Balancing governance, risk and compliance policies with architectural observability

vFunction GRC AO BB JEIntellyx BrainBlog for vFunction by Jason English

In our previous installment, Jason Bloomberg explored the challenges of delivering innovative AI-based functionality while depending upon legacy architectures. All too often, the design expectations of new and differentiating features are at odds with the massive architectural debt that exists within past systems. 

Any enterprise that is not agile enough to respond to customer needs will eventually fail in the marketplace. At the same time, if the organization moves forward with new plans without resolving architectural and technical debt, that’s a surefire recipe for system failures and security breaches.

Customers and partners can try to mitigate some of this modernization risk by building service level agreements (SLAs) into their contracts, but such measures are backward-facing and punitive, rather than preventative and forward-looking. This is why both industry organizations and government bodies are adopting better standards and defining policies for IT governance, risk mitigation, and compliance (or GRC, for short).

Ignore governance at your own risk

Never mind the idea that any one institution is ‘too big to fail’ any more, even if they fill a huge niche in an overconsolidated economy. Institutions and companies can and will fail, and governments won’t always be there to backstop them.

Since the 2008 global financial crisis knocked down many once-stalwart financial and insurance firms, additional regulations were put in place to demand better governance and reduce over-leveraged investments, but it seems like some of the old risk patterns such as mortgage-backed securities are creeping back.

Recent events like the 2023 bank run failure and regulated sale of Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) again put a spotlight on the responsible governance business processes within all financial institutions. Analysts could pin their failure on human overconfidence and bad decisions, because they tied up too much capital in long-term bonds that quickly became illiquid when interest rates started rising sharply in 2022—but there’s a deeper story here.

As the name suggests, SVB grew by catering services to cutting-edge Silicon Valley startups and elite tech firms. Still, they got started themselves back in the 1980s. Therefore, beyond suffering from a lack of diversification, the systems bank executives used to predict interest risk were likely obsolete and poorly architected, and they failed to notice the approaching economic storm until it was upon them…

Read the whole article on the vFunction Blog here: https://vfunction.com/blog/balancing-governance-risk-compliance-policies/ 

 

SHARE THIS:

Principal Analyst & CMO, Intellyx. Twitter: @bluefug