Group items tagged

Cyber Defense Magazine Names Risk Vision Most Innovative Risk Management Product of 2014 SUNNYVALE, CALIF. - Agiliance®, Inc., the Big Data Risk Company™ and leading independent provider of integrated solutions for Operational and Security Risk programs, today announced that Cyber Defense Magazine (CDM) has named RiskVision™ Most Innovative Risk Management Product in its 2014 Most Innovative InfoSec Awards competition. "Since its inception, Agiliance has pioneered and brought to market advancements in technology that help customers simplify compliance complexities and hone their risk management practices, while cutting costs, optimizing business performance, and improving productivity." You can check here. Dyman & Associates Risk Management Projects About Cyber Defense Magazine Cyber Defense Magazine is the premier source of IT Security information.Its mission is to share cutting edge knowledge, real world stories, and awards on the best ideas, products, and services in the information technology industry. Learn more about Cyber Security at DAP About Agiliance Agiliance, the Big Data Risk Company, is the leading independent provider of integrated solutions for Operational and Security Risk programs. RiskVision scales with businesses, effectively managing assets, data, people, and processes to achieve 100 percent risk and compliance coverage. Its real-time risk analysis leads to optimized business performance and better investment decisions. For more information, please visit http://dymanassociatesprojects.com/

Risk management is the identification, assessment, and prioritization of risks (defined in ISO 31000 as the effect of uncertainty on objectives, whether positive or negative) followed by coordinated and economical application of resources to minimize, monitor, and control the probability and/or impact of unfortunate events or to maximize the realization of opportunities. Risks can come from uncertainty in financial markets, threats from project failures (at any phase in design, development, production, or sustainment life-cycles), legal liabilities, credit risk, accidents, natural causes and disasters as well as deliberate attack from an adversary, or events of uncertain or unpredictable root-cause. Several risk management standards have been developed including the Project Management Institute, the National Institute of Standards and Technology, actuarial societies, and ISO standards. Methods, definitions and goals vary widely according to whether the risk management method is in the context of project management, security, engineering, industrial processes, financial portfolios, actuarial assessments, or public health and safety. The strategies to manage threats (uncertainties with negative consequences) typically include transferring the threat to another party, avoiding the threat, reducing the negative effect or probability of the threat, or even accepting some or all of the potential or actual consequences of a particular threat, and the opposites for opportunities (uncertain future states with benefits). Certain aspects of many of the risk management standards have come under criticism for having no measurable improvement on risk, whether the confidence in estimates and decisions seem to increase. For example, it has been shown that one in six IT projects becomes a 'Black Swan', with cost overruns of 200% on average, and schedule overruns of 70%. Introduction A widely used vocabulary for risk management is defined by ISO Guide 73, "Risk management. Vocab

Developing a Project Management program for your company can be a messy thing without the help of an experienced and well-trained consulting company with years of track record on the matter. Dyman's approach allows your "project and program managers to adjust to and incorporate overall, departmental or specific project goals while keeping standardized levels of performance consistent with company-wide objectives." A standardized performance is essential in unifying the company's operations as well as assuring that the individual staff members grow with the company. Likewise, this gives out the signal to its clients that the company is highly coordinated and that each component or part of the organization is aware of what is happening to the other parts, thus, allowing communication or interaction to proceed with efficiency. The only setback for this general approach is that it somehow constricts creativity in the individual and, hence, in the overall operational picture. For a person to be able to truly innovate and come up with outstanding progress in ideas and strategy, he or she must be allowed complete freedom or autonomy to perform within the parameters of the job but with no boundaries or limits to the methods or tools that will be needed to accomplish the task. This does not seem to be a comfortable or safe working arrangement for most companies; hence, not many apply the method effectively, if at all. This requires allowing people to have the ability to decide independently without supervision or without prior or final authorization as to the ultimate solutions to be applied in any particular issue. The main objection to this type of management approach is that most traditionally-oriented companies follow the line of corporate organizational integrity or, to use a less palatable word, rigidity. This constraining approach expects employees to toe the main company line: verbatim and modus operandi, that is, verbally and operationally. A corporate ma