Advertise on podcast: RiskMasters | Trailblazing Risk Leadership

How do organisations recognise emerging risks when the evidence is still incomplete? In this RiskMasters — The Download, Angela McConville, former Chief Executive of the National Childbirth Trust (NCT), explores how leaders can identify, interpret and respond to early warning signals before they develop into material strategic issues. Angela explains why organisations need to pay attention to frontline observations, intuition and emerging concerns without allowing those signals to become established assumptions prematurely. An important part of the discussion concerns the ability to distinguish between a signal, a symptom and a strategic issue. This requires curiosity, judgement and a culture where people feel comfortable sharing observations that may not yet be supported by conclusive evidence. Angela illustrates this through NCT's experience of recognising growing concerns about birth trauma. What initially appeared as isolated observations from practitioners working in different communities gradually developed into a broader picture of an issue receiving national attention. The example highlights why connecting signals across an organisation matters. Individually, observations may appear inconclusive, but collectively they can reveal patterns that warrant further investigation and ultimately influence strategic priorities, services and organisational responses. In this extract: Why early warning signals should be explored without becoming premature assumptions How leaders distinguish between signals, symptoms and strategic issues The importance of frontline intelligence and organisational listening How connecting observations across different locations can reveal emerging patterns What NCT's experience with birth trauma illustrates about organisational awareness How emerging risks can influence strategic decisions, services and priorities This extract comes from my CPD-accredited RiskMasters conversation with Angela McConville, When Mission Meets Reality: Resilience and Leadership in a Transforming Charity. 🎧 Listen to the full episode of RiskMasters for the complete conversation on organisational resilience, leadership, transformation and decision-making.

How can leaders make better decisions when information is incomplete and circumstances keep changing? In this RiskMasters — The Download, Angela McConville, former Chief Executive of the National Childbirth Trust (NCT), explores why organisational resilience depends on the ability to experiment, learn quickly and adapt without waiting for certainty. Drawing on NCT's experience of transformation, Angela explains how the organisation adopted a test-and-learn approach, using small, low-cost experiments to explore opportunities before committing significant resources. A particularly revealing example concerns an initiative that failed within just 10 to 15 days. Rather than treating the outcome as a setback, the leadership team celebrated what they had learned and moved on. The distinction is important. Learning from failure does not mean accepting uncontrolled risk. It means creating opportunities to test assumptions, contain potential losses and make better-informed decisions. For charities and other organisations operating under financial and operational pressure, this approach offers an alternative to lengthy transformation programmes that may struggle to keep pace with changing circumstances. In this extract: Why leaders must become comfortable making decisions with imperfect information How small experiments can reduce uncertainty before significant resources are committed Why speed of learning can matter more than speed of execution How celebrating contained failures can strengthen organisational culture Why a test-and-learn mindset supports organisational resilience and continuous adaptation This extract comes from my CPD-accredited RiskMasters conversation with Angela McConville, When Mission Meets Reality: Resilience and Leadership in a Transforming Charity. 🎧 Listen to the full episode of RiskMasters for the complete conversation on charity leadership, organisational transformation, decision-making and resilience.

In this CPD episode of the RiskMasters Podcast, I speak with Angela McConville, formerly Chief Executive of the National Childbirth Trust (NCT), about leadership, organisational resilience and transformation in one of the UK's largest charities. Angela joined NCT just ten weeks before the Covid-19 pandemic fundamentally disrupted how the organisation supported parents. Overnight, a charity built around bringing expectant parents together in local communities had to rethink how it delivered its services, maintained financial sustainability and continued fulfilling its mission. We also discuss balancing mission with financial sustainability, leading distributed workforces, navigating increasing regulatory expectations and collaborating across organisational boundaries to deliver greater social impact. 🎯 What You Will Learn By listening to this episode, you'll gain practical insights into: Building organisational resilience through leadership rather than crisis response. Challenging assumptions that have become embedded within successful organisations. Using experimentation and rapid learning to improve strategic decision-making. Creating cultures where curiosity is encouraged and learning is celebrated. Recognising emerging risks before they become measurable. Balancing governance, regulation and organisational agility. Empowering distributed teams while maintaining effective oversight. Using collaboration as a strategic capability rather than simply a partnership model. Reinventing an organisation without compromising its purpose. 🕒 Episode Highlights 00:00 – When resilience becomes a leadership challenge Angela reflects on joining NCT just weeks before the Covid-19 pandemic and leading an organisation through immediate disruption. 04:00 – Protecting the mission, not the operating model Why organisations must distinguish between their purpose and the way they currently deliver it. 08:00 – Learning faster than circumstances change How experimentation, rapid learning and celebrating small failures strengthen organisational resilience. 14:00 – Understanding changing customer needs Why successful organisations continually challenge their assumptions about the people they serve. 18:00 – Why leaders should communicate purpose, not simply process Helping people understand why change matters rather than overwhelming them with operational detail. 22:00 – Structured and unstructured listening How organisational awareness develops through formal governance and everyday conversations. 27:00 – Weak signals and emerging strategic risks Recognising patterns before they become measurable issues, illustrated through NCT's experience of identifying birth trauma as an emerging national concern. 34:00 – Enabling rather than controlling Why resilient organisations empower frontline teams rather than centralising decision-making. 39:00 – Collaboration as a resilience capability How working across organisational boundaries can amplify both influence and social impact. 43:00 – Reinvention and the future of leadership Why resilience ultimately depends upon continually rethinking how organisations fulfil their mission. 👤 About Angela McConville Angela McConville was at the time of the interview Chief Executive of the National Childbirth Trust (NCT), one of the UK's largest parenting charities supporting families through pregnancy, birth and early parenthood. Her leadership spans charity governance, organisational transformation, strategic leadership, operational resilience, service innovation and collaboration, with a strong focus on creating organisations that learn, adapt and continue delivering lasting social impact. 📚 Related Resources When Governance Comes Too Late: A Charity Risk Case Study Governance in Charities and Non-Profit Organisations A Guide to Assessing Risk Maturity for Non-Profit Organisations and Charities 🎓 Download your CPD certificate: https://thecpd.group/p/PSWG4GA

What happens when the assumptions behind an important decision change? In this RiskMasters — The Download, Grant Purdy explores why decision-making is fundamentally about resolving uncertainty and why organisations need to understand the assumptions on which their decisions depend. Drawing on the work he developed with the late Roger Estall, Grant explains how good decisions begin with clarity about organisational purpose, the opportunity being considered and the outcomes being sought. But a particularly important part of the discussion concerns assumptions. Every decision rests on assumptions about the organisation and the world around it. Yet Grant observes that boards and executive teams rarely record those assumptions explicitly. That creates a practical governance problem. If the assumptions behind a decision are not visible, how can leaders recognise when circumstances have changed enough to reconsider it? The objective is not perfect certainty. Grant argues that decision-makers instead need to reach “sufficient certainty” to exercise judgement and act. In this extract: • Why decision-making involves resolving uncertainty• The importance of purpose and desired outcomes• Why every important decision rests on assumptions• What Grant means by “sufficient certainty”• Why boards should make assumptions explicit• How changing assumptions can signal that a decision needs to be revisited This extract comes from my CPD-accredited RiskMasters conversation with Grant Purdy on ISO 31000, risk management, uncertainty and better decision-making. 🎧 Listen to the full episode of RiskMasters for the complete conversation.

Has risk management lost sight of what it was originally supposed to achieve? In this RiskMasters — The Download extract, Grant Purdy offers a provocative perspective on how the risk management profession has evolved and why he believes it needs to reconnect with decision-making. Grant reflects on the different philosophies that developed around ISO 31000 and COSO ERM. He argues that while ISO 31000 had the potential to move risk management towards decision support, tensions remained between integrating risk thinking into normal management decisions and maintaining separate risk management processes, terminology and frameworks. He also discusses a proposed revision of ISO 31000 around 2015 which, in his account, would have reframed the standard around helping organisations recognise and take account of uncertainty when making decisions. That more fundamental change was ultimately not adopted. The discussion then moves beyond standards to the profession itself. Grant questions whether risk management has become too focused on its own processes, documentation and terminology, including the difficulty practitioners still have in agreeing what the word “risk” actually means. His central argument is clear: risk management should not become an end in itself. Its value should come from helping organisations understand uncertainty and make better decisions. Grant Purdy's perspective on ISO 31000 and COSO ERMWhy integrating risk management with decision-making remains difficultThe proposed rethink of ISO 31000 around decision support and uncertaintyWhether risk management has become too focused on process and documentationWhy definitions of risk continue to create difficulties for the professionWhy Grant believes risk management should ultimately support better decisions This extract is taken from the full CPD-accredited RiskMasters conversation with Grant Purdy on ISO 31000, risk management, uncertainty and better decision-making. 🎧 Listen to the full conversation on Apple Podcasts, Spotify or at aevitium.com.

What was ISO 31000 originally designed to achieve, and how did the international risk management standard develop? In this RiskMasters — The Download extract, Grant Purdy, who was directly involved in the development of ISO 31000, explains the origins of the standard and its relationship with organisational decision-making. Grant traces ISO 31000 back to the Australian and New Zealand standard AS/NZS 4360, first published in 1995 and subsequently updated in 1999 and 2004. The objective was to bring greater consistency to different approaches to risk assessment and risk treatment while producing information that decision-makers could understand and use. As other countries began adopting AS/NZS 4360, Grant and his colleagues approached the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) about developing an international standard. What followed was a four-year process of discussion and compromise as different countries brought their own perspectives on risk management. Grant explains why the resulting ISO 31000 framework sought to integrate risk management and decision-making, but also why he believes this contributed to a distinction that continues to shape the profession. In his view, different philosophies of risk management have subsequently developed. He characterises the ISO 31000 approach as increasingly focused on decision support, while describing COSO and IRM approaches as placing greater emphasis on risk identification, governance and reporting. That distinction leads to a fundamental question for risk leaders: is risk management primarily a process for identifying and reporting risk, or should its ultimate purpose be to improve organisational decisions? The origins and history of ISO 31000How ISO 31000 evolved from AS/NZS 4360The original purpose of risk assessment and risk treatmentWhy risk information should support organisational decision-makingHow the international risk management standard was developedThe role of compromise in international standardsGrant Purdy's perspective on different philosophies of modern risk managementThis extract is taken from the full CPD-accredited RiskMasters conversation with Grant Purdy exploring ISO 31000, risk management, uncertainty, risk matrices, governance and better decision-making. Listen to the full conversation on Apple Podcasts, Spotify or at aevitium.com.

In this episode of RiskMasters, I speak with Grant Purdy about risk management, uncertainty and the relationship between risk and better decision-making. Grant has spent almost five decades working in risk and decision-making. He was a nominated expert involved in the development of ISO 31000, contributed to ISO Guide 73 and helped shape ISO/IEC 31010. He is also co-author, with the late Roger Estall, of Deciding, a practical guide designed to help people make better decisions. Our conversation examines how risk management has evolved, why Grant believes parts of the profession have become disconnected from decision-making, and what boards, executives and risk professionals can do differently. “Certainty is a total illusion. It can never be achieved. Sufficient certainty is as good as we can get.” – Grant Purdy 🎯 What You Will Learn Why risk management should ultimately improve decision-making How to make decisions without waiting for impossible certainty Why identifying and monitoring assumptions strengthens governance Where risk matrices and risk appetite can create false confidence How AI can support judgement without replacing accountability 🕒 Episode Highlights 01:23 - What ISO 31000 was originally trying to achieve Grant traces the development of ISO 31000 from AS/NZS 4360 and explains why creating useful information for decision-making was central to the original approach. 06:03 - Where risk management lost its way We discuss the different philosophies that emerged around risk management and why Grant believes the profession needs to reconnect risk with decision support. 10:29 - Uncertainty, assumptions and sufficient certainty Grant explains why decisions require clarity about purpose, opportunity, desired outcomes and the assumptions on which they depend. 16:08 - The danger of seeking certainty Why waiting for complete information can produce analysis paralysis, missed opportunities and delayed action. 21:10 - What risk matrices can and cannot tell us Grant explains why a useful prioritisation tool can become misleading when organisations treat it as a form of quantitative analysis. 24:20 - Governance, regulation and decision-making A provocative discussion about the relationship between standards, regulation and consultancy, and why governance should ultimately be concerned with how decisions are made. 32:49 - Why well-governed organisations still make poor decisions We explore unclear purpose, hidden assumptions, predetermined outcomes, insufficient challenge and weak monitoring. 36:49 - AI and the future of decision support Grant considers how AI can broaden context, challenge bias and surface assumptions, alongside the dangers of allowing technology to substitute for human judgement. 41:01 - The future of the risk profession Why Grant believes risk professionals should broaden their capabilities and become facilitators of better organisational decisions. 44:02 - Better decisions begin with purpose Grant closes with the principle at the heart of his approach to decision-making. 👤 About Grant Purdy Grant Purdy has almost five decades of experience working in risk management and decision-making. He chaired the Standards Australia and Standards New Zealand risk management committee for ten years and was a nominated expert involved in developing ISO 31000. Grant on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/grant-purdy-4ba1925/ Learn more about Deciding: https://www.sufficientcertainty.com/book 📚 Related Resources From Approval to Impact: Repositioning Risk Appetite  Strategic Uncertainty Governance  Risk Impact Assessment: What Actually Drives Decision Quality  When Delay Changes the Decision Itself  🎓 Download your CPD certificate: The CPD Group - Accreditation: #501335

How do leaders move from recognising a Gray Rhino to actually doing something about it? In this RiskMasters — The Download, Michele Wucker, author of The Gray Rhino and You Are What You Risk, explains the five stages of the Gray Rhino framework and how they can help leaders assess where they are in responding to visible, high-impact risks. The five stages are denial, muddling, diagnosing, panic and action. Michele explains why diagnosing represents an important shift. Rather than simply acknowledging the risk, leaders begin asking how quickly it is developing, how significant it could become, what solutions are available, what resources are required and who needs to be involved. The framework also considers where other stakeholders sit within those five stages. A response may depend on people who have not yet recognised the urgency of the risk or who lack the authority to act. The conversation explores why panic can be a double-edged sword. It can finally create momentum, but it can also lead to poor decisions. Having a plan matters, but so do the mechanisms and decision authority required to implement it. Michele also introduces the idea of a “crash of rhinos”, where several significant risks interact or arrive together, alongside smaller “baby rhinos” that may develop into larger threats. The five stages of the Gray Rhino framework How leaders move from recognition and diagnosis to action Why stakeholders may be at different stages of responding How panic can lead to action but also poor decisions Why multiple risks can develop into a “crash of rhinos” The Gray Rhino framework provides a practical way for risk leaders to assess not only the risks they face, but how prepared their organisations and key stakeholders are to respond. Effective action requires diagnosis, planning, decision authority, and continued tracking and adjustment. This extract is taken from the full RiskMasters conversation with Michele Wucker on the Gray Rhino, risk management, behavioural risk and strategic decision-making. Listen to the full RiskMasters episode on Apple Podcasts, Spotify or at aevitium.com.

Risk culture, cultural differences, leadership, and risk management are closely connected to how people perceive and respond to risk. In this RiskMasters — The Download segment, Horst Simon draws on his international experience to explore how cultural worldviews influence risk behaviour inside organisations. He discusses three broad perspectives, guilt versus innocence, honour versus shame, and power versus fear, and explains why organisations operating across cultures need to consider these differences when developing risk policies and processes. The conversation also explores how generational differences influence attitudes towards work, organisations, mobility, and risk, creating another important consideration for leaders building an effective risk culture. Listeners will gain insight into: • How cultural differences can influence risk management decisions• Why the same risk policy may be interpreted differently across cultures• How cultural worldviews shape attitudes towards responsibility and consequences• Why generational differences matter when building risk culture• How global organisations can consider human behaviour within risk frameworks This extract is taken from the full RiskMasters interview with Horst Simon on risk culture, people risk, leadership, operational risk, and the future of risk management, available on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and at aevitium.com.

How can risk leaders apply the Gray Rhino framework to risks their organisations already recognise? In this RiskMasters — The Download, Michele Wucker, author of The Gray Rhino and You Are What You Risk, explains how she applies the Gray Rhino concept to risk management, risk identification and decision-making. Her starting point is straightforward: organisations usually already know what their Gray Rhinos are. They may involve succession, organisational culture, competitive pressures, finance and liquidity, regulation or other strategic risks. Michele’s approach starts by taking a fresh look at those known risks and assessing honestly how effectively the organisation is responding. She explains how applying the Gray Rhino framework moves beyond identifying risk. Decision-makers need to understand who is affected, who has the power to act, how different risks interact and whether information flows effectively between frontline teams, management and the board. The conversation also explores psychological safety, behavioural risk and risk culture. Michele explains why organisations need channels that allow people throughout the business to communicate what they see and ensure important risk signals reach those empowered to act. The discussion then considers the relationship between quantitative risk management and behavioural factors, including how risks are interpreted, communicated and priced. How Michele Wucker applies the Gray Rhino frameworkMoving from risk identification to actionHow stakeholders and interconnected risks shape risk decisionsWhy psychological safety strengthens information flowHow behavioural risk complements quantitative risk management The Gray Rhino concept provides a practical framework for addressing high-probability, high-impact risks that are already visible. Michele shows how leaders can use it to examine organisational responses, improve risk communication and move from recognising a threat towards informed action. This extract is taken from the full RiskMasters conversation with Michele Wucker on the Gray Rhino, risk management, behavioural risk and strategic decision-making. Listen to the full RiskMasters episode on Apple Podcasts, Spotify or at aevitium.com.

What determines whether an organisation remains resilient when it comes under real pressure? In this episode of RiskMasters, Julien Haye is joined by Freddy Gielen, Executive Partner at Reply, to explore why organisational resilience is fundamentally a leadership and organisational design challenge rather than simply a matter of governance frameworks or regulatory compliance. Drawing on more than three decades advising financial institutions, regulators and boards across Europe, Freddy shares the recurring patterns he observes across organisations, explaining why resilience rarely fails through a single decision but instead erodes through rational trade-offs, fragmented accountability and unnoticed ambiguity. Together, they discuss the relationship between risk management, operational resilience, governance, leadership, and organisational resilience, challenging conventional thinking about how resilient organisations are built. In this episode, you'll learn: Why resilience is a leadership capability rather than simply a control functionWhy governance frameworks can appear robust yet struggle under stressThe difference between documented capability and operational capabilityHow weak signals become diluted as they move through organisationsWhy transformation often relocates organisational friction instead of removing itWhy ambiguity in ownership, data and governance creates systemic riskHow regulatory change exposes organisational capacity constraintsWhy resilience often competes with growth, speed and short-term performance Whether you are a Chief Risk Officer, risk leader, operational resilience professional, compliance executive, board member or governance practitioner, this episode offers practical insights into strengthening resilience in complex organisations. ⏱️ Episode Highlights 01:15 – Why organisational resilience is a design choice, not a technical problem 08:39 – The gap between documented capability and operational resilience 17:53 – Why transformation relocates organisational friction 23:53 – How weak signals become diluted through escalation 29:57 – When mature governance frameworks fail under stress 39:31 – Why ambiguity creates systemic organisational risk 45:19 – Why resilience competes with organisational success 📚 Related Resources Organisational Silos: The Hidden Cost of Fragmented Governance Discover how fragmented accountability, disconnected decision-making and organisational silos create hidden vulnerabilities that only emerge under stress. How Functional Silos Weaken Risk Identification and Escalation Explore why weak signals become diluted as they move through organisations and how governance structures influence escalation and decision-making. Psychological Safety in Risk Management Learn why challenge, escalation and speaking up are essential to organisational resilience and effective risk leadership. 🎓 Download your CPD certificate: ⁠The CPD Group – Accreditation:⁠ #501296

Most organisations look for major risks. Frédéric Gielen argues that the biggest threats often begin with something much smaller. Ambiguity. In this RiskMasters: The Download, Frédéric explains why unclear ownership, fragmented data, and poorly defined responsibilities rarely create immediate problems but become systemic vulnerabilities when organisations come under stress. He also explores another overlooked challenge. During periods of regulatory change, organisations often focus on budgets and implementation deadlines while underestimating their ability to absorb change. We explore: Why ambiguity creates systemic organisational riskHow unclear ownership compounds under stressThe relationship between governance, data, and resilienceWhy organisations run out of capacity before budgetHow regulatory change exposes organisational constraintsRisk rarely grows because of a single failure. It often develops where ambiguity, governance, and organisational capacity quietly intersect. --- Music by Lexin_Music via Pixabay, used under the Pixabay Content License.

Strong governance frameworks are essential. Clear responsibilities, documented escalation processes, and defined governance structures help organisations operate consistently. Yet these same structures can become obstacles during disruption. In this RiskMasters: The Download, Frédéric Gielen explores why governance frameworks that appear mature on paper may struggle when organisations come under stress. Drawing on decades advising financial institutions, regulators, and boards, he explains how fragmented accountability, sequential decision-making, and misalignment between legal entity governance and operational governance can reduce organisational resilience when rapid decisions are required. We explore: Why mature governance frameworks can fail under stressHow fragmented accountability slows decision-makingThe tension between legal entity governance and operational governanceWhy governance structures should evolve for resilienceThe relationship between governance effectiveness and organisational resilienceEffective governance is not only about clear structures. It is about ensuring those structures continue to support timely decisions when organisations face uncertainty and disruption.

Organisational resilience is often associated with governance frameworks, policies, and documented controls. These remain essential. However, resilience is rarely determined by documentation alone. In this RiskMasters: The Download, Frédéric Gielen explains why organisational resilience depends on organisational design, decision-making, and behaviours that continue to operate effectively under pressure. Drawing on decades of experience advising regulators and financial institutions across Europe, he argues that resilience rarely disappears through a single failure. Instead, it gradually weakens through rational trade-offs that appear reasonable when viewed individually but collectively reduce organisational control. The discussion also explores the difference between documented capability and operational capability. Many organisations develop comprehensive governance frameworks, recovery plans, and resilience documentation. Under stress, however, those same organisations often discover that decision-making, escalation, and accountability do not operate as expected. Another key insight is that resilience should be viewed as a design choice rather than a technical exercise. Governance frameworks provide structure, but organisational resilience depends on transparency, redundancy, accountability, and the ability of the organisation to adapt when disruption occurs. The extract covers: Organisational resilience and governanceRisk frameworks and governance frameworksOrganisational design and resilienceDocumented versus operational capabilityDecision-making under stressRational trade-offs and organisational fragilityThis extract is taken from the full RiskMasters conversation with Frédéric Gielen discussing organisational resilience, governance, leadership, and the structural choices that determine how organisations perform under pressure. This episode will be released on August 1st 2026.

Compliance is often defined through rules, regulation, and control frameworks. The challenge is not the absence of rules. It is how those rules are interpreted and applied in practice. In this RiskMasters bonus episode, Jennifer Geary and Natalie McManus explore the difference between rules-based compliance and principles-based compliance, and why starting with harm leads to better decisions. The discussion focuses on a shift in sequence. Compliance processes typically begin with the question: what does the rule require. In practice, decisions are shaped earlier, when potential outcomes and risks are considered. Starting with harm changes how compliance operates. It requires organisations to consider impact before interpretation, and to apply rules in context rather than in isolation. This creates a shift in how compliance decisions are made: • decisions are anchored in potential harm rather than rule interpretation• rules are applied in context rather than followed mechanically• judgement is exercised earlier in the decision process• supervision is balanced with trust and capability• compliance supports outcomes as well as adherence The extract also highlights the role of supervision. Organisations can increase control through oversight, automation, and monitoring. This reduces the risk of error. It also increases cost and can reduce flexibility. Alternatively, organisations can invest in judgement, enabling individuals to act as their own control. The balance between supervision and autonomy becomes a risk decision. For organisations, this changes how compliance supports governance and risk management. Compliance is not only about meeting regulatory requirements. It is about how those requirements are interpreted, prioritised, and embedded in decision-making. This includes how harm is identified, how rules are applied in context, and how judgement is developed across the organisation. Strengthening these capabilities improves how organisations manage compliance risk, support decision-making, and align outcomes with regulatory intent. This extract is taken from the RiskMasters episode with Jennifer Geary and Natalie McManus, discussing principles-based compliance, decision-making, and the role of the Chief Compliance Officer.