Talk:Risk management

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Nice to see an infusion of business information at the Wikipedia.

Should be very helpful for my studies.

V salute U.


This page is very much focused on a narrow aspect of risk management. There is a lot more to risk management than what is presented here. There are different kinds of risks (e.g. operational risk, etc.) and there are different philosophies (e.g. it's a myth that some risks are so important that they must be protected from at all costs)...I'll try to expand this article a bit more when I get time. Chadloder 20:14 Mar 29, 2003 (UTC)

Agreed. Though I believe I added a good start at a generalized introduction. I'm a bit at a loss as to how to use much of the narrowly focused material that is in the article, but I didn't want to remove it yet. Some of the past material even from the original page was better general encyclopedic risk management dicusssions than what is in the article currently. I am very confident the discussion I added about methods of dealing with identified risks is a generally accepted categorization. - Taxman 18:44, Apr 23, 2004 (UTC)
Well I think the new organization has at least moved the more focused discussion to a sub-heading, leaving the general discussion for the main article. Reading through past edits to pull back in some ideas for general discussion may be fruitful. - Taxman 19:25, Apr 23, 2004 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] from grateful reader:

I find the article very useful for my studies. thanks a lot. - <bisaya>

You're welcome, from one of the contributors at least. :) - Taxman 23:47, Nov 15, 2004 (UTC)


Helped me a lot without having to read a book. Before this I knew what George Castanza knew of risk management. zuzu in Sudbury, ON

[edit] Risk identification

I think the risk identification part is given too little attention. I am studying risk management to provide a practicle discription on how to use risk management in ones daily work (in software). This wikipedia page is very good base material for that. However, I think it is missing a bit in the identification part. How to identify risk? The two lines that are currently in could be enhanced. Does anybody have information, or should I write up my findings so far?

Indeed that section is lacking. I no longer have my textbook available, so I didn't have a reference to add good stuff from. If you have a good text or reference in front of you feel free to add what you can. Then add the text as a reference as in Wikipedia:Cite sources. Thanks - Taxman 14:22, Feb 16, 2005 (UTC)
I had some more on my list, but cannot fiind support for them as distinct methods for risk identification: stakeholder analysis, problem management and missing information. There are more sources of risks than identification possibilities. Now, how about enhancing the assessment part? Create a separate subsection for it?
Hope it helps - SevenSigma Feb 17, 2005 (CTE)
Yeah, that's pretty good. For assessment, I just did that, moved the assessment to its own subsection and added an intro to it. I'm not familiar with these additional identification methods you mention. I've heard of stakeholder analysis, but I can't recall much on it at the moment. But if you have more on those and can find a source that discusses them as more or less separate methods, then discuss them there too. Or if they are not really distinct, just cover how they fit in. - Taxman 13:41, Feb 17, 2005 (UTC)
There is a risk identification method called "potential threats analysis" which is a variation/combination of other common methods. It involves the use of workshops, keyword lists and dynamic idea accumulation. I did a few projects using it and it seemed quite useful. Ever heard of such a thing? --Pakoistinen 10:13, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

--BigAppleBob 15:09, 12 October 2006 (UTC)==Suggestion== How about something on the link between Risk management, Internal control and Corporate governance ? At the same time there should be links to leading websites on risk management like http://www.erisk.com, http://www.theirm.org and other leading risk management websites.If any body can incorportae these suggestions it will be great otherwise I will incorporate the same whenever I have time.--221.134.144.67 13:51, 20 October 2005 (UTC)sanjiv

Yes that would be a good idea, please do it if you can. I don't know a whole lot about that integration. As far as the links I added IRM, but I've never heard of erisk. It looks to me like just another risk consulting company. It would have to be especially prominent to warrant inclusion. Do you have something justifying that prominence? - Taxman Talk 15:33, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

Decisions about the selection and implementation of risk management measures should include an evaluation of the Return On Investment (ROI), or the cost/benefit. I believe that a discussion of this topic should be included. Should I undertake to do so? --BigAppleBob 15:09, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Replacement of material

An anon basically replaced the article with what I think is overall poorer material as shown in this diff. I've reverted, but the material the anon added isn't too bad in some cases. It didn't however make for a better written and properly focused and balanced article. It would be worth going through the material and seeing what is worth integrating back in. - Taxman Talk 15:33, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Links to other topics

Added a few links to the text about business continuity planning, the concept of risk and degree training programs (a few more programs should be added over there). Also wrote a topic to explain a bit the differences and similarities between BCP and risk management practices. Please read through and correct me as you see fit. --Pakoistinen 10:06, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Merge with emergency management

An article about emergency management also exists. I propose, since risk management and emergency management are essentially the same thing, this article be merged into the emergency management article and a re-direct be placed here.-- backburner001 00:28, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

They're not the same thing. For example one massively important example of risk management is managing financial risk. There are lots of others. Emergency management is just one particular case. I very strongly suggest they remain separate articles. Pcb21 Pete 11:51, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
I agree that emergency management and risk management are substantially different. These entries should remain separate. hogayoga

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Risk_management&action=edit Editing Talk:Risk management - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] About Further reading

There has been some to-ing and fro-ing about some articles in the Further reading section. The "three main standards that cover risk management" relate to an Australia/New Zealand standard. The web site cited at http://www.sia.com.au/ relates to stone (rocks, geology) and not finance. I guess that the person had http://www.sia.edu.au/ - this was the Securities Institute of Australia but is no more, as it merged in 2005 to create FINSIA. The PDFs referred do not appear in a public part of their website. Nor could I find them at http://www.saiglobal.com/ where an earlier revision suggested I might look. Therefore, I am going to remove the reference to the PDFs and add a qualifier that the standards are AU/NZ ones. Ringbark 15:05, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] A Possible Add for Risk Management Information Systems (RMIS)

Was hoping it would be cool to do a write up on Risk Management Information Systems (RMIS) and add a corresponding link to such a subtopic. RMIS are used primarily around business insurance program risk management (ala claims management, actuarial analysis, policy management, etc) but also for treasury operations as well (cash management, operational risk, etc) Just wanted to see if this was cool to do with group before posting up? TopiarydanTopiarydan 18:00, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Would be great! Might want to get a short preview of it up fairly quickly - redlinked items are usually removed from the 'see also' list. Kuru talk 14:54, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Risk Management Associations / Edit wars

As most people here will know, there have been acrimonious disputes between GARP members and PRMIA members over the years. Repeatedly, we see edit wars where one or other is removed from the article, and I believe that the same is happening to the cerification programs. As far as I am aware, PRMIA and GARP are both still active organisations; PRM and FRM are both still active certification programs. Even though I favour one of these over the other, I recognise that this is a personal view, and will support the right of the other one to exist and promote itself. Ringbark 08:30, 30 November 2006 (UTC)