The governance literature, including Policy Governance®
writers, commonly use the term risk appetite when referring to designing board
policies dealing with risk—the limitations or values-based no-nos the
organization must avoid. Do we really mean we are adjusting, by policy, how
risky to permit the organization to be?!
The concept of “risk appetite” comes from the investment
world where it represents the willingness to trade increased risk for a higher
probability of greater gain. We understand that, in the investment world, there
is a putative tradeoff between risk and gain. That principle seems true in
other areas of living as well. To do great things, we are told, we must step out
of our comfort zone, out of the box, and take risk.
The truth is much more complicated. For example,
entrepreneurs are usually thought of as risk takers. But this is not an
accurate characterization. Research finds that entrepreneurs are, in fact, risk
averse; they obsess about minimizing
risk to accomplish their objective of creating a product and a company. They do
not want greater risk so they take great pains to reduce it while proceeding. Inventors commonly
see little risk (except their time and possibility of attendant cost,) but can
achieve great gains. The Wright Brothers were very careful as they iterated
their way to finding what design principles would permit their invention to
actually fly. That care and minimization of risk paid great dividends.
More soberly however, there are risks we do not want at
all, if possible. Board policies, for the most part, actually address these, and
“risk appetite” does not apply. The answer is "as little as possible, even none, please." In the world of organizational risks we should
try diligently to minimize risk associated with organizational efforts
(operations, HR, customers, assets, environment, etc). The domain we are in
often is the greatest determiner of risk—working with kids, camping, health
care, carnival rides as part of a fundraiser, etc. What would a high risk
appetite look like in terms of assets? Loose controls because we don’t want to
bother?! What about operations? No attention to safety for the same reason? We
need to think carefully about the way we use terms, their origins and
implications when imported into another part of life.
No comments:
Post a Comment