Banks short of op risk experts and analysis
Investment banks are short on staff and are too focused on data collection, says a new BCS survey
LONDON – Investment banks are failing to fill op risk personnel requirements. There is a lack of expertise on staff, too much focus on day-to-day data collection and too little on data analysis, according to new research from operational consultant and software provider BCS.
The research – which focused on op risk and control within operations divisions – showed 65% of participants had not filled their op risk staff requirements. The staffing shortfall is exacerbated by labour-intensive, manual data collection and incident reporting, with inadequate investment in the mechanics of op risk and control processes.
“There’s an acceptance that people want to get from collection and reporting towards analysis and being proactive. People are so busy collecting data, collecting incidents and getting monthly reports out one way or another that they are less able to act pre-emptively,” says Jennifer Moodie, head of operational risk at BCS.
The least important priority was said to be governance – most firms claiming to have already implemented the structures upon which their risk reporting is founded.
"Everybody across the survey felt they did have their governance, structure and reporting very much in place, which wouldn’t have been the case if you’d asked that question three or four years ago,” says Moodie.
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@risk.net or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. Printing this content is for the sole use of the Authorised User (named subscriber), as outlined in our terms and conditions - https://www.infopro-insight.com/terms-conditions/insight-subscriptions/
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. Copying this content is for the sole use of the Authorised User (named subscriber), as outlined in our terms and conditions - https://www.infopro-insight.com/terms-conditions/insight-subscriptions/
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Regulation
Industry calls for major rethink of Basel III rules
Isda AGM: Divergence on implementation suggests rules could be flawed, bankers say
Saudi Arabia poised to become clean netting jurisdiction
Isda AGM: Netting regulation awaiting final approvals from regulators
Japanese megabanks shun internal models as FRTB bites
Isda AGM: All in-scope banks opt for standardised approach to market risk; Nomura eyes IMA in 2025
CFTC chair backs easing of G-Sib surcharge in Basel endgame
Isda AGM: Fed’s proposed surcharge changes could hike client clearing cost by 80%
UK investment firms feeling the heat on prudential rules
Signs firms are falling behind FCA’s expectations on wind-down and liquidity risk management
The American way: a stress-test substitute for Basel’s IRRBB?
Bankers divided over new CCAR scenario designed to bridge supervisory gap exposed by SVB failure
Industry warns CFTC against rushing to regulate AI for trading
Vote on workplan pulled amid calls to avoid duplicating rules from other regulatory agencies
Bank of Communications moves early to meet TLAC requirements
China Construction Bank becomes last China G-Sib to release TLAC plans
Most read
- Top 10 operational risks for 2024
- Japanese megabanks shun internal models as FRTB bites
- Market for ‘orphan’ hedges leaves some borrowers stranded