Presentation 2 Assignment: Measuring Performance At Intuit

Presentation 2 Assignment Measuring Performance At Intuit A Value A

Presentation 2 Assignment – Measuring Performance at Intuit: A Value-Added Component in ERM Programs ABC Organization is looking to improve on their Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) program. A board member saw Intuit’s ERM Performance Measurement Model case study. As with any ERM program, Intuit’s program has continued to evolve since 2009. Intuit’s ERM program began with the company's practice of risk management on an ad hoc basis. When a problem occurred, teams were formed to address the issue. When it was over, it was back to business as usual. In the late 2000s, Intuit’s ERM program focused on building a sustainable risk management capability. The program provided leadership with current and emerging risks to help them make strategic decisions. Intuit built the program using an ERM maturity model to establish a strong foundation. It was realized that executive leadership needed to measure the performance of the program. So, key risk indicators (KRIs) were used to understand potential emerging risks and trends that might impact current risks. Also, key performance indicators (KPIs) helped in understanding and managing current risks. By identifying these KRIs and KPIs, the case study emphasizes the importance of integrating these indicators into ERM processes. As a risk manager, you are responsible for ensuring your organization minimizes its risks. Your board has requested you to create a presentation discussing the case study findings and the impact of implementing KPIs and KRIs at Intuit.

Paper For Above instruction

Introduction

The evolving landscape of enterprise risk management (ERM) necessitates effective measurement techniques to ensure organizational resilience and strategic decision-making. The case study of Intuit reveals how developing a performance measurement model with the use of key performance indicators (KPIs) and key risk indicators (KRIs) can enhance ERM programs significantly. This paper explores the key components of Intuit’s ERM measurement approach, evaluates its effectiveness, proposes potential improvements, and assesses its applicability to similar organizations.

Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) in Intuit’s ERM Program

KPIs are metrics that evaluate the efficiency and effectiveness of an organization's current risk management strategies. In the case of Intuit, KPIs focused on tracking current performance levels in managing risks. Frequently, these indicators include the number of risk incidents, resolution times for emerging issues, compliance rates with risk mitigation practices, and overall risk posture scores. For instance, measuring the percentage of identified risks mitigated within a specific timeframe showcases the organization’s capacity to handle risks proactively. These KPIs enable leadership to monitor ongoing risk management activities, identify areas in need of improvement, and confirm whether current strategies are effective in maintaining organizational stability.

Key Risk Indicators (KRIs) in Intuit’s ERM Program

KRIs serve as early warning signs for potential future risks that could threaten organizational objectives. At Intuit, KRIs include emerging risk trends, shifts in regulatory environments, cybersecurity threat levels, and financial market volatilities. These indicators help in recognizing signals that may predict future adverse events before they materialize fully. For example, an increase in detected cybersecurity threats may indicate a possible data breach risk in the future. The use of KRIs in Intuit’s ERM model underscores the importance of proactive risk identification, enabling the organization to implement preventative measures well in advance of potential incidents.

Improvements to Intuit’s ERM Performance Measurement Model

While Intuit's approach to integrating KPIs and KRIs is commendable, enhancements could increase the program's effectiveness. One improvement involves expanding the scope of KPIs to include qualitative metrics, such as employee risk awareness levels and organizational culture assessments, which influence risk management performance. Additionally, implementing a real-time dashboard for monitoring KRIs would enable quicker responses to emerging threats. Incorporating scenario analysis and stress testing as part of the measurement process could further strengthen risk preparedness by evaluating potential impacts of extreme events. Building a feedback loop that periodically reviews and updates KPIs and KRIs based on evolving business risks ensures the measurement system remains relevant and aligned with strategic goals.

Effectiveness of Intuit’s ERM Program

Based on the case study, Intuit’s ERM program demonstrates strong attributes, including continuous monitoring, leadership involvement, and a structured risk maturity model. However, certain gaps exist. The program appears primarily focused on current and near-term risks without adequate emphasis on strategic risks such as market disruptions or technological obsolescence. Moreover, the integration of KRIs and KPIs within a broader risk culture appears limited; fostering a risk-aware organizational culture can enhance responsiveness. An effective ERM program also ensures accountability by clearly defining roles and responsibilities, which seems to be developing at Intuit but can be further strengthened. Embedding risk measurement into overall corporate governance protocols would improve overall risk oversight.

Applicability to Similar Publicly Traded Organizations

Intuit’s ERM performance measurement approach could be effectively adapted by other publicly traded corporations of similar size and complexity. Such organizations face comparable regulatory pressures, market volatility, and operational risks. Implementing KPIs and KRIs tailored to their specific risk landscape can facilitate proactive risk management and strategic agility. However, customization is essential; organizations must align their indicators with industry-specific risks and internal strategic priorities. Moreover, fostering a risk-aware culture and ensuring leadership commitment are pivotal success factors in replicating Intuit’s model successfully.

Role of Alignment and Accountability in ERM

Alignment and accountability are fundamental to the success of ERM programs. Alignment ensures that risk management objectives are integrated with organizational strategy, facilitating coordinated efforts across departments. Accountability clarifies roles and expectations, promoting ownership of risk mitigation activities. From the perspective of Intuit, fostering clear communication channels and decision-making authority enhances the efficacy of KPIs and KRIs. Effective alignment and accountability lead to more consistent risk responses, stronger internal controls, and an embedded risk management mindset throughout the organization. These elements are especially critical when scaling ERM practices across large, complex organizations.

Conclusion

Intuit’s ERM performance measurement model leveraging KPIs and KRIs exemplifies a strategic approach to proactive risk management. It provides valuable insights into current and emerging risks and aids decision-making. Nevertheless, enhancements such as broadening metric scope, integrating qualitative data, and embedding continuous review processes could improve its effectiveness. Adaptable by similar organizations, Intuit’s approach underscores that effective ERM depends heavily on organizational alignment, leadership commitment, and a culture of accountability. Moving forward, organizations should prioritize these elements while refining risk measurement systems to ensure resilient and agile operations.

References

1. Fraser, J., & Simkins, B. (2010). Enterprise risk management: Today's leading research and best practices for tomorrow's executives. John Wiley & Sons.
2. Lam, J. (2014). Enterprise risk management: From incentives to controls. John Wiley & Sons.
3. COSO. (2017). Enterprise Risk Management—Integrating with Strategy and Performance. Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission.
4. Dorfman, M. S. (2012). Introduction to risk management and insurance. Prentice Hall.
5. Basel Committee on Banking Supervision. (2019). Principles for operational resilience. Bank for International Settlements.
6. Higgins, J. M., & Vincze, J. (2018). Strategic risk management: A practical guide to portfolio risk management. Risk Books.
7. ISO 31000. (2018). Risk management — Guidelines. International Organization for Standardization.
8. Power, M. (2007). Organized uncertainty: Designing a world of risk management. Oxford University Press.
9. Oglesby, J., & Einhorn, H. J. (2003). Risk management in the context of ERM. Journal of Business Strategy, 24(4), 12-19.
10. Jorion, P. (2007). Financial risk manager handbook. John Wiley & Sons.