Category Archives: Business

Want to scan your crypto wallet for risks? Check: AML crypto BTC, USDT, ETH. Checking cryptocurrency wallets for dirty money.

RIMS NeXt Gen Forum Offers Insights for Rising Risk Professionals

Posted on by

“We’re becoming numb to the news,” said risk management veteran and author Joseph Mayo. “We’ve seen a 1,200% increase in daily record loss in the last five years. Globalization has created faster-moving and infinitely more complex risks and that’s what we have to adapt to.

buy rybelsus online bristolrehabclinic.ca/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/jpg/rybelsus.html no prescription pharmacy

”

In his keynote, “Don’t Tell Me What I Know, Tell Me What I Don’t Know,” at last week’s RIMS NeXt Gen Forum 2019 for rising risk professionals, Mayo discussed environmental, social and governance (ESG) risk events and how they will continue to impact the risk management community, noting that a 1,000% increase in ESG events has occurred from 2010 to 2018 compared to each of the three prior decades. 

(Hear a preview from his RIMScast interview.)

Despite flaws in actuarial approaches and the challenges surrounding artificial intelligence such as bias and adversarial machine learning, Mayo said that the profession’s outlook is “not all doom and gloom.”

“The future of risk management is to make decisions with incomplete, inaccurate and obfuscated information,” he said. “We will have to embrace fuzzy logic because decisions need to be made quicker.

buy advair rotahaler online www.suncoastseminars.com/assets/top/advair-rotahaler.html no prescription pharmacy

We no longer have decades to develop actuarial models.”

Shortly afterward, Robin Joines of Sedgwick and Kristy Coleman of Turner Broadcasting System hosted risk management “Jeopardy!” While not quite as fast-paced nor as well-funded as the long-running game show, the hosts provided a forum for discussion and debate on explored topics from business travel etiquette and travel risk to communication and corporate politics. Discussing the images people project when they cross their arms, for example, while many agreed that it projects rigidity, one audience member cited a recent Wired video that reported it could also be considered a method of self-soothing rather than hostility or reservation.

Joines and Coleman were open-minded in their scoring and even led a quick tongue twister that kept the atmosphere light and fun. “Final Jeopardy” focused on public speaking, offering some practical speech delivery tips that would benefit any professional. For example, Joines said, “Talk from your knowledge base, and not from your note cards, and you’ll come across as confident.”

The forum closed with “You are Your Brand – How to Distinguish Yourself in Your Career,” presented by Kathleen Crowe, chair of the RIMS Rising Risk Professionals Advisory Group, and Steve Pottle, RIMS vice president.

Despite their differences in age and experience, the duo explained how their careers followed similar patterns. Neither presenter had begun on a risk management track, with Pottle starting out as a budding Canadian radio personality and Crowe initially expecting to work for an incumbent U.S. senator. Taking career risks brought them into risk management, and they shared lessons from their respective journeys that ultimately influenced them to be active leaders in their organizations and the industry at large.

One key tip of theirs was planning a personal goal that aligns with a long-term strategy of an organization, which can be an early indicator of a transition to a leadership role. From there, they said, you can build your personal brand regardless of your industry.

“Your personal brand lies somewhere in between how you see yourself and how others see you,” Pottle said. 

Click here for more NeXt Gen Forum coverage on the “Legal Checklist for AI Risk.” 

Click here for “Key Takeaways from RIMS NeXt Gen Forum 2019,” a special RIMScast episode produced live from the event.

FIU Bridge Collapse Due to Negligence, OSHA Claims

Posted on by

According to a new Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) report, negligence from almost every party involved led to last year’s collapse of a pedestrian bridge at Miami’s Florida International University, killing 6 and permanently disabling one other. The pedestrian bridge project was supposed to pose lower risk of disruption thanks to a construction method called “accelerated bridge construction,” intended to minimize the time and risk involved on-site by performing much of the work off-site and then relocating it. Yet, according to the report, almost all parties involved shared some fault for the collapse, most notably FIGG Engineering-Bridge Group, the firm that designed the bridge.

On March 15, 2018, the bridge collapsed onto the street below, where multiple cars were waiting at a stoplight. FIGG Engineering-Bridge Group had designed the bridge and engineering firms Louis Berger and Bolton Perez and Associates provided additional design checks. Miami-based construction firm Munilla Construction Management (MCM) managed the bridge’s construction off-site and relocated it to the school using the accelerated bridge construction method.

OSHA says that FIGG produced a “deficient” design and the company’s attempts to seal cracks in the bridge led to its collapse.

buy xifaxan online www.mariettaderm.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/pdf/xifaxan.html no prescription pharmacy

FIGG reportedly also ignored MCM workers’ concerns about the bridge’s growing cracks, saying that it had examined them and did not find anything troubling. Given this response from FIGG, OSHA wrote that MCM should have exercised “independent judgment with regard to implementing necessary safety measures” to address those growing cracks and close the street below. OSHA also said that the road should have been closed immediately as FIGG attempted to repair the cracks—work that, as the Miami Herald reported, put additional stress on already-faulty and weak internal support cables.

According to the OSHA report, at a meeting with all construction participants on the day of the collapse, FIGG’s lead engineer “acknowledged that his computations could not replicate the cracks and, therefore, he did not know why the cracks were occurring.” Upon being told that the cracks were widening daily, he “stated more than once that the cracks did not present any safety concerns.
buy amoxicillin online https://royalcitydrugs.com/amoxicillin.html no prescription

” The engineer had also reportedly called the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) three days before the collapse to claim the same.

The report also calls into question Louis Berger’s independent review of the bridge’s designs, noting that the firm’s “constrained” budget and time led to deficiencies in the firm’s analysis, including not examining the post-installation construction phase, during which the collapse happened. OSHA said FIGG violated FDOT requirements by not requiring Louis Berger to conduct the full examination and failing to provide the firm with necessary documents.

buy biaxin online www.mariettaderm.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/pdf/biaxin.html no prescription pharmacy

Bolton Perez and Associates was reportedly aware of the cracks in the bridge, but failed to follow DOT requirements to “exercise its own independent professional judgment,” and did not recommend that the street be closed.

After the incident, victims filed 18 lawsuits against 25 companies connected with the collapse, with depositions beginning in May 2019. According to the Miami Herald, MCM declared bankruptcy and in May, the judge overseeing its bankruptcy approved a $42 million insurance settlement for victims and their families. Additionally, FIU has designated that its $5 million insurance payment should go to the victims. FIGG released a statement this week calling the OSHA report “factually inaccurate and incomplete,” citing “flawed analysis.” A National Transportation Safety Board report is forthcoming, but may not be released until 2020.

buy priligy online www.mariettaderm.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/pdf/priligy.html no prescription pharmacy

From Westeros to Government and Business, Women Have Less Voice

Posted on by

In the final, contentious season of HBO’s fantasy epic “Game of Thrones,” two powerful queens face off in a battle for control over the entire known world. Meanwhile, other formidable female characters outmaneuver their rivals to command entire kingdoms and (spoiler alert) strike the blow that saves humanity from eternal darkness. But looking solely at on-screen speaking time, you’d never know that women were main characters and, arguably, the show’s driving force. According to Statista, women on the show got just 22% of the speaking time in the last season, and only cracked 30% in one of the show’s eight seasons.

Of course, this kind of imbalance is hardly confined to the fictional world. Recently, Montreal city official Sue Montgomery made headlines for vividly illustrating the issue in the city’s monthly executive committee meetings. Montgomery tracked the difference in the amount of time that men and women spoke by knitting in red when men were speaking and in green when women did. The resulting product is overwhelmingly red with occasional smatterings of green. In response to questions on Twitter about the committee’s gender makeup, Montgomery noted that the committee is far more balanced, comprising 31 women and 34 men.

The concepts of “mansplaining” (when men condescendingly explain something to women) and acknowledging that men often talk over women in both professional and personal settings are now increasingly familiar and more widely discussed cultural issues. In fact, Merriam-Webster officially added “mansplaining” to the dictionary in March 2018. There is even a website called arementalkingtoomuch.com, which helps users track these disparities during meetings or social situations by clicking a button when “a dude” is talking and another when “not a dude” is talking.

A 2017 study by research company Prattle did just that, examining 155,000 business conference calls from the past 19 years, finding that men dominated the meetings by speaking 92% of the time. The study also found that women’s remarks in these meetings largely focused on investor relations staff introductions and not as much substantive contributions. While studies have shown that men far outnumber women in corporate leadership positions, as with the Montreal city meetings, Prattle CEO Evan Schnidman noted that the statistics on talking time do not necessarily correlate to the rate at which men outnumber women in the room. Indeed, Schnidman said, “Male executives provide significantly more verbose answers to analyst questions than their female counterparts.”

Gender diversity in corporate settings is hardly just about optics or legal requirements, it also offers broader benefits for employees and their employers that can pose critical advantages. For example, as discussed in “Pale, Stale and Male: Does Board Diversity Really Matter?” in Risk Management, McKinsey & Company found that companies with higher gender diversity in their board rooms are 21% more likely to have “above-average profitability” than those with lower rates. Efforts focusing on equitable representation particularly continue to lag with regard to women of color, who are the least represented group in every corporate setting except entry-level positions.

However, the cases above indicate that a balance of men and women in the room may not be enough, leading more people to discuss how their companies can promote both diversity and inclusion in their workplaces. In addition to focusing on diversity of those in the room, employers should be taking steps to ensure that they are facilitating a diversity of voices as well. Creating environments that encourage more women to voice their opinions can foster different perspectives and more innovation, and promote employee loyalty, engagement and well-being.

Texas Study Shows Business Impact of Major Storms

Posted on by

A new study conducted by Texas A&M University at Galveston and the Texas General Land Office examines the 50-year impact of a major storm hitting Galveston Bay on the Texas coast near Houston, including secondary effects to the economy. The study focused on catastrophic “500-year” flood events (with a one-in-500 chance of occurring in a year), which, while rare, have hit the state 3 times in recent years. This includes Hurricane Harvey, which struck Louisiana and Texas in August 2017, causing $125 billion in damage, according to the National Hurricane Center.

These larger storms have serious economic impacts locally, regionally and nationally. Over a 50-year time frame, the study notes, “the projected economic impact on Texas’ Gross State Product (GSP) of storm surge without coastal protection is substantial.” In the wake of a 500-year magnitude event, the regional petroleum and chemical manufacturing sectors would see their output decline by 19% (or $175.4 billion) in lost revenue, as well as a projected 17% loss of petroleum jobs (approximately 155,000 jobs) and a petroleum price increase of 13%. It would also impact the region’s housing, with the sector declining by 8%, or $39.5 billion lost in sales.

A 500-year surge event striking Galveston Bay would also have serious impacts for national economic activity, especially because the region processes 25% of the petroleum and more than half of the jet fuel used in the United States. According to the study, U.S. GDP could drop 1.1% (approximately $883 billion), U.S. exports would suffer a 4% drop (approximately $1.66 billion) and “30 states not including Texas will have lower GSP in response to a surge event in Texas.”

“The Galveston Bay region is one of the most flood- and surge-prone areas in the United States with vast amounts of vulnerable residential, commercial, industrial and petro-chemical areas at risk,” said Texas Land Commissioner George P. Bush. “This study clearly demonstrates that, without any new protections in place, future storm surges could have substantial and lingering impacts on Texas’ economy and send lasting ripples through other economic sectors nationwide.”

Turning to mitigation, the authors of the report assessed the potential measure of a 17-foot “coastal spine,” also called a “coastal storm suppression system,” made up of “connecting seawalls and fortified dunes/levees along the coastline to retractable gates.” In October, the Army Corps of Engineers released the study Coastal Texas Protection and Restoration Feasibility Study proposing a similar example of this sort of structure—74 miles of barrier, including “floodwalls (inverted T-walls), floodgates (both highway and railroad floodgates), seawall improvements, drainage structures, pump stations, and surge barrier gates.”

The researchers estimate that a coastal spine would reduce the region’s lost petroleum and chemical manufacturing sector losses to 3% and 5%, respectively, a 1% reduction in regional unemployment, and a 1% increase in petroleum product prices. The report also claims that a coastal spine mitigation plan would reduce Houston-Galveston regional insurance premiums by as much as 28%. This could provide significant relief for insurers as well. Even though insurance and reinsurance only covered about 30% of the total wind and flood damage from Hurricane Harvey, this amounted to tens of millions in losses.

In terms of construction cost, the Texas researchers polled residents of three local counties and found that 56% “believed that both government and port industries should be responsible for financing the coastal barrier system,” and a majority agreed that some form of taxation should support its construction.