2017 THE STATE OF RISK OVERSIGHT: AN OVERVIEW OF ENTERPRISE RISK MANAGEMENT PRACTICES 8th Edition | March 2017 Mark Beasley Deloitte Professor of ERM Director, ERM Initiative Bruce Branson Associate Director ERM Initiative Bonnie Hancock Executive Director ERM Initiative
41
Embed
2017 THE STATE OF RISK OVERSIGHT - AICPAOur study’s results may be limited to the extent that such bias exists. Furthermore, there is a high concentration of respondents representing
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
2017 THE STATE OF RISK OVERSIGHT:
AN OVERVIEW OF ENTERPRISE
RISK MANAGEMENT PRACTICES8th Edition | March 2017
Mark BeasleyDeloitte Professor of ERMDirector, ERM Initiative
Bruce BransonAssociate DirectorERM Initiative
Bonnie HancockExecutive DirectorERM Initiative
The State of Risk Oversight: An Overview of Enterprise Risk Management Processes
1
1
Overview of Study
The speed of innovation and the highly dynamic global business environment create tremendous
opportunities for organizations as they pursue value. As business leaders manage the ever-changing
economic, political, and technological landscape they face an exponentially increasing range of uncertainty
that creates a highly complex portfolio of potential risks that, if unmanaged, can cripple an organization’s
business model and brand.
A number of organizations are recognizing the value that a structured and explicit focus on emerging risks
can bring to the leadership of an organization by arming it with richer insights about opportunities and
challenges on the horizon. Many of them are strengthening organizational processes to identify, assess,
manage, and monitor those risks most likely to impact – both positively and negatively – the entity’s
strategic success. A number of these entities have embraced the concept of enterprise risk management
(ERM) to help them strengthen their enterprise-wide risk oversight. While organizations have managed
risks for decades, ERM is a process led from the top of the organization by its board and senior leaders
that considers risks from a top-down, strategic perspective so that those risks can be managed proactively
with an enterprise-wide lens which will make the organization more likely to achieve its core objectives.
To obtain an understanding of the current state of enterprise risk oversight among entities of all types
and sizes, we have partnered over the past eight years with the American Institute of Certified Public
Accountants’ (AICPA) Business, Industry, and Government Team to survey business leaders about a
number of characteristics related to their current enterprise-wide risk management efforts. This is the
eighth report that we have published summarizing our research in partnership with the AICPA.
Data was collected during the fall of 2016 through an online survey instrument electronically sent to
members of the AICPA’s Business and Industry group who serve in chief financial officer or equivalent
senior executive positions. In total, we received 432 fully completed surveys. This report summarizes our
findings and provides a resource for benchmarking an organization’s approach to risk oversight against
current practices.
This year we observe that the maturity of enterprise-wide risk oversight processes remains relatively
stable at levels consistent with the past few years with large organizations, public companies, and financial
services organizations significantly more mature than other organizations in their enterprise-risk oversight
processes. Most notably, organizations continue to struggle to integrate their risk oversight efforts with
their strategic planning processes. We believe that significant opportunities remain for organizations to
continue to strengthen their approaches to identifying and assessing key risks facing the entity especially
as it relates to coordinating these efforts with strategic planning activities.
The following page highlights some of the key findings from this research. The remainder of the report
provides more detailed information about other key findings and related implications for risk oversight.
Mark S. Beasley Bruce C. Branson Bonnie V. Hancock
Deloitte Professor of ERM Associate Director Executive Director
ERM Initiative ERM Initiative ERM Initiative
The ERM Initiative in the Poole College of Management at North Carolina State University provides thought
leadership on enterprise risk management (ERM) and its integration with strategic planning and corporate
governance, with a focus on helping boards of directors and senior executives gain strategic advantage by
strengthening their oversight of all types of risks affecting the enterprise.
www.erm.ncsu.edu.
The State of Risk Oversight: An Overview of Enterprise Risk Management Processes
2
2
Key Highlights
Risk Environment is
Complex
•Most leaders believe the risks they face are complex and numerous
•About 70% of large organizations, public companies, and financial services entities perceive the volume and complexities of risks have increased "mostly" or "extensively" in past 5 years
•That trend has been consistent over the past several years, suggesting the overall risk environment continues to be challenging to manage for all types of organizations
•Most organizations have dealt with significant operational surprises in past 5 years
But...Risk Management
Processes Less Advanced
•Less than half describe risk management processes as "mature" or "robust"
•25% of full sample describes their risk management processes as "mature" or "robust", with large organizations, public companies, and financial services entities having more mature processes (but less than 50% are "mature" or "robust")
•The majority of organizations do not believe their processes reflect "complete" or formal enterprise-wide risk management
Opportunities Exist to
Integrate Risk Management and Strategic
Planning
•Most organizations are struggling to integrate risk management with strategic planning
•About one-quarter of the respondents describe their processes as an important strategic tool with no real differences in that assessment across types of organizations
•34% of the full sample do no formal assessments of emerging strategic, market, or industry risks
• If an entity considers strategic risks, that mostly involves qualitative assessments of risk exposures
More Organizations
are Strengthening
Risk Leadership
•More organizations are establishing management-level risk committees
•58% of the full sample has a risk committee, up from 45% last year
•Management-level risk committees are more likely for larger organizations, public companies and financial services organizations (around 80%) - an increase of about 10% points over last year
•We also saw an increase in the designation of individuals who serve as chief risk officer or equivalent
Calls for Increased Senior
Management Involvement
•Strong majority of boards are asking for increased senior executive involvement in risk oversight ("somewhat", "mostly", or "extensively")
•67% of the boards for the full sample are calling for more involvement, with even higher percentages of boards asking for that at large organizations, public companies, and financial services entities
•This trend is consistent with prior years, suggesting boards continue to be interested in strengthening risk oversight
The State of Risk Oversight: An Overview of Enterprise Risk Management Processes
3
3
Overview of Research Approach
This is the eighth year we have conducted this study to identify trends across a number of organizations
related to their enterprise risk management (ERM) processes. This study was conducted by research
faculty who lead the Enterprise Risk Management Initiative (the ERM Initiative) in the Poole College of
Management at North Carolina State University (for more information about the ERM Initiative please
see http://www.erm.ncsu.edu). The research was conducted in conjunction with the American Institute of
Certified Public Accountants’ (AICPA) Business, Industry, and Government Team. Data was collected
during the fall of 2016 through an online survey instrument electronically sent to members of the AICPA’s
Business and Industry group who serve in chief financial officer or equivalent senior executive positions.
In total, we received 432 fully completed surveys. This report summarizes our findings.
Description of Respondents
Respondents completed an online survey consisting of over 40 questions that sought information about
various aspects of risk oversight within their organizations. Most of those questions are the same across
all eight of our editions of the surveys that we have conducted
each year from 2009 - 2016. This approach provides us an
opportunity to observe any shifts in trends in light of more
recent developments surrounding board and senior executive’s
roles in risk oversight.
Because the completion of the survey was voluntary, there is some potential for bias if those choosing to
respond differ significantly from those who did not respond. Our study’s results may be limited to the
extent that such bias exists. Furthermore, there is a high concentration of respondents representing
financial reporting roles. Possibly, there are others leading the risk management effort within their
organizations whose views are not captured in the responses we received. Despite these limitations, we
believe the results reported herein provide useful insights about the current level of risk oversight maturity
and sophistication and highlight many challenges associated with strengthening risk oversight in many
different types of organizations.
A variety of executives serving in financial roles responded to our survey, with 31%1 having the title of
chief financial officer (CFO), 15% serving as controller, and 9% leading internal audit. Other respondents
included the chief risk officer (9%) and treasurer (1%), with the remainder representing numerous other
executive positions.
Nature of Organizations Represented
The respondents represent a broad range of industries. Consistent with our prior year survey, the four
most common industries responding to this year’s survey were finance, insurance, and real estate (28%),
followed by not-for-profit (25%), manufacturing (14%), and services (13%).The mix of industries is
generally consistent with the mix in our previous reports.
1 Throughout this report we have rounded the reported percentages to the nearest full percent for ease of discussion.
Results are based on responses
from 432 executives, mostly
serving in financial leadership roles,
representing a variety of industries
and firm sizes.
The State of Risk Oversight: An Overview of Enterprise Risk Management Processes
4
4
Industry (SIC Codes) Percentage of Respondents
For-Profit Entities:
Finance, Insurance, Real Estate (SIC 60-67) 28%
Manufacturing (SIC 20-39) 14%
Services (SIC 70-89) 13%
Wholesale/Distribution (SIC 50-51) 5%
Construction (SIC 15-17) 5%
Mining (SIC 10-14) 4%
Retail (SIC 52-59) 3%
Transportation (SIC 40-49) 3%
Not-for-Profit (SIC N/A)
Government Agencies, Universities, Non-Profits 25%
The respondents represent a variety of sizes of organizations. As shown in the table below, two-thirds
(59%) of companies that provided data about their financial performance generated revenues up to $500
million in their most recent fiscal year.2 An additional 9% generated revenues between $500 million and
$1 billion while 32% of organizations providing revenue data earned revenues in excess of $1 billion.
Almost all (88%) of the organizations are based in the United States.
Range of Revenues in Most Recent
Fiscal Year
Percentage of Respondents
$0 <x < $10 million 14%
$10 million < x < $100 million 27%
$100 million < x < $500 million 18%
$500 million < x < $1 billion 9%
$1 billion < x < $2 billion 9%
$2 billion < x < $10 billion 14%
x > $10 billion 9%
Throughout this report, we highlight selected findings that are notably different for the 131 largest
organizations in our sample, which represent those with revenues greater than $1 billion. Additionally,
we also provide selected findings for the 120 publicly-traded companies, 117 financial services entities, and
108 not-for-profit organizations included in our sample.
2 Twenty-seven of the 432 respondents did not provide information about revenues.
The State of Risk Oversight: An Overview of Enterprise Risk Management Processes
5
5
Understanding Overall Risk Landscape
Key Insight from Analysis:
Most executives believe the risk landscape is becoming increasingly challenging to manage. That reality
is translating into operational surprises that require reactive versus proactive responses. Risk
management is not getting easier.
Many argue that the volume and complexity of risks faced by organizations today continue to evolve at a
rapid pace, creating huge challenges for management and boards in their oversight of the most important
risks. Recent events such as Brexit, the U.S. presidential election, immigration challenges, the constant
threat of terrorism, and cyber threats, among numerous other
issues, represent examples of challenges management and
boards face in navigating an organization’s risk landscape. To
get a sense for the extent of risks faced by organizations
represented by our respondents, we asked them to describe
how the volume and complexity of risks have increased in the
last five years. Twenty percent noted that the volume and
complexity of risks have increased “extensively” over the past
five years, with an additional 38% responding that the volume and complexity of risks have increased
“mostly.” Thus, on a combined basis, 58% of respondents indicate that the volume and complexity of risks
have changed “mostly” or “extensively” in the last five years, which is in line with what participants noted
in the most recent prior years. Only 2% responded that the volume and complexity of risks have not
changed at all.
50%
52%
54%
56%
58%
60%
62%
64%
66%
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Volume & Complexities of Risks Increasing "Mostly"
or "Extensively"
Volume & Complexities of Risks Increasing "Mostly" or "Extensivel"
The majority of respondents believe
the volume and complexity of risks
have increased “mostly” or
“extensively” in the past five years,
and that finding is consistent across
various types of organizations.
The State of Risk Oversight: An Overview of Enterprise Risk Management Processes
6
6
Description of Response (Full Sample)
Question Not at All Minimally Somewhat Mostly Extensively
To what extent has the volume and
complexity of risks increased over
the past five years?
2% 7% 33% 38% 20%
We separately analyzed responses to this question for various subgroups of respondents. As shown
below, the percentage of respondents indicating an increase in the volume and complexity of risks is even
higher for large organizations, public companies, and financial services. Collectively, this indicates that the
overall business environment is perceived as relatively risky across all types of entities.
Some risks have actually translated into significant operational surprises for the organizations represented
in our survey. About 11% noted that they have been affected by an operational surprise “extensively”
within the last five years and an additional 23% of respondents noted that they have been affected “mostly”
in that same time period. An additional 35% responded “somewhat” to this question. Collectively, this
data indicates that the majority of organizations (69%) are being affected by real risk events (e.g., a
competitor disruption, an IT systems breach, loss of key talent, among numerous others possible events)
that have emerged in their organizations that have affected how they do business, consistent with what
we found in our prior studies.
Description of Response (Full Sample)
Question Not at All Minimally Somewhat Mostly Extensively
To what extent has your
organization faced an operational
surprise in the last five years?
5% 26% 35% 23% 11%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
Volume & Complexities of Risks Increasing "Mostly"
or "Extensively" in Past 5 Years
Full sample Large Organizations Public Companies Financial Services Not-for-Profit
The State of Risk Oversight: An Overview of Enterprise Risk Management Processes
7
7
The rate of operational surprises is even higher for large organizations and publicly-traded entities, with
close to 80% of those responding as “somewhat,” “mostly,” or “extensively.” The reality is that all
organizations are dealing with unexpected risks. About 70% of the financial services entities and 67% not-
for-profit organizations in our sample responded with “somewhat” or higher to this question about the
presence of operational surprises in the past five years.
Relative to our earlier studies, we do not observe a notable reduction in the rate of operational surprises
affecting organizations “mostly” or “extensively.” The responses to questions about the nature and extent
of risks organizations face indicate that executives are experiencing a noticeably high volume of risks that
are also growing in complexity, which ultimately results in significant unanticipated operational issues. The
reality that unexpected risks and uncertainties occur and continue to “surprise” organizational leaders
suggests that opportunities to improve risk management techniques still exist for most organizations.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
Percentage Experiencing an Operational Surprise
"Somewhat," "Mostly," or "Extensively" in Past 5
Years
Full sample Large Organizations Public Companies Financial Services Not-for-Profit
The State of Risk Oversight: An Overview of Enterprise Risk Management Processes
8
8
Maturity of Risk Management Processes
Key Insight from Analysis:
The percentage of organizations with relatively mature risk management processes increased over recent
years, although the majority of organizations still do not believe their processes reflect a “complete” or
robust ERM process. Just under half of larger companies and public companies describe their risk
management oversight as “mature” or “robust.” While progress is being made, there is still room for
significant improvement in risk oversight for many organizations. This is especially relevant given views
about the growing volume and complexities of risks organizations face.
There have been growing calls for more effective enterprise risk oversight at the board and senior
management levels in recent years. Many corporate governance reform experts have called for the
adoption of a holistic approach to risk management widely known as “enterprise risk management” or
“ERM.” ERM is different from traditional approaches that focus on risk oversight by managing silos or
distinct pockets of risks. ERM emphasizes a top-down, enterprise-wide view of the inventory of key risk
exposures potentially affecting an entity’s ability to achieve its objectives. See Appendix A for more
information about the concept of ERM.
To obtain a sense for the current state of ERM maturity, we asked survey participants to respond to a
number of questions to help us get a sense for the current level of risk oversight in organizations surveyed.
One of the questions asked them to select from the following the best description of the state of their
ERM currently in place:
No enterprise-wide process in place
Currently investigation concept of enterprise-wide risk management, but have made no decisions
yet
No formal enterprise-wide risk management process in place, but have plans to implement one
Partial enterprise-wide risk management process in place (i.e., some, but not all, risk areas
addressed)
Complete formal enterprise-wide risk management process in place
Over the past three years, there appears to have been a leveling off of the percentage of organizations in
the full sample that believe they have a “complete formal enterprise-wide risk management process in
place.” As illustrated by the chart on the next page, we did see a small increase in the number of
organizations at that level of maturity for 2016.
The State of Risk Oversight: An Overview of Enterprise Risk Management Processes
9
9
The above chart shows an increase from 2009 through 2012 with a leveling off for the subsequent three
years in the percentage of organizations that claim they have a “complete formal enterprise-wide risk
management process in place.” In our 2009 report, only 9% of
organizations claimed to have complete ERM processes in place;
however, in 2016 the percentage is just above 28% for the full sample.
That suggests that there continues to be significant opportunity for
improvement in most organizations, given that just below three-fourths
of organizations surveyed cannot yet claim they have “complete ERM in
place.” The adoption of ERM is greatest for larger companies and public
companies as summarized in the table on the next page.