risk tolerance

Resilient By Design

In our interconnected, 21st century global economy, unexpected— black swan— events in one corner of the globe can have a ripple effect through global supply chains and impact customers like we have not seen in the history of global trade. In a January 24 session on supply chain resilience, we explored how companies who are prepared for such events can come out stronger and thrive, while others who may be less prepared or not at all, risk significant impact to revenue, brand and at the extreme, the very viability of the underlying business.

Session presenters included:

  • Joseph Fiksel, Executive Director of the Sustainable and Resilient Economy program at The Ohio State University and a faculty member in Integrated Systems Engineering. Dr. Fiksel is an international expert in sustainability and resilience with over 25 years experience in the space.
  • Keely Croxton, Associate Professor of Logistics at The Ohio State University. Dr. Croxton has a developed expertise in supply chain resilience, focused on helping companies balance their inherent vulnerabilities with their management capabilities in order to effectively mitigate disruptions in the supply chain.
  • Darrell Zavitz, Vice President (Retired) Shared Services/Supply Chain, The Dow Chemical Company. During his tenure with Dow, Darrell drove best practices into each of Dow’s businesses including Resilience, Six Sigma/Lean, and Network Design.

Between 1900 and 2010 global natural disasters have grown exponentially, arguably impacted by climate, global crowding and connectivity. With the frequency of black swan events accelerating, the traditional COSO Framework for Enterprise Risk Management (Objective Setting, Event Identification, Risk Assessment, Risk Response and Control Activities) is no longer a sufficient means to view the world.

Today, more than ever, risks cannot always be anticipated. The risks may be very hard to quantify and adaptation may be needed to remain competitive. Resilience strategies in turbulent times would suggest that a more comprehensive strategy to the abruptness of change and the magnitude of change is warranted.

Introducing SCRAM™

The SCRAM (Supply Chain Resilience Assessment & Management) Tool™ is based on more than a decade of research at The Ohio State University and was highlighted as an alternative framework allowing companies to focus on balancing vulnerabilities with capabilities. With this balance, a business will achieve balanced resilience and improved performance over time.

An ability to assess vulnerabilities and capabilities, look for gaps and build capabilities is at its basic level the key to building supply chain resilience. The more resilient a firm is, the less likely the firm will see swings in performance.

SCRAM™ in Action

The Dow Chemical Company began SCRAM implementation several years ago. Their focus on supply chain resilience and being agile drove a strategy shift. The project was in three phases:

  • Phase 1:   “Get Fit” | Manage the Cycle
  • Phase 2: “Change the Rules” | Dampen the Cycle
  • Phase 3: “Change the Game” | Break the Cycle.

The approach taken by Dow in its SCRAM implementation began with a rapid qualitative assessment. This included an electronic survey involving 30-40 business resources devoting an hour or so to the assessment. The SCRAM methodology was then used as a filter to prioritize and sequence business urgency (opportunity and commitment). Model those results and follow with and audit to value delivery.

Session Takeaways

  • Risk tolerance and resilience capabilities tend to change as companies grow.
  • Companies need to develop the right portfolio of capabilities to match the vulnerabilities they face.
  • Every disruption presents a learning opportunity.
  • A critical leadership requirement is to develop a culture of resilience in the organization.
  • To maximize return on investment, companies should design for inherent resilience.
  • Measuring and managing enterprise resilience is still an emerging field, ripe for collaboration between industry and academia.

A Snapshot of Risk Management in 2015

minton bernadette 130x195By Professor Bernadette A. Minton
Academic Director, The Risk Institute
Arthur E. Shepard Endowed Professor in Insurance
The Ohio State University Fisher College of Business 

 

As published on Columbus CEO’s CEO Live blog on May 20, 2015

In recent years, risk management has evolved into a more comprehensive and integrated practice.  Risk management was once viewed as only being done to meet regulatory requirements and to protect the firm against the negative effects of volatility in their business environment.  While those aspects remain leading catalysts for firms who increased risk management efforts over the last three years, a fraction of firms recognize risk management to be a source of growth.

Over the same three-year period, senior executives and the board of directors have become more involved in risk management processes. This integrated approach leverages collaboration across an organization to identify and evaluate risks and to proactively manage those risks to achieve corporate objectives and enhance shareholder value.

One of the primary goals for The Risk Institute at The Ohio State University Fisher College of Business is to create a greater understanding of how organizations can proactively leverage risk management to create value.  Given the varied roles that risk management plays in different organizations, it is important to hear from senior executives from both financial and nonfinancial industries about how they view risk management’s role in their organization. It’s also critical to understand how executives, if at all, integrate risk management into business decisions as well as structure their risk management function to support its role in the firm.

Organizations are increasingly impacted by risks that are more interconnected and ever changing. This means that the conversation about risk and risk management must continue to evolve and grow. It is with this goal in mind that The Risk Institute developed a comprehensive research initiative to survey senior risk management executives. The survey is designed to deepen the understanding of how U.S. companies structure their risk management practices.

The annual Risk Management Survey is one example of how The Risk Institute and its founding partners are committed to moving this conversation forward. In this inaugural survey, we provide a snapshot of risk management practices among a large and diverse set of U.S. firms.

As The Risk Institute unveils the findings from its inaugural 2014 Risk Institute Survey on Integrated Risk Management several things are clear.

 1) In order for firms to transition to a more integrated risk management approach, which views risk management as a source of value enhancing opportunities, it is important to choose a leader of the risk management functions who embraces this view and who does not see risk management as merely a defensive strategy. Equally important is choosing a leader who can effectively collaborate with other C-suite executives to leverage risk to enhance shareholder value.  Finally, the Board committee responsible for risk management also should share this view.

2) For firms wanting a more integrated risk management approach, it is important to include more business units/functions in the processes and not only rely on those functions related to finances and meeting mandated requirements. Aligning risk management with key organizational strategies will aid an organization to successfully develop a fully integrated risk management function that can leverage risk to achieve corporate objectives and enhance growth and shareholder value.

3) For firms to fully reap the benefits of an integrated approach, not only do they need to recognize a business process and analyze the risks of that process, they must also increase their efforts to have their analysis feeding back into the risk management of the firm itself. This “looping” process will allow firms to proactively manage the risks impacting their organizations and identify emerging risks to be leveraged or mitigated.

4) Given the changing nature of risks impacting firms, firms must continue to use a variety of techniques like best case/worse case and extreme scenario analyses, which can effectively evaluate these risks by including proprietary models and simulations.

5) As firms move from viewing risk management as a defensive strategy to a more fully integrated approach, senior executives and the Board must develop mechanisms to set the scope of risk-taking that are consistent with this latter view of risk management.

These findings afford some great insights and will enable us to investigate and address challenges in the practice of risk management so to advance the adoption of leading integrated risk management strategies.

To learn more and access the complete 2014 Survey on Integrated Risk management, visit: go.osu.edu/2014RiskSurvey