Risk mitigation involves making decisions and taking action after a risk assessment has taken place. Using the risk pyramid and impact model to analyse risk, managers can decide on the best option to mitigate risk. Examples are provided in the following table.
In reality, very few applications of Skills Recognition will pose a serious risk to the survival of the organisation, but many Skills Recognition processes could impact on safety, compliance and operational requirements. Treatment of assessed risks involved decisions to avoid, reduce, share or control the risk.
Risk mitigation in high risk areas
Skills Recognition process are used inappropriately and someone is accredited into the workplace as competent, when in fact, they pose a real danger to themselves and others.
- Do not use Skills Recognition where safety is a major area of risk
- Balance Skills Recognition with education and re-training activities in key areas of safety
- Use safety experts as assessors in a quality assured SR process
Skills Recognition processes are used in a way that does not take account of legislation, codes of practice or industry standards.
- Use only approved RTOs who can ensure compliance
- Develop internal expertise and processes to ensure compliance
SR processes become so cumbersome or detailed they disrupt or prevent normal operations.
SR gives credit to someone who cannot do the job; they escape training and cannot perform effectively in an operational function
- Skills Recogniton processes are made more efficient with the use of technology
- Skills Recognition processes draw on naturally occurring, readily available evidence
- Skills Recognition processes use multiple methods of assessment and confirmation of performance
- Skills Recognition processes assess competence over a sustained period of time
Skills Recognition processes are conducted in invalid or unreliable ways and this releases into a work area people rated as competent when their skills are clearly lacking. As a result, the reputation of the individual and their organisation is damaged
- Skills Recognition processes are open, transparent and communicated to stakeholders
- Process efficacy is auditable and audited periodically for quality assurance
- A process exists for dealing with complaints and grievances
- Data and IP management is secure and up to data
Systems exist to promote a culture of continuous improvement
Financial impact such as: capital investment outlay, costs, operational expenses, expected gains or loss in market share
- Investment in Skills Recognition is evaluated against return on investment (ROI)
- Skills Recognition cost/benefit analysis is included in training and development budget
Hidden or indirect costs of Skills Recognition are not overlooked
Customers and suppliers do not value SR processes and see them as constraining strategy and undermining competitive advantage in a broader industrial context
- Educate customers and suppliers on how SR is adding value to the business
- Co-share SR processes on similar training and development strategies
Engage customers and suppliers in assessments and contextual validation of SR
The damage of inappropriate SR in several other parts of the risk triangle means the viability of the organisation is put at risk
- Do not utilise SR in high risk areas of the business