Event Risk Assessment Protocols

Your Procurement Cycle is a Minefield of Risks. Are You Walking Blind? Procurement Excellence | 17 JAN 2026 - Procurement always navigates hidden risks that can derail projects, inflate costs, and tarnish reputations. Ignoring them? That’s the real risk. Here are 7 CRITICAL risks lurking in your procurement cycle + how to defuse them: #1. Performance Risk ↳Suppliers underdelivering on quality/timelines. ↳Fix: Clear KPIs. Penalty clauses. Regular performance reviews. #2.Specification Risk ↳Vague requirements lead to wrong deliverables. ↳Fix:Collaborate with stakeholders upfront & freeze specs before sourcing. #3. Supplier Financial Risk ↳Bankrupt suppliers = halted operations. ↳Fix:Run credit checks, diversify suppliers, demand financial disclosures. #4. Reputation Risk (ESG) ↳Child labor or pollution in supply chain = brand crisis. ↳Fix: Supplier ESG screenings. Audits. Sustainability clauses. #5. Price Volatility Risk ↳Market swings crush budgets. ↳Fix: Fixed-price contracts. Hedging strategies. Cost-indexed clauses. #6. Fraud & Corruption Risk ↳Kickbacks, fake invoicing, collusion. ↳Fix: Segregate duties. Whistleblower policies. AI-powered anomaly detection. #7. Contract Leakage Risk ↳Unused discounts, auto-renewals, scope creep. ↳Fix:Centralized contract repository. Milestone alerts. Spend analytics. #Bonus I: Over-Reliance Risk ↳One supplier holds 80% of your spend. ↳Fix: Strategic supplier diversification. #Bonus II: Cybersecurity Risk ↳Suppliers accessing your systems >>data breaches. ↳Fix:Vendor security assessments. Zero-trust architecture. #Bonus III: Supply Disruption Risk ↳Natural disasters, geopolitics or supplier failures. ↳Fix: Dual sourcing, Safety stock & Real-time supply chain monitoring. Risk Mitigation Playbook: ✅ Proactive: Map risks at EVERY stage ✅ Use AI for predictive analytics, blockchain for traceability. ✅ Train & empower teams to spot red flags early. ✅ Collaborate & partner with Legal, Finance, Operations. Risk-aware procurement NOT about avoiding suppliers Procurement can’t own risk alone! Build resilient, ethical & agile supply chains that drive sustainable value. What risks keep YOU up at night? ♻️ Share to help someone in your network. ➕️ Follow Frederick for more content like this. #ProcurementExcellence #RiskManagement #Leadership

𝐑𝐞𝐟𝐥𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐨𝐧 𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐮𝐩𝐩𝐥𝐢𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐈’𝐯𝐞 𝐬𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐜𝐞𝐝, 𝐨𝐧𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐢𝐬 𝐜𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐫: 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐜𝐞𝐬𝐬 𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐬. Taking shortcuts can lead to wasted money and a world of headaches downstream. (𝘙𝘢𝘪𝘴𝘦 𝘺𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘪𝘧 𝘺𝘰𝘶'𝘷𝘦 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳 𝘣𝘦𝘦𝘯 𝘢𝘴𝘬𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘧𝘢𝘴𝘵-𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘤𝘬 𝘙𝘍𝘗 𝘳𝘦𝘲𝘶𝘪𝘳𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘴, 𝘰𝘳 𝘩𝘢𝘥 𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘥𝘦𝘳𝘴 𝘱𝘶𝘴𝘩 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘤𝘦𝘳𝘵𝘢𝘪𝘯 𝘴𝘶𝘱𝘱𝘭𝘪𝘦𝘳𝘴, 𝘪𝘨𝘯𝘰𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘢𝘭 𝘳𝘪𝘴𝘬𝘴?!) 𝐖𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐈'𝐯𝐞 𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐞𝐝: 💡 𝙁𝙤𝙘𝙪𝙨 𝙛𝙞𝙧𝙨𝙩: Be specific about your needs in RFx docs. If you’re unclear, suppliers will be, too. Before going to RFP, always have quantifiable evaluation criteria finalized and approved by the Spend Owner. 💡 𝙄𝙩’𝙨 𝙣𝙤𝙩 𝙟𝙪𝙨𝙩 𝙥𝙧𝙞𝙘𝙚: The cheapest option often costs the most in the long run. Prioritize value over price. Suppliers who price things materially lower than benchmark norms usually cut corners somewhere to meet margins. 💡 𝘾𝙝𝙚𝙘𝙠 𝙧𝙚𝙛𝙚𝙧𝙚𝙣𝙘𝙚𝙨 𝙩𝙝𝙤𝙧𝙤𝙪𝙜𝙝𝙡𝙮: Source independent references via your network. Past performance tells the real story. Ask the right questions and listen closely to the answers.  💡 𝙏𝙝𝙞𝙣𝙠 𝙖𝙝𝙚𝙖𝙙: Can the supplier grow and evolve with your business? Are they innovative and flexible? Does their company culture and ways of working align with yours?  💡 𝙆𝙣𝙤𝙬 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙧𝙞𝙨𝙠𝙨: Most suppliers come with some level of risk, the key is understanding and managing it. Conduct due diligence on short-listed suppliers. Outputs should inform the down-selection process, with material deficiency action items included in the contract. 💡 𝘾𝙝𝙤𝙤𝙨𝙚 𝙥𝙖𝙧𝙩𝙣𝙚𝙧𝙨, 𝙣𝙤𝙩 𝙫𝙚𝙣𝙙𝙤𝙧𝙨: The best suppliers care about your long-term success and aligning with your goals.  Look at proposals holistically, thinking beyond the transaction and into value creation. 𝐇𝐞𝐫𝐞’𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐠: Looking back, I’ve been at firms in seasons where costs were prioritized over total value, often leading to short-term gains but long-term challenges. There were times I should’ve taken a firmer stance about material supplier risks identified and bias in the selection process.  As procurement peeps, we provide recommendations based on long-term value, risk management, and partnership potential. This includes having the courage to speak up with informed and actionable guidance when things don't pass muster. The goal is to ensure sourcing outcomes build a foundation for success, not just a quick win. 📢 𝙋.𝙎. 𝙒𝙝𝙖𝙩 “𝙨𝙘𝙝𝙤𝙤𝙡 𝙤𝙛 𝙝𝙖𝙧𝙙 𝙠𝙣𝙤𝙘𝙠𝙨” 𝙨𝙤𝙪𝙧𝙘𝙞𝙣𝙜 𝙡𝙚𝙨𝙨𝙤𝙣𝙨 𝙬𝙤𝙪𝙡𝙙 𝙮𝙤𝙪 𝙨𝙝𝙖𝙧𝙚 𝙬𝙞𝙩𝙝 𝙮𝙤𝙪𝙧 𝙮𝙤𝙪𝙣𝙜𝙚𝙧 𝙥𝙧𝙤𝙘𝙪𝙧𝙚𝙢𝙚𝙣𝙩 𝙨𝙚𝙡𝙛?

A lot of apparel brands still evaluate suppliers too simply. In unstable markets, reliability is a profit lever. Usually on: • unit cost • average lead time • MOQs That is incomplete. In current market, supplier quality should be evaluated on volatility, not just cost. Because a “cheaper” vendor becomes expensive very quickly if they create: • repeated lead time swings • inbound uncertainty • forced air freight • reactive overbuying • missed full-price selling windows The hidden cost is not just in the PO. It is in the downstream planning damage. A more strategic supplier scorecard for a $10M+ apparel brand should include: 1. Lead time variance Not just average lead time, but how often actual lead time deviates meaningfully from plan. 2. Delay frequency How often a supplier slips by more than 7 days. 3. Recovery reliability When a delay happens, how often the supplier catches back up on the next cycle. 4. Margin impact How much extra markdown, stockout risk, or emergency freight is created by that supplier’s instability. 5. Assortment criticality A volatile supplier is much more dangerous when they support your top-volume SKUs. The cheapest supplier is not always the cheapest. And the “best” lead time is not always the shortest one.

Understanding and managing risk is essential for any fintech company—but Revolut is taking it a step further. In their latest blog, the team shares how they’re designing risk as a system of dynamic state transitions. Each user account is embedded in a broader risk graph, where every event—like a payment failure or a balance drop—triggers transitions between states. These transitions are driven by probabilities and associated costs, enabling real-time calculations of key metrics like expected loss and worst-case loss. What’s especially compelling is how this model is put into production. Risk evaluation is built directly into Revolut’s event-driven architecture through a reasoner component that continuously interprets user states. On top of that, they’ve integrated large language models (LLMs) to generate natural-language summaries of risk, making insights easier to understand and act upon. By treating risk as a live, evolving flow of events rather than a static score, Revolut has developed a system that’s both scalable and adaptive. Whether you're working on fraud detection or credit risk, this post offers a thoughtful approach to embedding risk intelligence into your platform. #DataScience #MachineLearning #Graph #RiskManagement #SnacksWeeklyonDataScience – – –  Check out the "Snacks Weekly on Data Science" podcast and subscribe, where I explain in more detail the concepts discussed in this and future posts:    -- Spotify: https://lnkd.in/gKgaMvbh   -- Apple Podcast: https://lnkd.in/gj6aPBBY    -- Youtube: https://lnkd.in/gcwPeBmR https://lnkd.in/g6_y_Jxc

𝗛𝗼𝘄 𝗗𝗼 𝗬𝗼𝘂 𝗕𝗮𝗹𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝗥𝗶𝘀𝗸 & 𝗘𝗳𝗳𝗶𝗰𝗶𝗲𝗻𝗰𝘆 𝗶𝗻 𝗣𝗿𝗼𝗰𝘂𝗿𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁?   This is a question that every procurement team answers differently. It's tightly linked to risk culture and regulatory constraints.   Some organisations choose full control, documenting and actively approving every step of the process and checking compliance of all suppliers.   𝗜𝘁'𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝟭𝟬𝟬% 𝘀𝗮𝗳𝗲 𝗮𝗽𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗮𝗰𝗵 but can be cost-prohibitive and impossible to operate due to the impact on speed and efficiency of processes. It's raising the Cost of Compliance drastically and leads to people looking for loopholes and shortcuts.   Others take 𝗮 𝗿𝗶𝘀𝗸-𝗯𝗮𝘀𝗲𝗱 𝗮𝗽𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗮𝗰𝗵, tailoring their controls based on the risk profile of each process. For high-risk activities, they enforce robust controls, detailed documentation, multiple approvals, and audits whereas for lower-risk activities they may follow a more pragmatic approach supporting workflow automation, speed and efficiency of processes. It's providing a leaner foundation but may expose some processes to inefficiencies and compliance gaps.   So is there a right or wrong approach to risk vs efficiency? Not really. It's about finding balance and using technology in favour of leaner processes.   Let's look at some cases i recently came across: 1️⃣ 𝗦𝘂𝗽𝗽𝗹𝗶𝗲𝗿 𝗱𝘂𝗲 𝗱𝗶𝗹𝗶𝗴𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲: Should all suppliers be checked on financials & compliance? For strategic or high-risk suppliers, yes. But for low-spend or small suppliers, a lighter, risk-based approach can help maintain efficiency. 2️⃣ 𝟯-𝗪𝗮𝘆 𝘃𝘀. 𝟰-𝗪𝗮𝘆 𝗺𝗮𝘁𝗰𝗵: Is 4-way match (purchase order, order confirmation, receipt and invoice) always necessary? For critical or high-value goods, this extra control mitigates quality & payment errors. In lower-risk scenarios/catalog purchases, a 3-way match may totally suffice.   3️⃣ 𝗔𝗽𝗽𝗿𝗼𝘃𝗮𝗹 𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗶𝗻𝘀: Do all procurement transactions need multi-level sign-offs? High-value/sensitive purchases might require multiple approvals. However, automating approvals for low-value, recurring purchases reduces cycle times without compromising control.   4️⃣ 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗰𝘁 𝗠𝗮𝗻𝗮𝗴𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁: Should every contract be reviewed by legal? For high-complexity agreements, surely. But using contract templates for low-risk purchases can improve process effectiveness while maintaining compliance.   For an optimal balance, a risk-based approach will need to consider process-specific risk levels and tailored controls. Technology can make a real difference here: ▪️ Automating in-process and post-mortem activities with AI, reducing manual checks and improving process efficiency ▪️ Profiling risks and determining extra checks where fraud is typical so that risk mitigation is not impacting speed. ▪️ As a Gate Checker screening for patterns, adjusting the level of controls flexibly based on pre-defined conditions How do you balance risk & process efficiency? Where can Tech help?

Procurement teams struggle to measure risk mitigation but it’s the foundation of what we do. Because we can’t articulate the value in CFO-friendly terms… …millions of pounds never make it onto the Procurement Value Report. And here’s the thing: Risk mitigation isn’t the sole domain of the Risk team. Procurement is the first line of defence against supply chain disruption, supplier failure, and compliance breaches. The value IS measurable, in numbers your CFO will respect. Here are 6 procurement-specific ways to prove it and exactly how to capture each one: 1️⃣ Cost Avoidance from Supplier Disruptions 💡 Example: “Avoided £1.6M in downtime by identifying a critical supplier at risk of insolvency six months early.” ✍ Capture it: Compare projected cost of disruption (lost output, emergency spend) with actual cost after mitigation. 2️⃣ Reduction in Supply Chain Risk Exposure 💡 Example: Supplier risk score drops from 8 → 4, potential impact £2M → exposure cut by £1M. ✍ Capture it: Track supplier risk scores quarterly × estimated financial impact of a disruption. 3️⃣ Avoided Expediting / Spot Buy Costs 💡 Example: “Avoided £400K in emergency air freight and spot buys due to dual sourcing.” ✍ Capture it: Keep a log of all potential emergency orders avoided + standard market rate for those buys. 4️⃣ Mitigation ROI 💡 Example: £1.2M avoided − £150K cost = 700% ROI. ✍ Capture it: Record direct costs of mitigation initiatives vs. the quantified financial impact avoided. 5️⃣ ESG & Regulatory Compliance Impact 💡 Example: “Avoided £850K in fines by enforcing modern slavery and environmental compliance checks.” ✍ Capture it: Record potential fines/sanctions linked to non-compliance and match to supplier audit results. 6️⃣ Scenario-Based Value Modelling 💡 Example: “Mitigation plan X reduces exposure to Supplier Y’s failure from £2.5M to £150K over 12 months.” ✍ Capture it: Build ‘what-if’ models with Finance, showing pre- and post-mitigation exposure. If you’re not tracking this, it’s not on your Procurement Value Report. If it’s not on the report, it’s invisible. If it’s invisible, someone else will take the credit. Use this in your next quarterly value reporting session with your CFO. Repost if this was helpful ♻️ What's the biggest risk to organisations right now? LMK in the comments 👇

Risk Management in Medical Devices: More Than a Checklist In medical devices, risk management is not a one-time activity—it’s a continuous process that directly impacts patient safety and product reliability. Under ISO 14971 and aligned with ISO 13485, risk management is integrated into every stage of the product lifecycle—from design to post-market use. At its core, risk management is about answering three simple but critical questions: What can go wrong? How likely is it? And what is the impact? The process typically begins with hazard identification. This involves identifying all possible sources of harm—electrical, mechanical, biological, usability-related, or even software failures. In daily work, this often happens during design discussions, failure analysis, or even while reviewing customer complaints. Once hazards are identified, the next step is risk analysis and evaluation. Here, risks are assessed based on severity and probability. Not all risks can be eliminated, but they must be reduced to an acceptable level. This is where teams often make a mistake—accepting risks without proper justification or documentation. The most critical step is risk control. Controls can include design changes, protective measures (like alarms or insulation), or clear instructions in labeling. The priority should always be to eliminate risk through design rather than relying only on warnings or user instructions. An important but often overlooked aspect is residual risk evaluation. Even after controls are applied, some level of risk remains. This must be evaluated to ensure it is acceptable when weighed against the device’s benefits. Risk management does not stop after product release. Through post-market surveillance, real-world data such as complaints, adverse events, and user feedback must be continuously reviewed. If new risks are identified, they should feed back into the risk management file and trigger updates. In practice, risk management is closely linked with CAPA, design changes, and regulatory compliance. A poorly maintained risk file is one of the most common findings during audits. A mature organization treats risk management not as documentation, but as a decision-making tool. It guides design choices, improves product safety, and builds confidence with regulators and users. Ultimately, effective risk management ensures that innovation does not come at the cost of safety—and that every device delivered performs reliably in real-world conditions.

*Risk Analysis vs Risk Evaluation* Risk Analysis Risk Analysis is the process of examining identified risks to understand their nature, causes and potential impact. It focuses on quantifying and qualifying risks, estimating the likelihood of occurrence and the severity of consequences. The goal is to build a factual and data-driven understanding of each risk. Key Activities: Assessing the probability and impact of risks. Analyzing existing controls and their effectiveness. Using qualitative, quantitative or semi-quantitative methods (e.g., risk matrices, scenario analysis, sensitivity analysis). Producing a clear risk profile or ranking. Outcome: A detailed understanding of each risk’s significance and how it may affect objectives. Risk Evaluation Risk Evaluation follows analysis. It involves comparing analyzed risk levels against predefined risk criteria or appetite to determine whether they are acceptable or require further action. The focus here is on decision-making. Prioritizing which risks to treat, tolerate, transfer or terminate. Key Activities: Comparing risk analysis results with organizational risk appetite or tolerance levels. Prioritizing risks for treatment. Making informed decisions on control measures or mitigation strategies. Outcome: A clear decision on how each risk will be managed, whether to accept, mitigate, share or avoide. In essence: Risk Analysis helps you understand risks. Risk Evaluation helps you decide what to do about them.

Most third-party risk teams I speak with face the same challenge: Small staff, large vendor portfolios. 💼 The data backs this up: - The average portfolio is ~286 vendors; most TPRM teams have fewer than 10 staff. - 94% of teams say they cannot assess all vendors due to a lack of time or resources. - Nearly 50% of companies admit they don’t even reassess all vendors periodically. - Assessment cycles average 37+ hours per week, with vendor responses dragging 12+ days and 84% needing follow-ups. So, how do you cover more risk without more people? Here are some simple recommendations: ✅ Tier ruthlessly – Auto-tier vendors into 4 levels; reserve full assessments + monitoring for Tier 1. ✅ Use what exists – Accept SOC 2, ISO, or SIG Lite when fresh instead of sending new questionnaires. ✅ Streamline questionnaires – Keep only two: Core and Lite, with “proof selector” options to reduce doc sprawl. ✅ Event-based reassessments – Trigger quick checks after major incidents or CVEs instead of annual reviews for all. ✅ Automate workflows – SLA boards, templates, and parallel legal/security reviews speed decisions. ✅ Blend capacity – In-house for critical vendors, managed services, or external reviewers for overflow. Six metrics to prove efficiency to your board: 1) Coverage – % of Tier 1–2 assessed & monitored 2) Cycle Time – intake → decision 3) Risk Impact – remediation in 30/60/90 days 4) Accepted Risk Backlog – trend line 5) Reviewer Hours – per completed assessment 6) Cost – per Tier 1 decision Bottom line: You don’t need to assess every vendor equally. Focus depth where it matters, streamline the rest, and measure results. #ThirdPartyRiskManagement #TPRM #VendorRisk #OperationalResilience #RiskManagement #CyberRisk #Governance #Compliance #Procurement #SupplyChainRisk

Understanding Risk Assessment Methodology: A Corporate Guide with a Human Touch In today’s dynamic business environment, risks are inevitable, whether financial uncertainties, operational challenges, or regulatory compliance issues. Effectively managing these risks is essential for sustainable growth, operational resilience, and stakeholder trust. A structured Risk Assessment Methodology provides organizations with a clear framework to anticipate, evaluate, and address risks before they escalate. 1️⃣ Risk Identification The first step is awareness. Organizations must pinpoint potential risks affecting people, processes, or outcomes. This is about foresight, not fear. For example, identifying potential system downtime enables teams to implement contingency measures, ensuring business continuity for both employees and customers. 2️⃣ Risk Analysis After identification, each risk is assessed for likelihood and impact. Not all risks are equal, some may cause minor disruptions, while others can significantly affect operations or reputation. Analysis allows leaders to prioritize threats and allocate resources strategically. 3️⃣ Risk Evaluation Risks are evaluated against organizational criteria to determine urgency and relevance. This stage distinguishes between acceptable risks and those requiring immediate attention, balancing opportunities with compliance, safety, and operational standards. 4️⃣ Risk Prioritization Once evaluated, risks are ranked by significance. High-impact threats, such as cybersecurity breaches, demand immediate intervention, while lower-risk operational issues can be managed over time. Prioritization ensures efficient use of resources and proactive mitigation. 5️⃣ Risk Treatment Finally, organizations determine how to manage each risk through: • Avoidance – eliminating the risk entirely • Transfer – through insurance or outsourcing • Mitigation – implementing preventive measures • Acceptance – when the impact is minimal This step ensures that risks are not only acknowledged but strategically addressed in alignment with corporate objectives and human considerations. Why This Matters A robust risk assessment methodology reflects an organization’s commitment to resilience, responsibility, and the well-being of its people and stakeholders. Thoughtful risk management builds trust, enhances decision-making, and supports long-term sustainability. In business, risks will always exist, but with the right methodology, they transform from threats into opportunities for growth, innovation, and continuous improvement. @ChiefRiskOfficer, @RiskManagementProfessionals, @ComplianceLeaders Industry organizations: @GRCInstitute, @ISO, @COSO