COSO Enterprise Risk Management Framework ACCA Qualification Students. COSOs enterprise risk management ERM model has become a widely accepted framework for organisations to use. Although it has attracted criticisms, the framework has been established as a model that can be used in different environments worldwide. COSOs guidance illustrated the ERM model in the form of a cube. COSO intended the cube to illustrate the links between objectives that are shown on the top and the eight components shown on the front, which represent what is needed to achieve the objectives.   The third dimension represents the organisations units, which portrays the models ability to focus on parts of the organisation as well as the whole.            This article highlights a number of issues under each of the eight components listed on the front of the cube that organisations have had to tackle issues which have featured in exam questions for Paper P1. Internal environment. The internal environment establishes the tone of the organisation, influencing risk appetite, attitudes towards risk management and ethical values. Ultimately, the companys tone is set by the board. IT risk management is the application of risk management methods to information technology in order to manage IT risk, i. e. The business risk associated with the use. FIS risk management software and analytics solutions help you gain visibility of your enterprise risk across multiple asset classes and comply with global. Risk management is a tool that helps companies evaluate risks in processes and content. It evaluates event data in order to measure levels of risk in an operational. Financial Management Systems, including Risk Management Financial Management. Financial management and systems capacities are required to plan, direct, and control. An unbalanced board, lacking appropriate technical knowledge and experience, diversity and strong, independent voices is unlikely to set the right tone. The work directors do in board committees can also make a significant contribution to tone, with the operation of the audit and risk committees being particularly important.      However, the virtuous example set by board members may be undermined by a failure of management in divisions or business units. Mechanisms to control line management may not be sufficient or may not be operated correctly. Line managers may not be aware of their responsibilities or may fail to exercise them properly. For example, they may tolerate staff ignoring controls or emphasise achievement of results over responsible handling of risks. One criticism of the ERM model has been that it starts at the wrong place. It begins with the internal and not the external environment. Critics claim that it does not reflect sufficiently the impact of the competitive environment, regulation and external stakeholders on risk appetite and management and culture. Objective setting. The board should set objectives that support the organisations mission and which are consistent with its risk appetite. If the board is to set objectives effectively, it needs to be aware of the risks arising if different objectives are pursued. Entrepreneurial risks are risks that arise from carrying out business activities, such as the risks arising from a major business investment or competitor activities. The board also needs to consider risk appetite and take a high level view of how much risk it is willing to accept.   Risk tolerance the acceptable variation around individual objectives should be aligned with risk appetite.     One thing the board should consider is how certain aspects of the control systems can be used for strategic purposes. For example, a code of ethics can be used as an important part of the organisations positioning as socially responsible. However, the business framework chosen can be used to obscure illegal or unethical objectives. For example, the problems at Enron were obscured by a complex structure and a business model that was difficult to understand. Event identification. The organisation must identify internal and external events that affect the achievement of its objectives. 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. Applications International Corporation AIC is the global leader in enterprisewide safety management systems, compliance management software, HR, security. At Global Healthcare Exchange GHX, our mission is to help increase your operational efficiency and drive down costs of doing business. We do this by automating your. University of California Enterprise Risk Management Report October 19, 2012 Presented by the ERM Panel. ISOTS 169492009 Quality Management Systems and Quality Core Tools Global Benchmarks The Catalyst for Peak Performance 2012 AIAG 26200 Lahser Rd, Ste 200. CORPORATE QUALITY PROCEDURE SFBN4MRP6X Rev 20 Attention Printed Copies Are Uncontrolled Documents 7 1. Quality Management System QMS Overview. The COSO guidance draws a distinction between events having a negative impact that represent risks and events having a positive impact that are opportunities, which should feed back to strategy setting. Some organisations may lack a process for event identification in important areas. There may be a culture of no one expecting anything to go wrong.   The distinction between strategic and operational risks is also important here. Organisations must pay attention both to occurrences that could disrupt operations and also dangers to the achievement of strategic objectives.   An excessive focus on internal factors, for which the model has been criticised, could result in a concentration on operational risks and a failure to analyse strategic dangers sufficiently. Businesses must also have processes in place to identify the risks arising from one off events and more gradual trends that could result in changes in risk. Often one off events with significant risk consequences can be fairly easy to identify for example, a major business acquisition. The ERM has been criticised for discussing risks primarily in terms of events, particularly sudden events with major consequences. Critics claim that the guidance insufficiently emphasises slow changes that can give rise to important risks for example, changes in internal culture or market sentiment. Organisations should carry out analysis to identify potential events, but it will also be important to identify and respond to signs of danger as soon as they arise. For example, quick responses to product failure may be vital in ensuring that lost sales and threats to reputation are minimised. Risk assessment. The likelihood and impact of risks are assessed, as a basis for determining how to manage them. As well as mapping the likelihood and impact of individual risks, managers also need to consider how individual risks interrelate. The COSO guidance stresses the importance of employing a combination of qualitative and quantitative risk assessment methodologies. As well as assessing inherent risk levels, the organisation should also assess residual risks left after risk management actions have been taken. The ERM model has, though, been criticised for encouraging an over simplified approach to risk assessment. Its claimed that it encourages an approach that views the materialisation of risk as a single outcome. This outcome could be an expected outcome or it could be a worst case result. Many risks will have a range of possible outcomes if they materialise for example, extreme weather and risk assessment needs to consider this range. Risk response. Management selects appropriate actions to align risks with risk tolerance and risk appetite. This stage can be seen in terms of the four main responses reduce, accept, transfer or avoid. However risks may end up being treated in isolation without considering the picture for the organisation as a whole. Portfolio management and diversification will be best implemented at the organisational level and the COSO guidance stresses the importance of taking a portfolio view of risk.   The risk responses chosen must be realistic, taking into account the costs of responding as well as the impact on risk. An organisations environment will affect its risk responses. Highly regulated organisations, for example, will have more complex risk responses and controls than less regulated organisations. The ALARP principle as low as reasonably practicable has become important here, particularly in sectors where health or safety risks are potentially serious, but are unavoidable.  Part of the risk response stage will be designing a sound system of internal controls. COSO guidance suggests that a mix of controls will be appropriate, including prevention and detection and manual and automated controls. Control activities. Policies and procedures should operate to ensure that risk responses are effective. Once designed, the controls in place need to operate properly.