Back Custom print Link Text Only Rich Text Print

  • OM-4.1 OM-4.1 Contingency planning

    • OM-4.1.1

      Although operations risks are difficult to quantify, they can often be evaluated by examining a series of "worst-case" or "what-if" scenarios (stress testing), such as a power loss, a doubling of transaction volume or a mistake found in the pricing software for collateral management. They can also be assessed through periodic reviews of procedures, documentation requirements, data processing systems, contingency plans and other operational practices. Such reviews may help to reduce the likelihood of errors and breakdowns in controls, improve the control of risk and the effectiveness of the limit system and prevent unsound marketing practices and the premature adoption of new products or lines of business.

    • OM-4.1.2

      Such stress tests should not be limited to quantitative exercises that compute potential losses or gains. They should also include more qualitative analyses of the actions management might take under particular scenarios. Contingency plans are important products of such qualitative analyses.

    • OM-4.1.3

      Since the delivery of corporate and customer services represents key strategic and reputational issues, such problems could cause serious difficulties for banks and even jeopardise their ability to conduct key business activities. This potential requires the bank to establish business continuity and contingency plans outlining operating procedures and lines of communication, both formal and informal, in the event of an unexpected disaster (also see Basel Committee paper 'Framework for Internal Control Systems in Banking Organizations' for further guidance).

    • OM-4.1.4

      For contingency planning relating to outsourcing activities, see section OM-2.6.