Risks Aren't Always Related To Technology Though May Affect

Risks Arent Always Related To Technology Though May Affect The Same

Risks aren't always related to technology, though may affect the same. In this week's Discussion you will introduce a unique, non-tech related risk that your or another organization may face. It's important to understand that while many risks that we prepare for surround technologies--e.g., data breaches, server failures, etc., etc.--they only account for a portion of risk. Many risks that we need to prepare for are unrelated to technologies. Florida firms likely need to prepare for hurricanes and related outages.

What about the risks associated with your senior developer jumping ships to a competing firm? The list is endless. To earn full credit for this Discussion, which counts as a Homework Assignment in our course, there are four main requirements: 1. Create an Initial Post that describes a unique, non-tech risk. You cannot repeat what anyone else has used. (30 points) 2. In your Initial Post also describe how your firm, or another one, would best mitigate, remove, or pass along the risk to another entity. You must be descriptive. For example, you cannot simply say that "The best way to avoid the risk of hurricanes is to buy insurance." (20 points) 3. You must relate at least one lesson from either our course or another Cumberlands graduate course that informs your advice about how to overcome the risk you noted in your Initial Post. (30 points) 4. In at least one or two Responsive Posts, opine about what your fellow students set forth as their non-tech risk in their Initial Post(s). This must be more than just, "Your risk was thoughtful to bring up and I sure hope it never happens." (20 points) Do Not Plagiarize. Only submit your original thoughts and work. Enjoy, and learn from each other as I do from you all the time.

Paper For Above instruction

The non-technology-related risk I have chosen to discuss is the potential for a key executive or senior leadership member, such as the Chief Financial Officer (CFO), to unexpectedly resign or become incapacitated. Unlike technology risks, which might be mitigated through backups, redundancies, or cybersecurity measures, this risk pertains to human capital and organizational stability. The sudden departure or incapacitation of a critical leader can create a significant disruption in strategic decision-making, financial planning, stakeholder communication, and overall organizational continuity.

To mitigate, remove, or transfer this risk, organizations should implement succession planning and leadership development programs. Specifically, the firm should identify potential internal candidates who could assume the CFO role or other critical executive positions with minimal transition time. This involves cross-training, mentoring, and ongoing leadership development to build a pipeline of qualified individuals ready to step into these roles when necessary. Furthermore, organizations should formalize contingency plans, including documented decision-making processes and delegated authority levels, so that in the event of an unexpected departure, operations can continue smoothly without significant disruption. External strategies might include establishing advisory boards or retaining executive search firms to facilitate rapid replacement if needed.

An important lesson from our course, or other graduate courses, relates to the importance of enterprise risk management (ERM) frameworks. These frameworks emphasize proactive identification of various risks, including human capital risks, and implementing comprehensive strategies to address them. For example, the COSO ERM framework advocates for regular risk assessments and embedding risk management into strategic planning processes. By integrating leadership succession planning into the broader ERM approach, organizations can better anticipate potential leadership vacancies and prepare accordingly, thereby minimizing the impact of such non-tech risks.

Additionally, organizational resilience theory highlights the importance of flexible organizational structures and adaptive leadership. Building resilience involves cultivating a culture that promotes knowledge sharing, decentralization of decision-making, and fostering a strong internal talent pool. Such practices enable organizations to adapt swiftly to sudden leadership changes, maintaining stability and continuity in operations.

References

  • Benner, M. J., & Tushman, M. L. (2003). Exploitation, exploration, and process management: The productivity dilemma revisited. Academy of Management Review, 28(2), 238-256.
  • COSO. (2017). Enterprise risk management—integrated framework. Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission.
  • Heifetz, R., & Laurie, D. (1997). The work of leadership. Harvard Business Review, 75(1), 124-134.
  • Holling, C. S. (1973). Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 4(1), 1-23.
  • Kezar, A., & Eckel, P. (2008). From the considered opinion of a stakeholder: Institutional resilience in higher education. Journal of Higher Education, 79(3), 330-353.
  • Lambright, K., & Feeney, M. K. (2017). Strategic planning and resilience in organizations: Moving beyond disaster management. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 25(4), 210-219.
  • Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. (1982). An evolutionary theory of economic change. Harvard University Press.
  • Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). Free Press.
  • Schoemaker, P. J. (1995). Scenario planning: A tool for strategic thinking. Sloan Management Review, 36(2), 25-40.
  • Vogus, T. J., & Sutcliffe, K. M. (2007). Organizational resilience: Towards a theory and research agenda. IEEE International Conference on System, Man, and Cybernetics, 3418-3422.

Related Assignments