<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"><channel><title>Risk-Assessment on Andrew Sheves</title><link>https://andrewsheves.com/tags/risk-assessment/</link><description>Recent content in Risk-Assessment on Andrew Sheves</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en-us</language><lastBuildDate>Fri, 13 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://andrewsheves.com/tags/risk-assessment/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>Getting the Risk Assessment to Work For Us</title><link>https://andrewsheves.com/2024/12/13/getting-the-risk-assessment-to-work-for-us/</link><pubDate>Fri, 13 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://andrewsheves.com/2024/12/13/getting-the-risk-assessment-to-work-for-us/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;I’ve had a lot of conversations about risk assessments recently and just finished a new feature in the Decis platform, both of which prompted this thought: What if we have things backwards? What if our risk assessment updated us instead of the other way around?&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;We spend days — sometimes weeks — building a comprehensive risk assessment to understand our risks and build mitigation measures. But these are snapshots in time and can quickly become overtaken by events. That’s when we move from risk management to incident management or at minimum, we have to review our mitigation.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>