Page 8 - CIMA May 18 - MCS Day 2 Suggested Solutions

SUGGESTED SOLUTIONS

Transfer (low likelihood/high impact). In this case, the risk should be shared in some way by
being passed to someone else (such as an insurer) e.g. the cost of unforeseen accidents, fire,
theft, damaged goods from suppliers etc. MENTA must be prepared for such eventualities.

Reduce (high likelihood/low impact). In this case, MENTA needs to consider ways to reduce the
risk. This is normally done by putting controls or procedures in place; although the cost of the
controls should not outweigh the impact of the risk which could include having contingency plans
in place should the risk actually occur e.g. in the course of the maintenance programmes sourcing
similar replacement parts from alternative suppliers.

Avoid (high likelihood/high impact). Where a risk falls into this category, we must consider
avoiding the impact altogether. This may involve for example ensuring that adequate and
appropriate training for employees on critical safety procedures during bus operations has been
carried or ensuring that any new technology is only introduced after full and thorough training has
been carried implemented.

It is important to note that the management of risk is a continuous process and MENTA must have
regular reviews of the risks documented. This is best achieved by the introduction of a risk
register. It is important that MENTA also considers uncertainty when carrying out all of its
procedures (driving, maintenance, recording of journeys etc.) through contingency planning,
detailing plans of action dependent on the possible risks that may be identified. These plans will
need to include clear guidelines on, for example, insurance arrangements to avoid costly legal
cases e.g. employing drivers who may have underlying medical conditions not revealed at
interview as was the case with the bin lorry driver in Edinburgh.
If a new process or indeed a new department proves necessary very clearly agreed objectives
need to be drafted and agreed which must be in line with the overall strategy of the core
business. These objectives must be supported by formal documentation clearly setting out their
rights, powers and reporting lines of all personnel involved to ensure that their output can be
monitored and that their ideas are adopted, providing they comply with the overall strategic
objectives of MENTA. This is particularly important in the area of risk management given the
significant effect that failure to achieve safe, reliable, customer‐centred transport services may
have on profitability and reputation.

The department should be staffed with appropriately skilled employees and clearly seen to be
supported by senior management in order to highlight the importance of the new function. The
Main and Regional Boards must be seen to back this approach and also be seen to support the
department’s output. A chain of command should be set up so that findings are reported to the
correct person who is sufficiently senior to ensure that recommendations are considered and
options for future risk mitigation strategies evaluated. As with health and safety, it should also be
made clear that the responsibility for risk lies with all those employed by MENTA.

Clear communication with staff will be critical to ensure that the new department/system
achieves its objectives. This may be a significant hurdle for MENTA given that currently there is
very little interaction between the operating units because most serve a designated geographical
area. It will therefore be necessary to consider the most effective means of communication e.g.

KAPLAN PUBLISHING 95