Risk controller: Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page with "{{a|risk|}} ===Chicken Licken=== We spend large parts of our daily life catering for contingencies that will never happen. Look upon a control function as a sort of ...")
 
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
{{a|risk|}}
{{a|risk|}}
===[[Chicken Licken]]===
One of those fabulous men and women whose job is to make sure the institution they represent doesn’t unwittingly poke itself in the eye.
We spend large parts of our daily life catering for contingencies that will never happen. Look upon a [[control function]] as a sort of [[insurance]] against {{risk|risk}}. You pay a cost/premium up front ( in time and organisational resources) to have someone manage the {{risk|risk}}. But are these meaningful contingencies or just comfort blankets – paper tigers and imaginary monsters that, as {{risk|individual}}s we are professionally incentivised to treat as real?
 
People in these departments:
*[[Credit]]
*[[Legal]]
*[[Compliance]]
 
These poor people are the wrong side of an asymmetric option: no [[risk controller]] ever got  credit for approving a deal that was colossally profitable, but plenty were eviscerated and left to dangle outside the city walls for neglecting to stop one that wasn’t<ref>This is, of course, outrageous hyperbole. No risk officer was so much as gruffly reprimanded for not anticipating the forthcoming [[global financial crisis]]: the [[circle of escalation]] saw to that.</ref> so you shouldn’t begrudge them the outlandishly risk-averse behavior in which they will inevitably indulge.
 
After all, we spend large parts of our daily life catering for contingencies that will never happen. Look upon a [[control function]] as a sort of [[insurance]] against {{risk|risk}}. You pay a cost/premium up front (in time and organisational resources) to have someone manage the {{risk|risk}}. But are these meaningful contingencies or just comfort blankets – paper tigers and imaginary monsters that, as {{risk|individual}}s we are professionally incentivised to treat as real?
{{sa}}
*{{wastearticle|Over-processing}} - how risk controllers are incentivised to create {{wastearticle|waste}} in the negotiation process.
*[[Chicken licken]]
{{ref}}

Revision as of 10:15, 3 June 2019

Risk Anatomy™


Comments? Questions? Suggestions? Requests? Insults? We’d love to 📧 hear from you.
Sign up for our newsletter.


One of those fabulous men and women whose job is to make sure the institution they represent doesn’t unwittingly poke itself in the eye.

People in these departments:

These poor people are the wrong side of an asymmetric option: no risk controller ever got credit for approving a deal that was colossally profitable, but plenty were eviscerated and left to dangle outside the city walls for neglecting to stop one that wasn’t[1] so you shouldn’t begrudge them the outlandishly risk-averse behavior in which they will inevitably indulge.

After all, we spend large parts of our daily life catering for contingencies that will never happen. Look upon a control function as a sort of insurance against risk. You pay a cost/premium up front (in time and organisational resources) to have someone manage the risk. But are these meaningful contingencies or just comfort blankets – paper tigers and imaginary monsters that, as individuals we are professionally incentivised to treat as real?

See also

References

  1. This is, of course, outrageous hyperbole. No risk officer was so much as gruffly reprimanded for not anticipating the forthcoming global financial crisis: the circle of escalation saw to that.