Create a page like thisPowered by FeedvolleyFlag this page

Corporate Integrity

@MKRasmussen wrote:
#GRC Achievement Awards & Compliance Week 2010 - http://eepurl.com/i8h0

<>,

There are good conferences and bad conferences.  Having spent seventeen professional years attending various GRC, risk, compliance, and security conferences - most are categorized in my poor to bad category with only a handful making the good.

There are a few conferences that I deeply respect - some put on by vendors others by media or professional associations.  However, there is one conference that is my must attend event every year - Compliance Week.  In my opinion this is the leading GRC conference available.  It attracts the best audience with the most interesting sessions derived from practical experience.  While vendors attend there is no opportunity for free reign vendor fluff during the sessions.  Every year I have attended I come back inspired and ready to march forward a fresh with new GRC thoughts, perspectives, and new relationships that impact my research.

I highly recommend that you attend Compliance Week’s 5th Annual Conference which will be held May 24-26, 2010 at the Mayflower in Washington D.C.

I also recommend Matt Kelly's blog on the conference if you want to learn more what will be featured this year.

GRC Achievement Awards at Compliance Week:

This year brings something new to the Compliance Week conference - the 2010 OCEG GRC Achievement Awards.  Nominations are due shortly, and I highly recommend that you consider submitting a nomination for a leading GRC program that you are aware of.  If you need advice or help drafting a nomination - please let me know.

The Awards recognize the great strides that many companies, government agencies and other organizations have made in improving and integrating their approaches to governance, risk management and compliance (GRC) to achieve Principled Performance®.

Nominations are being accepted through March 21, 2010. The Awards will be presented at Compliance Week’s 5th Annual Conference, May 26, 2010, in Washington, D.C.

Awards will be presented to organizations that demonstrate achievements in any (or several) areas including:

  • Structure: Establishing a strong GRC organizational structure to ensure adequate oversight and coordination of efforts;
  • Information: Improving management, use and transparency of GRC relevant information;
  • Effectiveness: Gaining greater confidence in the effectiveness of compliance controls;
  • Processes: Coordinating risk assessment processes to develop a clearer enterprise view of risk;
  • Performance: Streamlining aspects of GRC capability to reduce cost and improve performance.

Here are some examples of achievements you may want to nominate:

  • Culture & Context: Achievement in better understanding or changing organizational culture, including ethical culture, risk culture, workforce culture and governance culture.
  • Organize & Oversee: Success in establishing a clear mission and vision for the organization's GRC efforts, or in integrating GRC management and oversight across and throughout the enterprise.
  • Assess & Align: Successes in streamlining, coordinating, or strengthening risk assessments; or improvements in risk identification and monitoring
  • Prevent & Promote: Achievements might address improvements in effectiveness and performance in any of the core elements of an effective compliance program: Code of Conduct, Policies, Awareness & Education, Human Capital Incentives and more.
  • Detect & Discern: Successes in hotline/helpline design and operation, workforce survey or other information gathering techniques, or effective use of detective controls.
  • Respond & Resolve: Achievements might address how an organization manages investigations, implements corrective controls, or integrates GRC efforts with crisis management and business continuity efforts.
  • Monitor & Measure: Achievements in various aspects of monitoring, measuring and improving program performance, including providing assurance to the Board or oversight committees.
  • Inform & Integrate: Achievements might address any aspect of information management, technology improvement, or usage for GRC efforts, including systems for enhancing communication internally or to external stakeholders about GRC expectations and outcomes.

To apply simply send a Microsoft Word document entitled GRC Achievement Award Nomination to awards@oceg.org. The nomination should include the following sections:

  1. Name of Project/Achievement
  2. Name of Organization
  3. Primary Contact Name/email/phone number
  4. Brief Description of Project (50-150 words per section below); should include:
    1. Challenge addressed
    2. Desired outcome(s)
    3. Process undertaken and roles involved
    4. Outcome(s) achieved, which may be operational, financial and/or other
    5. Optional – planned next steps

Nominations must be submitted by March 21, 2010, for consideration.

Award winners will be notified by April 10th and will be asked to submit a more detailed description (instructions to be provided), a number of which will be selected for review by participants at Compliance Week’s 5th Annual Conference at The Mayflower Hotel in Washington, D.C., May 24-26, 2010. Voting at the conference will determine the winners of the Peer Choice Prize for GRC Accomplishment, an additional award highlighting the “best of the best” as selected by the diverse group of GRC professionals who attend the Compliance Week conference.

The Achievement Awards will be announced at the conference and the Peer Choice Prize will be presented in a ceremony on the closing day of the conference, May 26th. OCEG and Compliance Week also will feature award recipients in future articles and webcasts.

Contact: For more information please contact OCEG at awards@oceg.org.

 

Upcoming Corporate Integrity Bootcamps & Workshops:

BOOTCAMP: GRC Fundamentals, Strategy, & Technology

Join Corporate Integrity, LLC in a three-day basic training exercise in GRC Fundamentals, Strategy, and Technology. Attendees will receive value in understanding and defining a GRC strategy. This bootcamp is authorized and endorsed by OCEG. The objective of this bootcamp is to provide attendees with the knowledge and hands-on practice necessary to efficiently design a GRC program. Attendees will learn about defining a GRC Strategy aligned with Red Book 2 through lectures and practical group interaction, discussions, and exercises. Others, such as technology providers and professional service firms, also benefit from understanding the issues and approaches to GRC challenges that organizations across industries are grappling with.

Chicago, IL, USA - GRC Fundamentals, Strategy, & Technology

Date: Wednesday, April 21, 2010 at 8:00 AM - Friday, April 23, 2010 at 5:00 AM (CT)

London, UK - GRC Fundamentals, Strategy, & Technology

Date: Monday, June 7, 2010 at 8:00 AM - Wednesday, June 9, 2010 at 5:00 AM(GMT)

San Diego, CA, USA - GRC Fundamentals, Strategy, & Technology

Date: Wednesday, June 23, 2010 at 8:00 AM - Friday, June 25, 2010 at 5:00 AM (PT)

New York, NY, USA - GRC Fundamentals, Strategy, & Technology

Date: Monday, August 16, 2010 at 8:00 AM - Wednesday, August 18, 2010 at 5:00 AM (ET)

WORKSHOP: Effective Policy Management & Communication

Attendees of the Effective Policy Management & Communication workshop will specifically learn:

  • Defining a process lifecycle for managing policies
  • Establishing policy ownership and accountability
  • Providing consistency in policies through consistent style and language
  • Communicating policies across extended business relationships
  • Tracking policies attestation and delivering effective training
  • Monitoring metrics to establish effectiveness and/or issues with policies
  • Relating policy management to risk, issue/case, and other GRC areas
 

Seattle, WA, USA - Effective Policy Management & Communication

Date: May 6, 2010 - 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM (PT)

Boston, MA, USA - Effective Policy Management & Communication

Date: July 13, 2010 - 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM (ET)

 

WORKSHOP: Developing a Risk Assessment & Management Process

Attendees of the Developing a Risk Assessment & Management workshop will specifically address answers to the following questions perplexing business:

  • Alignment of risk in the context of business.
  • Risk intelligent decision-making.
  • Establishment of risk culture and policy.
  • Risk monitoring and metrics.
  • Communication of business relevant risk information.
  • Defining ownership of risk within the business.
  • Multi-perspective risk analysis.
  • Effective risk treatment in context of business objectives.
  • Governance of risk within the business.
  • Consistent ranking and measurement of risk.

Milwaukee, WI, USA - Developing a Risk Assessment & Management Process

Date: February 31, 2010 - 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM (Central Time)

Seattle, WA, USA - Developing a Risk Assessment & Management Process

Date: May 7, 2010 - 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM (PT)

Boston, MA, USA - Developing a Risk Assessment & Management Process

Date: July 14, 2010 - 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM (ET)

 

Other Events Corporate Integrity is Engaged In:

Subscribe to receive notifications of future events by Corporate Integrity, LLC.

  • 3/10: Research Board Conference, Atlanta, GA, USA
  • 4/28: EMC/RSA/Archer WEBINAR: GRC Value Proposition

GRC, Risk, & Compliance Strategy Planning

Corporate Integrity is actively engaged in helping organizations plan their risk and compliance strategies. If you need a few hours of advisory time on the phone or in person to help plan your strategic approach to risk and compliance and need to understand drivers, trends, best practices, benchmarks, assessments, and the landscape of professional services and technology providers - contact me.

Sincerely,


Michael Rasmussen, J.D., CCEP, OCEG Fellow
Risk & Compliance Lecturer, Writer, & Advisor
mkras@Corp-Integrity.com
LinkedIn · Twitter

Corporate Integrity LinkedIN Group



  Hide links from @MKRasmussen
  Filter out hashtags: #GRC
  Let us know if this story is not showing up correctly

#

Editorial Observer - Television Is Not Free and Does Not Want to Be - NYTimes.com

@the_big_pic wrote:
Crude figuring about a la carte. Still worth a read. Television Is Not Free and Does Not Want to Be - http://nyti.ms/b2KXIx

Skip to article

Television Is Not Free and Does Not Want to Be

The proliferation of “free” media on the Internet seems to have convinced an entire generation that the old hacker slogan from a quarter-century ago, “information wants to be free,” can be an organizing principle for the information economy of the future.

Google brings us abundant “free” content while raking in billions from the ads alongside their search results. The Pirate Bay delivers “free” music and movies to teenagers while living off the revenue from banner ads. But then there is television. One of the oldest free mediums, it has something to teach us about free information: It can be expensive. And, perhaps, we would be better off if we were allowed to pay for it.

The TV spats of the past few weeks — between Cablevision and the Walt Disney Company over payments for ABC, and between Time Warner and the News Corporation over Fox — suggest that the future lies in the opposite direction from free.

The most recent tussle was over Disney’s demand that Cablevision pay something between 50 cents and $1 per subscriber per month, according to news reports, to pipe ABC to Cablevision’s three million subscribers in the New York metropolitan region.

Historically, cable companies have not had to pay for broadcast channels. They compensated broadcasters by buying access to sister networks. Cablevision says it pays Disney $200 million a year for about a dozen channels, including ESPN and the Disney Channel.

On Sunday, as talks hit an impasse, Disney cut ABC’s signal from Cablevision for almost 21 hours, including 14 minutes of the Oscars — the second-highest ranked program on TV by ratings after the Super Bowl. The signal was restored by a tentative, undisclosed deal.

If I were a Cablevision subscriber, I would probably want to pay. Compared with some of the other costs of free TV, $1 a month doesn’t seem too expensive. In fact, for the right broadcast, I would pay even more.

Americans watch 153 hours of TV a month, on average, according to a Nielsen survey. On prime time, ABC has a 9 percent share. At $1 a month, a rough, back-of-the-envelope estimate (assuming families watch TV together) would suggest Disney wants, at most, 7 cents an hour from the average Cablevision subscriber to watch its shows.

Compare that with today’s price of TV. Cablevision’s basic “family cable” package costs $55.95 a month, which works out at most to 37 cents an hour per home. That is cheap compared with the real price we pay for television: 18 minutes out of every hour that we are expected to spend watching ads. Those 18 minutes are much more valuable to me and you than they are to ABC.

A study in 2009 estimated that advertisers paid about $230,000 for a 30-second spot on ABC’s “Desperate Housewives.” That amounts to 79 cents an hour for each of the 10.6 million homes plugged into the show on Sunday nights. But if average hourly wages are $22.05 an hour, 18 minutes of the average workers’ time are worth $6.60.

Imagine a world in which information isn’t free. Your TV set is fitted with a coin slot — or a PayPal account. Wouldn’t you rather pay 79 cents for an hourlong show to get rid of the ads? Even the 50 or so national commercials on the Oscars, for which ABC reportedly charged up to $1.5 million per spot, amount to about $1.80 for each of the 41.3 million viewers.

While we’re at it, why not add 37 cents and ditch the family cable bundle and its dozens of unwatched networks? We could even throw in 7 more cents for Disney. It seems to be a better deal than $55.95 a month, plus 18 minutes an hour.

Technology might move us inevitably in this direction. Broadcast TV networks are badgering cable systems for money because falling ad revenues are forcing them to find new sources of income. Digital video recorders that offer customers the ability to strip out commercials could hasten the trend.

If we’re lucky, we’ll get a world in which TV is not free, but we will only pay for it when we want to watch it.

Next Article in Opinion (4 of 27) » A version of this article appeared in print on March 9, 2010, on page A26 of the New York edition.


  Hide links from @the_big_pic
  Let us know if this story is not showing up correctly

#