Two Scenarios

Obviously, workshops are going to generate too many risks, but that should be the

purpose of workshops, in my opinion. The advantages of workshops are that many things that

were almost invisible, can flourish, and then addressed. When assessing risk probably too much,

at the beginning, is not a disadvantage. However, one of the disadvantages is the spectrum of

probable risks can be too wide, so it may be hard to assess which of those risks are the most

important. Also, because there are many risks, the ERM team could be focusing on less crucial

issues, so there is a risk of overlooking more imperative concerns.

On the other hand, identifying a small number of risks have disadvantages as well.

Ignoring what appears to be a small risk, it is indeed very risky. It is my opinion that big risks

were small at one point. Nevertheless, if a deep investigation is done, and the risks founds are the

most crucial, as it should be, then focusing on small number of risks can be very advantageous.

ERM teams can leaser focus on what it matters the most, and not get distracted with insignificant

issues. To summarize, I think focusing on a big number of risks is not practical; also, it is not

proficient focusing on a small number of risks. There is a happy center where all the important

issues get the attention of the ERM team.

Outcomes, Causes, and Risks

Outcome is like the result after one or more things happened. Because outcomes can

surge from a diverse group of occurrences, the risk response could be difficult (Simkins, 2015).

An example of outcome could be a new law restricting gambling, so they need to minimize the

impact on profits due to that law.

 Cause it is self-explanatory. It is linked to outcome because cause is the origin of

outcome. For example, they do not have appropriate cybersecurity, so their online gambling gets

compromised.

Finally, risk is an outcome, but it is a more general statement which could not be useful

for an organization, BCLC, in this particular case (Simkins, 2015). For instance, a

misunderstanding on the rules of a certain game that can lead to misperceptions and probable

lawsuits.

Confusing outcome, cause, and risk can make the assessment of level of risk very

difficult; also, the suitable remedy of risk can be problematic. That is why BCLC created a risk

dictionary, so there was a clear understanding of specific risks.

Inherent Risk

Inherent risk is very helpful, in my opinion, because is the quantity of risk that exists

before any risk control (Rosowsky, 2020). On some occasions, inherent risk can be helpful to the

assessment of risk because it is not too difficult to look for issues that have not being under

control, so they may be found easily. At the same time, inherent risk can be difficult because

they can be so much part of the culture and/or history of an organization, that can be hard to

assess them as risks. Sometimes obvious issues are harder to pin down. Again, the most

important thing is to know there is something called inherent risk, and they need be to point out

to adequately assess risk.

 Reference

Fraser, J., Simkins, B. J., & Narvaez, K. (2015). Implementing enterprise risk management:

Case studies and best practices. Wiley.

Slabotsky, R. (n.d.). Inherent risk vs. residual Risk explained in 90 seconds. Inherent Risk vs.

Residual Risk Explained in 90 Seconds. Retrieved September 10, 2021, from

https://www.fairinstitute.org/blog/inherent-risk-vs.-residual-risk-explained-in-90-

seconds.