The top 10 op risks, reloaded
Survey to be expanded as part of benchmarking exercise
Click here to read this year’s top 10 operational risks
You can plan a pretty picnic but you can’t predict the weather, as the song has it.
It’s an often-heard frustration among operational risk managers that trying to anticipate when and how large losses will occur is extremely difficult.
In recent years, the industry has been encouraged to consider esoteric risks that might previously have been assigned a low or near-zero probability as part of routine stress testing, including regulator-set exams – in other words, knowing what your exposures are and thinking about what losses would occur if there were significant changes to your operating environment (or packing an umbrella, or scoping out a nearby café, to torture the picnic metaphor in ways that Outkast’s André 3000 and Antwan never imagined).
Of course, whether firms choose to act on the outputs these exercises throw up, and update control environments accordingly – like the bank that built a stress scenario for a global pandemic two years before Covid-19 struck, before tearing it up, dismissing it as unrealistic – is another matter.
For more than a decade, Risk.net has tried to help guide op risk managers pool their collective insights as a list of shared concerns over broad categories of risk in the form of the Top 10 Op Risks.
The analysis that results is consistently the most popular piece of content Risk.net produces all year: many of the world’s largest banks spend time debating the survey as part of so-called external perspectives exercises, puzzling over the ranking of a particular category, asking whether they’re paying enough attention to it and have enough internal expertise to respond appropriately if threats are realised.
As was the case with Covid, however, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine – while not wholly unexpected – has also exposed the inherent limitations of the Top 10 as a static, point-in-time exercise. So the survey needs to evolve, too.
Later this year, we’ll be getting in touch with respondents and asking for your input. How regularly should we run the survey: a semi-annual poll, to see how broad areas of concern to managers have evolved over the course of the year? Or a free-form exercise designed to identify emerging risks? What time horizon should we be thinking along?
The outcome might be a more regular, more granular survey offering a breakdown of the hierarchy of perceived threats, and accompanying detail on how some op risk chiefs are responding. But we don’t have a fixed vision yet, so if there’s something you’d like to see, please get in touch: tom.osborn [at] risk.net
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@risk.net or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (point 2.4), printing is limited to a single copy.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (clause 2.4), an Authorised User may only make one copy of the materials for their own personal use. You must also comply with the restrictions in clause 2.5.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Our take
Podcast: Alexandre Antonov turns down the noise in Markowitz
Adia quant explains how to apply hierarchical risk parity to a minimum-variance portfolio
Why did UK keep the pension fund clearing exemption?
Liquidity concerns, desire for higher returns and clearing capacity all possible reasons for going its own way
UBS’s Iabichino holds a mirror to bank funding risks
Framing funding management as an optimal control problem affords an alternative to proxy hedging
Trump 2.0 bank supervision: simpler but no soft touch?
Republican FDIC vice-chair Travis Hill wants more focus on financial risk instead of process
Lots to fear, including fear itself
Binary scenarios for key investment risks in this year’s Top 10 are worrying buy-siders
Podcast: Alexei Kondratyev on quantum computing
Imperial College London professor updates expectations for future tech
Quants mine gold for new market-making model
Novel approach to modelling cointegrated assets could be applied to FX and potentially even corporate bond pricing
Thin-skinned: are CCPs skimping on capital cover?
Growth of default funds calls into question clearers’ skin in the game