1. CRSA Forum Governance and risk culture round up December 2014

2. CG & RC round up Financial Stability Board Guidance on Supervisory Interaction with Financial Institutions on Risk Culture - A Framework for Assessing Risk Culture IIA Culture and the Role of Internal Audit OECD CG Principles – exposure draft FRC UK Code of Corporate Governance

3. Financial Stability Board Guidance on Supervisory Interaction with Financial Institutions on Risk Culture - A Framework for Assessing Risk Culture Supervisors should consider whether an institution’s risk culture is appropriate for the scale, complexity, and nature of its business and based on sound, articulated values which are carefully managed by the leadership of the financial institution. In this regard, supervisors should set expectations for the board to oversee management’s role in fostering and maintaining a sound risk culture. This requires supervisors to effectively articulate these expectations to the board and senior management and ensure ongoing follow-up on whether these expectations are being met.

4. Financial Stability Board Guidance on Supervisory Interaction with Financial Institutions on Risk Culture - A Framework for Assessing Risk Culture Embedded in these Principles is the assumption that financial institutions have the processes to establish their strategy and develop their business plan, and the models and systems to measure and aggregate risks. A sound risk culture is a substantial determinant of whether an institution is able to successfully execute its agreed strategy within its defined risk appetite.

5. Financial Stability Board Guidance on Supervisory Interaction with Financial Institutions on Risk Culture - A Framework for Assessing Risk Culture Assessing risk culture is complex. But given its importance attention must be paid to it. There are several indicators or practices that can be indicative of a sound risk culture. Institutions and supervisors can build awareness of the institution’s balance between risk-taking and control by considering such factors. These indicators can be considered collectively and as mutually reinforcing; looking at each indicator in isolation will ignore the multi-faceted nature of risk culture.

6. Financial Stability Board Guidance on Supervisory Interaction with Financial Institutions on Risk Culture - A Framework for Assessing Risk Culture Under ‘tone at the top’ The leadership of the institution promotes, monitors, and assesses the risk culture of the financial institution; considers the impact of culture on safety and soundness; and makes changes where necessary.

7. Financial Stability Board Guidance on Supervisory Interaction with Financial Institutions on Risk Culture - A Framework for Assessing Risk Culture These indicators include: 1.Tone at the top 2.Accountability 3.Effective communication and challenge 4.Incentives

8. Financial Stability Board Guidance on Supervisory Interaction with Financial Institutions on Risk Culture - A Framework for Assessing Risk Culture Supervisors should avoid supervisory methodologies that treat these indicators as a checklist. Supervisors should assess the processes in place by which core values are communicated, understood, embraced and monitored throughout the institution. In particular, supervisors should assess how the board and senior management systematically assess the risk culture of the institution.

9. Financial Stability Board Guidance on Supervisory Interaction with Financial Institutions on Risk Culture - A Framework for Assessing Risk Culture 3.1.7 The board and senior management systematically assess whether the espoused values are communicated and proactively promoted by management and staff at all levels so that the ‘tone at the middle’ and throughout the institution is consistent with the ‘tone at the top’. 3.1.9 Appropriate mechanisms are in place to ensure the risk appetite, risk management strategy, and business strategy are effectively aligned and embedded in decision making and operations at all appropriate levels of the institution.

10. IIA Culture and the Role of Internal Audit HIAs and boards should reach a common view on the importance of culture and the role internal audit can play 8 case studies Sectoral differences More detailed guidance is available for members or for a fee (36 pages)

11. FRC UK Code of Corporate Governance Changes Focus on Long term Going concern Risk assessment Location of risk reporting Remuneration Tone at the top

12. OECD CG Principles – exposure draft Regulation of stock markets Related party transactions (conflicts of interest) Remuneration claw back Internal audit and audit committees encouraged Internal control, ethics and compliance programmes Board evaluation Employee representation

13. Moral compass Behaviour Within the organisation - Management External to the organisation Within the organisation - Situational Incentives Making decisions Cognitive bias Within the individual – perception of reality Source Paul Moxey

14. Event Lens The lens: Distorts Blurs Obscures According to: Experience: Values, Belief Past decisions State of health Inclinations Leading to: different actions in different people The same event Is perceived differently by different people Our view of reality is distorted Source Paul Moxey

15. Trade-Offs Innovation xControl Risk seeking xRisk avoiding Protection xProduction Common sense xRules & procedures Empowerment xRules Trust xAccountability Leadership xFollowership Cohesion xDissent Openness to mistakes xZero tolerance Short term xLong term Big boards xLittle board Independence xInvolvement Value driver xValue protector Profit xPublic good Based on ACCA Culture and Channelling Corporate Behaviour summary of findings 2014