Trust Decisions: Future Risk Architecture...

Leadership within the enterprise requires "Trust Decisions" that they can count on.  Operational Risk Officers have a fiduciary duty to provide top executives with the confidence that the data and information they provide is trusted.

So how do you assist any corporate leader, who has the responsibility and accountability to the Board of Directors to make informed and sound decisions?  The answer is, that it depends on how willing the CxO's in the enterprise are to engineer a "Trust Decision" model and framework for the business.

The truth is, most executive managers have their own way of doing this.  The process that the CEO makes decisions, is quite different from how the CFO makes decisions and the COO may have a documented and tested way to make their decisions.  The point is, that major "Trust Decisions" for the good and welfare of the enterprise are being made by people who are each doing it differently.  These human decision makers are relying on a number of ways to get to the final answer.  The decisions from leadership are not as trusted and reliable as they could be.

As an Operational Risk executive charged with making timely and correct decisions you have no choice but to have the tools and the trusted sources to enhance your situational awareness.  The safety and security of the facility, information or peoples lives are at stake.  That is why you test and continually improve the process so your analytics dashboard, intelligence feeds and data sensors are all operating with integrity and in real-time.

You are relying on information that changes by the nanosecond and a system designed to provide decision support.  Intelligence-led investigations or reacting to the latest incident requires systems designed and tested to support human "Trust Decisions."  Now back to the executive leadership and their process for decision-making.  What is it?  How does the CEO make the final decisions for the future wealth of the company and it's stakeholders?  Are they trustworthy?

Unless you have seen the "Trust Decision" process and trusted data framework engineered for your enterprise, then probably not.  Think about all of the leadership level projects and how they turned out.  How did executive leadership decide to buy that other company or merge with their favorite supplier?  What process did they use to ensure all of the due diligence data was correct?  Why are the sources of data trusted?

We have the opportunity to improve and to arrive at a point where we make "Trust Decisions" our priority and a prerequisite.  After all, our employees, customers, shareholders and even mankind deserve it.  The challenge begins.

Whenever you encounter your next major business decision with your CxO, ask them how they arrived at the decision.  Ask them to explain the process they used and the sources of trusted data they relied on.  Ask them why they think the architecture of the decision at hand, is the most sound and trusted decision that can be made with the time available.

You are now well on your way to better understanding the power and the future risk architecture of TrustDecisions.

Asymmetric Warfare: Board Room to Battlefield...

The planet Earth is experiencing a multitude of historical and 21st century "Asymmetric Wars" from the Board Rooms of the Global 500, Internet Cafes of Third World countries and the Miranshah.

Operational Risk Management (ORM) doctrine will continue to be a factor:

a·sym·met·ric

    [ey-suh-me-trik, as-uh-]  Show IPA

adjective

1.

not identical on both sides of a central line;

"Asymmetric warfare" can describe a conflict in which the resources of two belligerents differ in essence and in the struggle, interact and attempt to exploit each other's characteristic weaknesses. Such struggles often involve strategies and tactics of unconventional warfare, the "weaker" combatants attempting to use strategy to offset deficiencies in quantity or quality.^[1] Such strategies may not necessarily be militarized.^[2] This is in contrast to symmetric warfare, where two powers have similar military power and resources and rely on tactics that are similar overall, differing only in details and execution.

The Irish Republican Army (IRA) perfected the car bomb against the British.  Now "Improvised Explosive Devices" (IED) and suicide bombers continue to be the single greatest threat to U.S. troops in Afghanistan as we withdrew and in Iraq as we engage once again. The Middle East has been embroiled in conflicts with the modern use of "Social Media" and an asymmetric rebel element to initiate change in labor laws or to overthrow a nation states leadership.

A laymen may not understand the relevance of "Asymmetric Warfare" on the corporate battlefield. Some would describe the age old tactic of industrial espionage, competitive intelligence or even patent litigation as a method for a small unknown company to gain an advantage over a much larger and established institution. This is a strategy of Asymmetric Warfare, nothing new.

In any case, the perception is that the small and agile still have the means, tools and tactics to defeat the large and overbearing with the benefit of time, resources and the will of the people.

So what are some good examples of modern day asymmetric conflicts:

• Apple vs. Google
• NATO vs. Putin
• Sunni vs. Shiite
• BMW vs. Jaguar
• Earth vs. Anonymous
• Taliban vs. Afghans
• United States vs. Jones

Each of these represent a conflict between two able parties, regardless of the perception of who is the "David" and who is the "Goliath". So what can your organization or nations state do to prepare yourself for the inevitable risks that will be associated with doing business or operating your enterprise across countries and in hostile environments?

By providing your employees and stakeholders the best education, research, training and exercise programs; technology test and evaluation and capability improvement programs that your resources can offer.  Why?  In a few words, to make faster and more informed "Trust Decisions".

The desire to Deter, Detect, Defend and Document is prudent doctrine in Operational Risk Management (ORM). You may call these steps or tactics by other names in your particular process; such as Observe, Orient, Decide Act (OODA). What matters most is that the environment and landscape for the "Asymmetric Threats" and "Asymmetric Warfare" will continue to be challenging and dynamic.

BY ASSOCIATED PRESS June 16 2014

WASHINGTON — Judges around the country are grappling with the ripple effects of a 2-year-old Supreme Court ruling on GPS tracking, reaching conflicting conclusions on the case’s broader meaning and tackling unresolved questions that flare in a world where privacy and technology increasingly collide. 

The January 2012 opinion in United States v. Jones set constitutional boundaries for law enforcement’s use of GPS devices to track the whereabouts of criminal suspects. But the different legal rationales offered by the justices have left a muddled legal landscape for police and lower-court judges, who have struggled in the last two years with how and when to apply the decision — especially at a time when new technologies are developed at a faster rate than judicial opinions are issued. 

The result is that courts in different jurisdictions have reached different conclusions on similar issues, providing little uniformity for law enforcement and judges on core constitutional questions. Technological advancements are forcing the issue more and more, a development magnified by a heightened national debate over privacy versus surveillance and the disclosure of the National Security Agency’s bulk collection of Americans’ telephone records.

Continuous Continuity (C2): Organizational Survivability...

The modern enterprise that effectively manages the myriad of potential threats to its people, processes, systems and critical infrastructures stands to be better equipped for sustained continuity. A Business Crisis and Continuity Management (BCCM) program is a dynamic change management initiative that requires dedicated resources, funding and auditing. Corporate Directors must scrutinize organizational survivability on a global basis. 

Corporate Directors are ultimately responsible for Continuous Continuity (C2) of the Enterprise and Organizational Survivability is a Board Room issue. 

Since effective BCCM analysis is a 24/7 operation, it takes a combination of factors across the organization to provide what one might call C2, or "Continuous Continuity". A one-time threat or risk assessment or even an annual look at what has changed across the enterprise is opening the door for a Board of Directors worst nightmare. These nightmares are "Loss Events" that could have been prevented or mitigated all together. 

According to the risk management best practices from sources such as the Turnbull Report1 and specifically Principle 13 of the Basel II Capital Accord, the Board of Directors and corporate management are responsible for the effectiveness of the Business Crisis and Continuity Management of an organization.

Certainly the largest organizations realize that the external threats are taking on new and different forms than the standard fire, flood, earthquake and twister scenarios. These historically large catastrophic external loss events have been insured against and the premiums are substantial. 

What it is less easy to analyze from a threat perspective are the constantly changing landscapes and continuity postures of the internal facets of the organization having to do with people, processes and systems. 

Corporate Boards of Director’s are now being consistently subjected to regulatory scrutiny across the globe to ensure the continuity and survivability of the enterprise. It is their duty and responsibility to their shareholders to make sure this occurs on a continuous basis.

The world can only hope that our Global 500 companies are well on their way to achieving C2 already...

USA 250: Trusted Decisions…

Over the course of the past week navigating new neighborhoods in Virginia and old hiking trails near Great Falls on the Potomac River, the thoughts of 250 years as the United States of America (USA) was evident.

When you are watching the grand display of Fire Works on July 4th…what do you think about?

Our country remains increasingly resilient and our continuous mission remains so relevant.

We have supported the foundation of our “Founding Fathers” hopes and prayers for the past (250 x 365) 91,250 days.

Each day the sun rises across our 50 states of America, we know we have made the rest of the world curious about our history.

When you are old enough, you must read about our history.  You must have the true context of our days before the document was created and agreed upon.

The “Declaration Of Independence” has been studied for 250 years.  It remains our mission forever.

Watching the flowing water of the Potomac River in Great Falls, VA and thinking about all that has been created, discovered and protected as a result of one document, is simply faithful.

You and your life here, is all up to you.

The decisions you make everyday in the USA will provide you with all that you were destined to become here.

Looking back on your particular journey so far, have your life “Trusted Decisions”provided you with all that you have ever dreamed of…

Why?

On July 5th, as you enter your own particular place of Worship somewhere across your town in the United States of America, look up…

Godspeed!