Risk mitigation strategies for organisations

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                                                                           

SAFETY

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.

Mitigation

- 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

 

 

COMPLIANCE

Skills Recognition processes are used in a way that does not take account of legislation, codes of practice or industry standards.

 

Mitigation

- Use only approved RTOs who can ensure compliance

- Develop internal expertise and processes to ensure compliance

 

 

OPERATIONAL

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

 

Mitigation

- 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

 

REPUTATION

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

 

Mitigation

- 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

 

 

FINANICAL VIABILITY

Financial impact such as: capital investment outlay, costs, operational expenses, expected gains or loss in market share

 

Mitigation

- 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  

 

 

MARKET SUPPORT

Customers and suppliers do not value SR processes and see them as constraining strategy and undermining competitive advantage in a broader industrial context

 

Mitigation

- 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

 

 

BUSINESS SURVIVAL

The damage of inappropriate SR in several other parts of the risk triangle means the viability of the organisation is put at risk

 

Mitigation

- Do not utilise SR in high risk areas of the business