RIMS, AIRMIC, Reptrak Report: Closing the Gap on Reputational Risk Management
Traditionally, risk is dealt with by risk experts, while reputation tends to be managed by the corporate affairs or corporate communications teams. When those two teams work in silos risks to reputation can develop and remain undetected until it is too late, and an organization can find itself as unplanned headline news.
Airmic, The
Furthermore, professors and industry thought leaders were brought together in working groups to discuss challenges and best practices. The resulting report, "Closing the Gaps on Reputational Risk Management", provides guidance to help close the gaps on reputational risk management.
Six Challenges
Risk professionals face six challenges to understanding and addressing risks to reputation, according to the report:
* Unclear definition of reputation.
* Confusion on the categorization of risks to reputation.
* No commonly agreed upon, consistent measurement of the business impact from specific risks to reputation.
* No framework for linking the strategic, operational, and tactical aspects of reputational risk management.
* An absence of integrated ownership and accountability across organizations.
* Slow development of solutions for risk transfer including insurance.
At a Crossroads
The report's release coincides with Airmic Fest, held
The report states that risk professionals today are at a crossroads, where they can follow one of two paths: the first, where they have the responsibility but no influence and control; or the second, where they can contribute value to the organization by leading implementation of a structured, data-driven and systematic approach to reputational risk that draws the whole organization together around a common framework.
Hoe-
KKR to Acquire DTC Pioneer 1-800 Contacts from AEA Investors
Rep. Nadler Applauds House Passage of 10 Judiciary Bills
Advisor News
Annuity News
Health/Employee Benefits News
Life Insurance News