ABSTRACT
This chapter begins the concluding arguments of the book. It discusses a deconstruction of the goals that organisations have for the use of risk-based resilience reasoning approaches. It is these goals which set the rules for how and where these are, in fact, applied. Rules, which, in turn, come to dominate methodology preferences and gaps. To examine these, we introduce a deconstruction taxonomy which poses that these operational choices map to a continuum from private, highly technical, forms of risk to those larger forms which ultimately mediate, in the public domain, the organisation’s licence to operate. Stopping to address the constant background forces of credulity and expedience, we see these as no less intrusive to reasoning at this point, since this goal setting is their ultimate source. The taxonomy we propose deconstructs methodologies according to: definitions; knowledge extraction; control features; and expert judgement. It offers a way for organisations to formally assess their operational risk methods portfolio in one exercise. Unified thus, certain key maturity goals for that portfolio can then be addressed. This aligns the goals for risk and resilience with operational goals. In essence this aims to turn them into business engines rather than isolated assessment exercises.
