Risk Managers Of The Universe
1 like345 views
On how the current top-down (command-and-)control approach, and the \'middle-out\' modelling aproach, will and can not work in the end. A new paradigm, bottom-up KISS risk management will be needed.
![Mpc mtcp six sigma [compatibility mode]](https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/mpcmtcpsixsigmacompatibilitymode-121216190232-phpapp02-thumbnail.jpg?width=560&fit=bounds)
More Related Content
Similar to Risk Managers Of The Universe (20)
More from Jurgen van der Vlugt (17)
Risk Managers Of The Universe
- 1. Risk Managers of the universe Jurgen van der Vlugt Dialogues House, 16 augustus 2012
- 2. Introductie
- 3. Agenda Risk Management, ? Top-down ? Middle-out ? Bottom-up
- 4. Top-down ? RM ? In control over risico¡¯s ? Risico¡¯s ? negatieve events ? Positieve? risico ? rendement ? Events: definitie? volledigheid? ? In control ? geen afwijkingen / correctie ? Geen afwijkingen: totale beheersing inputs ? Correctie: kosten, schade, positieve resultaten? ? Fantasie: Werkelijkheid beheersen
- 5. In control?
- 6. In control?
- 7. Janus Resultaten uit het verleden ¡ toekomst
- 8. De Toekomst¡ ? ALLE risicodiscussie is subjectief ? Gaat over de toekomst, ? De ? van onzekerheid ? Bestaat alleen in de verbeelding ? RM is speculeren over de toekomst ? Toch¡ amechtige pogingen
- 9. Overhead Evaluate design & Analysis Monitor & react set-up Operational Risk Problem Management Mgt Incidents ORAP Inherent for analysis Controls Risk indicators risks (Problems) R(S)A (K)ORC KRI Incident (+Audit) (Mgt) (Mgt) Mgt Insu- Near rance Designed, Tuning, Selected for Mandatory misses CLD Mgt efficiency Corrective KRI actions values Incidents Indemnities Process Breach Very, very basically Surprise!
- 10. Zoals voorspeld
- 12. Middle-out
- 13. n:m, feedback, time, continuity
- 14. Initi?le auditissues Forecast ultimo 2011 1 2 3 4 4 3 5 9 7 8 6 9 Kans Kans 6 2 7 1 Impact Impact ? 1 Kans Kansloos ? ¡ per? jaar? transactie? nanoseconde? ? 1 Impact Kansloos ? ¡ Alleen financieel? reputatie, etc.? tijd; vs ingrijpen? ? H x H = 25 Kansloos ? 3xM=H Kansloos ? ¡¯16¡¯ > ¡¯12¡¯ Kansloos ? Wie schat ¡®H¡¯; hoe en met welk ¡®bewijs¡¯?
- 15. In particular, for any consistent, effectively generated formal theory that proves certain basic arithmetic truths, there is an arithmetical statement that is true, but not provable in the theory. Kurt G?del No matter how perfect you try to risk manage, incidents will happen Yours Truly
- 16. ¡Ò ( Kansfunctie ¡Á? Impactfunctie ) ¡Æ( Kosten van tegenmaatregelen ) Voor vele series van functies en parameters, impact schattingsranges (¡), variabele sets van tegenmaatregelen Inclusief variabele maten van effectiviteit, met vage noties van risk appetites in de achterhoofden van sommigen
- 19. Resultaat
- 21. En dan zijn er nog kosten What was it astronaut John Glenn said went through his mind as he awaited lift-off? "You're thinking you're sitting on top of the most complex machine ever built by man, with a million separate components, all supplied by the lowest bidder."
- 22. Ja Maar ¡ 1. Yes we know all that. Nothing¡¯s perfect. 2. The assumptions are reasonable. 3. The assumptions don¡¯t really matter. 4. The assumptions are conservative. 5. You cannot prove the assumptions are wrong. 6. We only do what everyone else does. 7. The decision maker is better off with us than without us. 8. The models are not completely useless. 9. You gotta make the best of the data you¡¯ve got. 10. You need assumptions to make progress. 11. The models deserve the benefit of the doubt. 12. Models and assumptions don¡¯t do any harm so why bother ¡? ? David Freedman (in Nassim Taleb¡¯s Black Swan)
- 23. Combinaties Externe data Scenario?s ? Relevantie; toepasselijkheid (modereren vs bias) ? Resultaten uit het verleden ? Te weinig data (?) ? Self-reporting !? ? Veel (!) te weinig data; kwaliteit ? Te weinig data (?) ? Self-reporting !? ? Kennis, zicht op risico¡¯s ? Resultaten uit het verleden ? Zuiver en alleen lokaal bruikbaar ? Kennis en kunde Interne data ? Percepties van risico RSA?s
- 28. Bottom-up dan ..? In theory, nothing works, In practice, everything works, and everyone knows why. but no-one knows why. We have in our organisation a combination of theory and practice.
- 29. Klein beginnen
- 31. Risico¡¯s van alle tijden
- 32. Dus lat niet te hoog verkopen
- 33. ¡®Stress-testen¡¯ ? Maar dan goed
- 35. J. R. Galbraith, "Organization Design: An Information Processing View" Interfaces, 4 (1974), 28-36 Summary Galbraith believes that "the greater the uncertainty of the task, the greater the amount of information that must be processed between decision makers during the execution of the task to get a given level of performance". Firms can reduce uncertainty through better planning and coordination, often by rules, hierarchy, or goals. Galbraith states that "the critical limiting factor of an organizational form is the ability to handle the non-routine events that cannot be anticipated or planned for". When the "exceptions" become too prevalent, they overwhelm the hierarchy's ability to process them. Variations in organization design arise from different strategies to increase planning ability and to reduce the number of exceptional events that management must resolve. Galbraith defines a continuity of organizational forms that firms utilize to reduce uncertainty: 1. Creation of Slack Resources. These include extending delivery times, adding more money to the budget, and building inventory (all which have inherent costs). If a firm fails to actively create a higher level strategy to address uncertainty, this strategy will occur by default. 2. Creation of Self-Contained Tasks. One strategy at this level is changing from functional to product groups. 3. Investment in Vertical Integration Systems. Condensing the flow of information by building specialized languages and computer systems can help analysis and decision making. 4. Creation of Lateral Relationships. Moving the decision making power down in the firm to where the information exists can reduce uncertainty at the decision level. There are various strategies of increasing complexity to achieve this: A. Direct contact between managers across groups B. Liaison personnel between groups. C. Task Forces D. Teams E. Cross-group Managers (project managers, program managers, etc.) F. Linked Managers (with power over some cross-group resources) G. Matrix Organization
- 36. Combinatie
- 38. Conclusie ? Risk Management op de huidige manier, werkt niet ? Gedreven door CYA, angst voor de wereld ? RM of the Universe is een fantasie ? Idealen bijstellen, via Bottom-up (andere) idealen halen
- 39. Work In Progress
- 40. That was all. Thank you. Hope you enjoy(ed) the ride
- 42. Dank u
- 43. Contact details ? Jurgen = Ir.drs. J. van der Vlugt RE CISA CRISC ? Maverisk Consultancy, IS Audit and Advisory services (KPMG, ABN AMRO, Noordbeek, Achmea, ABN AMRO ? (IS) Audit, (Info)Security, Y2k, BCM, ERM/ORM ? ISSA, NOREA: Various committees ? Jvdvlugt@maverisk.nl ? LinkedIn, Twitter (etc.etc.) Motivate yourself! www.despair.com/viewall.html