FSA finds room for improvement in op risk practices
Feedback to thematic review mostly positive but there are still areas for improvement, says FSA
LONDON – The FSA has published feedback after its thematic review of operational risk management practices, which assessed industry readiness for the Capital Requirements Directive.
Conducted between late 2006 and early 2007, the review assessed the op risk framework in 30 representative firms of various types and sizes, looking in particular at their governance framework, op risk resources, senior management review, policies, risk identification, assessment and reporting, loss data collection and analysis, and treatment of capital. The FSA found examples of good practice at a number of firms but found several areas in need of improvement, including analysis and reporting of collected information, embedding of op risk policies and firms' chosen methodologies, and the provision of adequate training.
Although the paper is not guidance from the FSA, it allows op risk managers to compare their practices with their peers and assess their readiness to meet the requirements of the FSA rules.
A full analysis of the feedback will appear in the December issue of OpRisk & Compliance.
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.
As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (point 2.4), printing is limited to a single copy.
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. As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (clause 2.4), an Authorised User may only make one copy of the materials for their own personal use. You must also comply with the restrictions in clause 2.5.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Regulation
NBFI oversight ‘no longer adequate’, say BdF economists
Researchers call for stronger supervision of non-bank sector ‘before risks actually materialise’
Why Brexit still stirs up trouble for cross-border business
As EU erects another obstacle, banks consider ways around it – or exit strategies
Can US regulators keep Collins happy with one capital stack?
Legal experts say Basel III endgame redraft retains spirit if not letter of the floor
EU states take the slow road to new cross-border services ban
Late national transposition hampers foreign banks’ decisions on location of affected activities
Don’t mention the rules: the fight against prediction market abuse
For the CFTC to regulate new venues effectively, it must first redefine insider trading
Can the US FRTB revamp make the IMA great again?
Banks are finally presented with a viable internal models framework under Basel III’s market risk rules
UK rethinking tougher capital rules for US bank subsidiaries
US endgame draft would trigger UK Basel III trap floor for foreign banks, but PRA is reviewing
EBA proposes drastic overhaul to supervisory data reporting
Revamp will cut back the number of datapoints and integrate overlapping reports