Donna Galer

Looking at the root causes of the spate of fires -- and the root causes of the root causes -- suggests a lapse in discipline in enterprise risk management. 

Brokers and risk managers should prepare for possible claims many years from now related to climate litigation and "forever chemicals."

With an uptick in M&A in the insurance industry, it is timely to consider some of the most common of these risks.

Insurers of all sizes need to take note of changes in the risk landscape and continuously improve their ERM practices.

Companies with sound ERM practices were better-positioned to deal with the pandemic than those with less sound or no ERM.

The more nebulously a risk is characterized, the less clear who should own it, the greater the chance it won't be adequately addressed.

As risk morphs, leaders must build a sound risk culture, and underwriters must consider the risk culture of accounts they write.

Large books of low-volatility policies, normally covered by primary insurers, could be packaged by others into securitized risk pools.

It makes sense that insurers should be excellent at managing their own strategic, financial and operational risk. But is that always the case?

Cyber is more unusual, more uncertain and more potentially dangerous for the insurance industry than new offerings of the past.

How can the 2016 results at AIG be explained? Could the recent emphasis on technology, among other things, have caused a loss of focus?

Insurers will need to truly understand what the customer wants or values -- but collecting that information is very hard.

Just as insurers must innovate, they must acknowledge risk, assess risk, mitigate risk and prepare for some level of risk to materialize.

Human resource risk is often underestimated, and that can be a serious misjudgment -- as recent lawsuits and settlements prove.

When ERM is practiced in a mature and robust fashion, it should boost an organization’s resiliency and add an R to the acronym.

Firms that invest in enterprise risk management (ERM) must quantify the value, even though it can be ephemeral. Here are four methods.

Criticisms of ERM can be justified when a program is executed poorly, but issues are often taken out of the proper context.

Practitioners of enterprise risk management need to push for good governance because it reduces the biggest risks a company faces.

Many directors know much too little about how to oversee the issue.

ERM practitioners must determine how much they can rely on what colleagues in other functions or units say about a situation and its risks.

Insurers have long experience with enterprise risk management, and other companies should emulate three of their main approaches.