A Review of Risk Management Planning and Reporting in South Africa’s Public Institutions
This exploratory work attempts to review the risk management planning and reporting practices applied in South Africa’s public institutions by defining variables that were deemed indicators of risk management planning and reporting practices, namely: the timing of the institutions’ strategic and co...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
University of Ljubljana Press (Založba Univerze v Ljubljani)
2017-06-01
|
| Series: | Central European Public Administration Review |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://journals.uni-lj.si/CEPAR/article/view/20470 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1832591497904521216 |
|---|---|
| author | Tankiso Moloi |
| author_facet | Tankiso Moloi |
| author_sort | Tankiso Moloi |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description |
This exploratory work attempts to review the risk management planning and reporting practices applied in South Africa’s public institutions by defining variables that were deemed indicators of risk management planning and reporting practices, namely: the timing of the institutions’ strategic and combined assurance planning, documentation and active management of risks appearing in strategic risk registers and operational risk registers and the availability of risk management software (including its nature and usefulness).
The results point to the fact that there is confusion regarding the timing of both strategic and combined assurance planning sessions. Some institutions conduct these in the preceding year, whereas others appear to be conducting these during the year of implementation. Results further suggest that the practice of implementing combined assurance has not yet been embedded in the majority of public institutions, pointing to uncoordinated assurance activities that could lead to ‘assurance fatigue’. Results further point to the fact that there are still public institutions that are unable to prepare the strategic and operational risk registers. This raises the question of how these risks are managed if they have not been measured and documented.
|
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-275ba63d60f042709c02124aa2a67050 |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 2591-2240 2591-2259 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2017-06-01 |
| publisher | University of Ljubljana Press (Založba Univerze v Ljubljani) |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Central European Public Administration Review |
| spelling | doaj-art-275ba63d60f042709c02124aa2a670502025-01-22T10:51:50ZengUniversity of Ljubljana Press (Založba Univerze v Ljubljani)Central European Public Administration Review2591-22402591-22592017-06-0115210.17573/ipar.2017.2.03A Review of Risk Management Planning and Reporting in South Africa’s Public InstitutionsTankiso Moloi0University of Johannesburg, Department of Accountancy, Johannesburg This exploratory work attempts to review the risk management planning and reporting practices applied in South Africa’s public institutions by defining variables that were deemed indicators of risk management planning and reporting practices, namely: the timing of the institutions’ strategic and combined assurance planning, documentation and active management of risks appearing in strategic risk registers and operational risk registers and the availability of risk management software (including its nature and usefulness). The results point to the fact that there is confusion regarding the timing of both strategic and combined assurance planning sessions. Some institutions conduct these in the preceding year, whereas others appear to be conducting these during the year of implementation. Results further suggest that the practice of implementing combined assurance has not yet been embedded in the majority of public institutions, pointing to uncoordinated assurance activities that could lead to ‘assurance fatigue’. Results further point to the fact that there are still public institutions that are unable to prepare the strategic and operational risk registers. This raises the question of how these risks are managed if they have not been measured and documented. https://journals.uni-lj.si/CEPAR/article/view/20470enterprise risk managementrisk planningrisk reportingpublic institutions |
| spellingShingle | Tankiso Moloi A Review of Risk Management Planning and Reporting in South Africa’s Public Institutions Central European Public Administration Review enterprise risk management risk planning risk reporting public institutions |
| title | A Review of Risk Management Planning and Reporting in South Africa’s Public Institutions |
| title_full | A Review of Risk Management Planning and Reporting in South Africa’s Public Institutions |
| title_fullStr | A Review of Risk Management Planning and Reporting in South Africa’s Public Institutions |
| title_full_unstemmed | A Review of Risk Management Planning and Reporting in South Africa’s Public Institutions |
| title_short | A Review of Risk Management Planning and Reporting in South Africa’s Public Institutions |
| title_sort | review of risk management planning and reporting in south africa s public institutions |
| topic | enterprise risk management risk planning risk reporting public institutions |
| url | https://journals.uni-lj.si/CEPAR/article/view/20470 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT tankisomoloi areviewofriskmanagementplanningandreportinginsouthafricaspublicinstitutions AT tankisomoloi reviewofriskmanagementplanningandreportinginsouthafricaspublicinstitutions |