at 8:54 am

    How can the board foster a risk management culture within the firm?
    The board must clearly allocate risk management responsibilities among various senior managers to promote and ensure management accountability for risk control. Senior managers must be made to realise that their jobs are on the line if there are major failures in control. The board must insist that senior managers place control issues on a par with other strategic business matters. Management accountability for internal controls can also be encouraged through comprehensive annual assessments and public reporting on the effectiveness of risk management systems (as well as by regulators, if the institution is supervised.)
    On its part, the board must not be guilty of paying lip-service to the need for good controls and taking no concrete action. Its unqualified commitment to installing and maintaining a first-class control system must be reflected in the resources it makes available and its attitude to risk control personnel. The board must also ensure that appropriate risk education continues throughout the firm.

    It must make the funds available for the necessary hardware and software as well as the recruiting and retention of the right numbers of people with the appropriate expertise, skill and experience. Equally important, senior control personnel must have authority and clout with the board and senior management. They must have access and direct lines of communication with senior management, if not board members. They should not be seen and treated as second-class citizens just because they are not direct revenue-earners.
    http://riskinstitute.ch/Question5.htm

  26. jenkisn
    February 16, 2010 at 5:48 pm

    various risks fall into these categories but the most thing is that auditors can help prevent these as well. they need to be paid better to do the work.

  27. eross
    February 16, 2010 at 5:52 pm

    good article btw

  28. 24rthstreet
    February 16, 2010 at 5:53 pm

    i luv this article. thx 4 an excellent research.

  29. rarewit
    February 16, 2010 at 5:57 pm

    good wisdom here in this article, just like my finance book. thx and keep up the gd work man.

  30. rappr
    February 17, 2010 at 9:03 am
  31. gop_monk
    February 17, 2010 at 9:12 am

    good article especially the reputational risk part.

  32. are u mad
    February 17, 2010 at 9:24 am

    risk lies everywhere, not just at work or in companies. u can get hit by a car on your way to work or anything else. thats’ just probability.

  33. asr034
    February 17, 2010 at 9:37 am

    gd article. luv’d it!!!

  34. rpor40
    February 17, 2010 at 9:38 am

    Recruiters want to see how professionally you appear you could handle with rude or ignorant costumers as well as rude employees who slack off, or become jerks after getting hired. Don’t let that scare you, there are a lot of cool costumers that don’t want to cause a scene or make things difficult, but they ARE out there.

  35. goar
    February 17, 2010 at 11:13 am

    as long as there will be crazy things and people out there,there will be risks. even living on this earth is risky🙂

  36. gturt
    February 17, 2010 at 3:44 pm

    this is gd but does a company know for sure its risk universe? idk

  37. guy49
    February 17, 2010 at 4:09 pm

    risk nowadays for me is more abt being audited. i recommend this article for everyone http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2010/02/17/business/AP-US-On-the-Money-Gambling-Taxes.html
    Don’t Risk an Audit: Know the Rules on Gambling

  38. cou@lor
    February 17, 2010 at 4:45 pm

    i think risk is everywhere esp in healthcare. check out this article
    http://www.gooznews.com/node/3275
    FDA Finally Unveils Risk Management Plan for ESAs

    by GoozNews ~ 17 Feb 2010 08:33am
    Nearly two years after a Food and Drug Administration advisory committee called for restrictions on the use of red blood cell-stimulating drugs in cancer patients (erythropoiesis-stimulating agents or ESAs), the agency yesterday unveiled a stringent risk management plan that should further lower use of the drugs, which are already in freefall in cancer patients. The plan, which affects Amgen’s Aranesp and Epogen and Johnson & Johnson’s Procrit (manufactured by Amgen and identical to Epogen), requires the companies:

    Register oncologists who prescribe the drugs;
    Educate them about their risks, which include tumor progression and earlier death; and
    Fully inform patients about the risks with an updated medication information guide, both at the time they are initially treated and every time treatment is given; and
    Obtain signatures from patients that they’ve been apprised of the risks.
    The updated medication guide will contain information for chronic and end-stage renal disease patients, who also get ESAs for anemia. But renal physicians will not be facing the same registration and education requirements.

    The company was given a year to come into full compliance. Officials at a press briefing yesterday were uncertain what would happen to oncologists or the companies if they prescribe or use the drugs without giving the proper warnings.

    The program is called, appropriately enough, APPRISE. And while it’s tough, it’s not unprecedented. The FDA adopted a similar registration program for some opioids.

    When pressed by a reporter on why it took so long to come up with the program, Richard Pazdur, head of the oncology office at the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research at FDA, said “this took many many months of discussion. It’s a delicate balance. We don’t want to interfere in a draconian fashion with the practice of medicine.”

    Pazdur distinguished between patients undergoing therapy where there is a chance of cure, and those receiving palliative care for incurable cancers. In the latter case, patients may opt for the greater energy that comes from alleviating cancer- and chemo-related anemia, even if it results in a shorter end game.

    “The risks-benefit balance is a delicate one,” Pazdur said. The goal of the program wasn’t to restrict use of the drugs, but “to help patients make the best choice given their individual situation.”

    The failure to simultaneously force the companies to reeducate the renal physician community was disappointing. There’s mounting evidence that high doses of ESAs in renal disease patients is associated with increased risk of heart attacks, strokes and earlier mortality. Many of these patients are poor and unaware of the quality of care they receive at dialysis centers. They, just as much as cancer patients, need to be informed about the risks posed by overuse of ESAs.

  39. femwlor
    February 17, 2010 at 4:54 pm

    great article and insightful.🙂

  40. maripire
    February 17, 2010 at 4:56 pm

    thx for this. good

  41. dimport
    February 18, 2010 at 1:00 am

    i think risk can be mitigated simply by studyin the external environment and seeing what rivals do and try to replicate the same. if everybody follows the same risk strategy then we might be better off. thx for the article.

  42. madguy
    February 18, 2010 at 1:06 am

    ‘m wonderin’ if the risk that we find in our daily lives is the same as other risks we find at work or the ones that insurance companies cover. gd article btw

  43. sonaor
    February 18, 2010 at 1:15 am

    was wondering abt political risk and what a country can do to erase. maybe more military actions… just wonderin

  44. no rply
    February 18, 2010 at 1:19 am

    i work for an insurance company and there’s a risk that we look at now. it’s risk of terrorism. since sep 11, insurance companies are being very thorough with the underwriting process.

  45. rthink
    February 18, 2010 at 1:24 am

    wow… luv’d it.

  46. arorfo
    February 18, 2010 at 1:32 am

    i luv this article. thx for enlightening me.

  47. haita
    February 18, 2010 at 1:36 am

    very good article. are u a risk specialist or r u looking for a job? my company is lookin for risk managers and i think u r good. i sent u a private email. pls respond.

  48. sirnde
    February 18, 2010 at 1:44 am

    lov the analysis here. we can mitigate all risks if we can understand it. i do disagree though that companies are not doing enough for risk management. they’re spending millions every year even though recent events are showing otherwise.

  49. alleyes
    February 18, 2010 at 1:47 am

    very gd interpretation of the current risk issues.

  50. arpa305
    February 18, 2010 at 1:38 pm

    great insight. what we do abt risks that cannot be seen or evaluated? maybe analyse them differently…

  51. Patri20
    February 18, 2010 at 1:45 pm

    very good work. u shd write a book. give me a call if u’d like to discuss. i’m a publisher and i’ll email u my contact.

  52. Pargro
    February 18, 2010 at 1:54 pm

    great work. lu’v it.

  53. Canale
    February 18, 2010 at 7:34 pm

    Risk issues can’t be countered by setting up an effective framework. Auditors do that all the time. Great article btw

  54. aopraga
    February 18, 2010 at 7:34 pm

    great analysis, learnt a lot.

  55. Unan40
    February 18, 2010 at 7:38 pm

    I’m an experienced risk manager and there are some tools you can use to help evaluate risks. You can plot on a risk map the significance and likelihood of the risk occurring. Each risk is rated on a scale of one to ten. If a risk is rated ten this means it is of major importance to the company. One is the least significant. The map allows you to visualise risks in relation to each other, gauge their extent and plan what type of controls should be implemented to mitigate the risks.

  56. Mefor
    February 18, 2010 at 7:45 pm

    Check this out
    FDA unveils risk-management plan for Amgen anti-anemia drugs
    Studies have shown that the drugs, which sell under the trade names Epogen, Aranesp and Procrit, can cause tumors to grow faster and shorten the lives of some cancer patients.
    http://articles.latimes.com/2010/feb/17/business/la-fi-fda-amgen17-2010feb17

  57. Rhoex49
    February 18, 2010 at 7:50 pm

    Risk management is a growing field in today’s business and I wld advise everyone to look in that direction for future jobs. Very promising 

  58. McDo
    February 18, 2010 at 7:51 pm

    Il y a des risques dans la vie de tous les jours. Pas seulement au travail. Moi j’ai failli etre en Haiti lors du seisme, ca c’est un risque aussi.

  59. rastNET
    February 18, 2010 at 7:55 pm

    Has anyone heard of CPM? It’s critical path method and is used to address risk within companies as well.

  60. Flower
    February 18, 2010 at 7:58 pm

    Very wonderful article………………

  61. Riskguru
    February 18, 2010 at 8:03 pm

    RISK is EVERYWHERE. True, but to evaluate risks, it is worthwhile ranking these risks once you have identified them. This can be done by considering the consequence and probability of each risk. Many businesses find that assessing consequence and probability as high, medium or low is adequate for their needs.

  62. Aticle405
    February 18, 2010 at 8:06 pm

    Great work, right on target

  63. Woart
    February 18, 2010 at 8:11 pm

    I’ve signed up for your blog, pls give us some good work like this again

  64. turkish
    February 18, 2010 at 8:13 pm

    This is some gd work. I hope u don’t mind if I cite u in my Phd thesis I’m working on. I also sent u an email. Pls respond when u can

  65. Lcir
    February 18, 2010 at 8:16 pm

    You shd prioritse risks bf attempting to mitigate them. Good work

  66. Raf3leo
    February 18, 2010 at 8:16 pm

    I disagree with the author. Why wld those new risks be taken into acct while there are already being addressed. Most CPA firms offer services in risk and they’re fairly good at that. Btw I’m an accountant myself

  67. FFirea3
    February 18, 2010 at 8:19 pm

    Many banks still suffer from chronic underinvestment in the analytical tools required for measuring risk, while others are still figuring out how to translate data into key decisions used in everything from the loan-approval process to executive pay practices
    http://www.financial-planning.com/news/Risk-Wyman-Zmienski-2665834-1.html

  68. ExpERT
    February 18, 2010 at 8:20 pm

    Very good work.

  69. Daara40
    February 18, 2010 at 8:22 pm

    Banks will not implement risk frameworks because it’s costly. Very costly

  70. chiew
    February 18, 2010 at 8:24 pm

    Corporate risk is part of business

  71. Haitia39
    February 18, 2010 at 8:25 pm

    What will happen to trading now that everything is managed?

  72. Praglar
    February 18, 2010 at 8:27 pm

    Good article, I agree there’s a great deal of awesome info here.

  73. JuLag
    February 19, 2010 at 3:58 pm

    Thx for sharing this analysis.

  74. Aweslo
    February 19, 2010 at 4:01 pm

    awesome work, thx 4 the work.

  75. Gchrome
    February 19, 2010 at 4:07 pm

    risk is everywhere not just at work or in the house. if u divorce ur wife, that’s a risk rite there. believe me, i’ve been there.

  76. Tantinette
    February 19, 2010 at 4:12 pm

    :):):):):) luv it.

  77. Eartmart
    February 19, 2010 at 5:49 pm

    Check this out

    Risk Managers Hope To Blunt Effect Of Insurance Commission Rule
    A risk management group criticized an agreement that allows the largest insurance brokers to accept certain insurer-paid commissions and said it will counsel its members to push for fair treatment from brokers.
    http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20100219-709482.html?mod=WSJ_World_MIDDLEHeadlinesEurope

  78. HYSTERIA
    February 19, 2010 at 5:52 pm

    WHAT ABOUT RISK MANAGEMENT IN THE NATION’S POWER GRIDS AND CYBERSECURITY? VERY IMPORTANT.

  79. Sun30
    February 19, 2010 at 5:53 pm

    excellent

  80. Dnara
    February 19, 2010 at 5:55 pm

    corporate risk is so huge that it needs a whole dept just to take care of it. just like human ressources. even human beings are risks.

  81. Kiaright
    February 19, 2010 at 5:57 pm

    risks shoule be mitigated if rewards are less than the risks. believe me. the article is good tho

  1. February 16, 2010 at 1:11 am
  2. February 19, 2010 at 1:02 am

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: