Dear GlobalRisk Community member,
I wish everyone a prosperous and fruitful New Year and I as wanted to prepare the goals for the Community for 2011 I just realised that I don’t want to dictate you what the goals of the community will be.
We have now more than 3000 people around the world some of you are visiting the Community website very often. That’s why I’d like to propose that you suggest the goals by posting your thoughts to this discussion thread.
Perhaps producing webinars, conferences or round tables meetings, holding an annual event, interviewing some VIPs in the sector, be featured on television, creating our own products, publishing a book, campaigning on an issue – these are all good goals.
Also further clustering of the community to geographical and specific body of knowledge groups and setting a specific goal per group would be a good idea as well.
From my perspective the good goals for this year would be:
1. increase the interaction between members,
2. Continue to bring the community together,
3. Get people excited about collaboration,
4. Find a number of faithful partners or sponsors
I sincere hope that you will actively react on this discussion, as the goals set will require a robust action planning so that members can meaningfully participate in achieving the goals.
Thank you for being here.
Boris Agranovich, GlobalRisk Community, Founder
Replies
Goals for 2011: As for 2010, I am pleased to have found an interesting and interactive ERM team. Some future (2011) goals would lean towards a great seminar / event that will offer a balance between public and private sector/s and is not completely ‘financial’ focussed. Our own products such as common spreadsheets e.g. ISO 31000, checklists, prompt lists, tried and tested software would be great. I kind of like the idea of having “VIP interviews – with a balance between the politicians and the private sector would be valuable and ‘entertaining’ :-).
To all group members; thank you for all the interesting interaction and have a lovely, peaceful, contented & rewarding 2011.
A personal goal is to identify if there is any useful research into (collaborative sector risk management) lessons to be learned from two recent disasters - the 2008/09 economic meltdown [that was foretold by the US - Fanny May and Freddy Mac fiasco (1990), Enron and other management system failures, and that was "allegedly" caused by the so-called US and global experts including: "financial engineers", protected by their so-called internal and third party auditors;and financial risk management specialists]; and the BP oil spill. Such research could be consolidated into a global lessons (to be) learned "report" (and provide input to global financial and energy sector risk management strategies).
The movie "Inside Job" paints a pretty clear and scathing interpretation of short-term decision making, abuse of power, greed, fraud. corruption and elitism related to the economic "disaster". The silence in the aftermath (2010+) is deafening. The public perception is presumably that there should be criminal investigations and speedy judicial action, as well as recovery of unjustifiable, exorbitant bonuses from the perpetrators, and other consequences including for the not-so innocent executives that facilitated the disaster including registered lobbyists, Rating Agency specialists, and regulatory and government officials.
The media perception appears to be this is too big to handle, so lets focus on more tangible disasters with finite beginnings and endings, and better imagery (i.e., natural, as opposed to human-caused global financial disasters).
The governments' collective perception appears to be that a single government investigation and/or public inquiry would be insufficient, so why bother (uncertainty of the outcome, cost and political damage is likely too great). Presumably, the global financial organizations (e.g., WTO, UN, World Bank, IMF...) and national academic institutions will study the economic disaster for several years.
Regarding the BP drilling accident, there should be many lessons on the government, regulation and supply chain risk management side, in addition to the corporate, operational and engineering lessons. It is not sufficient for the US government to blame the industry prime contractor, when the USG accepted the design, inspected the the systems and authorized drilling operations, which included lucrative work packages, and payments to US subcontractors and local businesses.
Perhaps, one could start by identifying who is studying what and the timeframes for reports. Food for thought. Have a great year.
the above goals are good but a little too high level and not specific enough for me. I prefer to adopt the SMART principle in defining goals.
How about something simple, yet fundamentally important like..... clearly articulating and getting global agreement on the difference (in concept at least) between risk management and ERM... that would be a good start!
There is no distinction between risk management and ERM in either ISO31000 or ISO Guide 73. in my opinion, this was a deliberate oversight but one which has caused confusion in the marketplace and with industry practitioners as well.
For consideration.
cheers
Grant Whitehorn