A crystal ball called the Internet now defines ERM
GC must be soothsayers, key participants in the ERM agenda, simply because nearly all future risk will likely fall within the office of the general counsels purview.
December 31, 2013 at 07:00 PM
7 minute read
If you happen to be in the consumer product business, especially children's products, your world was rocked a few years ago when Mommy Bloggers—at first with almost no following—mounted a massive social media campaign accusing Procter & Gamble Pampers of causing serious chemical burns to children. It was a trenchant example of how the Internet has redefined risk—both current and future—for this industry.
If you happen to be in the energy business, an even louder thunderclap sounded when Colorado activists used their digital wherewithal to pass moratoria or outright bans on fracking. They used Twitter to promote anti-fracking documentaries, Facebook to target their messages, and YouTube to disseminate compelling visuals, not to mention search engine optimization (SEO) to control the story. Again, risk was redefined such that effective “enterprise risk management” (ERM) can no longer rely on traditional public affairs strategies to win the day in the Court of Public Opinion.
You can't even sell melons without redefining risk. When a salmonella outbreak was traced to a cantaloupe farm, plaintiffs' lawyers immediately bought up all the key search firms to dominate the litigation-related narrative.
These cases underscore the sea change transforming ERM. And, with this transformation, the role of GCs is likewise forever altered in terms of the responsibilities they incur and the skill sets they require.
At its root, the sea change is all about the reorientation of risk management from past/present to present/future. Hitherto, analysts labored to understand current exposures by probing the past for roadmaps and historical examples of organizations' practices that worked well or that did not. Now ERM entails a bold new purpose—precognition. In past years, what “historian” could have warned of the mega-risk called data exposure or articulated best practices to handle systemic compromises threatening business' very survival? By contrast, a “weatherman” could have read the tea leaves, looked at evolving technology trends and sounded warning shots about the need to prepare.
As the decisive agent of this change, the Internet both creates a universe of impending risks and the means by which to address them before they become real-time exigencies. If ERM is now all about precognition, the Internet is the crystal ball with which the soothsayers do their job.
The GC must be one of those soothsayers, key participants in the ERM agenda, simply because nearly all future risk will likely fall within the office of the general counsel's purview. If GCs are to continue emerging as indispensable C-suite and boardroom advisors, the ability to read the Internet now defines their job description. Similarly, if they are to continue to evolve as business leaders rather than just legal scriveners, they must transform themselves from lawyers who, like most lawyers, are preoccupied with precedent and the past, to risk experts asking and answering the key question: What's next?
We've clearly gone someplace beyond the law, and GCs must go there too. They must collaborate with ERM to cover all issues that could lead to problems, assessing trends and applying what they learn in the same way the brand team applies digital intelligence to sales.
This impact of the Internet should also have fortuitous ancillary consequences for the organization itself. After all, in a world where every facet of corporate operations is grist for the digital mill, silos are no longer practicable. Investor relations, for one, is all about online crystal balling: What is being said on the activist networks? Are regulators looking at new areas of enforcement? Who's controlling the risk terms in the search engine? What are the “high-authority” bloggers saying?
As the digital crystal ball discloses stress lines across the whole spectrum of corporate operations, it's the seamless corporate cultures that will best weather the inevitable storms ahead, “managing” risk in the fullest sense of the word.
If you happen to be in the consumer product business, especially children's products, your world was rocked a few years ago when Mommy Bloggers—at first with almost no following—mounted a massive social media campaign accusing
If you happen to be in the energy business, an even louder thunderclap sounded when Colorado activists used their digital wherewithal to pass moratoria or outright bans on fracking. They used Twitter to promote anti-fracking documentaries, Facebook to target their messages, and YouTube to disseminate compelling visuals, not to mention search engine optimization (SEO) to control the story. Again, risk was redefined such that effective “enterprise risk management” (ERM) can no longer rely on traditional public affairs strategies to win the day in the Court of Public Opinion.
You can't even sell melons without redefining risk. When a salmonella outbreak was traced to a cantaloupe farm, plaintiffs' lawyers immediately bought up all the key search firms to dominate the litigation-related narrative.
These cases underscore the sea change transforming ERM. And, with this transformation, the role of GCs is likewise forever altered in terms of the responsibilities they incur and the skill sets they require.
At its root, the sea change is all about the reorientation of risk management from past/present to present/future. Hitherto, analysts labored to understand current exposures by probing the past for roadmaps and historical examples of organizations' practices that worked well or that did not. Now ERM entails a bold new purpose—precognition. In past years, what “historian” could have warned of the mega-risk called data exposure or articulated best practices to handle systemic compromises threatening business' very survival? By contrast, a “weatherman” could have read the tea leaves, looked at evolving technology trends and sounded warning shots about the need to prepare.
As the decisive agent of this change, the Internet both creates a universe of impending risks and the means by which to address them before they become real-time exigencies. If ERM is now all about precognition, the Internet is the crystal ball with which the soothsayers do their job.
The GC must be one of those soothsayers, key participants in the ERM agenda, simply because nearly all future risk will likely fall within the office of the general counsel's purview. If GCs are to continue emerging as indispensable C-suite and boardroom advisors, the ability to read the Internet now defines their job description. Similarly, if they are to continue to evolve as business leaders rather than just legal scriveners, they must transform themselves from lawyers who, like most lawyers, are preoccupied with precedent and the past, to risk experts asking and answering the key question: What's next?
We've clearly gone someplace beyond the law, and GCs must go there too. They must collaborate with ERM to cover all issues that could lead to problems, assessing trends and applying what they learn in the same way the brand team applies digital intelligence to sales.
This impact of the Internet should also have fortuitous ancillary consequences for the organization itself. After all, in a world where every facet of corporate operations is grist for the digital mill, silos are no longer practicable. Investor relations, for one, is all about online crystal balling: What is being said on the activist networks? Are regulators looking at new areas of enforcement? Who's controlling the risk terms in the search engine? What are the “high-authority” bloggers saying?
As the digital crystal ball discloses stress lines across the whole spectrum of corporate operations, it's the seamless corporate cultures that will best weather the inevitable storms ahead, “managing” risk in the fullest sense of the word.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'Serious Disruptions'?: Federal Courts Brace for Government Shutdown Threat
3 minute readLegal Departments Gripe About Outside Counsel but Rarely Talk to Them
4 minute readGC With Deep GM Experience Takes Legal Reins of Power Management Giant
2 minute readPreparing for 2025: Anticipated Policy Changes Affecting U.S. Businesses Under the Trump Administration
Trending Stories
- 1GC Pleads Guilty to Embezzling $7.4 Million From 3 Banks
- 2Authenticating Electronic Signatures
- 3'Fulfilled Her Purpose on the Court': Presiding Judge M. Yvette Miller Is 'Ready for a New Challenge'
- 4Litigation Leaders: Greenspoon Marder’s Beth-Ann Krimsky on What Makes Her Team ‘Prepared, Compassionate and Wicked Smart’
- 5A Look Back at High-Profile Hires in Big Law From Federal Government
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250