Description: Feature article discussing the four main perspectives of ERM.

Description: We can do a better job of communicating the degree of "riskiness" that is inherent in our models of risk. The "Coefficient of Risk" is one way to present fatness of model tails in simple terms using widely understood basic concepts.

Description: In this article, the author examines five common perspectives on risk and see how they affect not just each participant’s own choices but everyone else’s choices, as well.

Description: Most reasonable risk mitigation strategies provide benefit in some circumstances, but come at a cost that adversely affects results in other scenarios. A research paper by the authors considers the view of multiple stakeholders to answer this question, resulting in a process they call Trifurcation.

Description: When companies engage in risk management activities, they can be seen as modifying their distributions of future outcomes. Often, this takes the form of trading off a sure cost for a decrease in some potential risk of loss. Companies may carry out these activities with several goals in mind, such as reduction in earnings volatility or preservation of capital. This paper will demonstrate a method for evaluating possible strategies by dividing the effects on costs and risks into three tranches: earnings, impact and estate. The tranches can be associated with different interests of the various stakeholders. This trifurcation analysis can help to explain the risk-reward trade-offs of different risk treatment alternatives and can aid in risk-related decisionmaking.

Description: Article from Risk Management Newsletter, March 2006, No. 7 on Standard & Poor's Enterprise Risk Management evaluation of insurers. In October 2005, Standard & Poor’s Ratings Services announced a new addition to the analysis process that leads to the ratings of insurers: Enterprise Risk Management ERM evaluation criteria.

Description: This is the first of a two-part article introducing and elaborating an “Adaptor” strategy for ERM. Such a strategy is intended to fulfil two purposes: first, switching among four styles of risk-coping strategies in order to track qualitative changes in a business’s risk environment; and, second, to support the business in navigating with resilience through all the seasons of a business-economic cycle, i.e., of boom, bust, moderate, uncertain. This latter requires careful study of the nature of resilience, the familiar idea of bounce back, and the less familiar idea of bounce forward. Part I of our article is underpinned therefore by a supplementary document (available from https://riskviews.wordpress.com/adaptor-exceptionalism/), which addresses the issue of structural change in a business or economy. It draws heavily on ideas taken from the discipline of control engineering, as well as some from ecology, social anthropology, and economics. The entire two-part article is thus an exercise in cross-disciplinary Systems Thinking.

Description: This is a summary of the 2005 ERM Symposium. From Risk Management Newsletter, July 2005, Issue No. 5.

Description: ICP 16 and its requirement for an Own Risk and Solvency Assessment (ORSA) will offer opportunities for the actuarial profession to provide uniquely well-educated and professional assistance to this process.

Description: This is the second of a two-part article introducing and elaborating an “Adaptor” strategy for ERM. Such a strategy is intended to fulfil two purposes: first, switching among four styles of risk-coping strategies in order to track qualitative changes in a business’s risk environment; and, second, to support the business in navigating with resilience through all the seasons of a business-economic cycle, i.e., of boom, bust, moderate, uncertain. This latter requires careful study of the nature of resilience, the familiar idea of bounce back, and the less familiar idea of bounce forward. Part I of our article is underpinned therefore by a supplementary document (available from https://riskviews.wordpress.com/adaptor-exceptionalism/), which addresses the issue of structural change in a business or economy. It draws heavily on ideas taken from the discipline of control engineering, as well as some from ecology, social anthropology, and economics. The entire two-part article is thus an exercise in cross-disciplinary Systems Thinking.