Risk Identification: Techniques, Aids, and the Underdeveloped Art
This paper examines the claim that risk identification is an underdeveloped art within risk management. It argues that organizations too often focus narrowly on pure loss exposure rather than leveraging risk identification to improve upside potential. The paper surveys the roles that various internal departments — including accounting, finance, marketing, production, and HR — can play in supporting risk identification efforts. It then provides an overview of three key risk identification techniques: cause convergent (bottom-up) analysis, Hazard and Operability (HAZOP) studies, and fault tree analysis. Together, these aids and techniques offer risk managers a more comprehensive and structured approach to identifying and mitigating organizational risk.
- Introduction: Risk Identification as an Underdeveloped Art: Thesis: risk identification underused as strategic tool
- Internal Departments as Risk Identification Aids: Roles of accounting, finance, marketing, production, HR
- Cause Convergent (Bottom-Up) Risk Identification: Analyzing loss-producing events and their causes
- HAZOP Studies: Structured Risk Deconstruction: Breaking complex risks into assessable, answerable units
- Fault Tree Analysis: A Visual Risk Approach: Visual mapping of risk causation and escalation
- Conclusion: Combining techniques develops risk identification practice
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The paper frames risk identification not merely as loss prevention but as a tool for improving upside potential, giving the argument a distinctive and useful angle.
- It balances breadth and depth by first surveying departmental roles before drilling into specific analytical techniques, giving readers both practical and technical context.
- The fault tree example using currency devaluation grounds an abstract concept in a concrete, relatable scenario that aids reader comprehension.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates systematic categorization: it organizes a complex topic (risk identification) into two distinct layers — human/organizational aids and formal analytical techniques — and treats each with consistent structure. This parallel treatment allows readers to compare the contributions of each element and understand how they work together within a broader risk management framework.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with a thesis that challenges the status quo of risk management practice. It then surveys five internal departments as informal risk identification aids before transitioning to three formal techniques: cause convergent analysis, HAZOP studies, and fault tree analysis. Each technique is introduced, defined, and illustrated. A brief conclusion synthesizes the argument that combining these approaches develops risk identification into a more mature discipline.
Introduction: Risk Identification as an Underdeveloped Art
Risk identification is an underdeveloped art that can be better served by incorporating into risk management the various aids, techniques, and resources generated by working with and integrating various entities within an overall risk management solution. The reason risk identification lacks full development is that organizations often fall into the trap of failing to adequately hedge against loss, focusing solely on pure loss exposure — even though there is no upside to such a practice, and the best that can occur is that an investment does not break down.
Risk identification can, however, actually boost an organization's upside potential even as it mitigates risk. To this end, risk identification aids, techniques, and resources can be incorporated into the overall strategy of the risk manager, enabling a more complete and proactive approach to managing organizational uncertainty.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.