Risk Managent Final
Risk Managent Final
INTRODUCTION TO RISK
LEARNING OUTCOMES
After going through the chapter student shall be able to understand
The Concept of Risk
Risk and Uncertainty : Distinction
Classification of Risks
Dynamic Nature of Risks
Types of Risk (illustrative list)
• Strategic and Operational Risks
• Business Risk
• Financial Risk
• Information Risk
• Liquidity Risk
A business event if it occurs; can have a positive or negative impact on business’s objectives.
Generally when we discuss risks we fall into the trap of thinking that risks have inherently negative
dimension. However, one should be open to those risks that create positive opportunities; you can
make your business faster, better and more profitable. Let us look at a example here say on
account of non-compliance with environmental laws few old suppliers of a Corporate entity were
restricted from supplying materials to the Corporate entity at preferred rates. This posed a
challenge to the corporate entity as they have to find new suppliers who would be compliant with
environment laws and also perhaps the new rates would be significantly higher than the preferred
rates of the old suppliers. The Corporate entity undertakes a detailed supplier discovery exercise
and realises that the new suppliers are willing to supply materials at rates that are lower than the
preferred rates (agreed with their old suppliers), thus a potential challenge or threat has been
converted into an opportunity to reduce the Corporate entity’s procurement spend. Think of the
adage – “Accept the inevitable and turn it to your advantage.” That is what you do when you take
business risks to create opportunities.
Risk arises on account of uncertainty of occurrence and unknown consequences if the risk event
were to occur. Uncertainty is unpredictable, and has an uncontrollable outcome; taking risks
means taking steps or business actions inspite of uncertainty. The degree of uncertainty or
likelihood of occurrence and impact of the risk outcome combined together forms the magnitude of
the risk. Therefore, measurement of uncertainty and unknown consequences lie at the heart of risk
management. Refer Table 1 for various important definitions of risk.
1.1 ICAI Guide on Risk Based Internal Auditing
Meaning of Risk
Organisations exist for a purpose. Whereas the private sector strives to enhance shareholder
value, the Government and Not for Profit organizations have a main purpose of delivering service
or other benefits in public interest. Achievement of organisational objectives is clouded by
uncertainties that both poses threats to and offers opportunity for increasing success. Businesses
operate in dynamic environment where change is a constant. Risks arise on account of internal or
external factors and circumstances. These circumstances need to be assessed with reference to
the organisation's objective.
In a larger sense, risks are those uncertainties of outcome, whether an opportunity or threat,
arising out of actions and events. While looking at them narrowly, risks are those uncertainties
which impede the achievement of the objective.
Business Risk
Business risks impede the achievement of the organisation's goals and objectives.
All entities exist to provide recognizable benefits for their stakeholders or, in other words to create
value for them. Value is created if a stakeholder gets more of something he finds important. Value
is created or destroyed by (management) decisions. Decisions entail the recognition of risk and
opportunity and require that management considers information about the internal and external
environment, deploys scarce resources and recalibrates activities to changing circumstances.
Today’s business is constantly changing. It is unpredictable, volatile and seems to become more
complex every day. By its very nature, it is fraught with risk. Organizations thus face uncertainty,
and they are not able to precisely determine likelihood and impact of potential events.
Risk Management enables management to deal with risks by reducing their likelihood or downside
impact. It aims to protect the value already created by the organization, but also its future
opportunities.
Historically, businesses have viewed risk as an evil that should be minimized or mitigated. In
recent years, increased regulatory requirements have forced businesses to contribute significant
resources to address risk, and other stakeholders in turn have begun to scrutinize whether
businesses have the right risk mitigation controls in place. To achieve sustainable success
business entity has to continuously identify, assess, measure and manage risks so as to achieve
its business objectives and fulfil promises made to stakeholders. Absence of risk management
means inviting “Frog in the Well Syndrome”. Frog in the well is a Chinese idiom which means a
person who is a narrow or close minded person. A frog living in the well believes that is the only
world and nothing beyond it exists.
A fast evolving business scenario, climate change, uncertainty arising from global events
especially protectionist regimes, innovation, start-up disruption, robotics and automation,
competition and volatility of prices, aggressive organisational cultures, heavy regulatory
interventions, creates stress and complexity in managing life and businesses. Black swan events,
climate crisis and high profile corporate failures in the world have brought risk into the agenda of
governments, regulators, boards and societies. Terrorist acts, extreme weather events and the
global financial crisis represent the extreme risks that are facing society, commerce and
businesses. These extreme risks exist in addition to the daily, somewhat mundane risks.
The Oxford English Dictionary definition of risk is: ‘a chance or possibility of danger, loss, injury or
other adverse consequences’ and the definition of at risk is ‘exposed to danger’. In this context,
risk is used to signify negative consequences. However, taking a risk can also result in a positive
outcome. There is a possibility that risk is related to uncertainty of outcome.
Take the example of traveling by an aeroplane. For most people, traveling by an aeroplane is an
opportunity to save time and gain the related benefits. However, there are uncertainties in traveling
by an aeroplane that are related to accidents, delays and higher costs. So there are obvious
negative outcomes that can occur.
The outcome of Risk is the potential of gaining or losing something of tangible value. The
consequence of risk outcomes shall be on health, social status, emotional well-being, financial
wealth or reputation/ goodwill can be gained or lost when taking risk resulting from a given action
or inaction, foreseen or unforeseen. In business and monetary terms, the value of risk outcomes
shall be on employees, suppliers, customers, strategy, objectives, profits, assets, etc.
Examples
1. A fisherman starting a sea voyage on a fishing expedition may result in loss of life.
2. An infant climbing on a window pane may result in damage or injury.
3. A corporate launching a new product or service in the market place may result in failure
thereby leading to financial and reputational losses.
Business Dictionary defines Risk Perception as Belief (whether rational or irrational) held by an
individual, group, or society about the chance of occurrence of a risk or about the extent,
magnitude, and timing of its effect(s). Risk perception is studied by Corporates, Universities,
Societies, Governments and other bodies to assess the opinions and views of a target audience or
focussed groups to sharpen decision making and judgments where there is lack of clear data on a
subject. The concept of Risk perception is closer to the concept of Cognitive Psychology.
Examples (of more riskier propositions in comparison to above)
1. A family of fishermen starting a sea voyage on a fishing expedition may result in loss of life
OR a fishermen starting a sea voyage on a fishing expedition in rainy season.
2. A home alone infant climbing on a window pane.
3. A corporate launching a new product or service in the market place without market research.
Examples of Probability and relationship with Value of the Risk Outcome -
1. The probability that an actual return on an investment will be lower than the expected return.
2. The probability of a satellite launch succeeding or failing.
3. The probability of a company successfully listing on a stock exchange.
4. The probability of a loss or drop in value, in case of Securities Trading.
5. The risk of developing cancer is estimated as the incremental probability of developing
cancer over a lifetime as a result of exposure to potential carcinogens (cancer-causing
substances).
SA 315 of ICAI defines the term Significant risk in the context of auditing as – An identified and
assessed risk of material misstatement that, in the auditor’s judgment, requires special audit
consideration.
ICAI’s Standard of Internal Audit
Enterprise Risk Management defines Risk is an event which can prevent, hinder, and fail to further
or otherwise obstruct the enterprise in achieving its objectives. A business risk is the threat that an
event or action will adversely affect an enterprise’s ability to maximize stakeholder value and to
achieve its business objectives.
Risk can cause financial disadvantage, for example, additional costs or loss of funds or assets. It
can result in damage, loss of value and /or loss of an opportunity to enhance the enterprise
operations or activities.
Risk is the product of probability of occurrence of an event and the financial impact of such
occurrence to an enterprise.
SA 315 of ICAI defines Business Risk as
A risk resulting from significant conditions, events, circumstances, actions or inactions that could
adversely affect an entity’s ability to achieve its objectives and execute its strategies, or from the
setting of inappropriate objectives and strategies.
TABLE 1. Important Definitions of Risk, IT Risk, Audit Risk
Source Definition of risk
ISO Guide 73 ISO 31000 Effect of uncertainty on objectives. Note that an effect may be
positive, negative, or a deviation from the expected. Also, risk is
often described by an event, a change in circumstances or a
consequence.
Institute of Risk Risk is the combination of the probability of an event and its
Management (IRM) consequence. Consequences can range from positive to negative.
Institute of Internal The uncertainty of an event occurring that could have an impact
Auditors on the achievement of the objectives. Risk is measured in terms of
consequences and likelihood.
Risk is defined as the possibility that an event will occur, which will
impact an organization's achievement of objectives (The
Professional Practices Framework 2004)
Paul Hopkins Event with the ability to impact (inhibit, enhance or cause doubt
about) the mission, strategy, projects, routine operations,
objectives, core processes, key dependencies and / or the delivery
of stakeholder expectations.
Institute of Chartered Business risk – A risk resulting from significant conditions, events,
Accountants of India, SA circumstances, actions or inactions that could adversely affect an
315 entity’s ability to achieve its objectives and execute its strategies,
or from the setting of inappropriate objectives and strategies.
Oxford English Dictionary (Exposure to) the possibility of loss, injury, or other adverse or
unwelcome circumstance; a chance or situation involving such a
possibility.
International Federation of Uncertain future events which could influence the achievement of
Accountants,1999 : the organization’s strategic, operational and financial objectives.
CIMA Official Terminology, Risk is a condition in which there exists a quantifiable dispersion
2005 in the possible outcomes from any activity. It can be classified in a
number of ways.
SA 315 of ICAI requires auditors to design and develop risk assessment procedures. Such risk
assessment procedures comprise of – the audit procedures performed to obtain an understanding
of the entity and its environment, including the entity’s internal control, to identify and assess the
risks of material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error, at the financial statement and
assertion levels.
The International Organization for Standardization defines Risk as the 'effect of uncertainty
on objectives'. In this definition, uncertainties include events (which may or may not happen) and
uncertainties caused by ambiguity or a lack of information. It also includes both negative and
positive impacts on objectives. This definition was developed by an international committee
representing over 30 countries and is based on the input of several thousand subject matter
experts. Very different approaches to risk management are taken in different fields, e.g. "Risk is
the unwanted subset of a set of uncertain outcomes" (Cornelius Keating).
Financial Risks
NASDAQ defines Financial Risks as the risk that the cash flow of an issuer will not be adequate to
meet its financial obligations. Also referred to as the additional risk that a firm's stockholder bears
when the firm uses debt and equity.
In generic terms finance risk is the possibility that the investment return on an investment will be
different from the historical or expected return, and also takes into account the magnitude of the
difference. This includes the possibility of losing some or all of the original investment.
A free market reflects this principle in the pricing of an instrument: strong demand for a safer
instrument drives its price higher (and its return correspondingly lower) while weak demand for a
riskier instrument drives its price lower (and its potential return thereby higher). For example, a US
Treasury bond is considered to be one of the safest investments. In comparison to an investment
or speculative grade corporate bond, US Treasury notes and bonds yield lower rates of return. The
reason for this is that a corporation is more likely to default on debt than the U.S. government.
Because the risk of investing in a corporate bond is higher, investors are offered a correspondingly
higher rate of return.
In financial markets, one may need to measure market risk, credit risk, information timing and
source risk, probability, model risk, operational risk, liquidity risk and legal risk if there are
regulatory or civil actions taken.
With the advent of automation in financial markets, the concept of "real-time risk" has gained a lot
of attention. Real-time risk is defined as the probability of instantaneous or near-instantaneous
loss, and can be due to flash crashes, other market crises, malicious activity by selected market
participants and other events. A well-cited example of real-time risk was a US $440 million loss
incurred within 30 minutes by Knight Capital Group (KCG) on August 1, 2012; the culprit was a
poorly-tested runaway algorithm deployed by the firm. Regulators have taken notice of real-time
risk as well. Basel III requires real-time risk management framework for bank stability.
1.2 Occupational Health & Safety Advisory Services (OHSAS)
Occupational Health & Safety Advisory Services (OHSAS) defines risk as the combination of the
probability of a hazard resulting in an adverse event, and the severity of the event.
In information security, risk is defined as "the potential that a given threat will exploit vulnerabilities
of an asset or group of assets and thereby cause harm to the organization”.
Economic risks can be manifested in lower incomes or higher expenditures than expected. The
causes can be many, for instance, the hike in the price for raw materials, the lapsing of deadlines
for construction of a new operating facility, disruptions in a production process, emergence of a
serious competitor on the market, the loss of key personnel, the change of a political regime, or
natural disasters.
In terms of occupational health & safety management, the term 'risk' may be defined as the most
likely consequence of a hazard, combined with the likelihood or probability of its occurring.
According to encyclopaedia, a Chemical accident is the unintentional release of one or more
hazardous substances which could harm human health or the environment. Chemical hazards are
systems where chemical accidents could occur under certain circumstances. Such events include
fires, explosions, leakages or releases of toxic or hazardous materials that can cause people
illness, injury, disability or death.
While chemical accidents may occur whenever toxic materials are stored, transported or used, the
most severe accidents are industrial accidents, involving major chemical manufacturing and
storage facilities. The most significant chemical accident in recorded history was the 1984 Bhopal
disaster in India, in which more than 3,000 people had died after a highly toxic vapour, (methyl
isocyanate), was released at a Union Carbide Pesticides factory.
Under Environmental risk analysis an emerging field practitioners identify the potential events that
could cause damage to the environment and assess the likelihood of an adverse outcome. An
environmental risk assessment (ERA) is a process of predicting whether there may be a risk of
adverse effects on the environment caused by a chemical substance.
Information technology risk, or IT risk, IT-related risk, or Cyber risk is a risk related to information
technology. This relatively new term was developed as a result of an increasing awareness that
information security is simply one facet of a multitude of risks that are relevant to IT and the real
world processes it supports. Security risk management involves protection of assets from harm
caused by deliberate acts. A more detailed definition is: "A security risk is any event that could
result in the compromise of organizational assets i.e. the unauthorized use, loss, damage,
disclosure or modification of organizational assets for the profit, personal interest or political
interests of individuals, groups or other entities constitutes a compromise of the asset, and
includes the risk of harm to people. Compromise of organizational assets may adversely affect the
enterprise, its business units and their clients. As such, consideration of security risk is a vital
component of risk management.
One of the growing areas of focus in risk management is the field of human factors where
behavioural and organizational psychology underpins our understanding of risk based decision
making. This field considers questions such as "how do we make risk based decisions?", "why are
we irrationally more scared of sharks and terrorists than we are of motor vehicles and
medications?"
Positive and negative feedback about past risk taking can affect future risk taking. In an
experiment, people who were led to believe they are very competent at decision making saw more
opportunities in a risky choice and took more risks, while those led to believe they were not very
competent saw more threats and took fewer risks.
Studies and research papers on the subject of Emotional Intelligence have revealed that when
people are anxious or in a state of emotion, they pay close attention to potential threats in the
environment and are highly vigilant so as to preserve themselves and their resources (Eysenck,
1997; Pacheco Unguetti, Acosta, Callejas, & Lupiañez, 2010). This attention to threat and vigilance
leads people to avoid risk (Loewenstein et al., 2001).
It is common for people to dread some risks but not others. They tend to be very afraid of epidemic
diseases, nuclear power plant failures, and plane accidents but are relatively unconcerned about
some highly frequent and deadly events, such as traffic crashes, household accidents, and
medical errors. One key distinction of dreadful risks seems to be their potential for catastrophic
consequences, threatening to kill a large number of people within a short period of time. For
example, immediately after the September 11 attacks, many Americans were afraid to fly and took
their car instead, a decision that led to a significant increase in the number of fatal crashes in the
time period following the 9/11 event compared with the same time period before the attacks.
The concept of risk-based maintenance is an advanced form of Reliability Centered Maintenance.
In case of chemical industries, apart from probability of failure, consequences of failure are also
very important. Therefore, the selection of maintenance policies should be based on risk, instead
of reliability.
Risk in an organizational context is usually defined as any event or action that can impact the
fulfilment of corporate objectives. Corporate objectives are usually not fully stated or well defined
by most corporates. Where the objectives have been established, they tend to be stated as
internal, annual and change objectives. This is particularly true of the personal objectives set for
members of staff in the organization, where objectives usually refer to change or developments,
rather than the continuing or routine operations of the organization. Refer Table 2 for illustrative
risks that Corporates are exposed to while navigating the business environment.
TABLE 2. Illustrative Corporate Risks
Corporate Functions Risk Areas
Human Resources Poor morale & talent retention
Sales & Marketing Poor Customer loyalty & retention
Operations Inability to Digitize/ automate processes
Treasury Low return on investments
Information Technology Hacking and unauthorized access
New Product development Product failure
Treasury Mismatch in cash flows
Finance & Accounts Unreliable financial statements
• New technology.
Each business faces risks that are unique to that business. Businesses should consider these
carefully and briefly describe what steps would be taken if an uncontrollable risk actually happens
to the business (contingency plan). For example, if the risk of a recession would severely
affect the company,
1.4 Risk Categories by COSO
The COSO framework categories risks as Operations, Financial Reporting, and Compliance. This
categorization is illustrated below:
• Inefficiency and non-effectiveness of operations-e.g., the company does not meet strategic
objectives, the process does not operate efficiently, customers are not satisfied with services
received, etc.
• Financial Reporting-e.g., the absence of a key financial control causes a material error in the
financial statements.
• Non-Compliance with laws and regulations-e.g., the company is in violation of applicable
regulatory requirements.
1.5 Inherent Risk and Residual Risk
Inherent risk is the level of risk assuming no internal controls, while residual risk is the level of
risk after considering the impact of internal controls. For example, the risk of 'over/ understatement
of revenue' without considering any internal controls indicates inherent risk. The above risk when
considered with internal controls in place (say, monthly reconciliation of revenue and follow up,
correction of discrepancies, etc.) indicate residual risk.
The objective of internal controls is to reduce the inherent risk and keep the residual risk within the
organization's risk appetite. The gap between the inherent risk and residual risk shows the
strength of the control and is known as the control score.
1.6 ICAI’s Standard of Internal Audit
Enterprise Risk Management states that Risk may be broadly classified into Strategic,
Operational, Financial and Knowledge.
• Strategic Risks are associated with the primary long-term purpose, objectives and direction
of the business.
• Operational Risks are associated with the on-going, day-to-day operations of the enterprise.
• Financial Risks are related specifically to the processes, techniques and instruments utilised
to manage the finances of the enterprise, as well as those processes involved in sustaining
effective financial relationships with customers and third parties.
• Knowledge Risks are associated with the management and protection of knowledge and
information within the enterprise.
From a risk management perspective, it is useful to classify the risks so that the mitigation of the
risks can be executed as expeditiously as possible. One common way for risks to be classified is
with respect to impact on the organization, whereby risks with certain impacts have to be
addressed by certain levels of governance.
Risks are normally classified as time (schedule), cost (budget), and scope but they could also
include client relationship risks, contractual risks, technological risks, scope and complexity risks,
environmental (corporate) risks, personnel risks, and client acceptance risks, etc.
Another way is to further classify risks by functional domains. Classifying risks as business,
information, applications, talent and technology is useful but there may be organisation specific
ways of expressing risk that the corporate enterprise architecture should adopt or extend rather
than modify.
1.7 Open Group Standard
The Open Group suggests classifying risks with respect to effect and frequency in accordance with
scales used within the organization. There are no hard and fast rules with respect to measuring
effect and frequency.
Effect could be assessed using the following criteria as an example:
• Catastrophic infers critical financial loss that could result in bankruptcy of the organization.
• Critical infers serious financial loss in more than one line of business leading to a loss in
productivity and no return on investment on the investment.
• Marginal infers a minor financial loss in a line of business and a reduced return on
investment.
• Negligible infers a minimal impact on a line of business' ability to deliver services and/or
products.
Frequency could be indicated as follows:
• Frequent: Likely to occur very often and/or continuously.
• Likely: Occurs several times over the course of a transformation cycle.
• Occasional: Occurs sporadically.
• Seldom: Remotely possible and would probably occur not more than once in the course of a
transformation cycle.
• Unlikely: Will probably not occur during the course of a transformation cycle.
Combining the two factors to infer impact would be conducted using a heuristically-based but
consistent classification scheme for the risks. A potential scheme to assess corporate impact could
be as follows:
• Extremely High Risk (E): The transformation effort will most likely fail with severe
consequences.
• High Risk (H): Significant failure of parts of the transformation effort resulting in certain goals
not being achieved.
• Moderate Risk (M): Noticeable failure of parts of the transformation effort threatening the
success of certain goals.
• Low Risk (L): Certain goals will not be wholly successful.
1.8 The ICAI Guide on Risk Based Internal Audit
It provides relevant information on the subject of Risk Attributes, Measurement and Risk Score. It
states the following:
All risks have two attributes, viz.
• Likelihood of risk occurrence.
• Risk consequence.
To facilitate understanding and usability in decision making of risk, comparison helps. To enable
comparison a risk score is used. By measuring the two risk attributes a risk score can be derived
for that risk. This risk score is meant for comparison between a cut-off point normally the 'risk
appetite' or comparing to other risks thereby filtering for 'significant risks'.
The measurement of the likelihood of risk is normally against five levels on a scale of 5, viz.
• Remote (score 1).
• Unlikely (score 2).
• Possible (score 3).
• Likely (score 4).
• Almost certain (score 5).
Risk consequences can also be against five levels on a scale of 5, viz.
• Insignificant (score 1).
• Minor (score 2).
• Moderate (score 3).
• Major (score 4).
be uncertain about the winner of a contest, but unless we have some personal stake in it, we have
no risk. If we bet money on the outcome of the contest, then we have a risk. In both cases there is
more than one outcome. The measure of uncertainty refers only to the probabilities assigned to
outcomes, while the measure of risk requires both probabilities for outcomes and losses quantified
for outcomes.
Complexity, Volatility, Ambiguity and Uncertainty
If terms are interchanged the acronym becomes VUCA which is used to describe or reflect on the
volatility, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity of general conditions and situations: -
Complexity
Characteristics: the situation has many interconnected parts and variables. Some information is
available or can be predicted, but the volume or nature of it can be overwhelming to process.
Example: you are doing business in many countries, all with unique regulatory environments,
tariffs, and cultural values.
Approach: Restructure, bring on or develop specialists, and build up resources adequate to
address the complexity.
Volatility
Characteristics: The challenge is unexpected or unstable and may be of unknown duration, but
it’s not necessarily hard to understand; knowledge about it is often available.
Example: Prices fluctuate after a natural disaster takes a supplier off-line.
Approach: Build in slack and devote resources to preparedness-for instances, stockpile inventory
or overbuy talent. These steps are typically expensive; your investment should match the risk.
Ambiguity
Characteristics: Casual relationships are completely unclear. No precedents exist; you face
“unknown unknowns.”
Example: You decide to move into immature or emerging markets or to launch products outside
your core competencies.
Approach: Experiment, understanding cause and effect requires generating hypotheses and
testing them. Design your experiments so that lessons learned can be broadly applied.
Uncertainty
Characteristics: Despite a lack of other information, the event’s basic cause and effect are
known. Change is possible but not a given.
Example: A competitor’s pending product launch muddies the future of the business and the
market.
Approach: Invest in information-collect, interpret, and share it. This works best in conjunction with
structural changes, such as adding information analysis networks that can reduce on-going
uncertainty.
(Source: - Harvard Business Review/[Link]/what-vuca-really-means-for-you)
3. CLASSIFICATION OF RISKS
3.1 Nature of Risks
Risk may bear positive or negative results or may simply result in uncertainty. For example where
the Municipal authorities of a metropolis decide to implement a Metro Rail project; it is with the
objective of reducing traffic and travel time for city residents, however, if there are frequent fatal
accidents at the Metro Rail resulting in loss of human life and public property, the decision of
Municipal authorities to implement Metro Rail project would be seen in a different light. Therefore,
risks may be considered to be related to an opportunity or a loss or the presence of uncertainty for
an organization. Every risk has its own unique nature and characteristics that require study,
management or analysis.
3.2 Categorisation of Risks
According to Paul Hopkins (in Fundamentals of Risk Management) risks are generally divided into
three categories:-
• Hazard (or pure) risks;
• Control (or uncertainty) risks;
• Opportunity (or speculative) risks.
Pure Risks are associated with uncertainties which may cause loss. In a pure risk situation, a loss
occurs or no loss occurs – there is no possibility for gain. These uncertainties may be due to perils
such as fire, floods, etc. or may arise from human action such as theft, accident etc. There are
certain risk events that can only result in negative outcomes such as fire accidents or leakage of
harmful chemicals from a manufacturing plant. These risks are hazard risks or pure risks, and
these may be thought of as operational or insurable risks. A good example of a hazard risk faced
by many organizations is that of theft. There are different types of pure risks:
• Personal risks - It includes early death, sudden accident and disability, unemployment, etc.
• Property risks - reduction in value of assets due to physical damage, fire, theft, etc.
• Liability Risks - the risk of legal liability for damages accruing to customer, suppliers, vendors,
etc. Such risks are also connected with compensation payable to employees for injuries and
other harm afflicted in the workplace.
Above situations all come under the category of pure risks and are insurable.
Fundamental Risks are impersonal in nature. They are present in nature and the economy, and
are beyond the control of man. Their effect is pervasive and usually impacts a large group of
people. Earthquakes, war, inflation, mass unemployment, etc., are examples of such fundamental
risks. Generally, these risks are not insurable and it is left to the Government to deal with the
effects of these events. However, in situations where the occurrences are irregular and the impact
in minimal, the insurers can venture to insure these risks.
Particular Risks have their origin in individual events which can be partially controlled. They occur
due to the action of the individuals, for example, meeting with an accident while crossing the road.
These risks are insurable with conditions.
Dynamic Risks may arise due to changes in the economy like fluctuations in price levels,
consumer references, distribution of income, product development, shifts in technology, etc. These
are called Dynamic Risks. As they are less predictable, generally, they are not insurable.
Control risks are associated with unknown and unexpected events. They are sometimes referred
to as uncertainty risks and they can be extremely difficult to quantify. Control risks are often
associated with project management. In these circumstances, it is known that the events will
occur, but the precise consequences of those events are difficult to predict and control. Therefore,
the approach is based on minimizing the potential consequences of these events.
There are two main aspects associated with opportunity risks. These risks/dangers are associated
with taking an opportunity and not taking the opportunity. Opportunity risks may not be visible or
physically apparent, and they are often financial in nature. Although opportunity risks are taken
with the intention of having a positive outcome, this is not guaranteed. Opportunity risks for small
businesses include moving a business to a new location, acquiring new property, expanding a
business and diversifying into new products.
Speculative Risks have three possible outcomes: loss, no loss or gain. Examples of such risks
include the decision to invest in some shares etc. The statistical techniques used in insurance
cannot be applied to speculative risks. Further, these risks are deliberately taken with the hope of
gain. Generally, speculative risks are not considered insurable.
It may be noted that there is no ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ classification of risks. Risks can be grouped
according to their nature, estimated cost or likely impact, likelihood of occurrence,
countermeasures required, etc.
For example, Credit risk, is classified according to the likelihood of the collection of accounts receivable.
The most important issue is that an organization adopts the risk classification system that is most
suitable for its own circumstances.
Risks which occur even with no changes in the economy are classified as Static Risks. These
include losses due to perils like fire, theft and dishonesty of individuals. Over a period of time,
certain regularity may be observed in these occurrences and they may become predictable. Such
static risks are more insurable than Dynamic Risks.
Example
In order to understand the distinction between hazard, control and opportunity risks, the example
of the use of machines is useful. Technical snag while operating a machine is an operational or
hazard risk and there will be no benefit to an organization suffering a technical breakdown in its
manufacturing operations. When an organization installs or upgrades a machine, control risks will
be associated with the upgraded project.
The selection of new machine is an opportunity risk, where the intention is to achieve better results
by installing the machine, but it is possible that the new machine will fail to deliver all of the
functionality that was intended and the opportunity benefits will not be delivered. In fact, the failure
of the functionality of the new machine may substantially undermine the manufacturing operations
of the organization.
4. TYPE OF RISKS
Events can have negative impact, positive impact, or both. Events with a negative impact
represent negative risks, which can prevent value creation or erode existing value. Events with
positive impact may offset negative impacts or represent opportunities. Risk and opportunity
management are closely related, organisations with superior competencies and knowledge
database attempt to convert negative risk events into positives by creating a focussed group of
experts who brainstorm on breakthrough ideas that could help the organisation move in a positive
direction. This is a contemporary phenomenon and is commonly referred to as “catching the ball”
or “idea funnel”. Risk management is all about value protection, maximizing gains from risk
outcomes and seizing the opportunities by formulating management action plans. Disruptive start
up culture is all about identifying real life problems and converting them into business
opportunities.
According to webopedia - Risk as part of GRC (Governance, Risk and Compliance) Management
is the ability to effectively and cost-efficiently mitigate risks that can hinder an organization's
operations or ability to remain competitive in its market.
Businesses face different type and extent of risks, few may cause serious loss of profits or even
bankruptcy. Large companies have extensive "risk management" departments; smaller businesses tend
not to look at the issue in such a systematic way but may have a more hands on approach to risk
management. A successful business needs a comprehensive, well-thought-out business plan.
However, business is dynamic; things change, and the best-laid plans can sometimes appear out-dated
in quick time. When the company’s strategy becomes less effective in the market place and it struggles
to reach its goals as a result; the company is facing strategic risks or model risks. It could be due to
technological changes, a powerful new competitor entering the market, shifts in customer demand,
spikes in the costs of raw materials, or any number of other large-scale changes.
Business risks can arise due to the influence by two major risks: - internal risks (risks arising from
the events taking place within the organization) and external risks (risks arising from the events
In addition to the business risks, organisation can have following major risks (illustrative) which will
be applicable to any organisation:-
• Financial risk - These risks are associated with the financial assets, structure and
transactions of the particular industry.
• Credit risk - The risk of loss arising from outright default due to the inability or unwillingness
of the customer or counterparty to meet their commitments. Credit risk is the probability of
loss from a credit transaction. It is also called as default risk.
• Liquidity risk - The potential inability to meet commitments as they fall due. It arises
whenever the bank is unable to generate cash to meet out its liability payment obligations or
increase in assets or its failure to manage the unplanned decreases or changes in the
funding sources. Liquidity risk also arises on account of its failure to address the changes in
the market conditions that affect its ability to liquidate its assets quickly and with minimal
losses.
Liquidity risk may arise due to changes or variations in the market conditions such as,
volatility of rate of interest or the Foreign exchange rate /Investment mismatch or risk or poor
economic conditions like depression / inflation / loss of confidence in the business by its
customers/ rumors about the business and its effects of run on the liquidity/ failure of some of
the banks where its deposits got struck or blocked or war like situations with the enemies of
state are some of the examples where the businesses will be facing liquidity crisis as it may
cause heavy out flow of funds.
• Market risk - The risk of losses caused by adverse changes in the market variables such as
interest rate, Foreign Exchange rate, equity price and commodity price. RBI has defined the
Market Risk as the possibility of loss to a bank caused by the changes in market rates /
prices. Market risk is the possibility for an investor to experience losses due to factors that
affect the overall performance of the financial markets in which he has invested money.
Market risk, also called "systematic risk," cannot be eliminated through diversification, though
it can be hedged against. Sources of market risk include recessions, political turmoil, and
changes in interest rates, natural disasters and terrorist attacks.
• Operational Risk- The risk associated with the operations of an organization. It is the risk of
loss resulting from failure of people employed in the organization, internal process, systems
or external factors acting upon it to the detriment of the organization. It includes Legal Risk
and excludes strategic and Reputational Risks as they are not quantifiable.
• Strategic Risk - The current and prospective impact on earnings, capital, reputation or good
standing of an organization arising from its poor business decisions, improper implementation
of decisions or lack of response to industry, economic or technological changes. Failure of
strategies will adversely impact the business objectives and attainment of the goals.
• Compliance Risk – It includes material financial loss or loss of reputation which may occur
as result of its failure to comply with the laws includes, regulations, rules, related self-
regulatory organization, standards and code of conduct applicable to its business activities.
• Regulatory Risk - Regulatory Risk arises due to changes made in policies and procedures
by the regulators viz, RBI, Central and State Governments, SEBI, IRDA, etc. Withdrawal of
licenses, change in capital adequacy requirements, change in NPA norms etc. may be
grouped under this category. Any changes in the rules and regulations which may have a
negative impact on the business activities can be classified under this risk.
• Reputation risk – Adverse publicity regarding an entity’s practices will lead to a loss of
revenue or litigation. Any event which affects the name or brand image of the entity is
Reputational Risk. Any adverse publicity, news coverage, comments etc. has the ability to
dent the trust created by the entity and becomes detrimental to the business of the entity.
• Legal risk - Arises from the uncertainty due to legal actions or uncertainty in the application,
interpretation of contracts, laws or regulations. Legal risk is the risk arising from failure to
comply with statutory or legal requirements.
• Interest rate risk - Risk where changes in the market interest rates might adversely affect
the Net interest Income earnings. It is the threat that interest paid may be more than the
interest collected resulting in financial loss.
• Foreign exchange risk- Risk of loss that the entity may suffer on account of adverse
fluctuations in the exchange rate movements in currencies.
• Management risk – Risk of management interference in day to day operations and putting
undue demands and restrictions on staff. Quality of senior management affects the decision
making and contributes to management risk. It means the risks associated with ineffective,
destructive or underperforming management, which hurts shareholders and the company or
fund being managed. This term refers to the risk of the situation in which the company and
shareholders would have been better off without the choices made by management.
• Staffing risk – Risk of not employing the right person for the right job. Poorly drafted job
descriptions, inadequate background verifications and inexperienced personnel contribute to
staffing risk.
• Technology risk – Risk of not keeping pace with the fast changing technologies for business
operations. Usage of outdated technologies could impact the business operations adversely
thereby resulting in loss of reputation, market share, customers, etc.
• Business continuity risk – Risk arising from inability to restore operations immediately in
the event of an incident / disaster.
• Information (data security) risk – Risk of unauthorized access to data. Poor access
controls both at the network level and application level give rise to this risk. While information
has long been appreciated as a valuable and important asset, the rise of the knowledge
economy and the Digital Revolution has led to organizations becoming increasingly
dependent on information, information processing and especially IT.
• Country risk – Helps to address the issues of identifying, measuring, monitoring and
controlling country exposure risks. Procedures are in place for ensuring that necessary steps
are taken as per RBI guidelines.
• Fraud risk – Risk of control failures, management override and deliberate acts of omission
and commission that lead to financial losses.
• Price risk - Probability of loss occurring from adverse movement in the market price of an
asset.
• Process risk – Inability of the management to meet its process related objectives on account
of failed activities in a business process. It is a risk of loss resulting from failure of
internal processes, people and systems or from external events.
• Security Risk - A person or situation which poses a possible threat to the security of
something. Security arrangements risk - risk which arises from vulnerability of security
systems is termed as security arrangements risk.
• Governance risk - Refers to in-effective, un-ethical management of a company by its
executives and managerial levels.
• Safety risks - These are the most common and will be present in most workplaces at one
time or another. They include unsafe conditions that can cause injury, illness and death.
Safety Hazards include: -
♦ Spills on floors or tripping hazards, such as blocked aisles or cords running across the
floor.
♦ Working from heights, including ladders, scaffolds, roofs, or any raised work area.
♦ Unguarded machinery and moving machinery parts; guards removed or moving parts
that a worker can accidentally touch.
♦ Electrical hazards like frayed cords, missing ground pins, improper wiring.
♦ Confined spaces.
♦ Machinery-related hazards (lockout/tag out, boiler safety, forklifts, etc.).
SOURCE AND
EVALUATION OF RISKS
LEARNING OUTCOMES
After going through the chapter student shall be able to understand
Identification and Sources of Risk
Quantification of Risk and various methodologies
Impact of Business Risk
Identity and assess the impact upon the stakeholder involved in Business
Risk
Role of Risk Manager and Risk Committee in identifying Risk
exercises work more effectively and provide better outcomes to the businesses.
Identification of risks is the process of determining which risks may affect the business/project and
documenting their characteristics. Participants in the Identification process will usually include:-
• Business managers
• Project team
• Risk management team
• Subject matter experts
• Customers
• End users
• Other project managers, stakeholders, and
• Outside experts
1.2 Risk identification sets out to identify an organisation’s exposure to
uncertainty
This exercise can be successfully executed if the risk management team has reasonable degree of
business knowledge and related variables in which the business operates. The various risk
variables include legal, social, community, political and other factors that impact the business
model of the entity. The risk management project team should intimately understand the business
strategy and the market place in which the entity operates. Further, the risk management team
should undertake a Strength, Weakness, Opportunity and Threat assessment exercise so as to
document the factors that could give rise to potential risks in future. The SWOT analysis exercise
will facilitate development of sound business knowledge and communication of key business
weaknesses, threats and opportunities to seize in the risk management exercise.
The entity becomes aware of various risks through the Risk Identification and thereafter deals with
the risks it faces. It must set objectives, integrated with the sales, production, marketing, financial
and other activities so that the organization is operating in concert. It also must establish
mechanisms to identify analyze and manage the related risks.
The entity identifies risks to the achievement of its objectives across the entity and analyses risks
as a basis for determining how the risks should be managed. It:
• Involves appropriate levels of management;
• Includes entity, subsidiary division, operating unit, and functional levels;
• Analyzes internal and external factors;
• Estimates significance of risks identified;
• Determines how to respond to risks.
All above activities should be approached in a methodical manner so that any significant business
activity or risk item is not missed out by the risk management project team. One of the best ways
to identify risks is by flow-charting the key business processes and thereafter undertaking a “what
can go wrong exercise”.
SA 315 of ICAI states that financial reporting is also subject to risks arising from a number of
internal and external transactions, events or circumstances. These factors may adversely affect
the company's ability to initiate record, process and report financial data consistent with the
assertions of management in the financial statements. Examples of some of these risks are:
• Change in operating environment
• New personnel
• Rapid growth
• New technology
• New business models, products, or activities
• Corporate re-structuring
• Expanded foreign operations
• New accounting pronouncements.
Generally, business functions that can be assessed from a risk perspective are:
• Strategic – These include business model risk factors in terms of product demand factors,
availability of supply chain inputs at competitive rates, innovation, competition, financial
stability and capital access, etc. These relates to the achievement of long-term strategic
objectives of the entity. They can be affected by availability of capital, country and political
risks, legal and regulatory changes, reputation and changes in the economic environment.
• Operational – These include process execution and day-today issues that the entity is
exposed to.
• Financial – These concern the effective management and control of the finances of the
organisation and the effects of external factors such as availability of credit, working capital,
foreign exchange rates, interest rate movement and other market exposures.
• Knowledge management – Where the entity does not manage effectively it only manages
information in its activity stream. The effective management and control of the knowledge
resources includes production, protection and communication of knowledge. Factors
contributing to knowledge risks include the unauthorised use or abuse of intellectual
property/competitive technology. Internal factors may include loss of key staff.
• Compliance management – Business entity has to comply with a lot of laws and regulations
that are directly or indirectly applicable to its business. The laws vary from environmental
protection to specific state laws in the region which the entity may operate. To manage
compliances effectively entities undertake a detailed compliance risk assessment exercise
wherein each applicable law is mapped for specific compliance obligation and the mitigating
compliance action plan against it is documented. Such activities can be undertaken in-house
or externally facilitated, however, the primary ownership and responsibility of compliance
management cannot be transferred to a third party such as consultant or auditor.
The Risk Identification process is a constantly evolving process as new risks emerge during the
business life cycle. The frequency of iteration and who participates in each cycle will be different
with different projects. The project team needs to be involved in the process so that it can develop
and maintain a sense of ownership and responsibility for the risks and associated risk-response
actions.
1.3 Additional objective information can be provided by persons outside
the team
The Risk Identification process usually leads to the Perform Qualitative Risk Analysis process, or it
can lead directly to the Perform Quantitative Risk Analysis process when conducted by an
experienced risk manager.
The objective of risk identification is the early and continuous identification of events that, if they
occur, will have negative impacts on the project's ability to achieve performance or capability
outcome goals. They may come from within the project or from external sources.
Organisations undertake Risk Identification by using several techniques and tools. Whilst a SWOT
Analysis is a quick way to identify new opportunities and identify threats, many organisations have
gone beyond this relatively simple approach and embraced more advanced forms of identifying
and assessing risks and opportunities. Many organisations have adopted an Enterprise-wide Risk
Management (ERM) approach that is more structured approach to identifying and managing risk.
Risk Measurement - Once risks have been identified, they are assessed and measured in order to
determine their probability of occurrence, costs, opportunity, social and eventual impact on the
entity’s profitability and capital. This can be done using various techniques ranging from simple to
sophisticated models. Accurate and timely measurement of risk is essential to effective risk
management systems. Good risk measurement systems assess the risks of both individual
transactions and portfolios.
Likelihood (probability)
Using the Decision Making Tree for this risk assessment, the data for the entire tree has to be
processed and calculated. The procedure for calculating this is;
[probability of public event in good weather ] + [probability of public event in bad weather]
i.e. [good conditions] + [bad conditions]
= [0.40 x 0.70] + [0.60 x 0.30]
= 0.28 + 0.18
=0.46
This can also be translated as a 46% probability for a public event. While the cut-off criteria for the
public event are 65%, the idea for having a public event can be cancelled. According to the
calculations, the risk for holding a public event is very high. It may never succeed.
Risk management is done from very early in the project until the very end.
Risk quantification involves evaluating risks and risk interactions to assess the range of possible
outcomes. It is primarily concerned with determining which risk events warrant response. It is
complicated by a number of factors including, but not limited to:-
• Opportunities and threats can interact in unanticipated ways (e.g., schedule delays may force
consideration of a new strategy that reduces overall project duration).
• One risk event can cause multiple impacts; say late delivery of a key manufacturing
component causes cost overruns for the manufacturing facility and delays schedule to
customers and results in penalties from the customer.
2.3 Tools and Techniques for Risk Quantification
Following are some of the tools and techniques that are available to assess and evaluate risks:
(a) Judgment and intuition: In many situations, the management and auditors have to use their
judgment and intuition for risk assessment. This mainly depends on the personal and professional
experience of the management and auditors and their understanding of the business, system and
its environment. Together with it is required a systematic education and on-going professional
updating.
(b) The Delphi approach: The Delphi technique is defined as: 'a method for structuring a group
communication process so that the process is effective in allowing a group of individuals as a
whole to deal with a complex problem'. It was originally developed as a technique for the US
Department of Defence. The Delphi Technique was first used by the Rand Corporation for
obtaining a consensus opinion. Here, a panel of experts is appointed. Each expert gives his/her
opinion in a written and independent manner. They enlist the estimate of the cost, benefits and the
reasons why a particular system should be chosen, the risks and the exposures of the system.
These estimates are then compiled together. The estimates within a pre-decided acceptable range
are taken. The process may be repeated four times for revising the estimates falling beyond the
range. Then a curve is drawn taking all the estimates as points on the graph. The median is drawn
and this is the consensus opinion.
(c) Scoring: In the Scoring approach, the risks in the business, system and their respective
exposures are listed. Weights are then assigned to the risk and to the exposures depending on the
severity, impact on occurrence, and costs involved. The product of the risk weight with the
exposure weight of every characteristic gives us the weighted score. The sum of these weighted
score gives us the risk and exposure score of the system. System risk and exposure is then
ranked according to the scores obtained.
(d) Quantitative techniques: These techniques involve the calculation of an annual loss
exposure value based on the probability of the event and the exposure in terms of estimated costs.
This helps the organization to select cost effective solutions. It is the assessment of potential
damage in the event of occurrence of unfavorable events, keeping in mind how often such an
event may occur.
(e) Qualitative techniques: These techniques are most widely used approaches to risk analysis.
Probability data is not required and only estimated potential loss is used. Most qualitative risk
analysis methodologies use a number of interrelated elements:
• Threats: These are things that can go wrong or that can 'attack' the system. Examples might
include fire or fraud. Threats are ever present for every system.
• Vulnerabilities: These make a system more prone to attack by a threat or make an attack
more likely to have some success or impact. For example, for fire, vulnerability would be the
presence of inflammable materials (e.g. Paper).
• Controls: These are the countermeasures for vulnerabilities. They are of four types:
(i) Deterrent controls reduce the likelihood of a deliberate attack.
(ii) Preventative controls protect vulnerabilities and make an attack unsuccessful or reduce
its impact.
(iii) Corrective controls reduce the effect of an attack.
(iv) Detective controls discover attacks and trigger preventative or corrective controls.
(f) Expected monetary value, as a tool for risk quantification, is the product of two numbers.
• Risk event probability--an estimate of the probability that a given risk event will occur.
• Risk event value--an estimate of the gain or loss that will be incurred if the risk event does
occur.
The risk event value must reflect both tangibles and intangibles. If Project A predicts little or no
intangible effect, while Project B predicts that such a loss will put its performing organization out of
business, the two risks are not equivalent.
In similar fashion, failure to include intangibles in this calculation can severely distort the result by
equating a small loss with a high probability to a large loss with a small probability.
The expected monetary value is generally used as input to further analysis (e.g., in a decision tree)
since risk events can occur individually or in groups, in parallel or in sequence.
(g) Simulation uses a representation or model of a system to analyze the behaviour or
performance of the system. The most common form of simulation on a project is schedule
simulation using the project network as the model of the project. Most schedule simulations are
based on some form of Monte Carlo analysis. This technique, adapted from general management,
"performs" the project many times to provide a statistical distribution of the calculated results.
(h) Decision Tree is a diagram that depicts key interactions among decisions and associated
chance events as they are understood by the decision maker. The branches of the tree represent
either decisions (shown as boxes) or chance events (shown as circles).
(i) Expert Judgement can often be applied in lieu of or in addition to the mathematical
techniques described above. For example, risk events could be described as having a high,
medium, or low probability of occurrence and a severe, moderate, or limited impact.
(j) Frequency of Loss measures the number of times losses occur during a particular period of
time. If you have measured this loss in the past, you can use the historical data to make a
prediction. An accounts receivable reserve account is an example of frequency of loss. If your
company had 2.5% in losses an uncollectable accounts receivable in the previous two years, you
would use this estimate for the current year.
(k) Scenario Analysis - Use scenario analysis to assess the risk of a downturn in real estate or
other asset prices, an up or down shift in interest rates or other market factors. With scenario
analysis, you determine what impact various scenarios could have on the business. For example,
a company has a line of credit with a variable interest rate. Using scenario analysis, one could
determine the company's default risk if the interest rate jumped three percentage points during the
year.
2.4 Other Business Risk Measurements
There are a variety of business risk measurement tools and techniques, few are highly technical,
statistical and quantitative, whereas others more subjective, judgement driven and qualitative.
Methods include expected loss, value at risk and unexpected loss measures, tolerance testing,
sensitivity analysis, financial ratios, statistical sampling and profit variation to evaluate and quantify
risks. It is important to identify the risks, and then measure them using a method that is sufficiently
simple for consistent application.
2.5 Outputs from Risk Quantification
The results of risk quantification shall facilitate decision making for the purpose of chalking out risk
mitigation strategies. The ultimate purpose of risk identification, quantification and analysis is to
prepare for risk mitigation. A systematic reduction in the extent of exposure to a risk and/or the
likelihood of its occurrence is termed as 'Risk Mitigation'. Typically, in cases of risk mitigation,
there is a particular threshold that is acceptable below which the risk is attempted to be mitigated.
Factor or casual analysis can help to relate characteristics of an event to the probability and
severity of the operational losses. This will enable the organization to decide whether or not to
invest in technology or people (hazards) so events (frequency) or the effect of events (severity)
can be minimized.
A causal understanding is essential to take appropriate action to control and manage risks
because causality is a basis for both action and prediction. Knowing 'what causes what' gives an
ability to intervene in the environment and implement the necessary controls. Causation is different
from correlation, or constant conjunction, in which two things are associated because they change
in unison or are found together.
Predictive models (such as loss models) often use correlation as a basis for prediction, but actions
based on associations are tentative at best. Simple cause and effect relationships are known from
experience, but more complex situations such as those buried in the processes of business
operations may not be intuitively obvious from the information at hand. An Information System
audit and control professional may be required to establish the cause. Cause models help in the
implementation of risk mitigation measures. Cause analysis identifies events and their impact on
losses.
Common outputs from risk quantification include Risk Scorecard, Value at Risk Measure,
Sampling plan, Simulated Model, Projections, etc.
One of the major outputs from Risk Quantification is a list of possible opportunities that should be
pursued and threats that require attention.
should not be biased or critical. It is one of the best and most popular ways to identify both
risks and key controls and is the basis for most successful risk workshops.
3. Questionnaires & Interviews - Focused on detecting the concerns of staff with respect to
the risks or threats that they perceive in their operating environment. During a Structured
interview, interviewees are asked through a set of prepared questions to encourage the
interviewee to present their own perspective and thus identify risks. Structured interviews are
frequently used during consultation with key stakeholders when designing the risk
management framework. Structured interviews are good to assess risk appetite and tolerance
when developing risk appetite statements. A specialist in risk prepares interviews with various
management level members of the company in order to elicit the concerns.
4. Checklists are information aids to reduce the likelihood of failures from potential hazards,
risks or controls that have been developed usually from past experience, either as a result of
a previous risk assessment or as a result of past failures or incidents or history or industry
learning. Auditors often prepare checklists of key controls to aid in their assessment of
control effectiveness and the internal control environment. Checklists are good guiding tools;
however, can lead to herd mentality and risk managers can miss out on fresh risk thinking
and the big picture.
5. “What-if” Technique (WIFT) This is a structured, team exercise, where the expert facilitator
utilises a set of “indicators” or “hints” to stimulate participants to identify risks. It is commonly
used for decision making purposes.
6. Scenario Analysis is a process to analyze future events by considering alternative outcomes
or alternative worlds. Scenario making involves preparing a brief narrative or description of a
hypothetical situation of how a future event or events might turn out or look like. For each
scenario, the management reflects and analyses the potential consequences and potential
causes when analysing risk. Scenario analysis can be used effectively to identify
opportunities for fraud, forecasting, managing financial risks, etc. Reserve Bank of India
prescribes scenario analysis based testing for Liquidity position of banks in India.
7. Fault Tree Analysis (FTA) This method is similar to a form of creative thinking called reverse
brainstorming. This technique is used for identifying and analysing factors that can contribute
to a specified undesired event (called the “top event”). Causal factors are then identified and
organized in a logical manner and represented pictorially in a tree [Link] example, if
you want to improve customer service, state the objective in reverse e.g. “How can we really
annoy our customers?” and from this statement, use brainstorming to identify causes that
could annoy customers.
8. Bow Tie Analysis There is a saying that “a picture is worth a thousand words” and this
method is a perfect example of this. Bow tie analysis is a diagrammatic way of describing,
linking and analysing the pathways of a risk from causes to effects/consequences. Unlike the
risk register, there are no numbers in this analysis i.e. there is no risk or control evaluation
involved. This keeps the focus on understanding the relationships between the causes, event
and consequences. After a brainstorming session, bow tie analysis is a great way to clean up
the ideas generated and consolidate the results into more appropriate risk statements.
9. Direct Observations This relatively simple technique is used daily in the workplace by staff
who may observe risky situations and hazards regularly. It is also used by emergency
services when attending to an emergency and is a form of dynamic risk assessment. It is also
heavily used by Workplace Health & Safety professionals during inspections and audits. A
risk aware culture and well trained staff will improve people’s ability to observe potential risks
and implement controls before the risk eventuates into an incident.
10. Incident Analysis - Incidents Analysis related to risks that have recently occurred. Recording
incidents in a register, conducting root cause analysis and periodically running some trend
analysis reports to analyse incidents, can potentially enable new risks to be identified. In
addition, a high frequency of like incidents can be a lead risk indicator to a potentially larger
problem.
11. Surveys - It is similar to structured interviews but involves a larger number of people. It can
be used to collect a broad set of ideas, thoughts and opinions across a range of areas
covering risks and control effectiveness. One of the best ways for risk managers to use
surveys is to assess the organisation’s risk culture. Internal auditors use surveys to assess
the internal control environment. Some organisations use annual staff surveys to gauge staff
understanding of key risk and governance policies and procedures.
12. Workshops - Meeting of group of employees in a comfortable atmosphere, in order to
identify the risks and assess their possible impact on the company.
13. Comparison with other organizations - Benchmarking is the technique used for comparing
one’s own organization with competitors. Benchmarking means to set a particular level of
performance or to set a particular standard of performance that the company should achieve
and this standard performance is determined by adopting the highest level of performance as
achieved by the rivals or the competitors.
14. Stakeholder analysis - Process of identifying individuals or groups who have a vested
interest in the objectives and ascertaining how to engage with them to better understand the
objective and its associated uncertainties.
15. Working groups - Compact working groups can be formed that could be cross functional.
Useful to surface detailed information about the risks i.e. source, causes, consequences,
stakeholder impacted, existing controls.
16. Corporate knowledge - History of risks provide insight into future threats or opportunities
through:-
♦ Experiential knowledge – collection of information that a person has obtained through
their experience.
factors viz., internal events within the organization and external events outside the organisation.
Internal risks arise from factors (that can be controlled) such as people or human factors (talent
management, strikes), technological factors (emerging technologies), physical factors (failure of
machines, fire or theft), operational factors (access to credit, cost cutting, advertisement). External risks
arise from factors (that cannot be controlled) such as economic factors (market risks, pricing pressure),
natural factors (floods, earthquakes), and political factors (compliance and regulations of government).
Sources of risk are all of those company environments, whether internal or external, that can
generate threats of losses or obstacles for achieving the company’s objectives.
A procedure that facilitates the identification of risks is to ask oneself, with respect to each of the
sources, whether weaknesses or threats exist in each case.
A brief list is set out below:-
1. Pressure by competitors
2. The employees
3. The customers
4. The new technologies
5. Changes in the environment
6. Laws and regulations
7. Globalization and global events
8. The operations
9. The suppliers
10. Natural disasters
11. Man-made disasters
For the purpose of risk identification it is advisable to make a SWOT analysis (Strengths,
Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats); particularly the weak points and the threats will offer a
view of the risks facing the entrepreneur.
Example - SWOT
Strengths-
• Location of establishments
• Highly flexible cost structure
• Proximity to customers
Weakness-
• Commercial fragmentation
• Limited access to financing
• Lack of specialized and trained personnel
Opportunities-
• Sector in expansion
• Specialization in market niches
• Increasingly better informed customers
Threats-
• Regulatory changes
• Entry of new competitor
• Customer tastes changes quickly
Exhibit
A GENERIC RISK SOURCES MATRIX
2. Floods. Mumbai civic authorities identify 10 sections along the Central Railway and 12 along
the Western Railway prone to serious flooding, along 235 other flooding points within the city.
The event of July 26, 2005 is maybe the worst that the city has faced in long time, an
exceptional series of rainstorm seriously disrupted the lives of many millions: basic amenities,
telecommunications, banking services, civic and political organizations were paralyzed in a
situation that has not been seen before.
3. Chemical (transport, handling), biological, and nuclear hazards. Mumbai is one of the
few big urban centers or megacities to count on a nuclear facility within the city limits.
4. Earthquakes. Mumbai lies in the Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) in Seismic Zone III.
5. Cyclones, Landslides, Bomb blasts, terrorism, riots and tidal surge are additional hazards
that need to be analysed too.
The following factors have been identified that can create vulnerabilities and associated risks in
the city:
• Being an “Island city”, the transport networks are in poor shape
• Inadequate road width vs. parking space
• Buildings – poor design and construction practices
• High-rise and old buildings
• Change of use of buildings from ordinary to critical functions without retrofitting or
strengthening the building
• Utilities: water supply – lack of back-up system; inadequate sewerage system
• Infrastructure: flyovers, hospitals in weak condition
• Power failures
• Poor security infrastructure
• Continuous migration of people to Mumbai
• Illegal construction
• Poor roads and civic amenities
3.3 Global Risk Outlook
One of most important source of information for the purpose of risk identification is the World
Economic Forum (WEF) that undertakes risk identification surveys and tracks the progress of risk
developments across the globe. Study of the global risk surveys undertaken by the WEF enables
risk professionals to identify and track developments in the risk management profession.
The WEF report has highlighted the potential of persistent, long-term trends such as inequality and
deepening social and political polarization to exacerbate risks associated with, for example, the
weakness of the economic recovery and the speed of technological change.
These trends came into sharp focus during 2016, with rising political discontent and disaffection
evident in countries across the world. The highest-profile signs of disruption may have come in
Western countries – with the United Kingdom’s vote to leave the European Union and President-
elect Donald Trump’s victory in the US presidential election-but across the globe there is evidence
of a growing backlash against elements of the domestic and international status quo.
The global risk indicators that are currently in trend include:-
• Increasing disparity between the rich and poor
• Fast technology evolution leading growing dependency for decision making
• Intelligent devices replacing human intervention impacting employment, manufacturing and
services sector
• Terrorism leading to intensified nationalism and regional conflicts
• Global warming and climate changes
Organisational Risks
Epstein and Rejc, 2005 depict organizational risks as:-
Strategic Operational Reporting Compliance
Economic Environmental, Reputation Information Legal and regulatory
Industry Financial, Commercial, Reporting Control
Property
Strategic Transaction Business Continuity Professional
Social Innovation
Technological Commercial, Project,
Political Human Resources, Health
and Safety
Organizational
Systems
• Insurance: An organization may buy insurance to mitigate such risk. Under the scheme of
the insurance, the loss is transferred from the insured entity to the insurance company in
exchange of a premium. However while selecting such an insurance policy one has to look
into the exclusion clause to assess the effective coverage of the policy. Under the Advanced
Management Approach under Basel II norms (AMA), a bank will be allowed to recognize the
risk mitigating impact of insurance in the measures of operational risk used for regulatory
minimum capital requirements. The recognition of insurance mitigation is limited to 20% of the
total operational risk capital charge calculated under the AMA.
• Outsourcing: The organization may transfer some of the functions to an outside agency and
transfer some of the associated risks to the agency. One must make careful assessment of
whether such outsourcing is transferring the risk or is merely transferring the management
process. For example, outsourcing of telecommunication line viz. subscribing to a leased line
does not transfer the risk. The organization remains liable for failure to provide service
because of a failed telecommunication line. Consider the same example where the
organization has outsourced supply and maintenance of a dedicated leased line
communication channel with an agreement that states the minimum service level
performance and a compensation clause in the event failure to provide the minimum service
level results in to a loss. In this case, the organization has successfully mitigated the risk.
• Service Level Agreements (SLAs): Some of risks can be mitigated by designing the service
level agreement. This may be entered into with the external suppliers as well as with the
customers and users. The service agreement with the customers and users may clearly
exclude or limit responsibility of the organization for any loss suffered by the customer and
user consequent to the technological failure. Thus a bank may state that services at ATM are
subject to availability of service there and customers need to recognize that such availability
cannot be presumed before claiming the service. The delivery of service is conditional upon
the system functionality. Whereas the service is guaranteed if the customer visits the bank
premises within the banking hours.
It must be recognized that the organization should not be so obsessed with mitigating the risk that
it seeks to reduce the systematic risk - the risk of being in business. The risk mitigation tools
available should not eat so much into the economics of business that the organization may find
itself in a position where it is not earning adequate against the efforts and investments made.
As seen from above table the impact of risk is all pervasive and organisations are rarely able to
document the full and complete impact of risks across their business value chains. The impact is
dependent on the severity or magnitude of the risk event.
Example –
• The impact from a high magnitude earthquake could be catastrophic; however, from a low
magnitude it could be minimal.
• The impact from loss of a single customer could be insignificant, however, loss of a business
segment comprising of a bunch of customers could be material.
Few more examples on the nature of impact that risks pose to a business
• Criminals can pose a threat to the security of a business’s sensitive data. If trade secrets are
revealed to competitors or client financial data is stolen, the results can be disastrous.
• Online reviews, blogs and social media can make it easier to spread negative information; a
negative review or post on social media can sometimes impact a company’s earnings, in a
single day.
• Employee injuries can be disastrous for a business.
• Internal fraud can be another major risk factor, and one that is an all-too-common reality.
• Customer payment defaults represent a financial risk to the company with a direct financial
loss/ exposure.
• Operational risks can disrupt a business, if proper precautions are not taken. For instance, in
the event of a fire, flood, or chemical leak, a business may be unable to operate as usual,
resulting in a loss of revenue.
• Supply chain disruptions caused by vendors who aren’t able to deliver reliably can also result
in business interruption.
• In case a key business asset is damaged by vandalism, misuse, or accidental damage, the
cost of repairing or replacing it can put substantial stress on a business’s cash flow.
Once businesses have identified the risks, they will assess the possible impact of those risks.
Depending on the results of the risk assessment and impact analysis exercise, organisations can
classify and separate minor risks from major risks that must be managed immediately.
Risks can be classified on the basis of their impacts into following rating buckets:-
• Severe
• Major
• Moderate
• Minor
• Insignificant
Organisations conduct Business Impact Analysis (BIA) which is a similar process like Risk Impact
Analysis. The BIA is primarily performed while organisations chalk out their business continuity
plans. To conduct a business impact analysis for the business, managers carry out following
activities:
• Understand and document the daily activities conducted in each area of business.
• Understand and document the long-term or on-going activities performed by each area of
business.
• Understand and document the potential losses if these business activities could not be
provided.
• Understand and document the outage time meaning how long could each business activity be
unavailable for (either completely or partially) before the business would suffer.
• Understand and document whether the business activities activities are dependent on any
outside services or products.
• Understand and document the activities important to the business for example, on a scale of
1 to 5 (1 being the most important and 5 being the least important), where would each activity
fall in relation to the rest of the business?
The BIA (business impact analysis) should identify the operational and financial impacts resulting
from the disruption of business functions and processes. Impacts to consider include:-
• Loss of life
• Lost sales and income
use as many levels as deemed fit for the business/sector. Also use descriptors that suit the
purpose (e.g. you might measure consequences in terms of human health, rather than rupee
value).
Evaluating risks
Once the level of risk is completed, we then need to create a rating table for evaluating the risk.
Evaluating a risk means making a decision about its severity and ways to manage it.
For example, one may decide the likelihood of a fire is 'unlikely' (a score of 2) but the
consequences are 'severe' (a score of 4). Using the tables and formula above, a fire therefore has
a risk rating of 8 (i.e. 2 x 4 = 8).
Risk rating table example
Risk rating Description Risk Management Action
12-16 Severe Needs immediate corrective action
8-12 High Needs corrective action within 1 week
4-8 Moderate Needs corrective action within 1 month
1-4 Low Does not currently require corrective action
Risk evaluation should consider:
• The importance of the activity to the business
• The amount of control we have over the risk
• Potential losses to the business
• Benefits or opportunities presented by the risk.
Once we have identified, analysed and evaluated the risks, the next step is to rank them in order
of priority. Effective risk management involves prioritization and thorough analysis of the risk
factors based on probabilistic models which can be directly related to the extent of impact of the
risk. Likewise, prioritizing stakeholders by authority and degrees of involvement and levels of risk
threats are necessary. This analysis will provide valuable input to a risk mitigation plan so that
more resources and attention are paid to the stakeholders who pose or face the greatest risk to the
project.
Businesses are responsible to several stakeholders as they function in an eco-system. The first
stakeholders can be the owners of the company who own equity in the company and therefore the
business has a duty towards them. This duty is primarily protect the value of investment and
generate more value to provide returns on investments to the shareholders. A modern view on this
subject is that a business converts inputs such as capital of investors, labour of employees and
materials from suppliers into outputs such as goods and services which customers buy, thereby
returning capital plus profits to the firm.
Therefore, a business has not only to take into account the primary interest of the owners or
shareholders, but it also has to create sustainable value for other key stakeholders such as
employees, its suppliers and its customers. This is further expanded by considering society,
community, government and other stakeholders who are impacted by the operations of the
business.
Stakeholders can be classified into two categories viz., internal stakeholders and external
stakeholders.
Internal stakeholders are entities within a business (e.g., employees, managers, the board of
directors, investors). Employees want to earn money and stay employed. Owners are interested in
maximizing the profit the business makes. Investors are concerned about earning income from
their investment.
External stakeholders are entities not within a business itself but who care about or are affected by
its performance (e.g., consumers, regulators, investors, suppliers). The government wants the
business to pay taxes, employ more people, follow laws, and truthfully report its financial
conditions. Customers want the business to provide high-quality goods or services at low cost.
Suppliers want the business to continue to purchase from them. Creditors want to be repaid on
time and in full. The community wants the business to contribute positively to its local environment
and population.
As John Greijmans states that - A corporate stakeholder is a party that can affect or can be
affected by the actions of an organization. Stakeholders are those groups without whose support
the organization would cease to exist. The stakeholder concept has been broadened to include
everyone with an interest (or “stake”) in what the entity does. Examples of stakeholders and their
stakes are:
• Government: taxation, legislation, low unemployment and truthful reporting.
• Employees: pay rates, job security, compensation, respect and truthful communication.
• Customers: quality, customer care and ethical products.
• Suppliers: equitable business opportunities.
• Creditors: credit score, new contracts and liquidity.
• Community: jobs, involvement, environmental protection, shares and truthful communication.
As seen from above table the impact of risk is pervasive and organisations are rarely able to
document the full and complete impact of risks across their business value chains. The impact is
dependent on the severity or magnitude of the risk event.
Advanced technologies can be put to meaningful use only if one is clear which stakeholder needs
what information and in what manner to manage risks effectively. One also needs to understand
how often the information needs to be shared with stakeholders.
10. Provide User Training for in-house developed risk management systems.
11. Conduct compliance & risk assessments.
12. Conduct and document audits of risk related compliance to industry standards
13. Define & develop risk policies, procedures, processes & other documentation as required.
14. Implement the risk management program and risk strategy. Ensure the risk management
program is effectively integrated into product development and delivery methodology.
15. Participate in local and global discussions to formulate new or enhance existing risk
management processes, policies and standards.
4. To examine and determine the sufficiency of company’s internal processes for reporting and
managing key risk areas.
5. To access and recommend board acceptable levels of risk.
7. To ensure the company has implemented an effective on-going process to identify risk, to
measure its potential impact against a broad set of assumptions and then to act pro-actively
to manage these risks, and to decide the company’s appetite or tolerance for risks.
8. To ensure that a systematic, documented assessment of the processes and the outcome
surrounding key risk is undertaken at least annually for the purpose of making its public
statement on risk management including internal control.
9. To oversee the formal review of activities associated with effectiveness of risk management
11. To monitor external development related to practice of corporate accountability and the
reporting of specifically associated risk, including emerging and prospective impacts.
12. To provide an independent and objective oversight and view of the information presented by
the management on corporate accountability and specifically associated risk, also taking
account of the report by the audit committee to the board on all categories of identified risk
being faced by the company.
13. To review the risk bearing capacity of the company in light of its reserves, insurance
coverage, guarantee funds or other such financial structures.
14. To fulfill its statutory, fiduciary and regulatory responsibilities.
15. To ensure that risk management culture is pervasive throughout the organization.
16. To review issues raised by internal audit that impact the risk management framework.
17. To ensure that infrastructure, resources and systems which are in place for risk management
is adequate to maintain a satisfactory level of risk management discipline.
18. The board shall review the performance of risk management committee annually.
19. Perform other activities related to risk management as requested by the board of directors or
to address issues related to significant subject within its term of reference.
IBM has about 30 online courses available to all employees. IBM has introduced risk gaming and
using simulation in which a business leader developing a customer proposal has to consider
different risks i.e. how to account for them, how to mitigate and control them. People find it funny
and engaging.
IBM’s risk team spends more time on the strategic side, engaging with risk leaders and ensuring
that they’re thinking about things like technology shifts, industry disruptions, and the risks of
mergers and acquisitions. The more fun part of their job is when they focus on value creation.
IBM’s risk team’s mission is that risk management must be engrained in the fabric of the business,
not a separate check-the-box process.
Perhaps one of the greatest shocks from the financial crisis has been the widespread failure of risk
management. In many cases risk was not managed on an enterprise basis and not adjusted to
corporate strategy. Risk managers were often separated from management and not regarded as
an essential part of implementing the company’s strategy. Most important of all, boards were in a
number of cases ignorant of the risk facing the company.
1. It should be fully understood by regulators and other standard setters that effective risk
management is not about eliminating risk taking, which is a fundamental driving force in
business and entrepreneurship. The aim is to ensure that risks are understood, managed
and, when appropriate, communicated.
2. Effective implementation of risk management requires an enterprise-wide approach rather
than treating each business unit individually. It should be considered good practice to involve
the board in both establishing and overseeing the risk management structure.
3. The board should also review and provide guidance about the alignment of corporate strategy
with risk-appetite and the internal risk management structure.
4. To assist the board in its work, it should also be considered good practice that risk
management and control functions be independent of profit centers and the “chief risk officer”
or equivalent should report directly to the board of directors along the lines already advocated
in the OECD Principles for internal control functions reporting to the audit committee or
equivalent.
5. The process of risk management and the results of risk assessments should be appropriately
disclosed. Without revealing any trade secrets, the board should make sure that the firm
communicates to the market material risk factors in a transparent and clear fashion.
Disclosure of risk factors should be focused on those identified as more relevant and/or
should rank material risk factors in order of importance on the basis of a qualitative selection
whose criteria should also be disclosed.
6. With few exceptions, risk management is typically not covered, or is insufficiently covered, by
existing corporate governance standards or codes. Corporate governance standard setters
should be encouraged to include or improve references to risk management in order to raise
awareness and improve implementation.
RISK MANAGEMENT
LEARNING OUTCOMES
After going through the chapter student shall be able to understand
Concept of Risk Management
Objective and Process of Risk Management
Importance of Risk Management
Risk Management Techniques
alternatives. Regulators started recognising the relevance and significance of the subject of risk
management and started prescribing advisories from 1980s; however, the awakening and intensity
of detailed regulatory interventions came about greatly post the global financial crisis in the year
2007.
Each strategy and business action is accompanied with its expected risk and reward. Good risk
management therefore does not imply avoiding all actions and associated, rather it implies making
informed and coherent choices. The risks that the organization wants to take in pursuit of its
objectives and in particular choices it makes to manage and mitigate those risks.
Let us study few important views on the subject of Risk and Risk Management:-
Source Views
Warren Buffet Risk comes from not knowing what you are doing
Theodore Roosevelt. Risk management is about people and processes and not about models
and technology
The Risk Management Risk management is a central part of any organisation’s strategic
Standard, The Institute management. It is the process whereby organizations methodically
of Risk Management address the risks attaching to their activities with the goal of achieving
sustained benefit within each activity and across the portfolio of all
activities.
Risk management should be a continuous and developing process which
runs throughout the organisation’s strategy and the implementation of
that strategy. It should address methodically all the risks surrounding the
organisation’s activities past, present and in particular, future. It must be
integrated into the culture of the organization with an effective policy and
a programme led by the most senior management. It must translate the
strategy into tactical and operational objectives, assigning responsibility
throughout the organization with each manager and employee
responsible for the management of risk as part of their job description. It
supports accountability, performance measurement and reward, thus
promoting operational efficiency at all levels.
Thomas S. Coleman, Risk management is the art of using lessons from the past to mitigate
Practical Guide Risk misfortune and exploit future opportunities—in other words, the art of
Management, CFA avoiding the stupid mistakes of yesterday while recognizing that nature
Institute can always create new ways for things to go wrong.
We cannot lose sight of the most important aspect of risk management—
managing risk. That means making the tactical and strategic decisions to
control those risks that should be controlled and to exploit those
opportunities that should be exploited. Managing risk cannot be divorced
from managing profits; modern portfolio theory tells us that investment
decisions are the result of trading off return for risk, and managing risk is
simply part of managing returns and profits. Managing risk must be a
core competence for any financial firm. The ability to effectively manage
stop limit within which the Board would like to restrict its business actions. For example an entity
with a networth of ` 500 Crores may have a capacity of risk taking upto ` 500 Crores while the
Board may still articulate a philosophy that the risk appetite of the entity would be limited to ` 100
Crores only or upto 20% of the networth of the entity. On account of such policy statement on the
risk appetite, the Business managers would not be allowed to take decisions that have the
potential to go beyond the risk appetite limits of the entity. Therefore, Business managers would
have to drop choices that have the potential to impair the financial stability of the company beyond
the boundary set up by the Board.
In determining the risk appetite of the company, the Board should engage with the executive/
management team and provide clear directions on the contours and definition of the risk capacity,
appetite and tolerance levels. For example, when does a company become uncomfortable if the
percentage of its revenues generated by just top four or five clients rises continually or even
becomes dominant? Another example ‘X’ company which experiences 10% growth (and still
growing) in product returns from customers. At what point does this become too big a risk to
overall customer satisfaction, company costs or general reputation? In both of these cases, one
company may have a completely different tolerance of risk to another but this needs to be explicitly
understood and capable of change when circumstances require it to do so.
1.3 Risks Appetite – Principles and Approach
The key question for all companies is how much risk do they need to take? And yet taking risks
without consciously managing those risks can lead to the downfall of organizations. This is the
challenge that has been highlighted by the UK Corporate Governance Code issued by the
Financial Reporting Council in 2010.
The following key principles have underpinned risk appetite:
1. Risk appetite can be complex. Excessive simplicity, while superficially attractive, leads to
dangerous waters: far better to acknowledge the complexity and deal with it, rather than
ignoring it.
2. Risk appetite needs to be measurable. Otherwise there is a risk that a statement may
become empty and vacuous.
3. Risk appetite is not a single, fixed concept. There will be a range of appetites or ranges for
different risks which need to be aligned and these appetites may vary over time. Like in
sourcing decisions, the Board may set vendor business share limits as they would be make
the entity dependent on few vendor companies that could eventually impact business
continuity or range of quality defects.
4. Risk appetite should be developed in the context of an organization’s risk management
capability, which is a function of risk capacity and risk management maturity. Risk
management remains an emerging discipline and some organizations, irrespective of size or
complexity, do it much better than others. This is in part due to their risk management culture
(a subset of the overall culture), partly due to their systems and processes, and partly due to
the nature of their business. However, until an organization has a clear view of both its risk
capacity and its risk management maturity, it cannot be clear as to what approach would work
or how it should be implemented.
5. Risk appetite must be integrated with the control culture of the organization. The Risk
Management framework explores this by looking at both the propensity to take risk and the
propensity to exercise control. The framework promotes the idea that the strategic level is
proportionately more about risk taking than exercising control, while at the operational level
the proportions are broadly reversed. Clearly the relative proportions will depend on the
organization itself, the nature of the risks it faces and the regulatory environment within which
it operates.
If one designs a framework around that uncertainty, then you effectively de-risk the business. And
that means one can move much more confidently to achieve your goals. By identifying and
managing a comprehensive list of business risks, unpleasant surprises and barriers can be
reduced and golden opportunities discovered. The risk management process also helps to resolve
problems when they occur, because those problems have been envisaged, and plans to treat them
have already been developed and agreed. One can avoid impulsive reactions and going into “fire-
fighting” mode to rectify problems that could have been anticipated. This makes for happier, less
stressed business teams and stakeholders. The end result is that we minimize the impacts of
threats and capture the opportunities that occur.
Risk Management Checklist (ISO 31000)
Risk architecture
● Statement produced that sets out risk responsibilities and lists the risk-based matters
reserved for the Board
● Risk management responsibilities allocated to an appropriate management committee
● Arrangements are in place to ensure the availability of appropriate competent advice on
risks and controls
● Risk aware culture exists within the organization and actions are in hand to enhance the
level of risk maturity
● Sources of risk assurance for the Board have been identified and validated
Risk strategy
● Risk management policy produced that describes risk appetite, risk culture and philosophy
● Key dependencies for success identified, together with the matters that should be avoided
● Business objectives validated and the assumptions underpinning those objectives tested
● Significant risks faced by the organization identified, together with the critical controls
required
● Risk management action plan established that includes the use of key risk indicators, as
appropriate
● Necessary resources identified and provided to support the risk management activities
Risk protocols
● Appropriate risk management framework identified and adopted, with modifications as
appropriate
● Suitable and sufficient risk assessments completed and the results recorded in an
appropriate manner
● Procedures to include risk as part of business decision-making established and
implemented
● Details of required risk responses recorded, together with arrangements to track risk
improvement recommendations
● Incident reporting procedures established to facilitate identification of risk trends, together
with risk escalation procedures
● Business continuity plans and disaster recovery plans established and regularly tested
● Arrangements in place to audit the efficiency and effectiveness of the controls in place for
significant risks
● Arrangements in place for mandatory reporting on risk, including reports on at least the
following:
• Risk appetite, tolerance and constraints
• Risk architecture and risk escalation procedures
• Risk aware culture currently in place
• Risk assessment arrangements and protocols
• Significant risks and key risk indicators
• Critical controls and control weaknesses
• Sources of assurance available to the Board
Some of the Risk Enabled and Managed organisations used the following techniques.
Technique Description
Risk Questionnaires Designed to identify the relevant risks and create risk history
Flow Charts with Risk Flags Designed to identify operational risks embedded in the
processes
Identify Controls to manage Recognize controls and test their adequacy and operative
risks effectiveness
Risk Event Maps Identify potential events that can have a significant impact on
business to avoid negative surprises
Risk Scorecards A Monitoring tool to track progress of risk management
Capital Budgeting A financial analysis tool to evaluate the future cash flow benefits
arising from risk management actions against the costs of risk
consequences
Value at Risk A financial analysis tool to evaluate the impact of the worst case
scenario of a risk event
Risk Heat Maps A Monitoring tool to track progress of risk management using
qualitative assessment of probability and impact of risk
Case Study 3
Staff at Barclays repeatedly filed misleading figures for interbank borrowings. First, between 2005
and 2008 – and sometimes working with traders at other banks - they tried to influence the Libor
rate, in order to boost their profits. Then between 2007 and 2009, at the peak of the global banking
crisis, Barclays filed artificially low figures. This tactic sought to hide the level to which Barclays
was under financial stress at a point where their peers were being forced to accept state funding.
When the scandal came to light it led to the resignation of the bank’s chief executive Bob
Diamond, along with Barclays chairman Marcus Agius. Barclays was fined €290m by UK and US
regulators for rigging Libor and investigations are continuing. Barclays have set up an independent
review to assess the bank’s current values, principles and standard of operation and determine to
what extent those need to change. It will also test how well current decision-making processes
incorporate the bank’s values, standard and principles and outline any changes required.
(BCC Website, 2012) (Barclays Press Release, 2012)
Case Study 4
Improving Cross Organizational Processes through Risk Management Working Group – A Carrier
Team One Case Study
An aircraft carrier is a floating city with power plants, satellite telecommunications, convenience
stores, and medical, dental, and hotel facilities. Maintaining and modernizing these ships can
involve up to fifty different organizations simultaneously conducting all sorts of work, from painting
to structural repair to electronic, electrical, and mechanical system upgrades. As an added project
management challenge, the ship’s crew typically lives on board during a major overhaul, which
means that work cannot be conducted day and night, and services such as telecommunications,
heating, ventilation, air conditioning, electricity, sanitation, and fresh water supply must remain
intact as much as possible. With up to 500,000 man-days of work scheduled during an eleven-
month dry docking period, you can imagine the tremendous amount of activity that must be carried
out in a confined space and on a tight schedule.
The Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) established Carrier Team One (CT1) in 1997 to
define, champion, and improve cross-organizational processes for planning and executing these
complex aircraft carrier overhauls, known as “availabilities.” CT1 provides the structure for
managing and systematically improving cost, schedule, and quality performance by focusing on
key planning and execution processes. They also integrate the efforts of numerous contributing
organizations into an effective total-maintenance process.
CT1 took notice when two aircraft carrier availabilities were completed a number of weeks late in
2006. The team identified many factors that contributed to the delays, including large work
packages with a number of high-risk items, critical path work with minimal margin, significant new
and expanded work, and project team inexperience and turnover. All these issues affected both
projects, yet project managers lacked an effective means of identifying, assessing, mitigating, and
communicating the risks they posed to their project’s timely completion. As a result, the carrier
maintenance community was unaware that help was needed until it was too late to take steps to
avoid or limit delays. In response to the problems encountered on those projects, CT1’s Executive
Steering Committee formed a Risk Management Working Group (RMWG) and tasked them to (1)
develop a standard process for comprehensive availability of risk management that could be
applied consistently across all aircraft carrier shipyards and (2) support and monitor a risk
management pilot project to be implemented on nine carrier availabilities at five different locations.
CT1 used the existing Northrop Grumman Shipbuilding Newport News Operations (NGSB-NN)
Risk Management Program (already in compliance with Department of Defence guidance) to
develop a formal process for all aircraft carrier availabilities.
NGSB-NN based their 1998 risk program on a NASA-proven practice. NASA’s Goddard Space
Flight Center conducted a number of risk management training sessions at NGSB-NN and
provided copies of their risk management procedures. Building on this knowledge transfer from
NASA, NGSB-NN developed a risk management process designed specifically for ship
construction and repair. This process included the development of a risk management strategy;
developing and conducting risk management training; identifying program risks; analysing potential
technical, quality, cost, schedule, and human-capital impacts; determining likelihood of problem
occurrence; developing plans to mitigate risks; developing and maintaining a risk tool for capturing
and updating project and shipyard risks; capturing risk management lessons learned; and
continually improving the process to reflect customer feedback. To indicate the probability and
impact of risks, the process uses the red/yellow/green risk cube described in the Defence
Acquisition University Risk Management Guide for Department of Defence Acquisition. It adds
environmental and safety risks to cost, schedule, and technical /quality risks. Proving its value
over time, NGSB-NN’s risk management program is now used company wide.
The CT1 risk management pilot project focused on the cultural journey required to convince naval
shipyard aircraft carrier project teams of the value of a formal risk management process and to
actively engage in it. That journey included the following essential elements.
Catalyst: As in any cultural journey, a catalyst for change is essential. In this case, the catalyst
was the late completion of the two 2006 aircraft carrier overhauls in an environment that lacked a
formal risk management process.
Infrastructure: The Executive Steering Committee formed the RMWG to establish a formal risk
management program and associated training tools.
Initial Buy-In: Once the infrastructure was in place, the RMWG leader met with key stakeholders
to share risk management background and procedures and develop their implementation plan and
customer expectations.
Launch: As Executive Steering Committee chairman, Captain Daniel Seigenthaler, United State
Navy (assistant chief of staff for carrier maintenance at Commander, Naval Air Forces Pacific
Fleet), signed a letter directing the implementation of a risk management pilot program for nine
aircraft carrier availabilities over a one-year period. This was followed by the RMWG leader
meeting with project leaders at the headquarters of all three aircraft carrier shipyards to discuss
ideas for implementation.
During the pilot project, the RMWG leader provided peer assistance and training for each project’s
assigned risk manager to support skills development and team acceptance.
Integration into the Organization’s Culture: From the outset, each project team’s leadership
needed to perceive the value of risk management to encourage their engagement. The initial
direction and expectations set by CT1 provided the “push;” the challenge was to create a “pull”
from the project teams. This was done by integrating risk management into command briefings,
progress briefings, meeting agendas, team training, awards and recognition, newsletter articles,
project strategies, retrospects, and the “hot wash” meeting at project completion. (“Hot wash” is a
military term for a meeting used to capture learning and develop related recommendations at the
end of a major activity or engagement.) CT1 thinks of a hot wash as a carrier-overhaul project
team’s “gift” to future project teams. Establishing a cross-project risk manager community of
practice for knowledge sharing and comparison was the key to the pilot’s accelerated adoption.
This community provides a peer-assist environment for the risk managers to communicate and
collaborate. It is also a forum for risk managers to discuss their challenges and share experiences
and learning.
Retrospect and Process Maturity: The one-year pilot involved eight different overhaul projects
that were either planned and less than a year from starting or in the process of executing four- to
six-month-long repair projects. The pilot work proved to be process easy, but the implementation
was hard. Early in the project, team leaders wanted to see value before engaging, but the best
way to see risk management’s value for their project team was to engage in it. At the conclusion of
the risk management pilot, project leadership interviews captured what went well and what could
be improved. A risk management process retrospect was held to capture lessons learned and
recommendations from the one carrier project whose risk implementation extended from the start
of planning to availability completion. Resistance occurred on all projects, but the quickest
adoption came from the one that was furthest from their start date (ten months of planning
remaining). As one would expect, the team that was a month into their six-month overhaul and
focused on executing the work that was already under way saw the least value in the risk program.
Data gathered during the pilot showed that project teams who embraced the formal risk
management process quickly achieved risk-exposure reductions similar to those NGSB-NN teams
that had been using it for years. These metrics helped convince other project teams of the value of
the process and encouraged their engagement. Captured risks were shared via CT1’s portal. The
commonality of risks gave valuable insights to shipyard and program leadership personnel. Some
examples of frequent risk categories were material availability, work package size and changes,
constraints from shipyards or naval bases, planning performance, key event management,
unidentified work and weather impacts, scheduling conflicts, worker availability, funding, ship’s
crew readiness, and project team turnover.
Following the pilot project, feedback from leadership showed that they were all fully engaged and
appreciative of this tool’s ability to help communicate and mitigate their biggest concerns. Matt
Durkin, Norfolk Naval Shipyard’s project superintendent for United State Ship Harry S. Truman’s
(CVN 75) 2009 overhaul, commented, “Risk management provided me with more visibility of our
project’s key issues. I’m not sure we would have completed our last availability on time without the
Risk Management process.” And Tim Ferguson, Puget Sound Naval Shipyard and Intermediate
Maintenance Facility’s project superintendent for USS Abraham Lincoln’s (CVN 72) 2009 overhaul,
said, “Our project team leveraged the risk management program to support open and honest
discussion of issues that could have impacted delivering the ship on time.” Pilot participant
suggestions for taking the risk management program to the next level included:
• Adapting the process to address potential problems that were beyond the program manager’s
scope of influence.
• Using the risk management process to identify and communicate potential shipyard and
ship’s crew work distribution conflicts.
• Integrating risk management into a work package’s development process during planning.
Captain Kevin Terry, USN, CT1’s chairman, summed up the work so far: “The Risk Management
Working Group has been a true success story. The pilot project was a home run. Aircraft carrier
public and private shipyards are using the same language and risk cube to mitigate and
communicate their issues.” The U.S. Navy’s Ship Maintenance Enterprise is currently building on
the success of CT1’s risk management pilot project. A NAVSEA instruction is being issued to
formalize the process for all the U.S. Navy’s ship and submarine overhauls. Over the next few
years, NAVSEA will expand from individual project teams to the entire shipyard enterprise. As
Cleve Butts, NAVSEA’s director for Carrier Support, notes, “It is absolutely essential that we
complete our maintenance periods on time and within cost, not only for aircraft carriers but for all
our ships. Risk management is a great communication and management tool for ensuring that the
right actions are being applied effectively and early. The RM [risk management] process has now
been successfully implemented at all aircraft carrier shipyards.
EVALUATION OF RISK
MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES
LEARNING OUTCOMES
After going through the chapter student shall be able to understand
Risk Management Strategy alignment with Business Strategy
Internal Control environment and linkages with Risk Management
Risk Culture and attitudes to Risk Management
Integrated Risk Reporting and Stakeholder responsibilities
IT Risk Management – Disaster Recovery
organisation. The term “strategic context” is relevant as it indicates alignment with business
strategy. Further, as ERM deals with risk mitigation it is natural that any event that prevents an
organisation from meeting its objectives would be managed effectively through an Internal Control
(IC) measure designed for this purpose; thereby improving the performance of the organisation.
ERM is closely linked to business strategy and performance of the organisation. ERM and IC are
also inter-connected subjects that compliment each other.
Empires or Businesses that survived over 100 years practiced risk management effectively by
anticipating events that could threaten their very existence. Over the years the art of anticipation
has been mastered through use of smart risk management strategies that are aligned to business
objectives. These smart risk management strategies have revolved around –
• Collecting signals for potential events,
• Acquiring data to learn more about such potential events,
• Detecting patterns of change in the environment and acquired data,
• Imagining event outcomes, using intuition and taking precautionary actions such as designing
internal controls.
Whether it is the golden era of India or the current digital era; substance or core of risk
management strategies remain the same. The primary design of any risk management strategy is
focused on de-risking the organisation from sudden surprise, emerging crisis, ability to adapt to
changing consumer needs, altered circumstances, rare large shock events such as natural
disasters, terrorism, collapse risk of business model and insulating from a contagion risk.
Contemporary Risk management strategies that are linked to business strategy and performance
outline the ERM vision on “how risks can be effectively managed” in addition to “what risks need to be
managed”. Further, risk management strategies focus on how to identify “Key Risk Indicators” by
describing “what measures need to be tracked or monitored” for monitoring emergence of a risk factor.
For example: -
Risk Factor - Threat of a disaster at an off-shore service centre
Key Risk Indicator - Tracking the threat levels from emergency response teams/ weather bureaus
For example
Strategic Objective Strategic Measure Risk Factor Control Measure
Flawless Operations Reliability (number of Machine Use of specified material
Provide flawless faults/ unit time) break down (quality and quantity)
implementation and Serviceability (mean Preventive inspection
operations at time to repair) (daily) and maintenance
competitive cost (scheduled)
Boards and entrepreneurs should understand the Risk Profile of the “Strategic Choice” that they
are making and also the “Strategy Execution Risks” involved.
For example: -
Strategic Objective Strategic Risk Factor Control Measure
Measure
Product development Product Delay in Planned product filings that are
Reduce product development legal comprehensive, pre-audited for
introduction cycle cycle time clearances accuracy and complete.
time Product acceptance testing by
retired or ex-regulators to
incorporate improvements at test
stage.
Boards foster an environment of performance, outcome orientation and quick risk responses to
manage emerging risk events. In emerging risk situations responses are “action oriented” rather
than focused on analyzing the “reason” of occurrence. Reasons and root causes are either pre or
post analyzed for preventive actions.
In order to align risk with strategy a goal alignment must exist from top to bottom. This is possible
by creating education and awareness of the significance of ERM in achieving strategic objectives,
open communication about strategic business objectives and events that could prevent
achievement of strategic business objectives, employee empowerment towards positive
contributions/ suggestions on introducing control measures that could prevent risk event
occurrences and finally linking employee compensation to risk management outcomes.
To align risk to business strategies – Corporate Boards invest time and resources in ERM
implementation exercises. Such exercises are a combination of top down and bottom up approach
where the Boards are setting the strategic context and executive management are identifying,
assessing and reporting risks. Regulators such as SEBI, RBI, IRDA in India are issuing enhanced
prescriptions to companies to develop robust ERM models and prepare their organisations to
address emerging challenges and opportunities. Indian companies that have evolved risk
monitoring practices are using Dashboards, Business Intelligence tools and enterprise wide
pictorial maps to monitor risk indicators on a real-time basis and take corrective action to prevent
crisis and resultant losses. The financial services industry in India is heading towards a risk-based
supervision regime involving real-time risk monitoring through automatic data transfer to the
regulator with respect to key risk indicator position for the purpose of centralised risk monitoring.
1.2 Case Example – Risk Management at core of Business Strategy –
Unilever Code of Business Principles
Risk management is integral to Unilever’s strategy and to the achievement of Unilever’s long-term
goals. Our success as an organisation depends on our ability to identify and exploit the
opportunities generated by our business and the markets Unilever operates in.
Unilever takes an embedded approach to risk management which puts risk and opportunity
assessment at the core of the leadership team agenda. Unilever defines risks as actions or events
that have the potential to impact our ability to achieve our objectives. Unilever identifies and
mitigates downside risks such as loss of money, reputation or talent as well as upside risks such
as failure to deliver strategy if it does not strengthen brand equities or growth in growing channels.
Unilever’s Risk Management approach is embedded in the normal course of business. Its
structural elements include: -
• Governance of Unilever, organizational structure and delegation of authority
• Vision, Strategy and Objectives
• Risk and Control Frameworks
• Performance management and operational processes execution
• Compliance and assurance activities.
1.3 Integrating Risk in the Strategic Planning Process
Strategic risks impact an organization’s ability to deliver its goal - that is generally articulated in the
strategic plan or intent document of the organisation. At the annual or early stage of strategic
planning organization can identify and respond to strategic risks. Given the velocity with which
threats and risk events strike organizations find it useful to integrate significant risk factors in the
strategic planning process.
For example: -
• An organisation with an on-line selling business model may identify a cyber-attack threat at
the stage of business plan preparation and respond by investing in a suitable internal control
such as a best in class Firewall device.
• Strategic risks affect the organizations’ s strategic plan can arise from internal operations or
external factors. More often from external forces that shape its business environment such as
- political, demographic, economic—and the dynamics of the industries where the
organisation plays a role.
• New legislation that curtails the selling price of a medical device. This would significantly
curtail the margins of the company.
• Company’s strategic objective may require launch of a new sophisticated product, however, a
specific set of skills required for installing the product may not be available with the company
• A new strategic initiative to implement cloud computing solutions may make the company
more vulnerable to information security breaches
The strategy of an organisation should make it clear as to how it intends to mitigate or manage
risks and maximize opportunities. It should develop objectives and the strategies to fulfil them.
Further, these can be implemented through resource allocation plans.
1.4 Integrating Risk with Performance
Organisations can evaluate the level of risk they are exposed to while they pursue their growth
goals. Knowledge of the level of risks that the organisation can take or accept at each stage of
progression or growth enables the organisation to make informed decisions while pursuing their
growth/ performance goals. Management’s confidence enhances with risk awareness,
understanding the risk profile of a strategic choice, risks associated with a desired performance.
Existence of Internal controls and internal control assurance programs such as internal control
evaluations or internal audits provide confidence to the management that they are ready to accept
greater risks in pursuing their growth/ performance goals.
Certain business performance indicators may also disclose the associated risk profile –
Examples: -
• % of Customer attrition (loss of customer is a risk event for the company)
• % of Employee turnover (loss of employee is a risk event for the company)
• Profitability of customer by regional segments (unprofitable customers in certain regions may
be a risk for the company)
• % of mission critical business processes with tested contingency plans (lack of contingency
testing for mission critical processes represents a risk for the company)
the organisation. Such surveys to ascertain the ICE effectiveness are referred to as “Ethical Climate
Surveys” or “Culture Monitoring Surveys”. ICE can be evaluated through company-wide or entity
level controls as well. These are high level controls that set the direction for other operating controls,
example policy for financial closure or budgeting. We can observe a clear linkage between the
concepts of ERM, IC and ICE as they have similar objectives of: -
• Ensuring reliable financial reporting
• Efficient use of resources
• Compliance with the laws
• Improving performance
ERM is business strategy aligned whereas IC is operational and transactional driven. ERM is
generally driven by the highest level whereas IC is implemented by the operating management.
ERM exercise requires the risk teams to study the business environment, eco-system of the
company in terms of vendors, customers, employees, etc to identify relevant business risks and
develop risk response action plans.
ICE and IC exercises requires the executive management to develop entity and process specific
control strategies say for example internal control checklists, authorisation matrix, compliance
procedures, standard operating procedures, etc.
Risk Management is a larger concept and internal control is a sub-set of Risk Management. Both
subjects fall under the mega-concept of Governance. The pictorial depiction of the three concepts
is as under: -
Generally, organizations face a wide range of uncertain internal and external uncertainties that may
affect achievement of their objectives which can be strategic, operational, financial or otherwise and
effect of these uncertainties on their objectives can be a Positive or a Negative Risks. While Positive
Risks are opportunities the Negative Risks are threats to the achievement of objectives.
Both Risk Management and IC works together as on one hand the Risk Management mainly
focuses on identification of threats and opportunities, on the other hand IC assist in countering
threats and taking advantage of opportunities.
Proper Risk Management and IC hand in hand assist organizations in to effectively pursue their
objectives by making informed decisions about the level of risk that they want to take and
Risk culture takes a long time to evolve, it requires continuous efforts of communication, building
of corporate memory so that people can learn from previous mistakes, shaping the right risk
actions, etc.
Basel’s Principles for the Sound Management of Operational Risk defines Risk culture as “the
combined set of individual and corporate values, attitudes, competencies and behaviour that
determine a firm’s commitment to and style of Operational Risk Management.”
Organisations are integrating Risk management into strategic planning, performance
measurement, budgeting, projects and operational activities to create Risk Culture and reap
benefits of sustainable business practices.
Various definitions of risk culture are available. The 2009 International Institute of Finance report
“Reform in the financial services industry: Strengthening Practices for a More Stable System”
defines Risk culture as the norms of behaviour for individuals and groups within an organisation
that determine the collective ability to identify and understand, openly discuss and act on the
organisations current and future risk.
Guidance on Supervisory Interaction with Financial Institutions on Risk Culture - A Framework for
Assessing Risk Culture (April 2014) states that: -
A sound risk culture should emphasise throughout the institution the importance of ensuring that:
(i) an appropriate risk-reward balance consistent with the institution’s risk appetite is achieved
when taking on risks;
(ii) an effective system of controls commensurate with the scale and complexity of the financial
institution is properly put in place;
(iii) the quality of risk models, data accuracy, capability of available tools to accurately measure
risks, and justifications for risk taking can be challenged, and
(iv) all limit breaches, deviations from established policies, and operational incidents are
thoroughly followed up with proportionate disciplinary actions when necessary.
3.2 Case Example – Risk Culture Development – Risk Focus Integrity
One of the leading Corporates operating in the Energy Sector has disclosed its policy on
“Supporting our Culture of Integrity”. Let us study the policy disclosure for prevention of improper
payments: -
3.2.1 Supporting our Culture of Integrity
CNOOC International’s culture and processes support our commitment to integrity. Our Prevention
of Improper Payments Standard requires that all employees comply with applicable laws
everywhere we operate. This Standard is periodically reviewed for best practices, vetted by
external counsel and reviewed by our Compliance Committee.
The Compliance Committee is comprised of members of our executive management team and
provides oversight on potential high-risk payments. Approvals required under the Prevention of
Improper Payments Standard are dealt with by this Committee, which also receives a report on
high risk payments. As an additional control, our internal audit department assesses corruption risk
on a periodic basis and conducts investigations if necessary.
Risk-based Prevention of Improper Payments training has been developed that provides
employees in high risk positions with guidance on avoiding improper payments.
3.2.2 Integrity Leaders
A network of Integrity Leaders has been established to promote the organization’s culture of
integrity, facilitate integrity education and awareness, as well as act as a divisional resource for
employees and internal stakeholders faced with an ethical dilemma or seeking guidance. Integrity
Leaders regularly liaise between the Integrity and Compliance group in Calgary, Canada and
employees working in our global locations.
4.2 Governance
Question: “How does the organisation’s governance structure support its ability to create value in
the short, medium and long term?”
An integrated report provides insight about how such matters as the following are linked to its
ability to create value:
• The organization’s leadership structure, including the skills and diversity (e.g., range of
backgrounds, gender, competence and experience) of those charged with governance and
whether regulatory requirements influence the design of the governance structure.
• Specific processes used to make strategic decisions and to establish and monitor the
culture of the organization, including its attitude to risk and mechanisms for addressing
integrity and ethical issues
• Particular actions those charged with governance have taken to influence and monitor the
strategic direction of the organization and its approach to risk management
• How the organization’s culture, ethics and values are reflected in its use of and effects on
the capitals, including its relationships with key stakeholders
• Whether the organization is implementing governance practices that exceed legal
requirements
• The responsibility those charged with governance take for promoting and enabling
innovation
• How remuneration and incentives are linked to value creation in the short, medium and
long term, including how they are linked to the organization’s use of and effects on the
capitals.
4.3 Business Model
Question: “What is the organisation’s business model?”
Basically Business Model is a system of transforming inputs into output or outcomes using
business activities that fulfil organization’s strategic purposes and creating value.
(I) Inputs: An integrated report shows how key inputs relate to the capitals on which the
organization depends, or that provide a source of differentiation for the organization, to the
extent they are material to understanding the robustness and resilience of the business
model.
(II) Business Activities: An integrated report describes key business activities. This can include:
♦ How the organization differentiates itself in the market place? – For example through
product differentiation, market segmentation, delivery channels and marketing
♦ The extent to which the business model relies on revenue generation after the initial
point of sale – For example extended warranty arrangements or network usage charges
♦ How the organization approaches the need to innovate? – For example, growing
demand less pollutant vehicles.
♦ How the business model has been designed to adapt to change – For example,
producing electric vehicles.
(III) Outputs: An integrated report identifies an organization’s key products and services. There
might be other outputs, such as by-products and waste (including emissions), that need to be
discussed within the business model disclosure depending on their materiality.
(IV) Outcomes: An integrated report describes key outcomes, including:
♦ Both internal outcomes (e.g., employee morale, organizational reputation, revenue and
cash flows) and external outcomes (e.g., customer satisfaction, tax payments, brand
loyalty, and social and environmental effects)
♦ Both positive outcomes (i.e., those that result in a net increase in the capitals and
thereby create value) and negative outcomes (i.e., those that result in a net decrease in
the capitals and thereby diminish value).
4.4 Risks and Opportunities
Question to be answered through this element in the integrated reporting is “What are the specific
risks and opportunities that affect the organisation’s ability to create value over the short, medium
and long-term, and how is the organisation dealing with them?”
An integrated report identifies the key risks and opportunities that are specific to the organization,
including those that relate to the organization’s effects on, and the continued availability, quality
and affordability of, relevant capitals in the short, medium and long term.
This can include identifying:
• The specific source of risks and opportunities, which can be internal, external or, commonly,
a mix of the two. External sources include those stemming from the external environment.
Internal sources include those stemming from the organization’s business activities.
• The organization’s assessment of the likelihood that the risk or opportunity will come to
fruition and the magnitude of its effect if it does. This includes consideration of the specific
circumstances that would cause the risk or opportunity to come to fruition. Such disclosure
will invariably involve a degree of uncertainty such as:
♦ an explanation of the uncertainty
♦ the range of possible outcomes, associated assumptions, and how the
♦ information could change if the assumptions do not occur as described
♦ the volatility, certainty range or confidence interval associated with the information
provided
• The specific steps being taken to mitigate or manage key risks or to create value from key
opportunities, including the identification of the associated strategic objectives, strategies,
policies, targets and KPIs.
4.5 Strategy and Resource Allocation
Question: “Where does the organisation want to go and how does it intend to get there?”
An integrated report ordinarily identifies:
• The organization’s short, medium and long term strategic objectives
• The strategies it has in place, or intends to implement, to achieve those strategic objectives
• The resource allocation plans it has to implement its strategy
• How it will measure achievements and target outcomes for the short, medium and long term.
This can include describing:
• The linkage between the organization’s strategy and resource allocation plans, and the
information covered by other Content Elements, including how its strategy and resource
allocation plans.
• What differentiates the organization to give it competitive advantage and enable it to create
value.
• Key features and findings of stakeholder engagement that were used in formulating its
strategy and resource allocation plans.
4.6 Performance
Question: “To what extent has the organisation achieved its strategic objectives for the period and
what are its outcomes in terms of effects on the capitals?”
An integrated report contains qualitative and quantitative information about performance that may
include matters such as:
• Quantitative indicators with respect to targets and risks and opportunities, explaining their
significance, their implications, and the methods and assumptions used in compiling them
• The organization’s effects (both positive and negative) on the capitals, including material
effects on capitals up and down the value chain
• The state of key stakeholder relationships and how the organization has responded to key
stakeholders’ legitimate needs and interests
• The linkages between past and current performance, and between current performance
and the organization’s outlook
4.7 Outlook
Question: “What challenges and uncertainties is the organisation likely to encounter in pursuing
its strategy, and what are the potential implications for its business model and future
performance?”
An integrated report ordinarily highlights anticipated changes over time and provides information,
built on sound and transparent analysis, about:
• The organization’s expectations about the external environment the organization is likely to
face in the short, medium and long term
• How that will affect the organization
• How the organization is currently equipped to respond to the critical challenges and
uncertainties that are likely to arise.
4.8 Basis of Preparation and Presentation
Question: “How does the organization determine what matters to include in the integrated report
and how are such matters quantified or evaluated?”
An integrated report describes its basis of preparation and presentation, including:
• A summary of the organization’s Materiality determination process
• A description of Reporting boundary and how it has been determined
• A summary of Significant frameworks and methods used to quantify or evaluate material
matters
[Source: International <IR> Framework, The International Integrated Reporting Council
(IIRC)]
mandating or encouraging companies to report on risk. The US, for example, has required
companies listed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to describe the risks faced
by the business (in some form or another) since the 1970s. The EU Accounts Modernisation
Directive of 2003 said that companies should describe the risks they face, in both annual and
interim reports.
Two countries have gone further than the Europe-wide requirements – Germany has its own Risk
Reporting Standard (GAS 5), while the UK’s Corporate Governance Code states that companies
should report at least annually on the effectiveness of their risk-management procedures. The
UK’s Corporate Governance Code still goes further where a more integrated approach to risk
reporting, linking risk management to internal controls and going concern.
The Management Discussions & Analysis (MD & A) section that is popular in Annual Report
disclosures was prescribed by the US Securities & Exchange Commission in the 1980s to meet the
growing demand of enhanced risk disclosures. The MD & A section requires has specific
disclosures on the trends, economic uncertainties that the business is exposed to and the likely
positive or negative impact of such trends and economic uncertainties on the revenues of the
company. In the US, large unexpected losses on derivatives incurred by several firms in the early
to mid-1990s reinforced demands that had already begun to emerge for better information on
firms’ derivative positions and market risks. This led to risk disclosure requirements in Disclosures
about Derivative Financial Instruments and Fair Value of Financial Instruments and Accounting for
Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities, and Disclosure of Accounting Policies for Derivative
Financial Instruments etc. These include Germany’s requirement for companies to disclose all
material risks, subsequently supplemented by an accounting standard on risk reporting, and the
EU’s requirement that a company’s annual report to include description of principal risks and
uncertainties that it is exposed to.
Global developments about risk reporting encompass following contemporary aspects to provide a
holistic risk reporting disclosure to stakeholders and investors: -
• Reporting of principal or material risk factors and responsibility for mitigating such risk factors
• Clear categorisation of risks into company specific or general/ industry related
• Ordering or numbering the risks so that investor understand the risk priorities
• Movement of risks from previous reporting periods showing the context and cause for such
changes
• Risk linkages to financial statements, other important parts of the Annual Report
• Impact of risks on financial and non-financial matters
• Indictive risk appetite of the company as it may be difficult to quantify
• Short term Liquidity and Long-term Business Viability reporting
• Stress and Sensitivity analysis with specific scenarios linking back to principal risk factors
In India, as per the SEBI (Listing Obligations and Disclosure Requirements) Regulations 2015: -
(i) Under responsibility of Directors - Ensuring the integrity of the listed entity‘s accounting and
financial reporting systems, including the independent audit, and that appropriate systems of
control are in place, in particular, systems for risk management, financial and operational
control, and compliance with the law and relevant standards.
(ii) The Board of Directors shall ensure that, while rightly encouraging positive thinking, these do
not result in over-optimism that either leads to significant risks not being recognised or
exposes the listed entity to excessive risk.
(iii) The Board of Directors shall have ability to “step back” to assist executive management by
challenging the assumptions underlying: strategy, strategic initiatives (such as acquisitions),
risk appetite, exposures and the key areas of the listed entity’s focus.
(iv) The listed entity shall lay down procedures to inform members of board of directors about risk
assessment and minimization procedures.
(v) The Board of Directors shall be responsible for framing, implementing and monitoring the risk
management plan for the listed entity.
(vi) Risk Management Committee: - The board of directors shall constitute a Risk Management
Committee. Majority members of Risk Management Committee shall consist of members of
the board of directors. The Chairperson of the Risk management committee shall be a
member of the board of directors and senior executives of the listed entity may be members
of the committee.
The board of directors shall define the role and responsibility of the Risk Management
Committee and may delegate monitoring and reviewing of the risk management plan to the
committee and such other functions as it may deem fit. The provisions of this regulation shall
be applicable to top 100 listed entities, determined based on market capitalisation, as at the
end of the immediately preceding financial year.
(vii) Under minimum information to be placed before the Board on a quarterly basis- Quarterly
details of foreign exchange exposures and the steps taken by management to limit the risks
of adverse exchange rate movement, if material.
(viii) Under disclosures in Annual Reports applicable to all listed entities except banks -
Management Discussion and Analysis: This section shall include discussion on the following
matters within the limits set by the listed entity’s competitive position:
(a) Industry structure and developments
(b) Opportunities and Threats
(c) Segment–wise or product-wise performance
(d) Outlook, (e) Risks and concerns,
cannot think of running their business operations without IT. IT is prone to increased risks which
can lead to failure of IT thus impacting operations. Hence, it is becoming increasingly important for
organisations to have a business contingency plan for their Information Systems. The criticality of
the plan can be determined based on the level of impact on critical business operations due to
failure or non-availability of IT impacting service delivery. The failure of IT could be caused due to
any or more of the following: -
(i) Server or network failure
(ii) Disk system failure
(iii) Hacker break-in
(iv) Denial of Service attack
(v) Electrical or extended power failure
(vi) Snow storm, earthquake, tornado, tsunami or fire
(vii) Spyware, malevolent virus or worm
(viii) Employee error or revenge
(ix) Sabotage or theft
(x) Terrorist cyber attack
(xi) Communication link break down
(xii) Civil disturbance
Disaster is a physical event which interrupts business processes sufficiently to threaten the
viability of the organisation. The basic objective of a Disaster Recovery Plan (DRP) is to document
a set of procedures which can be used to protect a business IT infrastructure if any disaster takes
place. DRP includes tasks like plan for disaster recovery, crisis management, recovery operations
etc. Disaster Recovery Plan is the set of plans which are to be executed initially at the moment of
crisis. These plans include measures to control the disaster, mitigate them and to initiate the
recovery of the resources that is needed for the continuity of business. These plans are targeted to
initiate/recover the resources that have been affected by a disaster. These are the first plans that
would be executed at the time of disaster. There are three basic strategies that encompass a
disaster recovery plan:
• preventive measures,
• detective measures, and
• corrective measures.
As the name indicates, the job of preventive measures is to prevent a disaster from taking place.
The purpose of these measures is proper identification and reduction of risks. They are designed
to mitigate or prevent an event from turning into a disaster.
These measures may include keeping data backed up and off site, using surge protectors,
installing generators and conducting routine inspections. Further, these measures may be
bifurcate into Detective or Corrective measures. For example: -
• Installing Fire alarms – detective
• Employee DR related trainings – detective
• Insurance Policies – Corrective
• Restoring systems post disaster - Corrective
A disaster can be defined as an unplanned interruption of normal business process. It can be said
to be a disruption of business operations that stops an organisation from providing critical services
caused by the absence of critical resources. An occurrence of disaster cannot always be foreseen;
hence we need to be prepared for all the types of disasters that can arise, handle them effectively
in the shortest time.
Business Continuity Plan (BCP) includes tasks like establishing continuity strategies, planning for
continuity of critical operations, continuity management etc. BCP is a plan that contains the steps that
would be taken by an entity to resume its business functions during its period of disruption. These plans
are executed in parallel with the disaster recovery plans depending on the impact of the disaster. BCPs
on a whole is about re-establishing existing business processes and functions, communications with the
business contacts and resuming business processes at the primary business location.
6.2 Testing the Disaster Recovery Plan
The Disaster Recovery Co-ordinator is responsible for testing of the disaster recovery plan at least
annually to ensure the viability of the plan. Special Disaster Recovery testing is undertaken
whenever there are changes in the software and technology or business environments. Objectives
of testing the Disaster Recovery plan/ procedures are outlined under: -
(i) To simulate the conditions of an actual Business recovery situation
(ii) Determine the time consumed and feasibility of the recovery process
(iii) Identify deficiencies in the existing procedures for improvement and take note of the physical
/ practical constraints
(iv) Test the completeness of the business recovery information stored at the Offsite Storage Location.
(v) Train members of the Disaster Recovery teams the initial test of the plan will be in the form of
a structured walk-through and should occur within two months of the Disaster Recovery
plan’s acceptance. Subsequent tests should be to the extent determined by the Business
continuity co-ordinator that are cost effective and meet the benefits and objectives desired.
(vi) Test the state of resilience of the organisation and associated service providers
(vii) Provide assurance to the Board and regulators that Disaster Recovery plan is operational and
effective
RISK MODEL
LEARNING OUTCOMES
After going through the chapter student shall be able to understand
VAR
Stress Testing
Scenario Analysis
Country and Sovereign Risk Models and Management
The VaR is dependent on two parameters which is holding period which is the time interval in which
we measure our profit/loss and second is the confidence level which indicates the likelihood that we
will get an outcome no worse than our VaR which might be 90%, 95% , 99% or indeed any fraction
between 0 and 1.
The figure above shows a common probability density function over a chosen holding period.
Positive P/L means profits and negative observations means losses. For VaR calculation, we need
to specify the confidence levels. If the confidence interval is 95%, then the VaR will be given by the
negative of the point on the X-axis that cuts offs the top 95% of P/L observations from the bottom
5% of tail observations. So corresponding to that the x-axis value is -1.645 so the VaR is 1.645. The
negative P/L value corresponds to a positive VaR which indicates the worst outcome at this
confidence level is 1.645. So the worst outcome at this level of confidence is a loss of 1.645. If the
worst outcome at this confidence level is a particular profit rather than a loss then the likely loss
must be negative. If we take corresponding VaR at 99% level of confidence so it is determined by
the cut-off between the top 99% and bottom 1% of the observations, so we are dealing with 1% tail
rather than the earlier 5% tail. So the cut off point is -2.326 and the VaR is 2.326. The higher the
confidence level, smaller the tail which leads to higher VaR.
VaR not only rises with the confidence level, but also rises at the rate which is increasing. Also, VaR
depends on the choice of the holding period. It rises with the square root of the holding period. But
we should recognise that VaR might rise in a different way or even fall, as the holding period rises.
In the above chart, we have the following observations i.e. probability of observing a value more
than 1.28 standard deviations below the mean is 10%, the probability of observing a value more
than 1.65 standard deviations below the mean is 5%; and the probability of observing a value more
than 2.33 standard deviations below the mean is 1%. Thus, we have critical z-values of-1.28, -1.65,
and -2.33 for 10%, 5%, and 1% lower tail probabilities, respectively. We can define VaR as:-
VaR (X %) = zX% * σ
where VaR(X %) = X% probability at risk
Zx% = the critical Z value based on normal distribution and the X% probability
σ (sigma) = standard deviation of daily returns on percentage basis
VaR is a one tailed test so the level of significance is entirely in one tail of the distribution
To calculate VaR on dollar basis, we multiply the percent VaR by the asset value:
VaR(X %) dollar basis = VaR(X %) decimal basis* asset value
= (zx% σ) * asset value
(a) VaR Conversions: Finance Professionals and Risk Managers may be interested in measuring
risk over long time periods such as month, quarter or year. VaR can be converted from one day
basis to longer basis by multiplying daily VaR by square root of no. of days e.g to convert into
monthly VaR, multiply daily VaR by square root of 20(i.e. 20 business days)
VaR(X %) X-days = VaR(X %) 1 day * √X
VaR can also be converted to different confidence intervals.
For example, if you want to convert VaR with 95% confidence interval to VaR with 99% confidence
interval. The formula will be
z1%
VaR (1%) = VaR (5%) *
z 5%
(b) VaR Parameters : VaR involves two parameters i.e. the holding period and the confidence
level. The usual holding periods are one day or one month but institutions can operate on other
holding periods. As per Capital adequacy rules, banks should operate with a holding period of two
weeks. The factor that determines the length of the holding period is the liquidity of the markets in
which institution operates. A short holding period is preferable for model validation or back testing
purposes, reliable validation requires a large data set and a large data set requires a short holding
period.
In case of backtesting, we would usually want low confidence levels to get a proportion of excess
loss observations. For example, we might want a high confidence level if we were using our risk
measures to set capital requirements. If we wish to estimate VaR, we would probably wish to use
confidence levels and holding periods that are comparable to those used by other institutions which
are in the range of 95%-99%.
1.2 VaR Methods
1.2.1 Delta – Normal Method (Linear Method)
In the delta normal approach, the linear approximation is assumed on the risk factor which is
assumed to follow normal distribution e.g. when looking at positions in options, the linear exposure
used will be delta. Also, in case of positions in bonds, the linear exposure will be duration. Both are
first derivatives. In case of options, the underlying factor is the stock price and we assume that the
stock price is normally distributed. In case of a bond, we would assume the yield is normally
distributed. This method is best used in portfolios which has a linear position.
Change in portfolio value with respect to change in risk factor is described as:
dp = ∆ * dr
where ∆ is the sensitivity of the portfolio value with respect to risk factor
dp is change in the portfolio value
dr is change in risk factor
Limitations of the delta-normal method
It is only accurate for linear exposures, non – linear exposures are not correctly captured by this
VaR method. E.g. Non linear exposures like convexity, mortgage backed securities and fixed income
securities with embedded options are not adequately captured by this method. For measuring non-
linear exposures, delta-gamma method can be used.
1.2.2 Full Revaluation Method
It is the full re-pricing of the portfolio with the assumption that the underlying risk factors are shocked
to experience a loss. This method shocks the risk factor. VaR for this method calculates the worst
expected change in the risk factor given some confidence and time horizon. It prices the portfolio
under the changed risk factors and for wide range of price levels. The values can be generated by:
• Subadditivity – The risk of the portfolio is at most equal to the risk of the assets within the
portfolio.
ρ(X) + ρ(Y) ≤ ρ(X + Y)
• Homogeneity – Size of the portfolio, t will impact the size of its risk
ρ (t X) = t ρ(X)
• Monotonicity – Portfolio with greater future returns will likely have less risk
ρ(X) ≥ ρ(Y) , X ≤ Y
• Risk free condition - The risk of a portfolio is dependent on the assets within the portfolio for
all constants n
ρ (X + n) = ρ(X) – n
The second, third & fourth properties imply well behaved distributions. Homogeneity says risk of a
position is always proportional to its size. Monotonicity suggests that if one risk always has greater
losses than the other risk, the capital requirements should be greater. Risk free condition means
that there is no additional capital requirement for an additional risk for which there is no uncertainty.
Subadditivity is the most important property for a coherent risk measure. It states that portfolios will
have equal or less risk than the sum of the individual portfolios.
1.4 Expected Shortfall
It is the most attractive coherent risk measure. This measure often has different names including
expected tail loss, conditional VaR, tail VaR, all of which are the same. It is the expected value of
our losses if we get a loss in excess of VaR. The VaR tells us the most we can expect to lose if a
bad or tail event does not occur whereas Expected Shortfall tells us what we can expect to lose if a
tail event does occur.
It is a more robust risk measure that satisfies all the properties of a coherent risk measure with less
restrictive assumptions. Expected Shortfall is defined as the average loss conditional on being
beyond a given percentile. E.g. the expected tail loss at the 99 th percentile is the probability weighted
average of all losses greater than the VaR at the 99th percentile.
Despite the VaR measure being better known than the expected shortfall, the latter has more
advantages:
• Expected shortfall is sensitive to the entire tail of the distribution, whereas VaR will not
change even if there are large increases in some of the losses beyond the cut-off percentile
at which the VaR is being measured.
• Expected Shortfall is a more stable measure than VaR in showing less sensitivity to data
errors and less day to day movement due to irrelevant changes in the input data.
• With VaR, negative diversification effects can arise whereas expected shortfall never
displays negative diversification effects.
1.5 Limitations of VaR
VaR has its drawbacks as a risk measure. VaR estimates can be subject to errors, model risk and
implementation risk. However, such problems are common to all risk measurement systems.
(a) VaR uninformative of tail losses – VaR tells us the most we can lose if a tail event does not
occur. It tells us the most we can lose 95% of the time but tells us nothing about what we can lose
on the remaining 5% of the occasions. If a tail event (i.e. loss in excess of VaR) does occur, we can
expect to lose more than the VaR but VaR itself does not give any indication of how much that might
be.
(b) VaR can create perverse Incentives Structures – It is not feasible to use information about
VaR at multiple confidence levels and where it is not, the failure of VaR to take account of losses in
excess of itself can create some perverse outcomes. For example, an investor using a VaR risk
measure can easily end up with perverse positions because a VaR based risk return analysis fails
to take account of the magnitude of the losses in excess of VaR. If a particular investment has a
higher expected return at the expense of the possibility of a higher loss, a VaR based decision will
suggest that we should make that investment if the higher loss does not affect the VaR regardless
of the size of the higher expected return and the size of higher expected loss. Such acceptance of
any investment that increases expected return regardless of the possible loss and the investor who
makes decisions in this way is asking for trouble.
(c) VaR can discourage diversification – Another drawback is that VaR can discourage
diversification. The VaR of the diversified portfolio is much larger than the VaR of the undiversified
one. So, a VaR measure can discourage diversification of risks because it fails to take into account
the magnitude of losses in excess of VaR.
(d) VaR not sub-additive – Sub–additivity means that aggregating individual risks does not
increase overall risk. Sub-additivity matters for a number of reasons. If the risks are sub-additive
then adding risks together would give us an overestimate of combined risk. This facilitates
decentralised decision making within a firm as we can always use the sum of the risks of the units
as a conservative measure. But if the risks are not sub-additive, adding them together gives us an
underestimate of combined risks, and this makes the sum of risks effectively useless as a risk
measure. In risk management, we want our risk estimates to be biased or unbiased conservatively.
2. STRESS TESTING
Stress testing as a formal discipline for risk and capital management was born out of financial crises.
Stress tests had previously been carried out for certain types of risk or for specific portfolios, but
rarely for all the risks faced by an entire enterprise. For example, market risk stress testing was
widely adopted in 1990s to supplement VaR measures, whose calculations tend to underestimate
extreme losses. While these narrow stress tests were useful for managing specific risks or portfolios,
they shed light on the overall effect that a stress event would have on an institution.
2.1 Role of Enterprise wide Stress Testing
The impetus for setting up enterprise-wide stress testing in most jurisdictions was a regulatory
requirement around capital adequacy assessment. As a result, the early use of stress testing was
narrow, focusing on whether there was sufficient capital to survive a stress event and what capital
actions such as dividend payments etc. were possible. However, financial institutions have since
built up their stress testing capabilities and explored ways of using it to the meet broader risk
management and business objectives, specifically, for which applications or decisions will stress
testing, will be a key input or a driver? Should risk appetite be articulated based upon tolerances in
a stress environment? Should capital requirements from stress testing be used for performance
management or loan pricing?
Various Reasons for incorporating stress testing results into a broader set of such risk and business
applications.
• Binding Constraint – Stress test results have become the binding constraint for evaluating
capital adequacy and the key driver of dividend policy for many institutions.
• Management attention – Given its linkage to dividend payments, as well as the
governance requirements demanded by regulators, stress testing has the attention of
senior management and the board of directors.
• Intuition – Many users find stress results to be more intuitive than other risk metrics
because they are presented in an accounting framework, similar to other external
communications regarding the institution’s financial condition.
• Transparency – As outcomes are linked to casual factors in stress testing, such results
are also more transparent and easier to understand than other risk metrics (such as
economic capital).
• Consistency – The enterprise wide stress testing usually piggybacks the budgeting and
planning process, which gives a degree of consistency with the inputs and approaches
accepted already in a well established process.
2.2 Applications of Stress Testing
Almost all surveyed institutions use stress testing to measure capital adequacy. However, half or
more also use it for risk reporting, risk appetite, limit setting and management, and various planning
exercises (e.g. financial, strategic and contingency)
Examples of such extended uses of stress testing are:
• Risk Reporting – Stress testing results are often used to report levels of risk in business
activities – for example, by reporting the credit losses by portfolio in various stress
The above exhibit clearly provides a step-by-step process by which stress testing can be integrated
into the decision-making system of a typical financial institution. The first step in the process is the
generation of various scenarios. The scenario development incorporates both historical and
hypothetical states of macroeconomic variables. It is important to select scenarios that appropriately
reflect the idiosyncratic business profile of a particular financial institution.
The second step involves the segmentation of the current risk exposures with particular focus on
risk concentration. It is essential to have detailed record of historical losses that correspond to the
same level of granularity as the current exposure to enable temporal analysis. Historical losses in
the form of defaults, loss severities, and exposure details are explained by macroeconomic
scenarios using regression based techniques.
The consequent relationships are then applied to the current portfolio to generate current
assessments of income and expenses, losses and capital ratios etc. These results are then
compared to the desired risk appetite of the financial institution. In case of a mismatch between
actual and potential risk appetite, de-risking options could have an impact on the capital policy
decisions of the financial institutions especially decisions involving dividends, share buybacks and
compensation policies. The entire process is subjected to governance oversight at every level,
beginning with scenario and model validation, to internal controls over data, and finally ending with
clear communication and review by senior executives and the various board committees.
3. SCENARIO ANALYSIS
Scenario analysis helps firms to look at their businesses and portfolios downside movement which
can either be because of a stress event or a downturn scenario. This analysis helps firms to analyse
any stressful situation which may or may not have happened in the past. It has been used for years
in many areas (e.g. health, economics etc.). Scenarios are basically sequence or development of
events which start from one set of assumptions in order to evaluate or map various outcomes of a
particular situation.
Generating scenarios can either be event based or portfolio based. In case of event based scenarios,
the scenario is generated from events that will cause movements in the relative risk factors. In case
of a portfolio driven scenario, first step is to evaluate the portfolio risk vulnerability. It is then
translated into adverse risk factor movements.
3.1 Categories of Stress Scenarios
In scenarios, we take into account the impact of adverse and external conditions which can be a big
threat to the survival of a company. There are four main categories of scenarios:
• Normal Stress Scenarios – The occurrence of these scenarios can be once or twice in
ten-year period. This type of scenarios should be manageable within the normal structure
of roles and responsibilities for daily decisions. In this scenario, the credit criteria can be
made more vigorous and guidelines might need to be tightened, but these fall within the
normal scope of regular policy adjustments. These types of events lead to increased loan
losses and reduced earnings but they usually do not present a serious threat to the survival
of a financial institution.
• Severe Stress Scenarios – These are scenarios that one would expect only once or twice
in a professional lifetime. The two oil shocks in 1970s triggered unusually severe economic
consequences. These episodes represent severe stress scenarios for many institutions. It
is normally included in regular stress testing exercises and it will definitely result in declines
in earnings and some period of losses. With proper early warning indicators and timely
action, institutions should be able to avoid serious risk of default in this environment.
• Near-Default Stress Scenarios – The global financial crises that began in late 2008 falls
into this category for many institutions especially those that were involved in the creation
and sale of the subprime mortgage securities. Because of this event, some institutions
came close to default but were able to weather the storm without assistance from the
Government. These types of stress scenarios form the basis for the development of a
detailed recovery plan. Such a plan represents an institution’s response to extraordinary
conditions during which extraordinary actions are required.
• Stress to Default Scenarios (Reverse Stress Test Scenarios) – Some institutions failed
during global financial crises, this period represented stress to default scenario. It involves
extremely unlikely events which force the companies to think about the firm’s most serious
vulnerabilities and design stress to default scenarios accordingly. Broad organizational
involvement is essential when defining appropriate events like failure of a major
counterparty, rogue trading losses, internal fraud etc. which might contribute to institutional
failure.
3.2 Scenario Selection
The identification of relevant stress events requires the opinions of all relevant experts such as risk
managers, economists, business managers, and traders. Stress Testing should include business
cycle stresses as well as event specific tail risks. For example, markets with low historical volatility
may experience large discrete movements, the scenario in such a case should reflect the potential
interaction of market risk, trading liquidity risk, and credit risk for corporate bonds. Effective scenario
analysis should take into account how events unfold over time. Scenarios should also address
correlations between risk factors and distinguish between static and dynamic scenarios—i.e., one-
period versus multi period frameworks. Forward looking stress and scenario tests must specify
length, speed and magnitudes of events and should describe dynamics between transactions. If the
scenarios are well developed, they can form an integral part of the management culture and have a
meaningful impact on business decisions.
3.3 Drawbacks of Scenario Analysis
With a small number of risk factors, the number of alternative scenarios is manageable. As the
number of risk factors increases, the number of alternative scenarios could easily become
unmanageable.
Another drawback of Scenario Analysis is that it assumes that the scenarios are equally probable.
This ignores the correlations between the risk factors. Although stress testing does allow risk
managers to identify major risks, it is subjective in deciding how serious the risks are. The risk
manager could generate an ever larger number of scenarios and uncover more extreme events. But
these potential losses might not be significant. Implausible losses might be considered and plausible
losses might not be discovered.
3.4 Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) Principles for
Sound Stress Testing Practices and Supervision*
*Source: Basel Committee on Banking Supervision
1. Stress testing should form an integral part of the overall governance and risk management
culture of the bank. Stress testing should be actionable, with the results from stress testing
analyses impacting business decisions of the board and senior management. Board and senior
management involvement in the stress testing programme is essential for its effective operation
2. A bank should operate a stress testing programme that promotes risk identification and control;
provides a complementary risk perspective to other risk management tools; improves capital
and liquidity management; and enhances internal and external communication.
3. Stress testing programmes should take into account of views from across the organization and
should cover a range of perspectives and techniques.
4. A bank should have written policies and procedures governing the stress testing programme.
The operation of the programme should be appropriately documented.
5. A bank should have a suitably robust infrastructure in place, which is sufficiently flexible to
accommodate different and possibly challenging stress tests at an appropriate level of
granularity.
6. A bank should regularly maintain and update its stress testing framework. The effectiveness of
the stress testing programme, as well as the robustness of major individual components, should
be assessed regularly and independently.
7. Stress tests should cover a range of risks and business areas, including at the firm-wide level.
A bank should be able to integrate effectively, in a meaningful fashion, across the range of its
stress testing activities to deliver a complete picture of firm-wide risk.
8. Stress testing programmes should cover a range of scenarios, including forward-looking
scenarios, and aim to take into account system-wide interactions and feedback effects.
9. Stress tests should feature a range of severities, including events capable of generating the
most damage whether through size of loss or through loss of reputation. A stress testing
programme should also determine what scenarios could challenge the viability of the bank
(reverse stress tests) and thereby uncover hidden risks and interactions among risks.
10. As part of an overall stress testing programme, a bank should aim to take account of
simultaneous pressures in funding and asset markets, and the impact of a reduction in market
liquidity on exposure valuation.
11. The effectiveness of risk mitigation techniques should be systematically challenged.
12. The stress testing programme should explicitly cover complex and bespoke products such as
securitized exposures. Stress tests for securitized assets should consider the underlying
assets, their exposure to systematic market factors, relevant contractual arrangements and
embedded triggers, and the impact of leverage, particularly as it relates to the subordination
level in the issue structure.
13. The stress testing programme should cover pipeline and warehousing risks. A bank should
include such exposures in its stress tests regardless of their probability of being securitized.
14. A bank should enhance its stress testing methodologies to capture the effect of reputational
risk. The bank should integrate risks arising from off-balance sheet vehicles and other related
entities in its stress testing programme.
15. A bank should enhance its stress testing approaches for highly leveraged counterparties in
considering its vulnerability to specific asset categories or market movements and in assessing
potential wrong-way risk related to risk mitigation techniques.
16. Supervisors should make regular and comprehensive assessments of a bank's stress testing
programme.
17. Supervisors should require management to take corrective action if material deficiencies in the
stress testing programme are identified or if the results of stress tests are not adequately taken
into consideration in the decision-making process.
18. Supervisors should assess and if necessary challenge the scope and severity of firm-wide
scenarios. Supervisors may ask banks to perform sensitivity analysis with respect to specific
portfolios or parameters, use specific scenarios or to evaluate scenarios under which their
viability is threatened (reverse stress testing scenarios).
19. Under Pillar 2 (supervisory review process) of the Basel II framework, supervisors should
examine a bank's stress testing results as part of a supervisory review of both the bank's
internal capital assessment and its liquidity risk management. In particular, supervisors should
consider the results of forward-looking stress testing for assessing the adequacy of capital and
liquidity.
20. Supervisors should consider implementing stress test exercises based on common scenarios.
21. Supervisors should engage in a constructive dialogue with other public authorities and the
industry to identify systemic vulnerabilities. Supervisors should also ensure that they have the
capacity and skills to assess a bank's stress testing programme.
4. COUNTRY RISK
Country Risk is broader concept which covers the adverse impact of host country’s economic,
financial and political environment. This risk is most important in case of Multinational National
Corporations (MNCs) which establishes their business in different countries away from the country
where they are registered.
4.1 Types of Country Risk
The analysis of Country Risk is not important not only because it impacts the profitability of MNCs
but also important for the investors who invest their money through FPI, FDI etc. Let us now discuss
the major types of Country Risk.
4.1.1 Political Risk
This risk mainly arises out of the changes in the political scenarios as well as adverse decisions by
the ruling Government. The various types of political risk which ultimately affect the profit of the
MNCs from the operations in the host country can be described as follows:
(i) Nationalisation or Expropriation Risk: This is most common form of risk wherein host country
takes over the business of MNCs without or with inadequate compensation.
(ii) Exchange Control Risk: This form of risk prevents the MNCs to get converted their earning from
local currency to foreign currency to repatriate the same to home country of MNCs. Due to this
restrictions even investors in MNCs business also suffer a lot.
(iii) Taxes, Rule and Regulation Risk: This risk arises mainly due to a sudden or dramatic change
in Rule and Regulations governing the host country. These sudden changes can be in any of
following type of forms:
♦ Unanticipated increase tax rates applicable for MNCs operating in the host country.
♦ Compulsion to hire local workforce.
♦ Compliances of stricter environmental standards.
(iv) Inefficient Legal System: High level of red tapism and corruption at local and higher level pose
a serious risk for MNCs operating in the host country as it leads to uncertainty and high cost of
operation.
(v) Repudiation of Contracts: This type of risk arises on account revocation of earlier awarded
turnkey projects by the Government of host country without adequate consideration and
damages. This risk is also called indirect expropriation risk.
4.1.2 Financial and Economic Risk
The main risk covered in this category is the Sovereign Risk i.e. default in repayment of borrowing
by the Government of host country.
Although Government of host country can easily repay the loan by printing more currency notes but
it will depreciate value of its currency. The sovereign risk hamper the reputation of the country
severely from investment point of view but it saves a lot of foreign exchange of the Government.
To identify such types of risk well in advance following economic variables can be used:
(iv) Other Methods: In addition to above, other methods can also be used which are as follows:
(a) Grade Based Rating – The grade can be assigned such as S & P, Moody’s and Fitch
assigns rating. For example, while USA been assigned rating of Aaa, AA+ and AAA by
these agencies respectively of safer zone, Venezuela has been assigned rating Caa, B-
and C indicating riskier zone.
(b) Event Driven – A very specific negative event such as removal of current government by
military or sovereign default etc. assessed with the probability of happening.
For example, for India, due to its democratic system, the possibility of taking over of Government by
military is rare and hence 0% probability can be assigned for this happening. On the other hand for
same event, 70% probability can be assigned in case of Pakistan.
4.3.2 Quantitative Tools
Generally, quantitative tools are related to economic measures such as GDP, Forex rates and
services, FDI etc. Other numbers include Growth in Industrial Production, Population Growth, etc.
Some of the indices that can be used for Country Risk Analysis are following:
S. Index Basis
No.
1 Corruption Perception It is one of the most popular indicator published by
Index Transparency International. The ranking is numeral based
ranging from 0-10. While 0 indicate least corrupt, 10
indicate highly corrupt.
2. Democracy Index Published by Economic Intelligent, countries are classified
into following four groups.
• Full democracy (8 to 10)
• Flawed Democracy ( 6 to 10)
• Hybrid Regime (4 to 5.9)
• Authoritarian Regime (0 to 3.9)
This index is based on following 5 categories :
Electoral process pluralism
Civil liberties
Functioning of Government
Political Participation
Political Culture
3. Freedom in the world This survey is conducted by Freedom House and provides
on the basis of study of Political rights and civil liberties. It
uses rating based on 1-7 scale indicating 1 being most
free and 7 being least free.
4. Gini Coefficient It is one of the most popular index to gauge the rich-n-poor
income countries. It measures inequality in income
(ii) Exposure Risk – This implies the uncertainty associated with future level or amount of risk.
In other words, this risk is mainly associated with unexpected action of other party say
prepayment of loan before due date or request for refund of deposit before due date.
In some cases, say for amortized credit such risks does not exists as period of receipt is
known with greater certainty. Due to uncertainty generally off balance sheet items create
such risks. However, in such cases, the exposure is not associated with client’s behavior
rather behaviors of market which keeps on changing constantly. In case value of derivative
position turns out to be positive there is credit risk as it will lose money, if other party
defaults. To overcome such risk normally derivative instrument are used.
(iii) Recovery Risk – This risk is related to recoveries in the event of default, which in turn
depends upon various factors such as quality of guarantee provided by borrower, and other
surrounding circumstances. This risk can be minimized through Collateral and Third Party
Guarantee. However, existence of these two risk management tool also carries risk.
(a) Collateral Risk: Although collateral reduces the credit risk but it happens only if
collateral can be sold at a significant value. The quickness in realization of collateral
depends upon its nature and prevailing market conditions. In normal course, fixed asset
collateral normally carries low realizable value than cash collateral. However, if in
buoyant market say in case of a property even a fixed asset in the form of a house
property carries a higher value. With the use of collateral, the credit risk becomes
twofold:
(i) Uncertainty related to access it and disposing encumbrances which may be legal in
some cases.
(ii) Uncertainty related to the value realizable from the collateral which may be subject
to various factors. To some extent the 2008 crisis was due to overvaluation of
collateral against which borrowers were granted hefty loan and at the time of
realisation the collateral value was very less.
(b) Third Party Guarantee Risk: This collateral is a kind of simple transfer of risk on
Guarantor and in case guarantor defaults then risk again comes back to lender.
R = Recovery Rate %
This default % can also be computed through probability.
3.2 Factors Affecting the Credit Risk
The factors affecting the credit risk of a bank can be divided into following two categories:
(i) Internal Factors: These factors are internal to the bank, some of these are as follows:
(a) Concentration of credit in particular geographical locations or business segments.
(b) Excessive lending to particular industry is subject to cyclical fluctuations.
(c) Ignoring the purpose for which loan was sought by the customer.
(d) Poor Quality or Liberal Credit Appraisal while granting the loan.
(e) Absence of efficient recovery mechanism.
(ii) External Factors: These factors are external to the bank and beyond its controls. These
factors not only impact the profitability of borrower but also effects their repayment capability.
Some of such external factors are as follows:
(a) Fluctuation in Exchange Rate.
(b) Change in Govt. Policies.
(c) Fluctuation in Interest Rates.
(d) Change in Political Environment of the own country.
(e) In case of Foreign project change in Country Risk profile.
Retail & wholesale financing could either be fund based or non fund based. Different types of loans
/ credit facilities are enumerated below:
4.1 Fund Based Facilities
Fund based facilities are limits where the borrower gets the money in cash from banks / financial
institutions. Few fund based facilities / loans are enumerated below
(a) Personal Loan – also called as consumer loans, these loans are unsecured in nature and
are advanced on the basis of borrower’s credit history and ability of repay the loan from personal
income. Repayment is usually through fixed amount installments over a fixed term. These loans
are generally unsecured in nature.
(b) Mortgage loan / Home Loan – a loan that is secured by property or real estate is called a
mortgage loan. In exchange of funds received by the borrower to buy a home or property, a lender
gets a promise from the borrower to repay the loan within a certain time frame for a certain cost.
(c) Working Capital loans – These loans are for the purpose of financing the everyday
operations of a company. Working capital loans are not used to buy long term assets or
investments and are instead used to cover short term needs of the business like funding the
creditors, accounts payable, wages etc.
Maximum Permissible Banking finance (MPBF) – This is mainly a method of working capital
assessment. As per the recommendations of Tandon Committee, the corporates are discouraged
from accumulating too much of stocks of current assets and are recommended to move towards
very lean inventories and receivable levels. There are 3 methods of working out the maximum
amount that a company / borrower may expect from the bank:
• Method 1 – MPBF = 75% of (Current Assets – Current Liabilities other than bank borrowings).
The borrower should provide the remaining 25% from long – term sources. The minimum
current ratio under this method works out to 1:1
• Method 2 – MPBF = (75% of Current assets) – Current liabilities other than bank borrowings.
The borrower should provide the raise finance to the extent of 25% of current assets from
long term assets. The minimum current ratio under this method works out to 1.33:1.
• Method 3 – MPBF = 75% of (Current Assets – Core Current Assets) – Current Liabilities other
than bank borrowings. The borrower should contribute 100% core current assets and 25% of
balance current assets from long term sources. A minimum current ratio under this method
works out to above 1.5:1
Various types of working capital loans include Bank Overdraft, Cash Credit, Factoring etc
(i) Overdraft - is a type of fund based lending. It occurs when money is withdrawn from a bank
account and the available balance becomes nil. In this situation the account is said to be
overdrawn. Thus under this facility, the account holder (individual or corporate) is allowed to
withdraw in excess of the balance standing in bank account. Bank fixes a limit beyond which the
account holder will not be able to overdraw the account. Legally, overdraft is a demand assistance
given by the bank. It is given for a very short period of time, at the end of which the account holder
is supposed to repay the amount. Interest is payable on the actual amount drawn.
(ii) Cash Credit - Cash credit is a short term cash loan to a company. It is just like overdraft
facility except there is no need to open a formal current account. Also, this type of funding requires
security deposit to secure the loan given by the bank. Legally, cash credit is a demand facility.
Interest is payable on actual amount drawn.
(iii) Bill Discounting- Bills purchased / discounted facility - enables the company to get the
immediate payment against credit invoices raised by the company. The bank holds the invoices till
the customer has actually made the payment. While granting this facility, the bank first satisfies
itself about the credit worthiness of the customer and the genuineness of the bill. A limit is fixed in
case of the company beyond which the bills are not purchased or discounted by the bank.
(iv) Packing Credit – This is the type of assistance given by the bank to enable the company to buy
the goods to be exported. This type of facility is included as short term loan and is in two forms:
(a) Pre shipment packing credit – loan / advance granted to an exporter for financing the
purchase, processing, manufacturing or packing of goods prior to shipment.
(b) Post shipment packing credit – loan / advance granted to an exporter after shipment of goods
to the date of realization of export proceeds.
(v) Factoring – This is a financial transaction and a type of debtor financing in which a company
sells its accounts receivable to a third party (called a factor) at a discount. There are 3 parties
involved; the factor who purchases the receivable, the one who sells the receivable and the debtor
who has a financial liability that requires him / her to make the payment to the owner of the
invoice.
(d) Demand Loan – A demand loan is a rare form of loan that can be called for complete / partial
repayment by the lender without any prior notice to the borrower. In other words, when the lender
demands the money, the borrower must pay it.
(e) Term Loans – A term loan is repaid in regular payments over a fixed tenor. They usually are
of tenor between one to 10 years, but may last as long as 30 years in some cases. These loans
are typically extended to mid and large corporate and usually have a unfixed (fixed / floating) rate
of interest. They are usually secured in nature. The security could be in the form of movable or
immovable assets like plant & machinery, land, building, shares, guarantees etc.
(f) Project / Infrastructure Loans – Project finance / loans are financing of long term
infrastructure, industrial projects and public services in which project debt and equity used to
finance the project are paid back from the cash flow generated from the project with the project’s
assets, rights and interests held as secondary security or collateral. These loans are long term in
nature and usually have a tenor of 15-20 years. Usually, project financing structure involves a
number of equity investors known as ‘sponsors’ and multiple banks / financial institutions / lenders
called a syndication or consortium of banks. Generally, a special purpose entity called a Special
Purpose Vehicle (SPV) is created for each project, thereby shielding other assets owned by the
project sponsor for the detrimental effects of a project failure. As a special purpose entity, the
project company has no assets other than the project.
(g) Micro finance loans – These loans are extended to individuals / entrepreneurs having small
businesses who lack access to banking and related services. The two main mechanisms for the
delivery of financial services to such borrowers are (1) relationship – based banking for individuals
entrepreneurs and small businesses, and (2) group based models where several entrepreneurs
come together to apply for loans and other services as a group.
(h) Real Estate Construction Loans – These loans are extended to developers / builders for
construction of residential / commercial buildings including and real estate development. These are
large ticket loans and have a long tenor ~ 10 to 20 years.
(i) Agriculture and Allied Services Loans – These are advances given to farmers for
purchasing farm equipment’s like tractors, harvesters etc. These are small ticket retail loans where
the underlying asset is hypothecated to the lender. The tenor of the loan usually matches the life of
the underlying assets ~ 4-5 years. The repayment of these loans is aligned to the harvesting cycle
usually bi annually.
4.2 Non Fund Facilities
Non fund facilities are where the banks / financial institutions do not commit any physical outflow
of funds. It is a nature of promise made by a bank / financial institution in favour of a third party to
provide monetary compensation on behalf of their clients. The fund position of the lending bank
remains intact. Types of non-fund facilities are as given below:
(a) Bank Guarantee – a bank guarantee is a guarantee from a lending institution / bank ensuring
the liabilities of a debtor will be met. In order words, if the debtor fails to settle a debt, the bank
covers it. A bank guarantee enables the customer, or debtor, to acquire goods, buy equipment, or
draw down loans.
(b) Letter of Credit - Letter of Credit is a non-fund based lending which is very regularly found in
international trade.
This facility is given when the exporter and importer are unknown to each other. In this case, the
importer applies to his bank (Issuing Bank) in his country to open a letter of credit in favour of
exporter whereby the importers’ bank undertakes to pay the exporter on fulfilling the terms and
conditions specified in the letter of credit.
5. CLASSIFICATION OF ASSETS
Every bank / FI after taking into account the degree of well – defined credit weaknesses and extent
of dependence on collateral security for realization, classify its loans & advances into various
classes. RBI in its Master Circular for Banks – Prudential Norms and asset classification have
spelled out the following classes:
• Standard Assets – shall mean the asset in respect of which, no default in repayment of
principal or payment of interest is perceived and which does not disclose any problem or
carry more than normal risk attached to the business.
• Sub – standard assets – shall mean an asset which has been classified as non – performing
asset for the period not exceeding 12 months.
• Doubtful assets – an asset which remains sub standard for a period not exceeding 12
months.
• Loss Assets – an asset which is adversely affected by a potential threat of non recoverability
due to either erosion in the value of security or non availability of security or sue to fraudulent
act or omission on the part of the borrower. Loss asset could be identified as such by the
bank / FI or its internal or external auditor
Non Performing Asset (NPA) shall mean an asset, in respect of which, interest has remained
overdue for a period of 3 months or more.
Banks write off assets which are non collectable removing it from their balance sheets. A reduction
in the value of an asset or earnings by the amount of an expense or loss is called write off.
and regularly. You need to understand the credibility that the customer possesses. And for
that purpose, lender organization should rely on the reports which are available. Or they can
consider going through the credit scoring agencies to ensure the customer has the paying
ability. Even asking for the basic information will provide you a rough idea about the credit
history of the customer. It always better to take the help of professionals during this step.
Engage the professional and rely on their expertise. During this stage, credit evaluation is
very critical.
(3) Ask and Check the references: It’s absolutely ok to ask customer for the references, List of
creditable clients are much more reliable source than anything else. It’s important to ask for
the lender organization to understand who all have been given trade credit from in the past
and how old are the relationship with such counterparty. This will establish a pattern to
understand if the customer has a tendency to maintain the business relation or it’s just a pure
business. Also, asking reference from the third party proves to be independent source to
verify the commitment made by the customers.
(4) Due Diligence: When a lender is convince to provide a line of credit to the customer, it is his
duty to have proper due diligence in place to ensure the line of credit is being placed in safe
pair of hands. Irrespective of the professionals involvement in due diligence process, lender
still has the moral responsibility to perform the due diligence on its own. This can be achieved
by simply visiting the website, assessing the market creditability etc. Basically, publically
sourced information is pretty useful in such cases.
(5) Recovery: Lender organization or its employee must understand that every single rupee
invested in the customer has cost involved in it. An effort should be made to ensure that this
minimal cost of capital should be recovered from the customer. This can be achieved by
simply asking your prospect for a deposit or the collateral.
(6) Nature of business: Once should not hesitate to ask for the nature of business in which
borrower is dealing with. This will give a fair bit item on risk exposure and also provide
adequate comfort to the lender.
Apart from this major risk other minor risks such as foreign exchange risk, inter-bank transactions,
letter of credit, derivative transactions like future, options , swaps and likewise. Financial
Institutions also needs to resolve the following issues: Magnitude of risk arising from large complex
organization structure, Geographical spread of the operations of the above organizations, and
borrowing pattern of large organizations.
The historical method of risk identification involves the identification of types of risk credit, market,
operational and liquidity. This approach is based on traditional method of measuring risk and
capital adequacy. However, the new approach to risk identification involves testing of the
organizations to stressful situations. This helps the institutions to test, develop their own
vulnerability to stress.
7.2 How Credit risk is Mitigated
We all know that credit risk is inevitable. But - mitigating the credit risk is a way where one can
lessen; reduce the impact of credit risk. This is one of the steps in credit risk management. There
are different ways and means to mitigate the credit risk. Banks may use various techniques which
reduce their exposure to individual customers and transactions. The taking of guarantees and
security to support the obligations of the primary borrower pre-dates capital adequacy rules by
many centuries. The desire to avoid loss is simply a feature of prudent banking and is by no
means intimately associated with the lender's capital position.
Basel II has suggested the two broad categories of risk mitigation. These are funded and non –
funded risk mitigation. As the name suggests, funded credit risk mitigation is that way of risk
mitigation where a bank has recourse to cash or buyers asset in order to money owing to it. The
concept of funded credit protection refers to the nature of the asset which forms the available
security.
As per Basel II norms, following are the different types of funded credit risk mitigation methods:
(a) On Balance Sheet Netting. On balance sheet netting of mutual claims/reciprocal cash
balances between the bank and the counterparty creates effective security and collaterals.
This norm accordingly be recognised as an acceptable form of credit risk; in order take in
account a funded credit risk mitigation, the underlying arrangement has to go through the
legal test.
(b) Collateral: The assets/security which are retained or deposited with bank against grant of
any loan advances, debt or credit lines. The typical examples are
♦ Cash or cash equivalents – Cash or Hand loans
♦ Gold Pledging
♦ Corporal Debt Securities
♦ Debt securities issued by banks, local authorities and certain other entities which meet
stated credit quality criteria;
Basel II has forced financial institution to comply with the requirements including the stringent
guidance and assessment by credit risk by private players. Detailed documentation is available at
([Link]
AAA (Highest Instruments with this rating are considered to have the highest
Safety) degree of safety regarding timely servicing of financial
obligations. Such instruments carry lowest credit risk.
AA (High Safety) Instruments with this rating are considered to have high degree
of safety regarding timely servicing of financial obligations. Such
instruments carry very low credit risk.
A (Adequate Safety) Instruments with this rating are considered to have adequate
degree of safety regarding timely servicing of financial
obligations. Such instruments carry low credit risk.
BBB (Moderate Instruments with this rating are considered to have moderate
Safety) degree of safety regarding timely servicing of financial
obligations. Such instruments carry moderate credit risk
BB (Moderate Risk) Instruments with this rating are considered to have moderate risk
of default regarding timely servicing of financial obligations
B (High Risk) Instruments with this rating are considered to have high risk of
default regarding timely servicing of financial obligations
C (Very High Risk) Instruments with this rating are considered to have very high risk
of default regarding timely servicing of financial obligations
D (Default) Instruments with this rating are in default or are expected to be
in default soon.
A1 Instruments with this rating are considered to have very strong degree of safety
regarding timely payment of financial obligations. Such instruments carry lowest
credit risk
A2 Instruments with this rating are considered to have strong degree of safety
regarding timely payment of financial obligations. Such instruments carry low
credit risk
A3 Instruments with this rating are considered to have moderate degree of safety
regarding timely payment of financial obligations. Such instruments carry higher
credit risk as compared to instruments rated in the two higher categories
A4 Instruments with this rating are considered to have minimal degree of safety
regarding timely payment of financial obligations. Such instruments carry very
high credit risk and are susceptible to default
D Instruments with this rating are in default or expected to be in default on
maturity.
• Additionally, the rating agencies may apply ‘+’ (plus) or ‘-‘ (minus) signs for ratings from AA to
C to reflect the comparative standing within the company
The rating agency may also assign outlooks for ratings from AAA to B. Ratings on rating watch will
not carry outlooks. A rating outlook indicates the direction in which a rating may move over the
medium term horizon on one to two years. A rating outlook can be ‘Positive’, ‘Stable’ or ‘Negative’.
A positive or negative rating outlook is not necessarily a precursor of a rating change.
8.3 Portfolio Risk Management
Once the funds are disbursed, periodic reviews on the portfolio/borrowers/assets are conducted by
the relevant Business and Credit Departments. Notwithstanding sound appraisal processes and
risk management, some portfolios / accounts may develop weakness on account of changes in
internal or external conditions. Mechanisms for monitoring and identifying early warning signals
(EWS) should be in place to review the portfolio and identify such weak accounts before they turn
NPA. These monitoring mechanisms will help take remedial measures and limit losses. Such
monitoring / review can be undertaken through a mix of portfolio and borrower level EWS matrix
(indicative parameters and not exhaustive list):
Retail Financing
• Roll forward / roll back rates – (deterioration on days past due / improvement in days past
due)
• Infant / Early delinquencies – non payment of first EMI / instalments.
• Performance review across at branch / scheme / program / Relationship Manager etc
• Scorecard parameter reviews
Wholesale Financing
• Early Default Alerts (EDA) in the form of adverse deviations in operational performance and
cash inflows vis-a-vis projections.
• Site visit reports.
• Progress report of the project through internal / external agencies including Lenders
Engineers vis-a-vis the envisaged / projected performance at the initial appraisal/previous
review stage.
• Security margin cover.
• Movement in internal / external rating including suspension/ withdrawal, more specially
downward revision in ratings.
• Covenant monitoring.
• Overdue monitoring.
Portfolio risk management emanates from a clearly spelled out risk appetite of the organization to
meet its strategic objectives. Portfolio Risk Management is predominantly driven through
“Concentration Risk Management”. Concentration risk in banking term denoting the overall spread
of bank’s outstanding loan accounts over the number or variety of debtors to whom the bank has
lent money. Concentration risk can be in terms of overexposure against a particular borrower /
group of borrowers or being over exposed to a particular industry / sector / regions / geography
etc. Concentration risk could be managed by setting limits on exposure per borrower or group of
borrowers belonging to the same management or limits on industry / sector / geography.
8.4 Credit Risk Rating Process
Credit Risk Rating or Credit Rating is an important tool to manage large ticket exposures credit
risk. The rating provides a consistent and common scale for measurement of credit risk of a loan
asset in terms of Probability of Default (PD) across products and sectors. Coupled with estimation
of Loss Given Default (LGD), it enables the organisation to make an estimate of credit cost for the
loan assets and thus, helps to differentiate among loan assets as objectively as possible. PD is
measured by the internal rating assigned to the Borrower and assesses the likelihood that the
Borrower will default on its debt obligations. LGD is measured by the value of the security/
collateral / cash flow cover (project finance)/ DSRA/other credit enhancements for the particular
facility provided by the Borrower, after applying haircut to each assets sub class, which will form a
cover for the outstanding facility, once a default has occurred.
Each Bank / FI would have an internal credit rating model which takes into account critical success
parameters relevant for each industry, competitive forces within the industry, regulatory issues
while capturing financial parameters, management strengths, project parameters, etc. and the LGD
models take into consideration the cover expected to be available for recovery based on asset or
cash flows that could be accessed after a default has happened. The LGD model also factors in
the estimated time to invoke different types of securities for applying suitable discounting factors.
Each proposed debt commitment is rated before taking a sanction decision and all such ratings of
assets in the portfolio are periodically reviewed by banks / FIs. Revised ratings are awarded for the
borrower if there is deterioration in the financial parameters from the originally assessed and
projected, adverse changes in industry / sector, changes in government regulations etc. Each
corporate loan is then assessed for rating migration (upward or downward movement) through out
the loan life cycle.
8.5 Credit Loss Estimation
Credit risk being the most prominent risk for banks and FIs and subject of strict regulatory
oversight and policy debate needs to be carefully estimated / assessed.
Credit risk management is the practice of mitigating those losses by understanding the adequacy
of both capital and loan loss reserves at any given time – a process that has long been a challenge
for financial institutions. Various quantification and modelling techniques are being applied in
practice for credit risk measurement and management. The estimation around credit risk
management necessitates the following measures to be quantified for capital and provisioning
purposes:
• Expected Loss: The average loss that the organisation expects from an exposure over a
fixed time period, usually a year
• Unexpected Loss: The loss that the organisation incurs over and above the average loss
expected from an exposure over a certain time period, usually a year. It is also known as the
variation in Expected Loss and includes the possibility of large losses
There are 3 integral components (known as risk components) that are required to be estimated
for credit risk quantification.
I. Probability of Default (PD): It refers to the probability / risk / chance of a borrower
defaulting* on the payment of the credit obligations, within a given time horizon, usually one
year.
II. Loss Given Default (LGD): It refers to the loss likely to be suffered in the event of a default
occurring in an exposure. It takes into account the amount of recoveries likely to be made
post default.
III. Exposure at Default (EAD): It refers to the amount that is exposed to the default risk. It is
usually the amount outstanding as well as undrawn commitment that is expected to be drawn
by the time of default.
A range of statistical or expert judgement techniques are used to estimate risk components (PD,
LGD, EAD) for both funded and non-funded exposures.
*Default definition as per Bank for International Settlement (BIS) - A default is considered to have
occurred with regard to a particular obligor when either or both of the two following events have
taken place: (i) The bank considers that the obligor is unlikely to pay its credit obligations to the
banking group in full, without recourse by the bank to actions such as realising security (if held).
(ii) The obligor is past due more than 90 days on any material credit obligation to the banking
group.
8.5.1 Estimation of Probability of Default (PD)
Given the requirement or constraints, PD can be calculated for a single obligor or a group of
obligors with similar credit risk features. The former method is more prevalent in corporate book
and the latter in retail book.
Types of PD Estimation
1. Pooling Method: This method relies on the historical data and assumes that past defaults
are a reasonable predictor for future likelihood of losses. Historical PD is calculated by taking the
ratio of the facilities that have defaulted to the total facilities that existed in the concerned time
frame, usually a year. In this method, the facilities are divided into different categories/pools based
on their risk drivers.
2. Statistical Method: Data on characteristics of retail obligors and corporate obligors can be
used to estimate their respective probability of defaults. Various statistical techniques can be
employed on the data to estimate PD for defined time horizons. The statistical model specifies the
relationship between the inputs and the outcome – PD. The parameters determined depend on the
data used to develop the model.
One of the most recommended statistical techniques to estimate PD is logistic regression. This
method of regression is applicable when the dependent variable is binary i.e. takes one of the two
available values i.e. default & non default. This variable indicates whether or not the loan/debt has
gone into default over a certain time horizon, usually a year. Some of the common variable
sources used to estimate the PD of a corporate are financial statements, owner’s data, type of
loan, size of loan, and industry of the company. Similarly, for retail obligors, variable sources could
be customer demographics, income statistics, age of loan, and number of late payments etc.
3. Structural Method: This method is generally applicable for listed corporate entities wherein
structural models are used to calculate the probability of default for a corporate based on the value
of its assets and liabilities. This technique is a sophisticated approach and requires valuation
models to be applied for firm valuation.
Over a period of time, we propose to collate other statistical relevant inputs to explore possibilities
of using statistical method for PD calculation as well as to improve portfolio quality.
8.5.2 Estimation of Loss Given Default
A bank / financial institution incur a loss when a company to which it has lent money, or entered
into a contract with, defaults on its payments. Loss Given Default (LGD) is defined as the
percentage loss rate on EAD, given the obligor defaults. It provides the loss that a bank is bound
to incur when a default occurs. The components of the loss that will be incurred, given the obligor
defaults are Loss of principal, Carrying costs and Workout expenses
Value of LGD varies with the economic cycle, so the following variations in LGD are defined:
• Cyclical LGD (Point-in-Time LGD) - Cyclical LGD is calculated based on the recent data and
its value depends on the economic cycle
• Long-run LGD (Through-the-Cycle LGD) - Long-run LGD represents the average long-term
LGD, corresponding to a non-cyclical scenario that is not dependent on the time the LGD is
calculated
• Downturn LGD - Downturn LGD represents the LGD at the worst time of the economic cycle
The current document is based on cyclical LGD calculation for our portfolio. As the data gets
enriched over time, the long run LGD would be gradually adopted.
8.6 Credit Default Swaps
A Credit Default Swap (CDS) is a financial swap agreement that the seller of the CDS will
compensate the buyer (usually the creditor of the reference loan) in the event of a loan default (by
the debtor) or other credit event. That is, the seller of the CDS insures the buyer against some
reference loan defaulting. The buyer of the CDS makes a series of payments (the CDS "fee" or
"spread") to the seller and, in exchange, receives a payoff if the loan defaults. It was invented by
Blythe Masters from JP Morgan in 1994.
In the event of default, the buyer of the CDS receives compensation (usually the face value of the
loan), and the seller of the CDS takes possession of the defaulted loan. However, anyone can
purchase a CDS, even buyers who do not hold the loan instrument and who have no direct
insurable interest in the loan (these are called "naked" CDSs). If there are more CDS contracts
outstanding than bonds in existence, a protocol exists to hold a credit event auction; the payment
received is usually substantially less than the face value of the loan.
Credit default swaps have existed since 1994, and increased in use in the early 2000s. CDSs are
not traded on an exchange and there is no required reporting of transactions to a government
agency. During the 2007–2010 financial crisis the lack of transparency in this large market became
a concern to regulators as it could pose a systemic risk.
As an example, imagine that an investor buys a CDS from AAA-Bank, where the reference entity is
Risky Corp. The investor—the buyer of protection—will make regular payments to AAA-Bank—the
seller of protection. If Risky Corp defaults on its debt, the investor receives a one-time payment
from AAA-Bank, and the CDS contract is terminated.
If the investor actually owns Risky Corp's debt (i.e., is owed money by Risky Corp), a CDS can act
as a hedge. But investors can also buy CDS contracts referencing Risky Corp debt without actually
owning any Risky Corp debt. This may be done for speculative purposes, to bet against the
solvency of Risky Corp in a gamble to make money, or to hedge investments in other companies
whose fortunes are expected to be similar to those of Risky Corp.
If the reference entity (i.e., Risky Corp) defaults, one of two kinds of settlement can occur:
• the investor delivers a defaulted asset to Bank for payment of the par value, which is known
as physical settlement;
• AAA-Bank pays the investor the difference between the par value and the market price of a
specified debt obligation (even if Risky Corp defaults there is usually some recovery, i.e., not
all the investor's money is lost), which is known as cash settlement.
The "spread" of a CDS is the annual amount the protection buyer must pay the protection seller
over the length of the contract, expressed as a percentage of the notional amount. For example, if
the CDS spread of Risky Corp is 50 basis points, or 0.5% (1 basis point = 0.01%), then an investor
buying $10 million worth of protection from AAA-Bank must pay the bank $50,000. Payments are
usually made on a quarterly basis, in arrears. These payments continue until either the CDS
contract expires or Risky Corp defaults.
All things being equal, at any given time, if the maturity of two credit default swaps is the same,
then the CDS associated with a company with a higher CDS spread is considered more likely to
default by the market, since a higher fee is being charged to protect against this happening.
However, factors such as liquidity and estimated loss given default can affect the comparison.
Credit spread rates and credit ratings of the underlying or reference obligations are considered
among money managers to be the best indicators of the likelihood of sellers of CDSs having to
perform under these contracts.
Key features of RBI guidelines on CDS
• Participants in the CDS market are classified as either users or market makers. User entities
are permitted to buy credit protection (buy CDS contracts) only to hedge their underlying
credit risk on corporate bonds. Such entities are not permitted to hold credit protection
without having eligible underlying as a hedged item. The users cannot buy CDS for amounts
higher than the face value of corporate bonds. This is the most important point of difference,
as there was no such limitation in United States of America prior to 2008, and hence many
Institutional players had taken huge long positions (in CDS) without having any exposure to
reference asset.
• Since the users are envisaged to use the CDS only for hedging their credit risks, assumed
due to their investment in corporate bonds, they shall not, at any point of time, maintain
naked CDS protection i.e. CDS purchase position without having an eligible underlying bonds
held by them and for periods longer than the tenor of corporate bonds held by them.
• The eligible entities under user’s category would be Commercial Banks, PDs, NBFCs, Mutual
Funds, Insurance Companies, Housing Finance Companies, Provident Funds, Listed
Corporates, Foreign Institutional Investors (FIIs) and any other institution specifically
permitted by the Reserve Bank of India.
• CDS will be allowed only on listed corporate bonds as reference obligations. However, CDS
can also be written on unlisted but rated bonds of infrastructure companies. This is another
major area of difference between the US markets and RBI guidelines. In United States of
America, the CDS were written on various pass through securities like Mortgage Backed
Security (MBS), Collateralized Debt Obligation (CDO) etc, whereas as per the RBI guidelines,
the CDS are specifically restricted for listed corporate bonds, the obvious reason being that
there is no big market of pass through securities in India as it is in US.
• The credit events specified in the CDS contract may cover: Bankruptcy, Failure to pay,
Repudiation/moratorium, Obligation acceleration, Obligation default, Restructuring approved
under Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (BIFR) and Corporate Debt
Restructuring (CDR) mechanism and corporate bond restructuring.
• Since, CDS are traded mainly over-the-counter (OTC), the contracting parties therefore have
to agree upon the terms and conditions of the CDS individually. In order to facilitate
documentation, and to avoid disputes as to whether a credit event had actually occurred and
how a contract should best be settled, CDS contracting parties (in the international and US
market) generally refer to the International Swaps and Derivatives Association (ISDA) Master
Agreement. In India, the RBI guidelines specifically states that Fixed Income Money Market
and Derivatives Association of India (FIMMDA) shall devise a Master Agreement for Indian
CDS
• Regarding the Settlement procedures, the RBI Guideline states that the parties to the CDS
transaction shall determine upfront, the procedure and method of settlement
(cash/physical/auction) to be followed in the event of occurrence of a credit event and
document the same in the CDS documentation. However it further adds that for transactions
involving users, physical settlement is mandatory. For all other transactions, market-makers
have been permitted to opt for any of the three settlement methods (physical, cash and
auction), provided the CDS documentation envisages such settlement
• Further, the guidelines specifically provide norms for Prevention of mis-selling and market
abuse, wherein it requires protection sellers to ensure that CDS transactions shall be
undertaken only on obtaining from the counterparty, a copy of a resolution passed by their
Board of Directors, authorizing the counterparty to transact in CDS.
• RBI has also incorporated certain reporting requirements in the guidelines which would
require market makers to report their CDS trades with both users and other market makers on
the reporting platform of CDS trade repository within 30 minutes from the deal time. The
users would be required to affirm or reject their trade already reported by the market- maker
by the end of the day. In addition to these reporting requirements the participants are also
required to report to respective regulators (e.g. IRDA for Insurance companies) information as
required by them such as risk positions of the participants vis-à-vis their net worth and
adherence to risk limits, etc.
8.7 Credit Insurance
Trade credit insurance, business credit insurance, export credit insurance, or credit insurance is an
insurance policy and a risk management product offered by private insurance companies and
governmental export credit agencies to business entities wishing to protect their accounts
receivable from loss due to credit risks such as protracted default, insolvency or bankruptcy. This
insurance product is a type of property and casualty insurance and should not be confused with
such products as credit life or credit disability insurance, which individuals obtain to protect against
the risk of loss of income needed to pay debts. Trade credit insurance can include a component of
political risk insurance which is offered by the same insurers to insure the risk of non-payment by
foreign buyers due to currency issues, political unrest, expropriation etc.
8.8 Difference between Credit Insurance and Credit Default Swaps
CDS contracts have obvious similarities with insurance, because the buyer pays a premium and, in
return, receives a sum of money if an adverse event occurs.
However, there are also many differences, the most important being that an insurance contract
provides an indemnity against the losses actually suffered by the policy holder on an asset in
which it holds an insurable interest. By contrast a CDS provides an equal payout to all holders,
calculated using an agreed, market-wide method. The holder does not need to own the underlying
security and does not even have to suffer a loss from the default event. The CDS can therefore be
used to speculate on debt objects.
The other differences include:
• The seller might in principle not be a regulated entity (though in practice most are banks);
• The seller is not required to maintain reserves to cover the protection sold (this was a
principal cause of AIG's financial distress in 2008; it had insufficient reserves to meet the
"run" of expected payouts caused by the collapse of the housing bubble);
• Insurance requires the buyer to disclose all known risks, while CDSs do not (the CDS seller
can in many cases still determine potential risk, as the debt instrument being "insured" is a
market commodity available for inspection, but in the case of certain instruments like CDOs
made up of "slices" of debt packages, it can be difficult to tell exactly what is being insured);
• Insurers manage risk primarily by setting loss reserves based on the Law of large numbers
and actuarial analysis. Dealers in CDSs manage risk primarily by means of hedging with
The original data sample consisted of 66 firms, half of which had filed for bankruptcy under
Chapter 7. All businesses in the database were manufacturers, and small firms with assets of < $1
million were eliminated.
The original Z-score formula was as follows:
Z= 1.2X1 + 1.4X2 + 3.3X3 + 0.6X4 + 1.0X5.
X1 = working capital / total assets. Measures liquid assets in relation to the size of the company.
X2 = retained earnings / total assets. Measures profitability that reflects the company's age and
earning power.
X3 = earnings before interest and taxes / total assets. Measures operating efficiency apart from
tax and leveraging factors. It recognizes operating earnings as being important to long-term
viability.
X4 = market value of equity / book value of total liabilities. Adds market dimension that can show
up security price fluctuation as a possible red flag.
X5 = sales / total assets. Standard measure for total asset turnover (varies greatly from industry
to industry).
Altman found that the ratio profile for the bankrupt group fell at −0.25 avg, and for the non-
bankrupt group at +4.48 avg.
In its initial test, the Altman Z-Score was found to be 72% accurate in predicting bankruptcy two
years before the event, with a Type II error (false negatives) of 6% (Altman, 1968). In a series of
subsequent tests covering three periods over the next 31 years (up until 1999), the model was
found to be approximately 80%–90% accurate in predicting bankruptcy one year before the event,
with a Type II error (classifying the firm as bankrupt when it does not go bankrupt) of
approximately 15% –20% (Altman, 2000).
From about 1985 onwards, the Z-scores gained wide acceptance by auditors, management
accountants, courts, and database systems used for loan evaluation (Eidleman). The formula's
approach has been used in a variety of contexts and countries, although it was designed originally
for publicly held manufacturing companies with assets of more than $1 million. Later variations by
Altman were designed to be applicable to privately held companies (the Altman Z'-Score) and non-
manufacturing companies (the Altman Z"-Score).
Neither the Altman models nor other balance sheet-based models are recommended for use with
financial companies. This is because of the opacity of financial companies' balance sheets and
their frequent use of off-balance sheet items. There are market-based formulas used to predict the
default of financial firms (such as the Merton Model), but these have limited predictive value
because they rely on market data (fluctuations of share and options prices to imply fluctuations in
asset values) to predict a market event (default, i.e., the decline in asset values below the value of
a firm's liabilities).
commonly stated as percentages from 0 to 100%. An R-squared of 100% means all movements of
a security are completely explained by movements in the index. A high R-squared, between 85%
and 100%, indicates the fund's performance patterns have been in line with the index. A fund with
a low R-squared, at 70% or less, indicates the security does not act much like the index. A higher
R-squared value indicates a more useful beta figure. For example, if a fund has an R-squared
value of close to 100% but has a beta below 1, it is most likely offering higher risk-adjusted
returns.
9.2.1 Return on Risk Adjusted Capital (RORAC)
The return on risk-adjusted capital (RORAC) is a rate of return statistic commonly used in financial
analysis, where varying projects, endeavours and investments are evaluated based on capital at
risk. Projects with different risk profiles are easier to compare to each other once their individual
RORAC values have been calculated.
RORAC = Net income / Allocated Risk Capital
Allocated risk capital is the firm's capital, adjusted for a maximum potential loss based on
estimated future earnings distributions or the volatility of earnings. Companies use RORAC to
place greater emphasis on firm-wide risk management. For example, different corporate divisions
with unique managers can use RORAC to quantify and maintain acceptable risk-exposure levels.
With RORAC, however, the capital is adjusted for risk, not the rate of return. RORAC is used when
the risk varies depending on the capital asset being analyzed.
For example, assume a firm is evaluating two projects it has engaged in over the previous year
and needs to decide which one to eliminate. Project A had total revenues of ` 100,000 and total
expenses of ` 50,000. The total risk-weighted assets involved in the project are ` 400,000. Project
B had total revenues of ` 200,000 and total expenses of ` 100,000. The total risk-weighted assets
involved in Project B are ` 900,000. The RORACs are calculated as below:
Project A RORAC = ` 1,00,000 – ` 50,000 / ` 4,00,000 = 12.5%
Project B RAROC = ` 2,00,000 – ` 100000 / ` 9,00,000 = 11.1%
Even though Project B had twice as much revenue as Project A, once the risk-weighted capital of
the projects are taken into account, it is clear that Project A has a better RORAC.
9.2.2 Economic Capital
Economic capital is the amount of capital that a firm, usually in financial services, needs to ensure
that the company stays solvent given its risk profile. Economic capital is calculated internally,
sometimes using proprietary models, and is the amount of capital that the firm should have to
support any risks that it takes
Calculations of economic capital and their use in risk/reward ratios reveal which business lines a
bank should pursue that maximize the risk-reward trade-off. Performance measures that utilize
economic capital include return on risk adjusted capital (RORAC), risk adjusted return on capital
(RAROC) and economic value added (EVA). Business units that perform better on measures like
these can receive more of the firm's capital in order to optimize risk. Value-at-risk (VaR) and
similar measures are also based on economic capital and are used by financial institutions for risk
management.
9.2.3 Value at Risk (VaR)
Value at risk (VaR) is a statistical technique used to measure and quantify the level of financial risk
within a firm or investment portfolio over a specific time frame. This metric is most commonly used
by investment and commercial banks to determine the extent and occurrence ratio of potential
losses in their institutional portfolios. VaR calculations can be applied to specific positions or
portfolios as a whole or to measure firm-wide risk exposure. VaR modelling determines the
potential for loss in the entity being assessed, as well as the probability of occurrence for the
defined loss. VaR is measured by assessing the amount of potential loss, the probability of
occurrence for the amount of loss and the time frame. For example, a financial firm may determine
an asset has a 3% one-month VaR of 2%, representing a 3% chance of the asset declining in
value by 2% during the one-month time frame. The conversion of the 3% chance of occurrence to
a daily ratio places the odds of a 2% loss at one day per month.
9.2.4 Risk – adjusted Return on Capital (RAROC)
Risk-adjusted return on capital (RAROC) is a risk-based profitability measurement framework for
analysing risk-adjusted financial performance and providing a consistent view of profitability across
businesses. The concept was developed by Bankers Trust and principal designer Dan Borge in the
late 1970s. Note, however, that more and more return on risk adjusted capital (RORAC) is used as
a measure, whereby the risk adjustment of Capital is based on the capital adequacy guidelines as
outlined by the Basel Committee, currently Basel III.
RAROC = Expected return / Economic Capital OR RAROC = Expected Return / Value at Risk
Broadly speaking, in business enterprises, risk is traded off against benefit. RAROC is defined as
the ratio of risk adjusted return to economic capital. The economic capital is the amount of money
which is needed to secure the survival in a worst-case scenario, it is a buffer against unexpected
shocks in market values. Economic capital is a function of market risk, credit risk, and operational
risk, and is often calculated by VaR. This use of capital based on risk improves the capital
allocation across different functional areas of banks, insurance companies, or any business in
which capital is placed at risk for an expected return above the risk-free rate.
RAROC system allocates capital for two basic reasons:
(a) Risk management
(b) Performance evaluation
For risk management purposes, the main goal of allocating capital to individual business units is to
determine the bank's optimal capital structure—that is economic capital allocation is closely
correlated with individual business risk. As a performance evaluation tool, it allows banks to assign
capital to business units based on the economic value added of each unit.
9.3 Ratios and Financial Assessment
For any Credit or Finance professional, it is critical to examine and analyze the Audited Financials
of the past 5 years of the company / borrower, in detail. They should additionally require to seek
and assess the latest audited or provisional quarterly / semi-annual financial data of the company.
Once the financial information has been gathered, the analysis should include the following critical
ratios:
9.3.1 Financial Statement analysis
(a) Sales Growth Rate – This ratio gives us a trend whether the growth / decline in topline is
consistent and hence sustainable over the projected period or it’s a spurt in one of the years.
The ratio is : ((Yr2 Sales – Yr1 Sales) / Yr1 Sales)*100
(b) EBITDA% - EBIDTA refers to Earnings before interest, depreciation and tax. This gives us a
fair idea how much profit the borrower is making from its business at operating level. This
eliminates the effects of financing and accounting decisions thus giving profitability purely
from operations. Ratio is (EBIDTA / Net Sales)*100
(c) PAT% - This is the net earnings after all the expenses before appropriation to reserves and
distribution to shareholders in the form of dividend. Ratio is (PAT / Net Sales)*100
(d) EBIDTA / Interest – This ratio gives us the measure of company’s ability to meet its interest
expenses through operating profits.
(e) Net Fixed asset turnover ratio – This ratio indicates how well the borrower is using its fixed
assets to generate sales. If a company has a higher fixed asset turnover ratio than its
competitors it is using its assets well to generate the topline.
(f) Total Debt / TNW – Tangible Networth (TNW) is most commonly a calculation of the networth
of a company that excludes any value derived from intangible assets such as copyrights,
patents, intellectual property etc.
Tangible Networth = Total Assets – Total Liabilities – Intangible Assets
The ratio Total Debt / TNW – this measures the proportions of company’s borrowed funds to
equity. The ratio indicates the financial risk to which a business is subjected, since excessive
debt can lead to financial difficulties. A high gearing ratio is indicative of high debt, which in
business downturn may pose trouble on the borrower in meeting its debt repayment
schedules.
(g) Debt Service Coverage ratio (DSCR) – is a measure of the cash flow available to pay current
debt obligations. The ratio states net operating income as a multiple of debt obligations due
within one year, including interest, principal. Ratio is (PAT + Dep + Interest) / (Current portion
Credit scoring models which are alternatively called as scorecards are primarily used to inform
management for decision making and to provide predictive analysis or the information on the
potential delinquency of the loan approved or credit line extended. Adoption of the credit scoring
model is vital for the organization as it’s a base to determine the credit management policy.
Erroneous, misused, misunderstood, or poorly developed and managed scoring models may lead
to lost revenues through poor customer selection (credit risk) or collections management.
The usage of credit models are as follows but not limited to:
• Controlling risk selection
• Translating the risk of default into appropriate pricing
• Managing credit losses
• Evaluating new loan programs.
• Reducing loan approval processing time
Most likely, scoring and modeling will increasingly guide risk management program in an
organization through end to end. The increasing regulatory requirements are the guide to use
scoring and modeling to be embedded in management’s lending decisions and risk management
processes which accentuates the importance of understanding scoring model concepts and
underlying risks.
10.2 Types of Credit Scoring Model
Credit scoring models are mainly used by the credit rating agency to determine the credit
worthiness of an individual. The degree of creditworthiness is denoted by the credit scores for
each individual. Now a days, many financial institutions are using credit scores to evaluate the
potential risks exposure by lending the money to consumers and to mitigate the losses
organization may suffer by the default risk. To determine the credit score various credit scoring
models are available through the agencies or credit bureaus.
In this section lets understand the different models predominantly used across the world. These
are mix of statistical or behavioral scoring models.
FICO Score It imperative to have knowledge about the credit. Bad credit history has
the impact on borrower’s future. If you want to be better versed about
your credit, resorting to FICO Score could be a great place to start.
A FICO Score is a powerful measure of the creditworthiness as a lender
might refer. FICO Scores are used in 90% of credit decisions, so they’re
a very good barometer of how your credit can look to potential lenders.
Credit score ranges between 300 – 850 points
Scoring ranges are just one of the tools lenders can use to link ranges of
values with associated characteristics and metrics at-a-glance, allowing
Governance Risks
• Absence of effective corporate governance framework and documented governance policies
• The rights of shareholders and key ownership functions are not defined and communicated
• There is no equitable treatment of shareholders
To evaluate and assess Governance Risks it is highly recommended to study the Sound Risk
Governance Practices recommended by the Financial Stability Board in 2013. The list
extracts some of the better practices exemplified by national authorities and firms. The sound
practices also build on some of the principles and recommendations published by other
organisations and standard setters, drawing together those that are relevant for risk governance.
This integrated and coherent list of sound practices aims to help national authorities and firms
continue to improve their risk governance. This list is summarized as below:
(i) The Board of Directors
a) avoids conflicts of interest arising from the concentration of power at the board (e.g., by
having separate persons as board chairman and CEO or having a lead independent
director where the board chairman and CEO are the same person);
b) comprises members who collectively bring a balance of expertise (e.g., risk
management and financial industry expertise), skills, experience and perspectives;
c) comprises largely independent directors and there is a clear definition of independence
that distinguishes between independent directors and non-executive directors;
d) sets out clear terms of references for itself and its sub-committees (including tenure
limits for committee members and the chairs), and establishes a regular and transparent
communication mechanism to ensure continuous and robust dialogue and information
sharing between the board and its sub-committees;
e) conducts periodic reviews of performance of the board and its sub-committees (by the
board nomination or governance committee, the board themselves, or an external party);
this includes reviewing, at a minimum annually, the qualifications of directors and their
collective skills (including financial and risk expertise), their time commitment and
capacity to review information and understand the firm’s business model, and the
specialised training required to identify desired skills for the board or for director
recruitment or renewal;
f) sets the tone from the top, and seeks to effectively inculcate an appropriate risk culture
throughout the firm;
g) is responsible for overseeing management’s effective implementation of a firm-wide risk
management framework and policies within the firm;
h) approves the risk appetite framework and ensures it is directly linked to the business
strategy, capital plan, financial plan and compensation;
i) has access to any information requested and receives information from its committees
at least quarterly;
j) meets with national authorities, at least quarterly, either individually or as a group.
(ii) The risk committee
a) is required to be a stand-alone committee, distinct from the audit committee;
b) has a chair who is an independent director and avoids “dual-hatting” with the chair of the
board, or any other committee;
taking into account the complexity and risks of the firm as well as its Risk Assessment
Framework (RAF) and strategic business plans;
f) is actively involved in key decision-making processes from a risk perspective (e.g., the
review of the business strategy/strategic planning, new product approvals, stress
testing, recovery and resolution planning, mergers and acquisitions, funding and liquidity
management planning) and can challenge management’s decisions and
recommendations;
g) is involved in the setting of risk-related performance indicators for business units;
h) meets, at a minimum quarterly, with the firm’s supervisor to discuss the scope and
coverage of the work of the risk management function.
f) It conducts stress tests (including reverse stress tests) periodically and by demand. Stress
test programs and results (group-wide stress tests, risk categories and stress test metrics)
are adequately reviewed and updated to the board or risk committee. Where stress limits are
breached or unexpected losses are incurred, proposed management actions are discussed at
the board or risk committee. Results of stress tests are incorporated in the review of budgets,
RAF and ICAAP processes, and in the establishment of contingency plans against stressed
conditions.
identifies business risks relevant to the preparation of financial statements in accordance with the
entity’s applicable financial reporting framework, estimates their significance, assesses the
likelihood of their occurrence, and decides upon actions to respond to and manage them and the
results thereof.
For example, the entity’s risk assessment process may address how the entity considers the
possibility of unrecorded transactions or identifies and analyses significant estimates recorded in
the financial statements. Risks relevant to reliable financial reporting include external and internal
events, transactions or circumstances that may occur and adversely affect an entity’s ability to
initiate, record, process, and report financial data consistent with the assertions of management in
the financial statements. Management may initiate plans, programs, or actions to address specific
risks or it may decide to accept a risk because of cost or other considerations.
Risks can arise or change due to the following circumstances:
a) Changes in operating environment. Changes in the regulatory or operating environment can
result in changes in competitive pressures and significantly different risks.
b) New personnel. New personnel may have a different focus on or understanding of internal
control.
c) New or revamped information systems. Significant and rapid changes in information systems
can change the risk relating to internal control.
d) Rapid growth. Significant and rapid expansion of operations can strain controls and increase the
risk of a breakdown in controls.
e) New technology. Incorporating new technologies into production processes or information
systems may change the risk associated with internal control.
f) New business models, products, or activities. Entering into business areas or transactions with
which an entity has little experience may introduce new risks associated with internal control.
g) Corporate restructurings. Restructurings may be accompanied by staff reductions and changes
in supervision and segregation of duties that may change the risk associated with internal control.
h) Expanded foreign operations. The expansion or acquisition of foreign operations carries new
and often unique risks that may affect internal control, for example, additional or changed risks
from foreign currency transactions.
i) New accounting pronouncements. Adoption of new accounting principles or changing
accounting principles may affect risks in preparing financial statements.
3.2 Role of Risk Assessment with respect to Financial Reporting
Risk assessment underlines the entire audit process described by the ICAI guidance note,
including the determination of significant accounts and disclosures and relevant assertions, the
selection of controls to test, and the determination of the evidence necessary for a given control. A
direct relationship exists between the degrees of risk that a significant deficiency or material
weakness could exist in a particular area of the company's internal financial controls over financial
reporting and the amount of audit attention that should be devoted to that area. In addition, the risk
that a company's internal financial controls over financial reporting will fail to prevent or detect a
misstatement caused by fraud usually is higher than the risk of failure to prevent or detect error.
The auditor should focus more of his or her attention on the areas of highest risk. On the other
hand, it is not necessary to test controls that, even if deficient, would not present a reasonable
possibility of material misstatement to the financial statements. The complexity of the organisation,
business unit, or process, will play an important role in the auditor's risk assessment and the
determination of the necessary procedures.
3.3 Risk Based Internal Auditing (RBIA)
The definition of internal audit, as described in the Preface to the Standards on Internal Audit,
issued by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India, amply reflects the current thinking as to
what is an internal audit: Internal audit is an independent management function, which involves a
continuous and critical appraisal of the functioning of an entity with a view to suggest
improvements thereto and add value to and strengthen the overall governance mechanism of the
entity, including the entity's strategic risk management and internal control system.
Internal auditors can carry out their job in a more focused manner by directing their efforts in the
areas where there is a greater risk, thereby enhancing the overall efficiency of the process and
adding greater value with the same set of resources.
Internal audit is a management function, thus, it has the high-level objective of serving
management's needs through constructive recommendations in areas such as, internal control,
risk, utilisation of resources, compliance with laws, management information system, etc.
Risk management enables management to effectively deal with risk, associated uncertainty and
enhancing the capacity to build value to the entity or enterprise and its stakeholders. Internal
auditor plays an important role in providing assurance to management on the effectiveness of risk
management.
Boards of Directors are increasingly becoming risk aware and risk focused. Expectations from
internal auditors are increasing from providing an assurance on the adequacy and effectiveness of
internal controls to an assurance on whether risks are being managed within acceptable limits as
defined by the Board of Directors. This has given to birth Risk Based Audit Methodologies that are
pursued by Auditors.
The business environment is increasingly throwing up newer challenges and opportunities with
globalisation, disruptive technologies and rules being continuously rewritten. New risks are hence
coming up frequently. Risk management is the process of measuring or assessing risk and
developing strategies to manage it. The 21st century internal auditors have the following vital
areas of responsibility in the field of risk management:
• Review operations, policies, and procedures.
• Help ensure that goals and objectives are met.
the Annual Report of the Board of Directors must include a statement indicating the development
and implementation of a risk management policy for the company. This should include the
identification of elements of risk, if any, which in the opinion of the Board may threaten the
existence of the company.
The audit committee is directed to act in accordance with the terms of reference specified in
writing by the Board, which shall, inter alia, include evaluation of risk management systems. The
code of conduct prescribes that the Independent Directors should satisfy themselves that systems
of risk management are robust and defensible.
4.1.2 Provisions of the SEBI (Listing Obligations and Disclosure Requirements)
Regulations 2015
SEBI Listing Requirements as applicable to listed entities in India is a comprehensive set of
guidelines that are prepared on the lines of international practices. As per SEBI (Listing
Obligations and Disclosure Requirements) Regulations 2015 following risk management
disclosures are mandatory for listed entities in India.
i) Under responsibility of Directors - Ensuring the integrity of the listed entity‘s accounting and
financial reporting systems, including the independent audit, and that appropriate systems of
control are in place, in particular, systems for risk management, financial and operational
control, and compliance with the law and relevant standards.
ii) The board of directors shall ensure that, while rightly encouraging positive thinking, these do
not result in over-optimism that either leads to significant risks not being recognised or
exposes the listed entity to excessive risk.
iii) The board of directors shall have ability to “step back” to assist executive management by
challenging the assumptions underlying: strategy, strategic initiatives (such as acquisitions),
risk appetite, exposures and the key areas of the listed entity‘s focus.
iv) The listed entity shall lay down procedures to inform members of board of directors about risk
assessment and minimization procedures.
v) The board of directors shall be responsible for framing, implementing and monitoring the risk
management plan for the listed entity.
vi) The board of directors shall constitute a Risk Management Committee.
The majority of members of Risk Management Committee shall consist of members of the
board of directors.
The Chairperson of the Risk management committee shall be a member of the board of
directors and senior executives of the listed entity may be members of the committee.
The board of directors shall define the role and responsibility of the Risk Management
Committee and may delegate monitoring and reviewing of the risk management plan to the
committee and such other functions as it may deem fit.
The provisions of this regulation shall be applicable to top 100 listed entities, determined on
the basis of market capitalisation, as at the end of the immediate previous financial year.
vii) Under minimum information to be placed before the Board on a quarterly basis- Quarterly
details of foreign exchange exposures and the steps taken by management to limit the risks
of adverse exchange rate movement, if material.
viii) Under disclosures in Annual Reports applicable to all listed entities except banks-
Management Discussion and Analysis: This section shall include discussion on the following
matters within the limits set by the listed entity‘s competitive position:
(a) Industry structure and developments.
(b) Opportunities and Threats.
(c) Segment–wise or product-wise performance.
(d) Outlook
(e) Risks and concerns.
(f) Internal control systems and their adequacy.
(g) Discussion on financial performance with respect to operational performance.
(h) Material developments in Human Resources / Industrial Relations front, including
number of people employed.
(i) Details of significant changes (i.e. change of 25% or more as compared to the
immediately previous financial year) in key financial ratios, along with detailed
explanations therefor, including:
(i) Debtors Turnover
(ii) Inventory Turnover
(iii) Interest Coverage Ratio
(iv) Current Ratio
(v) Debt Equity Ratio
(vi) Operating Profit Margin (%)
(vii) Net Profit Margin (%) or sector-specific equivalent ratios, as applicable.
(j) Details of any change in Return on Net Worth as compared to the immediately previous
financial year along with a detailed explanation thereof.]
General information to shareholders: Under this head the information related to Commodity
Price Risk or Foreign Exchange Risk and related Hedging activities are covered.
International Federation of Accountants (IFAC) states that Integrated Reporting is the way to
achieve a more coherent corporate reporting system, fulfilling a need for a single report that
provides a fuller picture of organizations’ ability to create value. Integrated reporting can be used
as an “umbrella” report for an organization’s broad suite of reports and communications, enabling
greater interconnectedness between different reports. IFAC also strongly supports the
International Integrated Reporting Council and the implementation of its Framework.
IFAC’s position paper No. 8 addresses reporting that provides decision-useful information to
organizational stakeholders beyond that which is provided in traditional financial reporting and
financial statements, and may provide important links between that financial reporting and other
organizational reporting.
Risk & Opportunity Reporting (ROR) is a key component in the IRF. The details of the ROR as part
of the IRF are as under:-
a. Key risks impacting ability to create value in short term, medium term and long term- these
could be from:-
i) Internal sources – business related risks
ii) External sources-from external environment
b. Key opportunities like those related to process improvement, employee training and
relationships management.
c. Organisation assessment of likelihood that the risk or opportunity will fructify and probability
or certainty of same.
d. Steps taken to mitigate or manage key risks or create value from key opportunities including
identification of associated strategic objectives, policies, targets and KPIs.
4.3 Risk Management Disclosures – A Global Case Study
Let us study the annual report of Global major operating in the retail sector in 2016; Principal Risk
and Uncertainties Disclosure in a summarised manner describes all the Principal Risk Factors
covering Customer Proposition, Transformation of economic model, Liquidity, Competition and
Markets, Brand, Reputation and Trust, Technology, Data Security and Privacy, Regulatory and
Compliance, Safety, People, etc. Further, the Board discloses that three scenarios have been
modelled, considered severe but plausible, that encompass these identified risks. None of these
scenarios individually threaten the viability of the Company; therefore the compound impact of
these scenarios has been evaluated as the most severe stress scenario.
Scenario Associated principal risks Description
Competitive • Brand, reputation and trust Failure to respond to fierce
pressure • Competition and markets competition and changes in the
• Customer retail market drives sustained
significant like-for-like volume
Policies could cover the transfer of risk, such as whether or not to hedge or insure against certain
risks, depending upon the costs and practicalities involved. They could establish criteria and
thresholds for reporting and guiding management responses. Directors need to ensure effective
processes and practices are in place for the identification and management of risks. How complex
and comprehensive do these needs to be once the most likely and significant risks have been
addressed?
Assumptions and business models should be periodically challenged. An assessment of the
implications, consequences and dependencies of certain corporate strategies, policies and
projects might reveal exposure and vulnerability. Corporate systems and processes need to be
sufficiently resilient to be able to withstand the simultaneous materialization of multiple risks.
For example,
• Should an interruption in certain supplies occur, might just in time approaches result in
shortages?
• What external and objective advice does the board receive in relation to risk?
• Overall, from the board perspective, what more needs to be done to build a risk resilient
enterprise?
5.1 Corporate Risk Management
Are people within the organization and its supply chain aware of the diversity, incidence and
severity of some categories of risk? For example, while overall relationships with customers might
seem acceptable, what about particular relationships with key customers that are especially at
risk? When addressing questions read the road ahead. A small account might have growth
potential and could become strategically significant in the future.
Directors need to make sure that a management team and executives are not so focused upon
listing and addressing individual risks that they overlook the interrelationship of different risk
factors. An incident or development in one area can often have consequences elsewhere. For
example, too many errors and exceptions can lead to overload and may bring down a system.
How well positioned is a company in respect of certain risks? Is the risk culture of the organization
appropriate in relation to its activities, its operations and the opportunities it faces? A degree of
balance is required. An excessively risk averse culture could prevent progress, but a step change
increase in risk might be unsettling for some investors. High risk in certain areas can sometimes
be balanced within a portfolio of activities and products by other items with lower risk profiles.
Processes and systems need to be adaptive as well as resilient. The nature and source of risks
can change. As old ones are addressed so new ones may emerge. Are risk registers and
management reports relating to risk over generalized? How realistic are they in relation to
assessments of risk and planned corporate responses? Do they provide sufficient evidence and
explanation to inform the board’s own reporting of risk to shareholders?
Some boards regularly review schedules of risks notified by management, but rarely consider less
predictable and external risks such as natural disasters, an act of terrorism or political instability.
Does issue monitoring and management involve identifying and ranking developments in the
eternal business environment and assessing their impact upon a company and its customers and
supply chain? Do the results feed into risk management processes? Is the risk management team
involved in deciding what action a company needs to take in response?
Certain unpredictable events might potentially have huge implications for companies and their
activities. Corporations have had their assets and operations nationalized as a result of regime
change. How resistant would offices and plants be to gales, floods or a tsunami or earthquake?
How should a company cope with a terrorist attack, a pandemic, a sudden interruption to its supply
chain, the loss of key staff, or a breakdown of law and order? Are contingency arrangements and
backup and recovery plan in place? How resilient area company’s finances and business model?
Companies that operate internationally sometimes find that the risk profiles of their local activities
vary significantly. Particular involvements might expose them to geopolitical, economic, trade and
other risks. These could range from a repudiation of debts to the sudden devaluation of currencies.
Some risks might be insurable at a cost, while others may need to be borne. How does a company
assess unpredictable and/or uninsurable risks? Are these spread across a range of activities, or is
there disproportionate exposure in certain markets? Are such risks and a distinctive risk
management perspective taken into account in related and strategic decision making? For
example, a strategy of focusing upon a core business has resulted in many companies being less
diversified and having “more of their eggs in a single basket.”
The continuing operation of many businesses as going concerns is dependent upon the effective
operation of the utilities, the banking and financial system and the activities of governments, regulators
and the legal system in the major markets within which they operate even in advanced countries, one
cannot assume a banking and financial system will remain free of the challenges and loss of confidence
that occurred in the period 2008-09 and which led to bank failures and bailouts.
A company’s defenses are only as strong as the weakest link across the various networks to which
its people and operations are connected. The internet of things is a frontier of opportunity for
hackers. The issue is not whether a breach will occur, but how to limit the damage and recover
quickly when a breach occurs.
Monitoring of emerging and mutating threats in relation to cyber security and fraud, is important.,
such as sharing of information about identified threats, breaches and responses with other
organizations, regular review of cyber security and information governance policies, testing of
threat scenarios and planned responses and contingency arrangements.
Checks to avoid money laundering, to avoid the loss of strategically significant intellectual property
and unapproved access to personal information when data thefts occur/ means of information
when in case of corporate data breach and compensation to those who suffer losses.
The speed with which defensive and anti-malware software, and data and system security, can be
updated quickly as and when the need arises, is also a key question.
Further, whether adequate security, measures to a company’s supply chain, corporate data that is
held externally and corporate systems that are operated by thief parties? How secure are “working
from home” equipment, customer support facilities and portable devices? What advice and
assistance is given to staff and business partners in these areas?
The management/Board should also consider and review the usefulness of International
frameworks and standards such as COSO’s ERM framework, ISO 31000 standards, in enterprise
risk management, in effective internal control and fraud deterrence and prevention, mitigation and
management of risk.
5.3 Striking the Right Balance in Action and Reaction
Today, companies operate in an uncertain world. Management and Boards face multiple
challenges and confront sensitive issues. Circumstances demand difficult decisions.
An organization that is prepared is able to respond quickly and aptly when unwelcome risks materialize.
Having a moral compass and reacting in a proportionate, fair and responsible way can help a company
and its board to restore confidence, maintain trust and build relationships with stakeholders. This can
be achieved by listening to peers and learning, thereby building resilience and a balanced perspective.
It is important to both recover and move forward while responding to incidents.
In a globally competitive market transition and with intense digitization taking place in the country,
it is but necessary that risk appetite and risk mitigation measures are fully integrated with the
business plans and policies so that the companies can benefit by correctly assessing their risk
appetite and identifying and mitigating risk in time. Cyber Security has taken a new dimension and
is important not only for the financial sector but for all sectors of the society. The majority of the
cases reported so far under cyber security refer to financial institutions, alone, whereas cyber
security for infrastructure sectors is equally important.
Today, Companies from different sectors of activities are seriously trying to put the risk
management system in place as per the international standard. What is now needed is an
emphasis on the effective implementation, thereby ensuring maximum benefits to the companies
and “Enterprise risk management” emerging as the “Business differentiator”.
ENTERPRISE RISK
MANAGEMENT
LEARNING OUTCOMES
After going through the chapter student shall be able to understand
Definition
Scope
Techniques
• ISO 31000 Risk Management Standard: provides a set of principles, a framework and a
process for managing risk.
• COSO ERM Framework: This framework defines essential enterprise risk management
components, discusses key ERM principles and concepts, suggests a common ERM
language, and provides clear direction and guidance for enterprise risk management.
Enterprise risk management (ERM) is a plan-based business strategy that aims to identify, assess
and prepare for any dangers, hazards and other potentials for disaster – both physical and
figurative – that may interfere with an organization's operations and objectives. Relatively new (it's
less than a decade old), the discipline not only calls for corporations to identify all the risks they
face and to decide which risks to manage actively; it also involves making that plan of action
available to all stakeholders, shareholders and potential investors, as part of their annual reports.
Industries as varied as aviation, construction, public health, international development, energy,
finance and insurance all utilize ERM. (Source : Investopedia)
Risk management in an organization minimizes the impact of risk on the business with the help of
a chief risk officer or a risk committee but it does not give a guarantee that the organization will
become risk free.
2. IMPLEMENTING ERM
COSO framework states that Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) is defined as a process, affected
by an entity's board of directors, management, and other personal, applied in strategy setting and
across the enterprise, designed to identify potential events that may affect the entity, and manage
risk to be within its risk appetite, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the achievement of
entity objectives. ERM includes the following activities:
• Determining the risk appetite.
• Establishing an appropriate internal environment, including a risk management policy and
framework.
• Identifying potential threats to the achievement of its objectives and assessing the risk, i.e.,
the impact and likelihood of the threat occurring.
• Undertaking control and other response activities.
• Communicating information on risks in a consistent manner at all levels in the organization.
• Centrally monitoring and coordinating the risk management processes and the outcomes, and
• Providing assurance on the effectiveness with which risks are managed.
The term 'risk appetite' used in the above definition refers to the extent of risk that the Board is
willing to take to pursue the objectives. Risk appetite setting is done at different levels, viz. for the
organization at the entity level, process level, and different risk groups and for individual key risks.
Risk appetite provides a standard against which a risk can be compared and where the risk is
above the risk appetite, it is considered a threat to the reasonable assurance that the objective will
be achieved.
While risk appetite is to be set lower than the risk capacity; however, with an aggressive Board,
the risk appetite can be higher than the risk capacity. For example, the Board may decide on
utilizing the cash flow for operational purposes in the short term for earmarked funds meant for
payment of quarterly installment of taxes. This could result in default of payment on due date and
hence becomes a significant risk which needs to be covered by the internal auditor and reported
upon even though the risk may be within the risk appetite. However, in the normal course, internal
auditors are expected to take the risk appetite as a given and evaluating the risk appetite is out of
audit scope. Internal auditors can, however, do a consulting activity of assisting the Board in fixing
the risk appetite and its documentation.
ERM is a new approach in the ways organizations are assessing, managing and communicating
business risks. By assisting organizations climb up on the risk maturity scale, ERM makes a major
contribution towards helping an organization manage risks to achieve its objectives. ERM helps an
organization become a risk managed business.
An ERM policy is first put in place which defines the guiding principles showing responsibility of
line management for ERM and the broad activities covered by the risk management processes. A
risk management framework to implement the ERM policy is then finalized showing the activities
which need to be carried out and how they are to be carried out under three processes, viz.
• Risk assessment.
• Risk management.
• Risk communication.
Implementation is facilitated by a risk manager or the internal auditor as a consulting assignment.
Subsequently risk based internal audit is carried out.
Risk Register
• Risk register is a record of risk, risk assessments; risk mitigation and action plans prepared by the
responsible parties that help to support overall ERM and controls disclosures reporting process.
• Risk register is continuously updated and has columns for risk, causes, consequences,
ownership, inherent risk score, controls, residual risk score, process, action for further
mitigation, action owner, due date, etc.
foundation for specific actions detailed. These keys also help company’s board to address some of
the recognized barriers and resistance points to ERM adoption.
Key 1: Winning support and sponsorship from the Top management is a pre-cursor
The Board of directors should sponsor the ERM function and activities by providing the right focus,
resources and attention for ERM. ERM must be truly enterprise wide, and understood and
embraced by all personnel, and driven from the top through clear and consistent communication
and messaging from the company’s board to senior management and to the organization as a
whole.
The Board needs to put in place an effective ERM leader who is widely respected across the
organization and who has accepted responsibility for overall ERM leadership, resources and
support to accomplish the effort.
Key 2: Building ERM using small but solid steps
Organisation can start with a simple process and build from there using incremental steps rather
than trying to make a quantum leap to fully implement a complete ERM process.
By doing so, they are able to:
• Identify and implement key practices to achieve immediate, tangible results.
• Provide an opportunity to change and further tailor ERM processes.
Key 3: Focus on a simple Risk model with Small Number of Top Risks
The ERM team should identify small number of critical and strategic risks that can be managed,
and then evolve from this start.
Focusing initially on a smaller, manageable number of key risks would also be beneficial in
developing related processes such as monitoring and reporting for those specific risks. This
focused approach also keeps the developing ERM processes simple and lends itself to subsequent
incremental steps to expand the risk universe and ERM processes.
Key 4: Leverage Existing Resources
Organizations often discover that they can rely on their existing staffs, with the knowledge and
capabilities relating to risks and risk management that can be effectively used to start the ERM
process. For example, some organizations have used their Chief Audit Executive or their Chief
Financial Officer as the catalyst to begin an ERM initiative. In other instances, organizations have
appointed a management committee, sometimes headed by their Chief Finance Officer (CFO), to
bring together a wide array of personnel from across the entity that collectively have sufficient
knowledge of the organization’s core business model and related risks and risk management
practices to get ERM moving.
In addition, most organizations start their ERM effort without any specific enabling technology or
automated tools other than basic spreadsheets and word-processing capabilities.
as goods received but unreconciled with Purchase Orders, delayed supplier payments resulting in
line managers chasing accounts department for release of payment, etc., wherein the root cause is
usually a risk which has not been addressed. In a risk aware organization, the silo approach
culture wherein the manager tracks and addresses new risks related to his department only rather
than in the business process usually throws up big losses arising out of customer dissatisfaction or
failure of an enterprise wide activity such as implementing ERP.
The audit strategy depends upon the organization's risk-maturity. Organizations at low risk
maturity levels may require internal auditors to consult by promoting and advising on identification
of and response to risks. For organisations with high risk maturity, the internal auditor would need
to concentrate more on carrying out process audits of the risk management processes and
especially reviewing the risk assessment process wherein the inherent risk (untreated) are
identified, estimated (scored) and evaluated (compared with risk appetite).
Risk Maturity Levels
The following aspects in the organisation indicate its risk maturity. Internal auditors should refer to
the same for concluding on the organisation's risk maturity:-
• Business objectives are defined and communicated.
• Risk appetite is defined and communicated across the organisation.
• Control environment is strong including the tone from the top.
• Adequate processes exist for the assessment, management and communication of risks.
The table given below shows the levels of risk maturity. Key Characteristics at Different Levels of
Risk Maturity:-
OPERATIONAL RISK
MANAGEMENT
LEARNING OUTCOMES
After going through the chapter student shall be able to understand
Operational Risk Management
(a) Definition,
(b) Scope and
(c) Techniques
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 What is Operational Risk?
The most commonly used and accepted definition of operational Risk is from Basel II which states
that Operational Risk is the risk of loss resulting from inadequate or failed processes, people and
systems and from external events.
This definition includes legal risk, but excludes strategic risk and reputational risk.
Basel II is the common name used to refer to the “International Convergence of Capital
Measurement and Capital Standards: A Revised Framework,” which was published by the Bank for
International Settlements in Europe in 2004, and the framework is broadly adopted, with country
level customisation as required by the countries that have been party to the accord. While this was
specific only for the regulated financial institutions industry, the overall concept of operational risk
remains the same irrespective of the industry.
Each and every industry, whether manufacturing, trading or in service sector, is subject to a
degree of operational risk though the level of risks may differ between industry sectors,
companies, the nature of products and services offered, and the actual management control over
these risks.
Operational risk is an overarching concept interrelated with several other types of risks, and
cannot be viewed in isolation. The most important risks linked to operational risk are risk of non-
compliance to applicable laws and regulations, risk of fraud losses due to an internal or external
event that takes advantage of gaps in the processes to make an unlawful gain, risk of financial
losses, risk of incorrect financial reporting, and in several organisations, reputational risk is also
part of the areas touched by operational risk.
1.2. Why does operational risk originate?
(a) Inadequately defined products and services which may not be compliant to industry
regulations, and/or may be exposed to risk of misspelling;
(b) Inadequately defined policies and processes which would directly adversely impact quality of
controls like checks and balances, segregation of duties as may be required;
(c) Inadequate technology functionality, or infrastructure that exists in any technology supported
environment, which organisations use in respective business operations;
(d) Internal or external crime that takes advantage of gaps in processes for unlawful gain, i.e.
fraud;
(e) External events like terrorist attacks or natural disasters that disrupt business or cause
financial losses;
(f) Change in the environment of the industry sector (including significant regulatory changes)
that impacts the operational risk profile of an organisation.
Thus, Operational Risk Management (ORM) is primarily an exercise in mitigating potential losses,
i.e. possible losses, through a well-laid out mechanism of identifying the inherent risks in a
business process and reviewing / testing the efficacy of the controls related to each risk.
Additionally, an important part of ORM is also to identify and report operational risk events,
including their financial impact (losses and recoveries) if any. Thus, an adequate governance
framework is expected to cover both the preventive and the lag aspects of operational risks.
In coming sections, we shall also elaborate on the concepts outlined above, in terms of how
policies, processes and technology failures can cause possible risks and losses.
development and implementation of risk management framework for the company, including
identification of risks, which as per Board’s opinion could threaten the very existence of the
company.
Clause (e) of Sub-section 5 of Section 134 explains the meaning of the term ‘internal financial
controls’ as “the policies and procedures adopted by the company for ensuring the orderly
and efficient conduct of its business, including adherence to company’s policies, the
safeguarding of its assets, the prevention and detection of frauds and errors, the accuracy
and completeness of the accounting records, and the timely preparation of reliable financial
information.”
Section 177 instructs that the Audit Committee shall review the risk management procedures
implemented by the management.
Schedule IV instructs that Independent Directors are required to get assurance that systems
of risk management are robust and defensible.
(b) Paragraph 4(c) of the Standard on Auditing (SA) 315 “Identifying and Assessing the Risks of
Material Misstatement Through Understanding the Entity and Its Environment” defines the
term ‘internal control’ as “the process designed, implemented and maintained by those
charged with governance, management and other personnel to provide reasonable assurance
about the achievement of an entity’s objectives with regard to reliability of financial reporting,
effectiveness and efficiency of operations, safeguarding of assets, and compliance with
applicable laws and regulations. The term “controls” refers to any aspects of one or more of
the components of internal control.”
(c) Clause 49 of the Listing Agreement, indicates that disclosures are to be made to the Board of
Directors on risk management, on whether the company has laid down any procedures to
inform Board members about the risk assessment and mitigation procedures.
(d) The ICAI Guidance Note on Audit of Internal Financial Controls over Financial Reporting has
several sections pertinent to the understanding of operational controls underlying in the
processes;
While the Guidance Note does not explicitly dwell on operational risk per se, the overall
approach and methodologies mentioned in the Note rest on, and derive from an implied
understanding of the auditor’s understanding of operational risks and the mitigating controls
of the organisation; for instance, the auditor is expected to have a thorough understanding of
the automated and manual controls that lie in each of the processes that have a direct
bearing on the financials of the organisation.
The following section on auditor’s responsibility is broadly paraphrased from the Guidance
Note, and it is recommended that the student read it in entirety for a holistic understanding:
• Assessing risks across the organisation that could lead to a material misstatement in the
financial statement;
The Third line of defence is Internal Audit; it is independent of management control and reports
to the Audit Committee of the Board.
• An effective internal audit would highlight issues and potential gaps in processes, which
were missed by the first two lines of defence as well. As an independent vertical, their
value addition provides a better insight into the process from a holistic perspective since
they are not directly involved in managing the process.
• Checking on efficacy of controls that mitigate operational risk, is a key deliverable of
Internal Audit.
• Over last few decades, internal audit has evolved into a concept of Risk Based Auditing.
The term itself refers to an approach where the audit function identified risks and controls
in a very similar fashion as the operational risk methodology, and then choose to focus
their attention and deploy resources on checking the areas of choice.
All three lines of defence are expected to work in a professionally collaborative manner, respecting
each other’s views and concerns. ORMC of an organisation must include the Internal Audit head
too, in addition to senior management, so that a holistic view of the risks and controls is obtained.
For an effective Operational Risk Management Framework, the following focus areas are
recommended; though they fall outside the direct management of the Operational Risk
department, these are prime drivers of operational risk, and hence frequently either the cause of
higher operational risks and/or its remedial measure.
3.4 Effective policy framework
• Entity level policies: Depending on nature of the industry and applicable regulations, it
is necessary for an organisation to have certain high-level policies that are applicable to
the organisation, irrespective of lines of businesses or departments. These are typically
owned at the highest levels of management and set the tone at the top. Examples are
Code of Conduct for employees, Whistleblower policy, Expense Delegation Policy,
Procurement Policy, Information Security Policy etc.
• Line of business / Departmental policies: Depending on nature of the business an
organisation is engaged in each business activity or department may need suitable
Policies to govern and direct its functioning. Inadequate definition of the policy statement
and responsibilities thereof are often a cause of operational risk events. Examples are
Credit policy in a lending institution, product specific policies in a manufacturing industry,
Human Resources policies, and Operational policies. Policies often include a “standard”
too, which outlines the specific deliverables and a minimum expected level of
performance in it. In some organisations, the Standards could be maintained outside the
Policy documentation, nevertheless, it is an advisable item to have in overall governance
process.
Policies have to be made in a manner that they are compliant all existing applicable laws and
regulations, and enable the organisation meet the business objective.
3.5 Process notes / Standard Operating Procedures (SOP)
Process notes are detailed instructions that address the specific responsibilities given in the policy
documents; process notes detail the roles and responsibilities of each department / responsible
person in executing a process/ transaction; it is expected that process notes have fair granularity,
on how exactly a process is executed, including the controls to be exercised. In an advanced
operational risk management environment, the process notes tend to be very articulate and define
the processes granularly and leave no scope for ambiguity or misinterpretation by those
responsible for execution.
Taking the same example as in policies, in a lending institution, a credit process note would detail
the exact steps that an organisation is to follow, in lending money to a customer and all the checks
and controls expected to be done in the process. A manufacturing process manual may describe
in detail aspects like the factory specifications, technology used in the process or the sub-process,
the assembly line, the specific departmental, and individual roles and technical tasks, output,
productivity and the quality expected.
impact to the revenues, injury to employees or loss or property that can be recuperated with a
small expense or effort.
Broadly, risk types that often overlap or are caused by operational failures, used commonly are:
(a) Regulatory risk: When the risk of a failure may lead to a violation of the regulatory
requirements that the organisation is supposed to comply with, the risk is termed as
regulatory risk. An inter-related term, often used in conjunction with regulatory risk, is
statutory risk. Statutory risk refers to violation of applicable law. Essentially, in common
parlance they often refer to the same group of potential risk, though, most organisations use
the word statutory risk to refer to violation of law, and regulatory risk to refer to violation of
norms issued by the specific regulator they fall under. KYC-AML is a common example of
being a statutory and regulatory risk (since Prevention of Money Laundering is an Act), and
since all regulated industries have norms on KYC, it is commonly tagged as regulatory risk.
(b) Financial risk: Risk of possible financial loss to the organisation.
(c) Financial reporting: Risk of misstatement of financials due to a failure, is termed risk of
financial reporting. This may be linked to financial risk in some specific risks, but not always.
For example, an excess payment made to a vendor may qualify for being categorised as
financial loss, but if it is accounted for properly it may not lead to risk of financial reporting.
Some organisations choose to include a description of financial assertions in the RCSAs, so
as to indicate the nature of impact a failure may have on the financial reporting from an audit
perspective.
(d) Legal risk: Risk of the organisation being at a risk of facing lawsuits, litigation, or a risk of
inadequate legal enforceability. Often, contractual risk is clubbed with legal risk, since lack of
due diligence in contractual agreements is inter-related to legal risks, given the chance of
disputes between parties, or the incapability to enforce terms of the agreement due to a
poorly defined contract.
(e) Reputation risk: Risk of the organisation’s reputation in public view is a key concern in
current age of an active and engaged media and social media. The related aspects like a
lower credit rating for the organisation, higher borrowing costs, reduction in credit terms
extended to organisation, fall in share price leading to overall market capitalisation fall, and
disruption due to vendors/suppliers/service providers refusing to do business due to
reputational risk are all real risks that a business faces. Quite often, a failed operational
transaction leading to a customer dispute/complaint may lead to an enhanced reputation risk.
(f) Fraud risk: Fraud risk is basically one that can lead to an unlawful gain by an internal
employee or an external person / entity by exploiting a gap in a process that fails to catch the
deliberately created scenarios by the perpetuator of the fraud; Examples are falsifying identity
for taking a loan, or raising an inflated bill, deliberate excess payment to a customer / vendor
etc. With the enhancement of COSO framework to ensure highest degree of accuracy and
completeness in financial statements, fraud risk in financial reporting assumes greatest
importance. Operational control failures, such as those that allow an employee to deliberately
tamper data (on systems or manually) leading to financial misstatement is a typical fraud risk,
linked to operational risk (poorly designed process of reporting of data).
(g) External risk: External risk are essentially those on which the organisation has no control,
like terrorist attacks, natural disasters etc. But these are real risks and the losses of loss of
employee lives or damage to physical assets incurred on these events do fall under
operational losses.
4.3 Risk Grading / Rating
Table of examples below indicate an assessment of impact into high, medium and low. These are
purely indicative and a hypothetical example; each organisation has to create this grid basis a mix
of qualitative and quantitative parameters and keep improving upon it with ongoing learnings with
reference to the risk appetite.
A purely illustrative table is given below, containing hypothetical thresholds.
A lot of it is subjective to the perception of the organisation and basis the risk appetite of each
operational risk framework. These are only examples, and parameters are to be set by the ORMC
and evolved.
Parameter High Medium Low
Financial loss Over 10 lacs (due to 5 to 10 lacs (due to Below 5 lacs (due to
any event falling under any event falling under any event falling under
any Loss category) any Loss category) any Loss category)
Regulatory Design level error, over Transaction level Below 0.2% of
violation 1% violation in key errors, above 0.2% transactions
regulatory compliance; and below 1% of Minor violations, but
May lead to regulatory transactions ; overall the process
reprimand / license May lead to regulatory design is in place
suspension / penalty reprimand/ penalty
etc.
Statutory Design level error, Transaction level Minor transgressions,
violation leading to serious non- errors, not leading to not leading to statutory
compliance of serious penalty / penalty etc.
applicable laws, may withdrawal of licence Overall process being in
lead to penalties, etc., but may lead to place, only transactional
reprimand, withdrawal issues with statutory errors occur.
of licence etc. authorities
Financial Significant error that Minor error but overall Minor error in financial
reporting error may lead to material could lead to a reporting, leading to a
misstatement of misstatement in material misstatement
financial information financials and an or a qualified statement
and/or material adverse comment from
• Impact /Severity: Impact category has to be ascribed to each risk. Impact category may
fall under one or more heads; for example, a fraud risk may also result in financial loss;
or a regulatory violation may lead to a reputational risk; or, wrong product configuration
sold to a customer and inability to service it, may lead to regulatory, reputational and
financial losses in combination; thus, it is possible to tag multiple heads of impact as well
as use only the primary impact category, that is a flexible judgement of the organisation.
• Probability / Frequency: Probability, simply put, is the chance of the transaction /
process going wrong due to a failure. Probability of failures are often expressed in
percentage terms of the total volume of transactions in a process if it is a high volume
transaction process; in processes where the universe of transactions is of lower volumes
or of lower frequency, a qualitative judgement on probability is often required to be taken.
Probability can be arrived at in high-volume processes by analysing past data on failures
in the process. It is important to note that this is often a subjective assessment in
instances where no past data is available.
This brings us to a very important concept of bucketing the risk profile of the processes into four
basic categories:
• High Impact – High Probability
• High Impact- Low Probability
• Low Impact – High Probability
• Low Impact – Low Probability
While the first and third categories tend to get sufficient attention by management, the high impact
low probability often skips the management decision purely because these incidents are either not
foreseen at all in reality or even if they are, they are so rare but with severe impact that putting a
risk mitigation plan for them is very difficult. However, wherever possible the management must
consider them on an evolving basis.
While it is easier for an operational risk practitioner to work on four buckets, it is often enhanced by
introducing an additional factor of Medium Probability and Medium Impact, depending on the
organisation’s view on risk grading.
4.4 Residual risk and Rating/Grading
Identified inherent risks in processes, are expected to be mitigated by using suitably designed
controls. In any organisation that has a view on managing operational risks, all or most of the
identified risks in a process would be controlled through a process that reduces, or eliminates the
risk of a failure taking place in that process.
Residual risk is thus the remaining risk in a process assuming the control designed is operating
properly. Thus, all companies strive to have a low level of residual risk.
Higher the control effectiveness, the lower the residual risk. Lower the control effectiveness, the
residual risk would be same or similar to level of inherent risk. We shall study more about the
concept of controls in the subsequent section.
5. UNDERSTANDING OF CONTROLS
Controls are activities that are intended to prevent the inherent risk from materialising into a real
failure of the process / transaction. These activities are designed keeping in mind the overall
process objective, the inherent risks in the process, and the impact of the risk if the failure were to
materialise in reality. Given that this concept applies to all industries we have attempted to broadly
categorise the types of controls into the following.
There are several different, but closely related or similar categorisations used in different kinds of
control framework, organisations, but mostly they would fall under these categories, thus this is an
indicative list and is subject to evolution.
(a) Verification: Refers to a control where a control step necessitates the transaction is verified
by either the same individual or a different individual before it is completed. For example, in a
financial lending institution, a department may process an application along with the customer
documents, and carry out a verification at the end of the process within the department,
before passing the file to the other department for further processing that relies on the
accuracy of the earlier department’s processing.
(b) Reconciliations: Refers to a control where an output of a process step is reconciled against
other known, established sources of information. For example, before publishing a report, the
responsible person may use the primary data, and reconcile it with other existing sources
from multiple systems / departments before finalising it.
(c) Segregation of duties: Refers to a control where part of the transaction is executed across
two segregated departments / functions / verticals thereby eliminating the risk of the
originating department to carry out the entire transaction on its own. For example, in a
finance lending organisation, the process of sourcing an application is owned by Sales
department, while the credit process is completely segregated into the Risk department, and
further, the entire operational process of checking the accuracy and completeness of the
processed application documentation may lie with Operations who would actually set up the
account and make the disbursement.
(d) Physical control: Refers to a control type where physical custody of an asset is the control.
For example, cash and blank cheque books are stored in a vault or safe to prevent misuse.
Original critical documents, legal agreements etc. are also stored safely in safe keeping
vaults. In certain cases, organisations may further add a control of authorisation thereby
creating a process where an individual holding a key has to operate it first, and additionally
the manager would use a different key in his position and open the vault to be accessed.
(e) Supervisory control: Refers to a control where the primary transaction / process is executed
at a particular level in an organisation, but before finalising it, the supervisor is required to
review it and accord an approval. Sometimes this is also classified as Authorisation if the
authorisation is given by an authority superior to the one originating the transaction. Often,
where the primary control is MIS (Management Information System) such review based
controls fall under supervisory control category.
(f) Exception triggers: Refers to a control where a system, or a responsible individual, throws
up regular reports of transactions which are deviant from the accepted, established process.
These reports are expected to be actioned upon by designated individuals. This control type
is effective only when the process has achieved a stability and scale that only deviations are
reviewed by authorities. For example, reporting of error rate in an operational process is an
exception trigger. Or, reporting of a high balance in a suspense account beyond the usual
acceptable levels can be an exceptional report item.
(g) Authorisation/ approval: Refers to a control step where, after a processing of a transaction
basis built in controls is almost complete, a final authority reviews it and approves it. For
example, there are several organisations use automated or semi-automated credit decision
tools in a financial lending process. However, as per selected parameters, a credit officer
may be designated to review the system based processing and approve it as well.
Classification of controls is also required to be classified in two more ways, considering whether
the control is exercise manually or is built into an automated system; and if the control is intended
to prevent a potential failure in the process, or detect a failure if it has happened.
(i) Preventive controls are those which attempt to prevent the inherent risk from materialising
into a failure.
(ii) Detective controls are built in to analyse the process / transactions post-facto and throw up
issues and exceptions. Preventive control in a transaction intensive process may be
verification and authorisation; a detective control may be MIS on errors that falls under
supervisory review.
For example, two people being required to count cash before making a cash payment, is a
common preventive control. If there is a cash reconciliation process at end of day, that
detects whether the correct amounts of cash was paid out, it is termed detective control.
(iii) Manual controls are those which are exercised by a designated role in a manual fashion.
For example, a verification of customer documents in a credit application, done manually, is a
manual control.
(iv) Automated controls are dependent on a predefined system check, it is called an automated
control. For example credit application data is fed into an automated system and data
supporting the process is done by a system, giving the recommended investment decision
and/or next steps in processing as the output. For example, a complex credit decision
involving several parameters and input data, if done manually, is subject to error if done
manually; using a system would be an optimal control and hence an automated control is set
up. There may be controls that are partly automated and use manual steps to synergize /
verify data from automated controls, these are termed hybrid controls. A MIS process that
uses automated data, and involves manual collation from different sources and checked
manually by a verifier is a hybrid control.
Additional information may include, financial assertion impact (if any), the name of system used (if
any), Sample description of test done etc.
7. TECHNOLOGY RISK
As we saw in the very fundamental definition of operational risk, a key constituent is technology
risk. In the current environment of increasing automation in business processes, and evolved
technology platforms for accounting, the operational risk practitioner and the auditor must both
understand the exact nuances of technology risk in any organisation.
All organisations nowadays use some kind of systems, technology platforms depending on the
nature of business. For large complex business processes, there would be several systems, either
in isolation or interrelated with each other, working to deliver the business outputs required.
From an auditor’s perspective or the operational risk professional perspective, the main issues that
can surface from technology risk are:
(a) Unscheduled system downtime or a system malfunctioning due to which a business
process is disrupted, due to which the necessary work output suffers a setback. This could result
in financial loss, loss of opportunity of business, customer issues and loss of raw material. For
example, a system failure in a financial lending organisation may lead to critical customer
commitments like disbursements not happening due to which customer may suffer losses; or
inability to post incoming payments on account leading to liquidity issues; or inability to service a
customer account leading to customer attrition. Organisations have backup servers, systems,
databases, and disaster recovery procedures to ensure work disruption is minimized in such
circumstances. The operational risk manager is expected to have an overview of the specific
facilities available to the technology department, to service the organisation’s critical needs at such
times of failure.
(b) System failure pertaining to incorrect programming: This is by far the most common
cause of operational risk events in an organisation, since each system can only function in the
manner it is set up. Organisations either build their own systems or buy them from specialised
service providers, and customise them. In either case, depending on the nature of transactions
required to be processed, a very detailed business requirement document is required to be given
to the technology department by the business user groups. Often, either due to incapability or poor
co-ordination between the business user groups, the requirement document does not capture the
entire detailing and the extremely granular details that are required by the technical teams doing
the coding, customisation or the deployment. The result is a poorly executed system that causes
errors in processing, which may have financial, regulatory, fraud risks, depending on kind of error
in the system.
For example, taking an example of a lending institution that processes loan applications on a
particular Loan Originating System and a Loan Management System the following scenarios
indicate how errors of programming can cause severe operational risk failures:
• Processing fees or interest not being charged correctly to the loan account correctly,
resulting in financial loss and / or customer disputes;
• Hands-off between different control owners may be compromised if the system workflow
is not properly defined on the system; for example, an application that requires specific
fraud risk checks on documents supplied by customer, may totally bypass the required
check and go from sales to credit department, thus exposing the organisation to fraud
risk. Or, an application may get processed with incorrect customer data, credit bureau
information basis the credit parameters set in the system. The coding of acquisition
scorecards in the financial lending industry is a typical example of a very sensitive area
where technology risk is the cause of operational risk.
Taking an example from manufacturing,
• A software error in parameterizing the right quantity of one raw material to flow into an
automated assembly line may result in a completely wasted production output thereby
causing an operational loss;
• Another industry-agnostic example is wrong master maintenance of taxation rates in any
business charging its customers can lead to a non-compliance in taxation requirements.
(c) Master maintenance: All systems, besides the basic coding, need a set of Masters which
are user-defined parameters that enable the processing of the data. Master configuration is in itself
a key risk that technology users face, since the linkages between products or service programs as
defined by the business users can be ambiguous, or at times contradictory instructions go to the
technology team resulting in erroneous set up of Masters.
(d) User access control: This is by far the most key control in driving controls in an automated
controls environment. For example, in a lending institution, a credit officer if allowed to process
operational activities beyond his job role may result in compromise of the segregation of duties
that the process is designed with; or, if an user may have a higher level of access to changing
customer data by one modification, while the process may require an authorisation which was
bypassed due to inadequate user access control maintenance. User access control requires the
user profiles to be set up properly upfront in the initial basic programming, followed by correct
assignment of user profiles upon employee requests as per their permissible authorities basis their
job role. Organisations are required to delete or modify user IDs once employees move out from
their roles or the organisation itself.
(e) Accounting systems: From an audit and accounting perspective, the most intensive focus
area is the technology platform that is used for accounting. There are obvious operational risks of
misstatements in financial reporting if the accounting software is not configured properly. In
complex organisations with several types of transactions that have a financial impact are
performed in various systems, the feed in from other production systems (i.e. outside of the main
accounting system) are very important to check for accuracy since they are used in financial
reporting. The feeds, if manual have their own risk of incorrect manual processing; in automated
feed process also, there are risks of incorrect data inflows that could lead to financial
misstatements. In lending institutions, the loan management systems are different from the main
accounting system; a huge amount of data, at various frequencies, flows into the accounting
system. The linkage of the source system to the correct GLs in accounting system, and
appropriate reconciliations, the exception reports, analysis and ongoing supervisory reviews can
prevent the data from being inconsistent in final reporting. Any regular exceptions in the data in
two systems, need to be analysed to find out the root cause of the technological reason, and any
incorrect programming. Examples are the data of customers like interest due, principal
outstanding, overdue amounts etc. which flow from loan management systems to accounting
systems.
(f) Change management is a key area of Information Technology General Controls (ITGC). It
simply means that any change to the systems can cause a risk of incorrect change being
developed or deployed. This can be a result of multiple causes:
• Change being carried out without approvals of authorised roles,
• Change being wrongly conceived by the user groups, without adequate analysis of pros
and cons for the change, and getting deployed by the technology unit under approvals
well as from an operational perspective otherwise the seamless functioning of the systems can be
disrupted.
(c) Keyman risk due to death or incapacitation of key decision makers in a company leading to
chaos in management of the company;
(d) Failure of one department or function to do their assigned tasks in a case of disruption may
cause the entire process to delivery of the organisation;
(e) In current business scenario, several organisations concentrate their operational activities in
one major operational hub; these organisations are at a higher BCP risk than the ones with
operations in several hubs if they are geared to support each other in a moment of crisis.
Common examples of critical disruption in business process are:
• Raw material in process being lost or spoilt due to one of the processes being disrupted
due to system, people or process failure, i.e. operational reasons;
• Contractual financial obligations such as repayment of loans, or vendor payments,
salaries,
• Payment of taxes;
• Inability to disbursement of loans that causes customer dissatisfaction;
• In an ITES company, the principal (i.e. the main organisation that hires an ITES
company) may have complete disruption of their services to their customers in case of
failure in the ITES service provider’s services;
• In fact in highly developed economies, the risk of customer’s dissatisfaction, the highest
form of which takes class lawsuits, is high in case of large scale business process
failures;
Hence a Business Continuity Plan (“BCP”) is required to be adopted.
BCP is now an evolved, objective framework and involves a large section of the organisation,
including the operational risk management framework.
Now we shall discuss the key constituents of a BCP one by one.
9.1 Business Impact Analysis (BIA)
This refers to the impact that a business disruption has on all activities in an organisation; this is
the base line from which an organisation can build its BCP.
All departments of the organisation are required to list all their processes (including sub-
processes) and grade them in order of priority. This is a difficult task, since most organisations like
to believe all their processes are critical; but in reality, with limited resources in a disruption
situation, the best that can be done are the most important activities; hence parameters of
prioritisation are to be fixed; these could be as follows:
Impact: Critical, Important, Routine; the classification into each of these could be done on the
basis of some objective parameters such as whether it affects regulatory violations, or can cause
financial loss, or loss to lives or property; for instance, in a lending institution, a process that does
due diligence on customer identity and address (KYC checks) may be very critical and
indispensable without which a sanction cannot happen since it is a regulatory risk; or a case where
a secondary check on the sanction is dispensed with in given sanctions, where a financial loss can
happen. These are carefully evaluated parameters that the management has to consider and take
a decision on what processes to keep running in disruption situation and what to stop.
Also, what is considered as important but not critical for a department, may be critical for another
department; for instance, treasury may feel making payment to external lenders as most critical
while making payments to operations or finance departments for making disbursements to loan
customers or vendors as not critical; however, the operations or finance departments may be
severely inconvenienced if the money to service their obligations is not made available in a
disruptive situation. Thus, a categorisation of Impact is done with collaborative approach of all
departments that a process impacts.
In summary,
A BIA must ideally cover following aspects:
• Minimum % that the process must continue to run in BCP scenario (say 10 %, 50 % etc.
of original volume / workload),
• Minimum resourcing required to carry it out,
• Maximum permissible time to allow a task to be not performed (Recovery Time)
• Category of impact due to disruption (customer impact, regulatory impact, financial loss
or risk to employee health and life),
• Deriving the criticality from these parameters (including consideration for normal days
and month-ends),
• Minimum technological and infrastructural requirements in the BCP site.
• This exercise will lead to decisions on which processes / activities need to be covered
under BCP on priority, and which can be scoped out (and for how long).
9.2 Functional Recovery Plan (FRP)
Here, once the BIA is approved at management level, a detailed plan as to alternate functioning of
the selected processes / sub-processes has to be made. This by far is the most challenging phase
since it involves alternative resources, staffing, infrastructure and maybe technology systems as
well. Depending on the complexity and nature of services provided by an organisation, each
organisation must decide the steps to be taken;
For example: an operations intensive company may decide to use an alternative, smaller hub to
process all key transactions; a customer service centric company may have an alternative
customer service centre if the main one is down due to disruption;
Roles identified as key in running a FRP in execution, are required to have formal backups in case
they cannot move locations or carry out the required operation from their base location or site.
Companies resort to several tech savvy solutions such as work-from-home facilitated by remote
logging in to systems, webinars, video conference, telephonic conference bridges, and use of
secured-data-storage such as cloud.
An FRP has to consider the key elements involved in the alternate plan; whether it is movement of
goods, or movements of information, or paper-based files; any plan is successful only if the
practical constraints of the Plan are clearly elucidated, thereby objectively listing the conditions in
which the FRP would function, and when it cannot.
A FRP is a very detailed document that would list the following at a minimum:
• Site in which the process would be carried out (called the Alternate Site), the role/s who
would carry it out, the back-up to the roles if the primary one is unable to perform in
disruptive circumstances; the minimum resources such as telephones, internet, printers
or access to intranet, internal systems etc. as an indicative list.
• This needs to be documented and circulated, and reiterated to each employee and/or
service provider who is involved in the FRP. Operational risk managers are required to
oversee whether the framework is composite and integrated sufficiently to ensure the
framework is real and practically implementable, not a drawing board theory document.
• The names and contacts of all key members in each process need to be listed and
available to all others involved in FRP , in a domain other than the primary office domain
so that the communication lines are not disrupted when it is required to invoke a FRP.
This communication plan is commonly known as a Call Tree.
• The FRP is useful and practical only if tested regularly, maybe at predefined periodic
intervals, as well as unannounced situations to mirror a real disruption. This is the critical
stage where theory is tested in practice, and the ensuring failures and successes have to
be documented to improve the Plan in future. An organisation has to ensure this is a
recurring process to be able to give confidence to investors/promoters/owners,
management, and customers that the FRP is practical and genuinely addresses the
critical tasks.
In an effective BCP, the concern on outsourced activities need to be addressed too; in current
scenario where several organisations use outsourced vendors, the vendor’s BCP has to reviewed
periodically to ensure the whole process works. In fact the choice of a vendor should ideally cover
the BCP aspects too.
An auditor / consultant working on internal controls or an operational risk manager needs to review
the efficacy of the organisation’s BCP, in context of the services it provides. For example, even a
small scale audit firm may need a BCP to ensure its services to the clients are not disrupted. In
large complex manufacturing organisations the BCP needs to be a major framework that co-
ordinates the interrelationships of various business units, locations, business processes etc.
It is highly advisable to have a formal decision making committee of management functions to
oversee the entire chain of activities from formation of BCP policy, Business Impact Analysis,
Functional Recovery Plan and to review Test results.
It is recommended to have an internal audit scoped for technology and information security by
teams that have technology assessment competence.
Most organisations do have a Code of Conduct that has a significant section on confidentiality and
protection of data, broadly covering information security aspects. This is further enabled by
mandatory training by the employees depending on their roles and exposure.
Unlicensed activity
Money laundering
Product Flaws Product defects (unauthorised etc.)
Model errors
Selection, Failure to investigate client as per
Sponsorship, guidelines
and Exposure Exceeding client exposure limits
Advisory Disputes over performance of
activities advisory activities
Damage to Losses from Disasters and Natural disaster losses, human losses
physical physical assets other events from external events like terrorism
assets damage either
intentional or from
natural disaster
Business Losses arising Systems Hardware, software,
Disruption and from disruption of telecommunications, utility
System business or disruptions/outage
Failures system failures
Execution, Losses from Transaction Miscommunication, Data entry,
Delivery and failed capture, maintenance or loading error,
Process transactions execution, and Missed deadline/ responsibility
Management processing or maintenance Model/ system mis-operation
process
Accounting error
management
Delivery failure
Collateral management failure
Reference data maintenance,
Other task mis-performance
Monitoring and Failed mandatory reporting obligation
reporting Inaccurate external report (loss
incurred)
Customer Client permissions/disclaimers
intake and missing; Legal documents
documentation missing/incomplete
Customer/client Unapproved access given to accounts
account Incorrect client records leading to loss
management Negligent loss or damage of client
assets
Trade Non-client counterparty mis-
counterparties performance / disputes
For example, an excess full and final settlement payment to an exiting employee, would have been
booked under Salaries by normal course. But once the error is discovered, it is advisable to book it
in a separate Operational Loss GL and credit the Salaries GL so that the financial reporting is
appropriate. Further in a lending institution, if a loan is closed erroneously, the entire principal and
other heads’ outstanding is a real financial loss to the organisation; these need to be booked in the
operational loss GL and the respective other GLs be credited with the amounts.
Some organisations book Fraud Losses in the Operational Loss GL (since fraud losses are also
part of operational losses as per categorisation elaborated above), but some organisations
maintain a separate GL for Fraud losses, so as to enable efficient reconciliation with other
reporting requirements like Fraud reports to regulators and to track action taken against them.
In instances where a recovery of the loss is expected, the management is expected to track the
event till its logical end by recovering whatever is possible thereby reducing the net operational
loss.
12.3 Reporting
A report to the ORMC (and to the Board / Board Committee as may be necessary by regulation or
by company policy) is recommended to include the following:
Date of Date of Event Financial Event Recovery Action Event
incident reporting description loss category if any taken closed /
including further
root action
causes due
The convergence of the secular trends of exponential growth in data volume, concomitant
geometric increase in computational capacity and the resultant development of sophisticated
algorithms is fuelling rapid technology advances and business disruptions. The field of risk
management is not immune to these changes and we are witnessing significant changes in the
discipline.
13.1 Machine Learning
A standard software code is characterized by explicit rules that a computer is supposed to perform.
In case, there is a change in the data / situation, a programmer needs to change these explicit
rules. In contrast, a machine learning program dynamically responds to change in data / situation
by changing the rules that govern the behaviour.
Machine learning, meanwhile, uses an inductive approach to form a representation of the world
based on the data it sees. It is able to tweak and improve its representation as new data arrive. In
that sense, the algorithm “learns” from new data inputs and gets better over time.
Techniques such as regression, support vector machines, and k-means clustering have been in
use for decades. Others, while developed previously, have become viable only now that vast
quantities of data and unprecedented processing power are available. Deep Learning and
Reinforcement learning are good example of newly developed machine learning techniques.
At the most basic level, machine learning techniques can be divided into two primary groups:
• Supervised Learning
• Unsupervised Learning
Supervised Learning refers to the statistical analysis that aims to map the behaviour of a certain
variable on the basis of some other variables. The principal aim of these methods is to fit a model
that relates the set of independent variables to the dependent variable. The model in turn is
largely used for future prediction of better understanding of the relationship between the
independent and dependent variables. Bulk of the machine learning methods such as linear
regression, logistic regression, boosting, and support vector machines operate in the supervised
learning domain.
Unsupervised Learning, as the name suggests, refers to statistical methods that aim to delve into
the challenging realm of data that has no dependent or response variable i.e. there is no variable
that supervises the behaviour of the algorithm. The primary aim of this kind of analysis is to
understand the relationships between the variables or between the observations. One statistical
learning tool that we may use in this setting is cluster analysis, or clustering.
Machine Learning methods can also be categorized on the basis of the nature of the variables
handled. Regression methods primarily deal with variables that are quantitative in nature e.g. a
person’s age, height, or income, the value of a house, and the price of a stock. In contrast,
Classification methods deal with qualitative variables i.e. variables that take on values in one of K
different classes, or categories. Examples of qualitative class variables include a person’s gender
(male or female), the brand of product purchased (brand A, B, or C), whether a person defaults on
a debt (yes or no), or a cancer diagnosis (Acute Myelogenous Leukemia, Acute Lymphoblastic
Leukemia, or No Leukemia).
13.2 Analytics – Risk Management Applications
Risk management faces new demands and challenges. In response to the crisis, regulators are
requiring more detailed data and increasingly sophisticated reports. Banks are expected to
conduct regular and comprehensive bottom-up stress tests for a number of scenarios across all
asset classes. Big Data technologies present fresh opportunities to address these challenges.
Vast, comprehensive and near real-time data has the potential to improve monitoring of risk, risk
coverage, and the stability and predictive power of risk models. In a number of key domains –
particularly operational and compliance risk – Big Data technologies will allow the development of
models that will support every day.
Post-crisis, financial institutions are now expected to have thorough knowledge of their clients.
Increasingly, forward-thinking banks harness Big Data to develop more robust predictive indicators
in the credit risk domain. New data sources - including social media and marketing databases –
are being used to gain greater visibility into customer behaviour. This information can augment
traditional data sources including financial, socio-demographic, internal payments and externals
loss data.
Together, the data sets can produce a highly robust, comprehensive risk indicator. Rather than
waiting to review loan clients’ financial reports to discover loan-servicing problems, firms can
utilise Big Data technologies to detect early warning signals by observing clients’ on-going
behaviours, and act in time.
The high cost of money laundering cases has prompted banks to seek new ways to address the
severe limitations in current anti-money laundering risk management. Traditional approaches to
anti money laundering remain dependent on rule-based, descriptive analytics to process structured
data. This system clearly has limitations - without automated algorithms, detecting information
within the wealth of data requires laborious keyword searches and manual sifting through reports.
Big Data analytics can improve the existing processes in AML operations. Its approaches allow for
the advanced statistical analysis of structured data, and advanced visualisation and statistical text
mining of unstructured data. These approaches can provide a means to quickly draw out hidden
links between transactions and accounts, and uncover suspicious transaction patterns. Advanced
analytics can generate real-time actionable insights, stopping potential money laundering in its
tracks, whilst still allowing fund transfers for crucial economic and human aid to troubled regions.
Big data technologies can identify incidents, help draw a wider picture, and allow a bank to raise
the alarm before it’s too late.
14. INSURANCE
Insurance is used by organisations to mitigate operational risks that can be insured. Insurance
coverage is commonly available for risks arising out of fire, for instance. Depending on the cover
available and opted for, other losses due to terrorist attacks, natural disasters etc. can also be
covered. Cash transit insurance and fidelity insurance are off quoted examples.
These three examples are based on loss categories of Damage to Assets, External fraud and
Internal fraud. Recently a new concept of Cyber risk insurance has also come up, and there are
companies offering cover against the risk of damages due to lawsuits / compensation on account
of being a victim of cyber-attack, due to which data of customers, vendors or any other counter-
party can be leaked to an unauthorised, malevolent entity.