Risk Oversight is a Team Sport
By Henry R. Keizer, The global head of Audit for KPMG International, and U.S. vice chair, Audit, KPMG LLP. | March 05, 2010
From the Audit Committee Institute
When considering a board-level risk committee, the board first must clarify its own oversight responsibility as well as the oversight responsibilities of its standing committees. This article from Directors and Boards discusses several considerations to help boards put these "risk committee" discussions into context and determine what makes most sense given an organization's specific risks, challenges, and oversight objectives.
The laser-focus on risk - how a company manages it, and how the board oversees it - has sparked rigorous discussions in many boardrooms and in Washington, D.C. about the pros and cons of establishing board-level risk committees.
It's certainly a healthy debate to have, but context is critical. The role of a risk committee cannot be considered in isolation; rather, it should be viewed in the context of the broader board/committee structure for overseeing the company's risk management system.
Read Risk Oversight Is a Team Sport- Browse KPMG Services
- Give Feedback
- Subscribe to RSS News Feeds
- Listen to Podcasts
- View Webcasts on Demand
- See Upcoming Events
Things You Can Do
Register for KPMGInstitutes.com
As part of the KPMG Institutes online community, you'll be able to participate in Webcasts, access premium content, post comments, rate research and provide valuable insight supporting critical business topics and industry issues.
KPMG Institutes Network
- KPMGInstitutes.com
- KPMG 404 Institute
- KPMG Audit Committee Institute
- KPMG Global Energy Institute
- KPMG Global Enterprise Institute
- KPMG Government Institute
- KPMG Healthcare & Pharmaceutical Institute
- KPMG IFRS Institute
- KPMG Shared Services and Outsourcing Institute
- KPMG Tax Governance Institute
- KPMG Financial Reporting Network
- KPMG TaxWatch