
Banks short of op risk experts and analysis
Daily news headlines
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 confused by EU’s ‘bingo card’ clearing rules
Uncertainty over definition of representative trades in Emir active account requirement
FDIC scrutinised over move to cover all SVB deposits
Advisory panel questions whether guaranteeing uninsured deposits was necessary to prevent contagion
EBA seeks to tighten up uneven prudent value adjustments
Regulator to consult ‘soon’ on changes to improve consistency of capital deductions
Post-Brexit divergence puts EU subsidiaries on the rack
Banks face choice between higher staffing costs or over-engineered processes at UK headquarters
SEC criticised for belt-and-braces ban on volume-based pricing
Legal experts question need for rules to prevent firms disguising agency trades as proprietary
SEC expected to protect CRT in conflicts of interest rule
Decision could come as early as today; high hopes for credit risk transfer exemption
FRTB managers face hard facts about risk factors
There are ways to reduce the capital charges caused by NMRFs, but they come at a price
SEC official defends delayed dealer registration rule
Regulator says market should be treated like equities, but PTFs warn it will harm market liquidity