Risk& Tolerance Appetite - The Institute of Risk Management

20 Pages·2011·0.99 MB·English

Risk Appetite
& Tolerance
Executive Summary
Risk Appetite and Tolerance
Executive Summary
Foreword 1 Risk appetite
and performance 10
Introduction 4
Putting it into practice 12
About IRM 6
Five tests for risk
About the Author 6 appetite frameworks 14
Risk appetite – Questions for the boardroom 15
principles and approach 7
Supported by:
A guidance paper from
the Institute of Risk Management
September 2011
©2011 The Institute of Risk Management
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be
reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted
in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical,
photocopying, recording or otherwise without the express
permission of the copyright owner. Permission will generally
be granted for use of the material from this document
on condition that the source is clearly credited as being
the Institute of Risk Management.
Risk Appetite and Tolerance Foreword
Executive Summary
Risk appetite today is a core By providing practical advice on how
consideration in any enterprise to approach the development and
implementation of a risk appetite
risk management approach.
framework we believe we will be helping
As well as meeting the requirements boards and senior management teams both
imposed by corporate governance to manage their organisations better and
standards, organisations in all sectors to discharge their corporate governance
are increasingly being asked by key responsibilities more effectively.
stakeholders, including investors, analysts
We are particularly pleased that a
and the public, to express clearly the extent
large number of professional bodies are
of their willingness to take risk in order to
supporting this work – risk is everyone’s
meet their strategic objectives.
business and a common understanding
The Institute of Risk Management, and approach helps us work together
now in its 25th year, has a key role to play to address this challenging area.
in establishing sound practices in this area
Alex Hindson
and building consensus in what has, for
Chairman
too long, been a nebulous subject.
The Institute of Risk Management
1
This paper will be helpful to senior The Chartered Institute of Internal
managers in public service organisations Auditors welcomes this contribution from
who are trying to understand risk appetite the Institute of Risk Management to the
in the context of their own strategic and debate on risk appetite and risk tolerance.
operational decision making. In its recently In theory, the idea of deciding how much
published Core Competencies in Public risk of different types the organisation
Service Risk Management, Alarm identified wishes to take and accept sounds easy.
the need to understand the organisation’s In practice, it is difficult and needs ongoing
risk appetite and risk tolerance, as part of effort both from those responsible for
the key function of identifying, analysing, governance in agreeing what is acceptable
evaluating and responding to risk. The and from all levels of management in
‘questions for the boardroom’, set out in communicating how much risk they wish
this paper, could easily be translated into to take and in monitoring how much
‘questions for the public organisation’s they are actually taking. Anything
senior executive committee’ and as such that stimulates debate on the practical
may be of value to many Alarm members challenges of risk management is to
and their organisations. be welcomed.
Dr Lynn T Drennan Jackie Cain
Chief Executive Policy Director
Alarm, the public risk Chartered Institute
management association of Internal Auditors
While the Financial Reporting Council has CIPFA is pleased to endorse this work
kick-started the debate on risk appetite by IRM on risk appetite and tolerance
and risk tolerance in the UK, it is a debate which provides welcome leadership on a
that resonates around the world. As an challenging subject for both the public
integrated global risk consulting business, and private sectors. We look forward
I can testify to the fact that our clients are to taking the debate further with our
debating risk appetite. That is why we membership in pursuit of our commitment
are pleased to support the work of the to sound financial management and good
Institute of Risk Management in moving governance.
this debate forward. We look forward to
Diana Melville
actively engaging with IRM and others
Governance Adviser
in promoting this thought-provoking
Chartered Institute of Public Finance
document and turning risk appetite into
and Accountancy
a day-by-day reality for boards and risk
management professionals around the
world.
Larry Rieger
CEO, Crowe Horwath
Global Risk Consulting
2
All successful organisations need to be This document is an important contribution
clear about their willingness to accept risk to a key area of board activity and helpfully
in pursuit of their goals. Armed with this addresses one of the issues highlighted in
clarity, boards and management can make the Financial Reporting Council’s Guidance
meaningful decisions about what actions on Board Effectiveness. ICSA is pleased
to take at all levels of the organisation to support the work started here by the
and the extent to which they must deal Institute of Risk Management, and looks
with the associated risks. But defining forward to a well-informed debate and
and implementing risk appetite is work some useful conclusions.
in progress for many. CIMA therefore
Seamus Gillen
warmly welcomes this new guidance
Director of Policy
from the Institute of Risk Management
Institute of Chartered Secretaries
as a sound foundation for developing
and Administrators (ICSA)
best practice on this critical topic.
Gillian Lees
Head of Corporate Governance
Chartered Institute of Management
Accountants (CIMA)

This paper sends out a clear statement that
the principle of risk appetite emanating
from the board is the only effective
way to initiate an ERM implementation.
Charterhouse Risk Management is
delighted to be associated with the launch
of this paper after contributing to the
consultation process. Our own experience
with clients confirms that this approach is
not only critical, but that the whole process
must be undertaken with a practical rather
than theoretical vigour. This is an essential
ingredient of our delivery capability.
References to ‘appetite’ and ‘hunger’ only
reinforce the living nature of the required
approach.
Neil Mockett
CTO
Charterhouse Risk Management
3
Introduction
The UK Corporate Governance Code We have prepared this guidance under
states that “the board is responsible the overall direction of a working group
of the Institute of Risk Management. Our
for determining the nature and
work has produced this executive summary,
extent of the significant risks it
which is designed to provide an overview
is willing to take in achieving its
of the subject for general use, particularly
strategic objectives.” by board members, and a more detailed
version which is primarily designed to assist
The intent of this document is to provide
those whose task it is to advise boards on
high level guidance to directors and senior
these matters. The detailed version of our
executives on how to address this part
guidance is available for free download
of the Code, which essentially requires
from IRM’s website*.
consideration of the subjects of ‘risk
appetite’ and ‘risk tolerance’. Following the financial collapse,
precipitated by banks which we all
This summary will tell you:
assumed were outstanding at managing
• what you need to know risk, which was after all their raison
• what you need to do, and d’être, first the Walker Report, and then
• where can you turn for more the review of Corporate Governance by
detailed guidance the FRC highlighted the need for boards
to re-evaluate just how good they are
It became apparent during the
at managing risk. As a consequence Risk
development of our paper that there is
Appetite and Risk Tolerance are now
considerable interest in this topic in
on the agenda for all listed companies.
the public sector as well as the private
Importantly, our work has shown that
sector, and also beyond the UK. So, while
this interest extends outside the listed
some specifics might differ, we feel that
sector to organisations in all walks of life.
the underlying principles hold true for
But managing risk appetite represents a
all sectors and all geographical locations.
massive challenge: risk professionals have
been divided as to how to determine risk
appetite and there is precious little in terms
of useful guidance.
* Risk Appetite and Tolerance – Guidance Paper available
from www.theirm.org/publications/risk_appetite.html
4
We do not regard this guidance Members of
as the last word on the subject: the Working Group
thinking will continue to develop and, if, Richard Anderson,
as we hope, this booklet is superseded Deputy Chairman of IRM and
before too many reporting seasons come Managing Director of Crowe
and go, then we will know that the Horwath Global Risk Consulting
concept of risk appetite is beginning
Bill Aujla,
to take root.
CRO at Etisalat
It is our view that risk appetite, correctly
Gemma Clatworthy,
defined, approached and implemented,
Senior risk consultant at Nationwide
should be a fundamental business concept
Building Society
that could make a substantial difference to
how businesses and organisations are run. Roger Garrini,
We fully expect that the initial scepticism Audit manager at Selex Galileo
about risk appetite will be gradually
Paul Hopkin,
replaced as boards and executive directors
Director of IRM and technical
gain greater insight into its usefulness.
director of AIRMIC
We also anticipate that analysts will soon
be asking chief executives, chairmen and Steven Shackleford,
finance directors about risk appetite. Senior academic in audit and risk
After all, this subject is at the heart of the management at Birmingham City
organisation: risk-taking, whether private, University
public or third sector, whether large or
small, is what managing an organisation John Summers,
is about. The approach of the new UK Chief advisor – risk at Rio Tinto
Corporate Governance Code represents Carolyn Williams,
an opportunity to place risk management, Head of thought leadership at IRM
and in particular risk appetite, right at the
centre of the debate on effective corporate
governance and the role of the board in
running organisations.
Richard Anderson
Deputy Chairman,
Institute of Risk Management
5
About IRM About the Author
The Institute of Risk Management (IRM) Richard Anderson, the principal author
is the world’s leading enterprise risk of this booklet, is Deputy Chairman of
management education Institute. We are IRM. Richard is also Managing Director
independent, well-respected advocates of of Crowe Horwath Global Risk Consulting
the risk profession, owned by practising risk in the UK. A Chartered Accountant, and
professionals. We provide qualifications, formerly a partner at a big-4 practice,
short courses and events at a range of Richard has also run his own GRC practice
levels from introductory to board level for seven of the last ten years. Richard
and support risk professionals by providing has been professionally involved with risk
the skills and tools needed to deal with management since the mid-nineties
the demands of a constantly changing, and has broad industry sector experience.
sophisticated and challenging business He wrote a report for the OECD on
environment. We operate internationally Corporate Risk Management in the banking
with members and students in over 90 sector in the UK, the USA and France.
countries, drawn from a variety of risk- He is a regular speaker at conferences
related disciplines and a wide range of and contributes to many journals on risk
industries in the private, third and management and governance issues.
public sectors.
“It is interesting, but not surprising,
that whilst a significant proportion
of financial organisations who have
formally articulated a risk appetite
statement have been compelled to do
so by regulatory requirements, non-
financial organisations have developed
risk appetites in order to assist in the
achievement of strategic goals.”
Source: Jill Douglas,
Head of Risk,
Charterhouse Risk Management
6
Risk appetite –
principles and approach
It is often said that no company The following key principles have
can make a profit without taking underpinned our work on risk appetite:
a risk. The same is true for all
1 Risk appetite can be complex. Excessive
organisations: no organisation,
simplicity, while superficially attractive,
whether in the private, public
leads to dangerous waters: far better
or third sector can achieve its
to acknowledge the complexity and
objectives without taking risk.
deal with it, rather than ignoring it.
The only question is how much
risk do they need to take? 2 Risk appetite needs to be measurable.
And yet taking risks without Otherwise there is a risk that any
consciously managing those statements become empty and
risks can lead to the downfall of vacuous. We are not promoting any
organisations. This is the challenge individual measurement approach but
that has been highlighted by the fundamentally it is important that
latest UK Corporate Governance directors should understand how their
Code issued by the Financial performance drivers are impacted
Reporting Council in 2010. by risk. Shareholder value may be an
appropriate starting point for some
private organisations; stakeholder
value or ‘Economic Value Added’ may
be appropriate for others. We also
anticipate more use of key risk and
control metrics which should be readily
available inside or from outside the
organisation. Relevant and accurate
data is vital for this process and we
urge directors to ensure that there is
the same level of data governance over
these metrics as there would be over
routine accounting data.
7
3 R isk appetite is not a single, fixed 5 Risk appetite must take into account
concept. There will be a range of differing views at a strategic, tactical
appetites for different risks which need and operational level. In other words,
to align and these appetites may well while the UK Corporate Governance
vary over time: the temporal aspect of Code envisages a strategic view of
risk appetite is a key attribute to this risk appetite, in fact risk appetite
whole development. needs to be addressed throughout
the organisation for it to make any
4 R isk appetite should be developed
practical sense.
in the context of an organisation’s
risk management capability, which 6 Risk appetite must be integrated with
is a function of risk capacity and the control culture of the organisation.
risk management maturity. Risk Our framework explores this by looking
management remains an emerging at both the propensity to take risk and
discipline and some organisations, the propensity to exercise control. The
irrespective of size or complexity, do it framework promotes the idea that
much better than others. This is in part the strategic level is proportionately
due to their risk management culture more about risk taking than exercising
(a subset of the overall culture), partly control, while at the operational level
due to their systems and processes, the proportions are broadly reversed.
and partly due to the nature of their Clearly the relative proportions will
business. However, until an organisation depend on the organisation itself, the
has a clear view of both its risk capacity nature of the risks it faces and the
and its risk management maturity it regulatory environment within which
cannot be clear as to what approach it operates.
would work or how it should be
implemented.
8