AbhishekJha
New Member
Hi,
With respect to ERM , does it follow a "horizontal" orientation OR a "top down approach".
In Chapter 1 , Page # 6, it sounds like it follows both orientations as mentioned in the notes.
1. ERM has a top-down orientation or at least incorporates a top-down perspective: the board of directors defines a risk appetite and defines risk limits (for example), which may “cascade down” into the organization. In this way, business units (or divisions) are not isolated from the overall firm’s needs.
2. ERM morphs traditional tools into new tools. For example, VaR was developed for market risk, but under the ERM umbrella, VaR and economic capital are used to aggregate risk horizontally (e.g., across risk types) and vertically in the organization. As another example, scenario analysis is employed with software to illustrate more sophisticated multivariate macroeconomic scenarios.
With respect to ERM , does it follow a "horizontal" orientation OR a "top down approach".
In Chapter 1 , Page # 6, it sounds like it follows both orientations as mentioned in the notes.
1. ERM has a top-down orientation or at least incorporates a top-down perspective: the board of directors defines a risk appetite and defines risk limits (for example), which may “cascade down” into the organization. In this way, business units (or divisions) are not isolated from the overall firm’s needs.
2. ERM morphs traditional tools into new tools. For example, VaR was developed for market risk, but under the ERM umbrella, VaR and economic capital are used to aggregate risk horizontally (e.g., across risk types) and vertically in the organization. As another example, scenario analysis is employed with software to illustrate more sophisticated multivariate macroeconomic scenarios.