2222222222

RIMS 2017

The Tools to Face Uncertainty

Speakers at this year’s RIMS conference in Philadelphia will address political and economic uncertainties, and how risk managers can transform them into opportunities.
By: | March 3, 2017 • 7 min read

The theme for this year’s annual RIMS conference, “Risk Revolution,” calls on attendees to “disrupt the status quo” in their organizations.

This year in particular will challenge risk managers to change the way they think about the future. Around the world, political upheaval has wrought economic uncertainty. Brexit, Donald Trump’s surprise presidential win, and other populist movements are shattering the very idea of a status quo.

These topics will be the subject of both session presentations and informal discussions among the roughly 10,000 attendees converging on the Pennsylvania Convention Center in Philadelphia from April 23-26.

“We have evolved in an ever-changing business environment so that the status quo is no longer acceptable. It needs to be constantly revisited,” said RIMS CEO Mary Roth. “In every industry, what we did in the past may not be the best way to proceed in the future.”

Advertisement




Patrick Harker, president and CEO of the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia, said in an early January segment on Wharton Business Radio that “my biggest concern is concern. The biggest risk we face is uncertainty.”

Uncertainty is so ominous because unlike a defined risk, it is not necessarily manageable.

“The risk manager is in the midst of a ‘risk revolution,’ evolving into a risk strategist who is required to have plans to deal with both controllable and uncontrollable matters.”  — Scott Addis, president and founder, Beyond Insurance

“Risk is best defined as an ‘unknown’ that has a measurable probability of outcome. Uncertainty, on the other hand, involves an unknown with no measurable probability of outcome,” said Scott Addis, president and founder of Beyond Insurance and a speaker at the conference.

“Uncertainty is not quantifiable because future events are too unpredictable and information is insufficient.”

Unanswered Questions

Uncertainty will affect U.S. businesses on multiple fronts. Corporate tax changes and international trade policies are two examples.

Import tariffs and potential trade restrictions imposed with the intention of boosting American manufacturing and job creation could also limit free competition globally and drive up operating costs.

“This can happen in any country that adopts nationalistic policies. From a management perspective, we have to produce at a higher cost,” said Roger Kashlak, professor of international business at Loyola University Maryland and another presenter at RIMS this year.

Scott Addis, president and founder, Beyond Insurance

Restrictive trade policies could also compound the negative impact of a strong U.S. dollar, which makes American exports more expensive and less desirable around the world. With a diminished standing in the global marketplace, it may be hard for businesses to recoup the higher cost of labor that comes with manufacturing at home.

“There’s a cost to this political churn if you play it out. In the short term, you will create jobs that come with tax breaks for businesses, and that’s a good thing. But long term it’s very risky because we’ll miss out on competitive benefits and have higher costs,” Kashlak said.

Regulatory changes also come with a set of pros and cons. In general, less regulatory oversight means more freedom and fewer costs of compliance, which attracts foreign investment and stimulates economic activity. But over the long term, relaxed regulations could be detrimental.

The current administration’s stance on energy regulation offers a good example. If corporations are not held to standards that call for them to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases, and if subsidies for “green” companies are done away with, it provides greater freedom for businesses in every sector to choose how they produce and consume energy. More choices and fewer compliance hurdles are unquestionably good for business.

But without environmental regulation, the long term effects of climate change could also elevate risk for every sector over the long term. And as other countries invest in clean energy resources, the U.S. could lose competitive standing in that industry.

“You have to play it out from both sides,” Kashlak said. “What will we gain, and what will we be missing?”

Unfortunately for risk managers, confusion among the political ranks and strong influence exerted by the general populace on both sides of these issues make it difficult to know just which way the winds will blow.

Planning for the Unknown

Balancing short and long term goals against potential risks in the face of so much uncertainty will be a key challenge for risk managers.

“One of the biggest challenges facing any decision-maker  is developing long-term strategies while still recognizing the need to deal with the short term,” said Howard Kunreuther, James G. Dinan professor of decision sciences and business and public policy at the Wharton School and co-director of the Wharton Risk Management and Decision Processes Center at the University of Pennsylvania.

Howard Kunreuther, co-director, Wharton Risk Management and Decision Processes Center, University of Pennsylvania

“We all tend to be myopic by focusing on short term impacts. But corporations, more so than individuals, also recognize the need to develop short term and long term strategies. There is thus a need to build in short term incentives to enable long term planning,” he said.

Short term impacts include end-of-year balance sheets and bonuses. But Kunreuther suggested that insurers should change their way of thinking to broaden what “short term” means. They can, for example, move away from annual property policies and toward three- to five-year terms, which would promote longer term thinking in a way that is still manageable.

Darin Goodwiler, chief compliance, risk and ethics officer at CFA Institute, said that reliable information and intelligence monitoring is the key to being prepared to react to change over the long term.

“One of the biggest challenges in any decision is developing long-term strategies while still recognizing the need to deal with the short term.”  — Howard Kunreuther, co-director, Wharton Risk Management and Decision Processes Center, University of Pennsylvania

“Risk managers need trusted and defendable information, and the faster you get it, the better equipped you are to respond to any event,” said Goodwiler, who will also be presenting a session at RIMS.

The challenge, though, lies in the vast amount of information to be gathered, and the question of where to get the best quality, most dependable facts.

“Today, the risk manager is expected to have a keen awareness of a host of issues that range from international trade policies, regulatory updates, immigration laws and import/export tax changes,” Addis of Beyond Insurance said. Risk managers will have to expand their own understanding of political and economic issues, and identify both internal and external resources and experts to fill in the gaps when necessary.

Goodwiler suggested that the best way to start planning for the future is to look back. Examine your organization’s past 20 years; what events made a significant impact, either positive or negative? How did your company respond? Are these repeatable events?

That analysis tips off risk managers to pre-event indicators. In the face of uncertainty, it’s important to be able to tell when an event or change is coming and start a proactive response to mitigate the full negative impact — or in the best case scenario, leverage it to create a positive impact. Know who the decision-makers in your organization are, and have a plan to get information into their hands as fast as possible.

Opportunities for Risk Managers

On the upside, this level of uncertainty opens an opportunity for risk managers to become strategic partners in their organizations. They can take a leading role in data and intelligence gathering, in formulating plans to identify critical upcoming changes and response plans, and in educating senior executives and boards of directors on long term risks.

Advertisement




“The risk manager is in the midst of a ‘risk revolution,’ evolving into a risk strategist who is required to have plans to deal with both controllable and uncontrollable matters,” Addis said.

Recognizing that trend, this year’s RIMS conference features a new Executive Leadership track, which Roth said, “is positioned for senior professionals that are engaged in driving strategy throughout their organization.” Sessions in this track will examine “international strategic planning and ERM, the threats and opportunities of Brexit, and risk and resiliency in the changing world.”

“As leaders in risk management and representatives of the risk management community, we feel it’s imperative to engage our members and attendees in that dialogue and look at ways that others are addressing these changes and challenges,” she said. “We have to provide a forum for individuals to find out what best practices are out there and how other risk professionals are addressing the challenges they’re facing.” &

Katie Dwyer is an associate editor at Risk & Insurance®. She can be reached at [email protected]

More from Risk & Insurance

More from Risk & Insurance

Cyber Resilience

No, Seriously. You Need a Comprehensive Cyber Incident Response Plan Before It’s Too Late.

Awareness of cyber risk is increasing, but some companies may be neglecting to prepare adequate response plans that could save them millions. 
By: | June 1, 2018 • 7 min read

To minimize the financial and reputational damage from a cyber attack, it is absolutely critical that businesses have a cyber incident response plan.

“Sadly, not all yet do,” said David Legassick, head of life sciences, tech and cyber, CNA Hardy.

Advertisement




In the event of a breach, a company must be able to quickly identify and contain the problem, assess the level of impact, communicate internally and externally, recover where possible any lost data or functionality needed to resume business operations and act quickly to manage potential reputational risk.

This can only be achieved with help from the right external experts and the design and practice of a well-honed internal response.

The first step a company must take, said Legassick, is to understand its cyber exposures through asset identification, classification, risk assessment and protection measures, both technological and human.

According to Raf Sanchez, international breach response manager, Beazley, cyber-response plans should be flexible and applicable to a wide range of incidents, “not just a list of consecutive steps.”

They also should bring together key stakeholders and specify end goals.

Jason J. Hogg, CEO, Aon Cyber Solutions

With bad actors becoming increasingly sophisticated and often acting in groups, attack vectors can hit companies from multiple angles simultaneously, meaning a holistic approach is essential, agreed Jason J. Hogg, CEO, Aon Cyber Solutions.

“Collaboration is key — you have to take silos down and work in a cross-functional manner.”

This means assembling a response team including individuals from IT, legal, operations, risk management, HR, finance and the board — each of whom must be well drilled in their responsibilities in the event of a breach.

“You can’t pick your players on the day of the game,” said Hogg. “Response times are critical, so speed and timing are of the essence. You should also have a very clear communication plan to keep the CEO and board of directors informed of recommended courses of action and timing expectations.”

People on the incident response team must have sufficient technical skills and access to critical third parties to be able to make decisions and move to contain incidents fast. Knowledge of the company’s data and network topology is also key, said Legassick.

“Perhaps most important of all,” he added, “is to capture in detail how, when, where and why an incident occurred so there is a feedback loop that ensures each threat makes the cyber defense stronger.”

Cyber insurance can play a key role by providing a range of experts such as forensic analysts to help manage a cyber breach quickly and effectively (as well as PR and legal help). However, the learning process should begin before a breach occurs.

Practice Makes Perfect

“Any incident response plan is only as strong as the practice that goes into it,” explained Mike Peters, vice president, IT, RIMS — who also conducts stress testing through his firm Sentinel Cyber Defense Advisors.

Advertisement




Unless companies have an ethical hacker or certified information security officer on board who can conduct sophisticated simulated attacks, Peters recommended they hire third-party experts to test their networks for weaknesses, remediate these issues and retest again for vulnerabilities that haven’t been patched or have newly appeared.

“You need to plan for every type of threat that’s out there,” he added.

Hogg agreed that bringing third parties in to conduct tests brings “fresh thinking, best practice and cross-pollination of learnings from testing plans across a multitude of industries and enterprises.”

“Collaboration is key — you have to take silos down and work in a cross-functional manner.” — Jason J. Hogg, CEO, Aon Cyber Solutions

Legassick added that companies should test their plans at least annually, updating procedures whenever there is a significant change in business activity, technology or location.

“As companies expand, cyber security is not always front of mind, but new operations and territories all expose a company to new risks.”

For smaller companies that might not have the resources or the expertise to develop an internal cyber response plan from whole cloth, some carriers offer their own cyber risk resources online.

Evan Fenaroli, an underwriting product manager with the Philadelphia Insurance Companies (PHLY), said his company hosts an eRiskHub, which gives PHLY clients a place to start looking for cyber event response answers.

That includes access to a pool of attorneys who can guide company executives in creating a plan.

“It’s something at the highest level that needs to be a priority,” Fenaroli said. For those just getting started, Fenaroli provided a checklist for consideration:

  • Purchase cyber insurance, read the policy and understand its notice requirements.
  • Work with an attorney to develop a cyber event response plan that you can customize to your business.
  • Identify stakeholders within the company who will own the plan and its execution.
  • Find outside forensics experts that the company can call in an emergency.
  • Identify a public relations expert who can be called in the case of an event that could be leaked to the press or otherwise become newsworthy.

“When all of these things fall into place, the outcome is far better in that there isn’t a panic,” said Fenaroli, who, like others, recommends the plan be tested at least annually.

Cyber’s Physical Threat

With the digital and physical worlds converging due to the rise of the Internet of Things, Hogg reminded companies: “You can’t just test in the virtual world — testing physical end-point security is critical too.”

Advertisement




How that testing is communicated to underwriters should also be a key focus, said Rich DePiero, head of cyber, North America, Swiss Re Corporate Solutions.

Don’t just report on what went well; it’s far more believable for an underwriter to hear what didn’t go well, he said.

“If I hear a client say it is perfect and then I look at some of the results of the responses to breaches last year, there is a disconnect. Help us understand what you learned and what you worked out. You want things to fail during these incident response tests, because that is how we learn,” he explained.

“Bringing in these outside firms, detailing what they learned and defining roles and responsibilities in the event of an incident is really the best practice, and we are seeing more and more companies do that.”

Support from the Board

Good cyber protection is built around a combination of process, technology, learning and people. While not every cyber incident needs to be reported to the boardroom, senior management has a key role in creating a culture of planning and risk awareness.

David Legassick, head of life sciences, tech and cyber, CNA Hardy

“Cyber is a boardroom risk. If it is not taken seriously at boardroom level, you are more than likely to suffer a network breach,” Legassick said.

However, getting board buy-in or buy-in from the C-suite is not always easy.

“C-suite executives often put off testing crisis plans as they get in the way of the day job. The irony here is obvious given how disruptive an incident can be,” said Sanchez.

“The C-suite must demonstrate its support for incident response planning and that it expects staff at all levels of the organization to play their part in recovering from serious incidents.”

“What these people need from the board is support,” said Jill Salmon, New York-based vice president, head of cyber/tech/MPL, Berkshire Hathaway Specialty Insurance.

“I don’t know that the information security folks are looking for direction from the board as much as they are looking for support from a resources standpoint and a visibility standpoint.

“They’ve got to be aware of what they need and they need to have the money to be able to build it up to that level,” she said.

Without that support, according to Legassick, failure to empower and encourage the IT team to manage cyber threats holistically through integration with the rest of the organization, particularly risk managers, becomes a common mistake.

He also warned that “blame culture” can prevent staff from escalating problems to management in a timely manner.

Collaboration and Communication

Given that cyber incident response truly is a team effort, it is therefore essential that a culture of collaboration, preparation and practice is embedded from the top down.

Advertisement




One of the biggest tripping points for companies — and an area that has done the most damage from a reputational perspective — is in how quickly and effectively the company communicates to the public in the aftermath of a cyber event.

Salmon said of all the cyber incident response plans she has seen, the companies that have impressed her most are those that have written mock press releases and rehearsed how they are going to respond to the media in the aftermath of an event.

“We have seen so many companies trip up in that regard,” she said. “There have been examples of companies taking too long and then not explaining why it took them so long. It’s like any other crisis — the way that you are communicating it to the public is really important.” &

Antony Ireland is a London-based financial journalist. He can be reached at [email protected] Dan Reynolds is editor-in-chief of Risk & Insurance. He can be reached at [email protected]