Companies operating in the financial
services, manufacturing as well as oil and gas sectors can overcome the
many challenges that have bedeviled them in the last few quarters if
they imbibe effective risk management culture, a report by H. Pierson
Associates has revealed.
For companies in Nigeria, H. Pierson pointed out that the last few quarters to date has been very challenging but also very sobering.
For companies in Nigeria, H. Pierson pointed out that the last few quarters to date has been very challenging but also very sobering.
Challenges, it stated, have ranged from
the impact of price risks for oil and gas firms, foreign exchange risks
for manufacturing firms, credit default issues for financial
institutions, costly compliance risk challenges against purported
regulatory breaches by major firms across sectors and liquidity and
capital risks for power companies.
“All these, amongst other risks to
corporate sustainability, have taken significant toll on shareholder
value in most instances. Against similar risk management challenges
across other jurisdictions, global expectation for board oversight has
risen astronomically. More specifically, stronger oversight over the
corporate risk culture is being seen by many, as the next frontier for
directors of boards, towards better handling of these risks by
institutions.
“Here, the company’s risk culture refers
to the institution’s norms, attitudes and behaviour as it relates to
risk awareness, risk taking and risk management by the institution. In
other words, the way the institution identifies, understands, discusses
and acts on the risks it confronts and the risks it takes. Also key is
the extent to which this culture has been embedded through mature risk
practices, processes and systems, “it stated.
H. Pierson added that a sound risk
culture provides firm-wide consensus that drives effective corporate
strategy implementation and consistency in organizational performance.
“It is therefore a point of attraction for external stakeholders such as regulators, institutional investors and credit rating agencies. For systemically important institutions, inclinations are towards regulatory assessment of the institutions’ risk cultures as well as the assessment of the boards’ diligence in overseeing same.
“It is therefore a point of attraction for external stakeholders such as regulators, institutional investors and credit rating agencies. For systemically important institutions, inclinations are towards regulatory assessment of the institutions’ risk cultures as well as the assessment of the boards’ diligence in overseeing same.
“The tone at the top in building a sound
risk culture, refers to the general ethical climate evolving from the
board of directors, the audit committee and senior management. Good and
consistent tone at the top is critical for sound risk governance and
risk culture. This is because employee behaviour across the
organisation, is significantly impacted by what they see and hear every
day from those at the top,” it added.
For our current corporate challenges, it
stated that boards must increasingly set the right tone at the top
through transparency, consistency and the right formal and informal
communication to the rest of the organisation.
It added, “The Boards’ risk management
vision for the corporation, its true commitment to operating within
clearly defined risk appetite, its effective oversight over same, its
ethics and non-tolerance of compliance failures, should be communicated
effectively throughout the organisation. The message must be consistent,
unambiguous and authentic at all times. Clearly, the role of the board
and senior management in exemplarily living and driving the
institution’s risk culture is increasingly critical. It is a fundamental
indicator of the level of risk management maturity of the institution
and positively impacts on the company’s ability to weather periodic
systemic pressures.
“For some of the crisis confronting
institutions across various sectors, some questions to be asked
regarding their large exposures would be: what is the defined risk
appetite of these institutions? What is the level of board oversight
over institutionalization and compliance with the agreed risk appetite?
Were directors fully knowledgeable about the true levels and direction
of the inherent and residual risks facing the firm at all times? If
these exposures were within the institutions’ risk appetite and things
have gone awry, could this question their risk appetite and risk
culture?
“What was the tone at the top with
regard to the risk culture? Did the tone at the top pose a warning
signal? Were these warning signals heeded by the directors and senior
management? Did the top have constraints in re-aligning the risk
culture? This certainly may seem a good time for directors to
individually and collectively re-assess and further sharpen the tone at
the top.”
To successfully achieve the above, H. Pierson said boards should gain solid insight into the principles and expectations on risk culture oversight.
To successfully achieve the above, H. Pierson said boards should gain solid insight into the principles and expectations on risk culture oversight.
“Boards must also ensure periodic risk
culture gap assessment and alignment. Next, Boards and senior management
must actively track the maturity curve of their Risk Management
Frameworks through assurance reviews of the effectiveness and impact of
their risk management practices in helping achieve defined corporate
objectives, as against overly focusing on the risks themselves. Boards
will also need to ensure that the risk culture is characterised by an
environment of open communication, and is accommodative of effective
challenge by employees through diverse views and constructive engagement
on risk issues.
“Finally, the Board would need to ensure
it receives periodic consolidated reports on the company’s residual
risk status and company objectives that are impacted, including reports
on the soundness and compliance with a robust risk appetite framework.
This puts a burden of accountability and transparency on the CEO, the
CRO, the CFO and the head of Audit.
“Organisations with strong top-driven risk cultures continue to show resilience in challenging times as we saw in the 2008 period as well as today. The leadership of our institutions must therefore track their risk culture. They must constantly monitor and evaluate the impact of the current and emerging risk culture on the safety and soundness of the organization. They must develop measurable and repeatable approaches to evaluating the tone at the top of their institutions, identify gaps and have the discipline and courage to highlight and correct misalignments towards embedding the desired firm-wide risk culture from top to bottom,” it stated.
by Eromosele Abiodun/Thisday
No comments:
Post a Comment