Master the 2025 CRISC Challenge – Grab Your Risk Control Superpowers!

The rationale for identifying that those who manage risk should not report to someone who delivers value is grounded in organizational dynamics and risk management structure. In effective risk management, individuals in charge of assessing and mitigating risk should ideally report to a higher-level authority that can make decisions based on comprehensive risk analyses and enterprise-wide implications.

When managers of risk report to someone whose primary focus is on delivering value—such as a product line manager or business unit leader—there may be a conflict of interest. This situation can lead to a tendency to underreport or overlook risks to prioritize immediate value delivery over long-term risk considerations. Reporting to individuals whose primary role includes regulatory compliance and oversight—like compliance officers or external auditors—ensures that risk management can operate independently and provide unbiased assessments.

Supervisors overseeing daily tasks typically focus on operational efficiency and daily performance metrics, which may divert attention from broader strategic risk management interests. Regulatory compliance officers have roles that intersect with risk management responsibilities, making them appropriate channels for risk managers to report findings. Similarly, external auditors provide an independent review of organizational practices, including risk management, which further supports the idea that risk should be reported through established governance and compliance frameworks rather than being influenced by value delivery priorities.