Not Reporting Risks as Audit Issues – Will perform Advisory Instead?

One response

1. It seems like you’re considering the decision to shift from reporting risks as Audit issues to taking an advisory approach instead. This can be an interesting strategy, but there are a few points to consider:

   1. Clarifying Objectives: What are the main objectives behind this shift? Are you aiming for a more collaborative approach, or is there a perception that reporting risks as Audit issues may be too confrontational?

   2. Stakeholder Communication: It’s crucial to communicate this change clearly to all stakeholders. They need to understand the reasons behind this shift and how it can ultimately lead to improved risk management and stronger organizational governance.

   3. Value of Advisory: The advisory approach can provide value by helping departments identify and mitigate risks effectively before they escalate into larger issues. How will you ensure that your advisory efforts are taken seriously and lead to concrete actions?

   4. Balancing Act: There may be a fine line between advisory and oversight. Balancing support with the necessary scrutiny is key. How will you maintain accountability while providing guidance?

   5. Monitoring and Follow-Up: Regardless of the approach taken, it’s important to have mechanisms in place for monitoring the implementation of advisory recommendations. Will there be regular follow-ups to assess the effectiveness of the changes proposed?

   6. Training and Expertise: If you’re moving towards a more advisory role, would additional training for your team be beneficial to ensure they have the skills needed to provide effective guidance?

   In conclusion, while an advisory approach can be beneficial, it’s important to retain an element of accountability and ensure that risks are still being effectively managed. I’d love to hear your thoughts on these considerations!

   Log in to Reply