This article was interesting to me for two reasons: 1) It formalized a data view of risk management within the financial community around the context of BCBS (and for BCBS 239 related to Risk Data Aggregation and Reporting); and, 2) it provided an interesting perspective on governance / data quality and associated metrics.
This paragraph sums it up:
“What is actually happening in practice is that each major institution’s regional banks are lobbying/negotiating with their local/regional regulators to agree on an initial form of compliance – typically as some form of MS Word or PowerPoint presentation to prove that that they have an understanding of their risk data architecture. One organization might write up 100 page tome to show its understanding – and another might write up 10. The “ask” is vague and the interpretation is subjective. Just what is adequate?”
The perspective on governance that the article proposed is a way to “systematically compare different architectures” with a set of metrics that was understandable, obtainable, and actionable.
Have a read – let me know your thoughts. The article also provides a nice summary of the BCBS requirements.
analyticaltern 
Leave a Reply