'Near enough good enough' attitude to risk management

Peter Dinham
Sunday, 15 March 2009 13:02

IT Industry - Deals

Many of Australia’s largest businesses and organisations have a ‘near enough is good enough’ attitude when it comes to addressing business risk, according to the findings of a research report just released.

The report, commissioned by Australian enterprise software solutions provider, TechnologyOne, found that 35 percent of large organisations surveyed have no systematic risk management program, most organisations have only fulfilled legislative requirements to manage risk, and 75% of organisations had one person solely responsible for managing risk and sustainability, meaning that any existing sustainability program was unlikely to have ownership from all aspects of the business.

TechnologyOne’s general manager for performance planning, Peter Gill, was blunt in his assessment of risk preparedness:  “The harsh reality is that Australian organisations have a ‘near enough is good enough’ attitude when it comes to addressing business risk, and they should be examining all of the possible scenarios and planning for them to ensure long term sustainability.”

A worrying finding of the survey, according to Gill, is the fact that 49% of organisations considered legislative requirements to be the primary driver for their organisation’s risk and sustainability auditing and reporting activities.

Gill said that while complying with legislative requirements was obviously very important for any organisation, there were a range of different factors that could also seriously threaten the long term viability and sustainability of an enterprise, and these needed to be proactively considered and planned for.

“Political considerations, social developments, economic conditions, natural disasters and labour shortages are just some of the factors that organisations need to consider and plan for to ensure their long term success.

“Organisations need to take the next step and move beyond compliance.  They can move ahead of what is currently legislated so that they are sheltered from future changes to regulations and laws.  This also means that organisations can take the time to implement systems proactively in a reasonable timeframe and at lower cost as opposed the inevitable high cost hurried implementation typified by a reactive approach to legislation.”
CONTINUED page 2