Resilience manual is always important. People should look forward in the business environment and think about the potential change in the future. In this case, we should follow instructions on the current resilience process we have, and improve the parts where is impractical.
Really thought-provoking piece. I was struck by the analogy of a “fake map” vs a “North Star” and how it applies to risk leadership: when the heading is unclear or artificially defined, teams may end up following a map that looks right but doesn’t actually lead anywhere meaningful. The question “What is the Head of Op Risk pointing to?” invites deep reflection about whether the strategic guidance is genuine or simply decorative.
I especially appreciated how the article challenges us to ask whether our guiding metrics or objectives are truly directional or just cosmetic signposts. For someone like me—currently studying management and risk systems—it underscores that alignment and purpose matter far more than ticking boxes.
The case mentions the need to consider changes in the external and internal business environment when assessing the current operational risk exposures. What are some practical techniques the team can use to identify and evaluate these evolving risk factors?
Resilience manual is always important. People should look forward in the business environment and think about the potential change in the future. In this case, we should follow instructions on the current resilience process we have, and improve the parts where is impractical.
Really thought-provoking piece. I was struck by the analogy of a “fake map” vs a “North Star” and how it applies to risk leadership: when the heading is unclear or artificially defined, teams may end up following a map that looks right but doesn’t actually lead anywhere meaningful. The question “What is the Head of Op Risk pointing to?” invites deep reflection about whether the strategic guidance is genuine or simply decorative.
I especially appreciated how the article challenges us to ask whether our guiding metrics or objectives are truly directional or just cosmetic signposts. For someone like me—currently studying management and risk systems—it underscores that alignment and purpose matter far more than ticking boxes.
The case mentions the need to consider changes in the external and internal business environment when assessing the current operational risk exposures. What are some practical techniques the team can use to identify and evaluate these evolving risk factors?