Risk Guide is delighted to bring a very special short episode from the very first series of our Extreme Risk Podcast in collaboration with Runderc.
In this special episode, Alexander Larsen speaks to Mykhailo Rushkovskyi about the need for more Risk Governance at a governmental level in the form of for example a Government Chief Risk Officer which will bring accountability and visibility to how societal and country risk is managed and how risks are considered in decision making.
The need for resilient countries is becoming more evident by the year and ensuring transition initiatives consider risk is critical to remaining resilient. Over-reliance by the EU on gas from Russia for example has proved a disaster for many countries in the EU. Re-opening of coal mines (despite ESG and environmental targets) indicates how poorly the green transition was thought out in terms of risks and resilience.
And what influence does Leadership play? Alexander highlights an excellent example from Pakistan of strong and positive leadership that can only improve risk culture.
For further information about Mykhailo and his career, you can find the Risk Managers Getting Coffee series on: https://youtube.com/riskguide
You may also find the Extreme Risk Podcast on the most popular platforms: ⚪️ Apple podcast 🟢 Spotify 🟡 Amazon
Episode Content:
1.00 – Risk Management at Government Level 3.00 – Resilience & Risk-Based Transition Plans 4.20 – The Gold Standard – Pakistan Case Study – Risk Leadership & Culture 7.00 – What is the Role of Risk Management at Government Level 10.00 – Where is Resilience? (Banking, Natural Disasters, Government Budgets) 11.26 – Risk-Based Strategy & Resilience – Norway Case Study – The Norwegian Oil Fund
About the Podcast
The Extreme Risk Podcast is a new podcast that focuses on Crisis and people working under extreme circumstances. The podcast seeks to learn from the few Risk Masters who have experienced extreme events and share it with as many people as possible.
The first series of the podcast are focused on risk management during the largest military conflict in Europe since World War II – the Russia-Ukraine war. Together with Mykhailo, we speak extensively about the lead up to the war, the invasion as well as the months that followed. Undertaking a war risk assessment, preparation for potential scenarios, monitoring, how people reacted and how businesses responded. We also discuss the potential wider ripple effects of the war on the world economy 🌍
The Extreme Risk Podcast – How the Russia-Ukraine war could cause a global ripple effect on countries, societies, individuals and organisations.
Risk Guide is delighted to continue the very first series of our Extreme Risk Podcast in collaboration with Runderc.
In this episode, Alexander Larsen speaks to Mykhailo Rushkovskyi about the potential ripple effects of the war. Looking at what industries are being impacted and what regions could face major risks (from Europe’s energy crisis to an expanding war, through to the Middle East struggling with increased grain and wheat production and potentially facing social unrest). There is an additional focus on resilience with mention to a children’s book focused on resilience called Mr Goose (this can be found at www.mrgooseonline.com
For further information about Mykhailo and his career, you can find the Risk Managers Getting Coffee series on: https://youtube.com/riskguide
You may also find the Extreme Risk Podcast on the most popular platforms: ⚪️ Apple podcast 🟢 Spotify 🟡 Amazon
Episode Content:
01:00 – What is the Ripple Effect? 02:56 – What scenarios are you considering from a Ukrainian perspective? 05:45 – Reviewing our strategic plans during times of potential uncertainty 07:00 – The various timescales for the end of the war 10:30 – Regions of the world and how they might be impacted by the war 19:20 – The Insurance Role 26:00 – The Risk Appetite 27.45 – Industries Risk and Opportunities from the war 33.20 – Global Economic impact of the war 35:25 – The impact on Society 38:55 – The Individual Responsibility and learning resilience at School 43.00 – Season Wrap Up 44.00 – Long Term Transition and Resilience – The Norwegian Case – Electric Vehicles
About the Podcast
The Extreme Risk Podcast is a new podcast that focuses on Crisis and people working under extreme circumstances. The podcast seeks to learn from the few Risk Masters who have experienced extreme events and share it with as many people as possible.
The first series of the podcast are focused on risk management during the largest military conflict in Europe since World War II – the Russia-Ukraine war. Together with Mykhailo, we speak extensively about the lead up to the war, the invasion as well as the months that followed. Undertaking a war risk assessment, preparation for potential scenarios, monitoring, how people reacted and how businesses responded. We also discuss the potential wider ripple effects of the war on the world economy 🌍
The Extreme Risk Podcast –Adjusting to new opportunities, taking risk, living up to values and mission and developing resilient organisations using risk-based strategies.
Risk Guide is delighted to continue the very first series of our Extreme Risk Podcast in collaboration with Runderc.
In this episode, Alexander Larsen speaks to Mykhailo Rushkovskyi about the new reality of living and working in a state of war. How did people and organisations adapt? what is the importance of being agile and resilient and what opportunities exist in such a reality? Mykhailo uses some great examples of industries that have been created, the importance of values and mission (and living up to them) and the balance between Risk and Reward.
For further information about Mykhailo and his career, you can find the Risk Managers Getting Coffee series on: https://youtube.com/riskguide
You may also find the Extreme Risk Podcast on the most popular platforms: ⚪️ Apple podcast 🟢 Spotify 🟡 Amazon
Episode Content:
01:45 – How long did Mykhailo expect the war to take? 03:35 – Where did these timelines come from? 06:50 – The importance of considering the other side and culture 09:10 – How do organisations live up to Vision, Mission and Values 13:30 – What is Reputation, and the risks around it? 14:55 – How long has the New Reality existed? 19:50 – A Global Cyber Crisis and Resilience 22:10 – When did people realise there was a new reality? Risk Appetite of the people coming back to Kyiv 23:40 – Risk Appetite – Would you Jump out of an airplane? 26:39 – Risk and Reward – Quantitative Risk Analysis and Risk Management’s role in decision making 29:30 – Risk Culture, taking risk and Appetite (the Warren Buffet example) 30:45 – How are people and businesses adapting on the ground? 33:50 – Risk-Based Strategies 35:10 – Types of businesses in the War scenario 37:35 – IT Industry 39:15 – Banking Industry – how did they avoid disruption and stabilise the economy?
About the Podcast
The Extreme Risk Podcast is a new podcast that focuses on Crisis and people working under extreme circumstances. The podcast seeks to learn from the few Risk Masters who have experienced extreme events and share it with as many people as possible.
The first series of the podcast are focused on risk management during the largest military conflict in Europe since World War II – the Russia-Ukraine war. Together with Mykhailo, we speak extensively about the lead up to the war, the invasion as well as the months that followed. Undertaking a war risk assessment, preparation for potential scenarios, monitoring, how people reacted and how businesses responded. We also discuss the potential wider ripple effects of the war on the world economy 🌍
The Extreme Risk Podcast – Evacuation, communication channels, planning routes, recovering business and infrastructure….
Risk Guide is delighted to continue the very first series of our Extreme Risk Podcast in collaboration with Runderc.
In this episode, Alexander Larsen speaks to Mykhailo Rushkovskyi who is based in Kyiv about the invasion itself. Mykhailo shares his experience of evacuating Kyiv, what considerations were needed, what plans he had in place (including routes and petrol stations) and how businesses focused on recovery.
Episode Content:
02:00 – How the invasion started and what were the immediate actions? 04:50 – What are the emotions when something like this happens? 09:04 – What did Mykhailo do when the invasion happened? How did he evacuate? 12:00 – What research and preparation did Mykhailo need in order to prepare? 15:00 – How long did it take to get to safety and to get back to work (and what did that look like?) 22:00 – Mykhailo discusses communications, platforms for communications and rules. 25:00 – How did businesses prepare and what did they expect of staff? What does good plans vs bad plans look like? 31:30 – Importance of Early Warning Signals / Key Risk Indicators in order to focus evacuation 32:38 – Importance of clarity for staff and empowering staff, ensuring they know their roles. 35:15 – What were the key learnings? what would you focus on next time? 39:40 – The importance of testing plans! 41:00 – What did organisations need to focus on from a recovery point of view?
About the Podcast
The Extreme Risk Podcast is a new podcast that focuses on Crisis and people working under extreme circumstances. The podcast seeks to learn from the few Risk Masters who have experienced extreme events and share it with as many people as possible.
The first series of the podcast are focused on risk management during the largest military conflict in Europe since World War II – the Russia-Ukraine war. Together with Mykhailo, we speak extensively about the lead up to the war, the invasion as well as the months that followed. Undertaking a war risk assessment, preparation for potential scenarios, monitoring, how people reacted and how businesses responded. We also discuss the potential wider ripple effects of the war on the world economy 🌍
The Extreme Risk Podcast –War Risk Assessment, Business Continuity, Resilience, Key Risk Indicators, Intelligence and Preparation…..
Risk Guide is delighted to present the very first series of our Extreme Risk Podcast in collaboration with Runderc.
The Extreme Risk Podcast is a new podcast that focuses on Crisis and people working under extreme circumstances. The podcast seeks to learn from the few Risk Masters who have experienced extreme events and share it with as many people as possible.
The first series of the podcast are focused on risk management during the largest military conflict in Europe since World War II – the Russia-Ukraine war. Alexander Larsen, together with Mykhailo Rushkovskyi (For more information about his background you can watch his interview on risk managers getting coffee… by clicking here), speak extensively about the lead up to the war, the invasion as well as the months that followed. Undertaking a war risk assessment, preparation for potential scenarios, monitoring, how people reacted and how businesses responded. We also discuss the potential wider ripple effects of the war on the world economy 🌍
Episode 1 is already out and covers the experience of how organisations and people considered their options and various scenarios in order to prepare for the war (War Risk Assessment, Resilience, Business Continuity Plans and Key Risk Indicators)
Additionally, there are two videos published on Youtube that show the key highlights from the podcast which can be found below:
Russia-Ukraine War – The Months Leading Up To The War – Part 1 – Preparation and War Risk Assessment
Russia-Ukraine War – The Months Leading Up To The War – Part 2 – Key Risk Indicators, Intelligence and Resilience
Mykhailo Rushkovskyi is the Head of Risk Management of the largest Ukrainian private energy holding DTEK, holds MA degree in International Business from Kyiv National University, Ukraine and MBA degree from MIB School of Management, Italy. Mykhailo has over 8 years of experience as a head of risk management function across different sectors such as energy, oil & gas and financial services.
How Risk Management played a key part in Robert the Bruce’s Battle Strategy
The 1314 Battle of Bannockburn is one of the most important battles in Scottish history, where the Scots, led by Robert the Bruce, defeated the English under Edward II in the First War of Scottish Independence. The Scottish victory was highly unexpected as the Scots were not only significantly outnumbered by the English but were also out skilled and had less weaponry available. This case study will look at how the Battle of Bannockburn is relevant to factors in Risk Management and how the Scots managed to turn risks into rewards in order to claim victory.
The Battle
The English army, was, at the time, amongst the most professional and well trained armies in Europe with vast experience of battles, of which they never lost, and morale was high. Historians estimate their troop numbers at 20,000 whilst the Scottish army had 5,000. To give an idea of the difference in numbers, the English had 2,000 heavily armoured horsemen whilst the Scots had 500 who were only lightly armoured. The King pulled his English army from various places across Europe, including recruiting Irish and Welsh soldiers, in order to finally defeat the Scots and take over Scotland.
The battle took place on hilly ground which included marshland, hills, streams and bumps. The Scots positioned themselves between the castle (in the north) and the English (in the south), from where the English would launch their attack.
Whilst the English King held back behind his army, Robert the Bruce led from the front. An English Knight, Sir Henry de Bohun, spotted the opportunity to finish the battle before it had even started (and gaining glory in the process) by killing Robert the Bruce in a one on one battle.
Henry with his lance and heavily armoured horse raced towards Robert’s position. Robert saw this and rather than flee behind his front line, he decided to attack the knight. Whilst not as well armoured, Robert was less restricted and his movement managed to avoid the Lance whilst quickly attacking as the Knight rode by him, striking him in the helmet and killing him.
Whilst this shook the English (and empowered the Scots) they decided to stick to what they knew best; with what had always worked well for them in the past and was most likely to maximise their chances of a swift and easy victory over an under-powered Scottish army. They unleashed their heavy cavalry from the south side although they didn’t get very far. Used to fighting on flat ground the English quickly found themselves in unfamiliar terrain which challenged their horses and horsemanship
Eventually reaching the forest where the Scots were waiting, again not the ideal terrain for their heavy cavalry, the English forces were soon chased back out. Rather than follow them, the Scots army remained in the forest and re-manned their defences.
The English then launched an additional attack from the north (the Castle side) in order to panic the Scots. These units also struggled with the terrain as well as the Scots’ formations (Hedghog, which were highly defensive and with the ability to move more effectively in the conditions) however and soon the English decided to regroup and find a spot to set up camp.
Not expecting the Scots to attack a vastly more skilful army, they not only let their guard down but also picked a spot for their camp which lay to the marshy east which had few exits. Timing their raid to suit the conditions and taking advantage of the English decision to camp in a location which left them with few options and without a suitable response strategy, the Scots attacked that night, leveraging their knowledge of the terrain and conditions to great effect.
The English archers who were positioned elsewhere were unable to fire on the Scots for fear of hitting their own and when the opportunity to fire did eventually present itself, additional Scots who had been held back as a contingency chased the the unprotected archers back.
The English King fled soon after, and despite being concerned at their King’s retreat, his army fought on, still believing they were undefeatable. When the Scots who had been held back joined the battle however, the English wrongly believed that the Scots had additional support from other Clans that the English were not aware of and made the decision to pull back in retreat.
One of the key reasons the Scots won this battle was due to the fact they understood their environment, evaluated scenarios and uncertainty, embraced opportunity and risk equally, and planned their strategy accordingly.
Risk-Based Strategy
Some of the key elements that helped the Scots win this battle was having a well thought out strategy that had clear objectives, considered risk (and taking the view that risk equated to opportunity rather than seeing it as only potential defeat), and which considered their Risk Appetite (which was large).
Robert the Bruce understood very well (as did his men) that due to the lack of experience and numbers, the battle as a whole was a huge risk to the Scots, however they opted to embrace this as an opportunity which could ultimately achieve Scottish Independence. Whilst looking at risks to their specific battle plans, Instead of looking at them from a purely negative, fear driven and defensive point of view, which would have led to their strategy being largely driven by what their adversaries (the English) did, they took a positive and aggressive view, which ultimately allowed them to develop and execute a clearer and well planned risk-based strategy from the outset.
An interesting aspect of Robert’s approach to planning for the battle was Scenario Planning.
Scenario Planning
Robert considered how the English would approach the battle, looking at different scenarios that might unfold, and preparing for them all. Would they attack directly? Would they try to cut them off from the castle or would they approach from the west? Would they attack with their cavalry or would they use some other unit? He considered the likelihood of these scenarios and eventually opted for one which turned out to be very similar to the actual approach employed by the English. This allowed him to develop a strategy to defeat this approach. A risk-based strategy derived from scenarios.
Something that should be highlighted is that whilst Robert decided to develop his strategy based on this particular scenario, he also realised that they would need to adjust the strategy depending on the scenario that might eventually play out. Robert therefore ensured that he planned for the other scenarios too and ensured he had enough men left behind as a contingency in order to adapt to these scenarios (respond to the risk) if needed.
Objectives
Robert the Bruce proceeded to plan his strategy for the battle in great detail setting clear objectives and tactics for each section of his army. Perhaps more importantly, Robert the Bruce also made sure that these objectives were clearly communicated to his men and they were trained in each aspect. He had a few months to prepare and train his men before the English arrived and by the end of those few months the battle strategy, objectives and tactics were all fully understood by everyone. The English were not so lucky. Travelling from various parts of Europe to go and fight in Scotland, they had little time for planning or training.
Risk Appetite
The Scots, seeing this as an opportunity despite needing to defy the odds, clearly had a higher risk appetite – and, arguably, more to gain – than the English from the outset, as they were willing to sacrifice their lives (despite knowing it was unlikely they would survive) for the battle, knowing it was for such an important cause.
The Scots understood how many they could afford to lose (their risk appetite and tolerance levels were evaluated) before needing to change strategy or bring other men into battle. They knew how many English would need to be lost before overwhelming them with additional men they had held back for just such an opportunity.
The English on the other hand expected this battle to be an easy victory since they outnumbered and out skilled the Scottish army and based on underlying assumptions which didn’t sit the context of the battle. It can be argued that whilst each individual of the English army may have been aware of their own appetite for risk there was probably not an awareness of the collective appetite for risk, the consequences of breaching the thresholds, or how to react once these thresholds were breached.
Battle Tactics
Part of the scenario that Robert had prepared for was the expectation that the English would send their horses and heavily armoured men from the South and potentially try to send some units to the North of the Scots. Robert knew the terrain was difficult for anyone trying to cross it and embraced the advantages of their home terrain by positioning their troops around the forest, using it as a protective barrier and avoiding tiring themselves out trying to cross or fight in the marshy ground.
Knowing the English would press forward to the Scots position, he also managed to mitigate the full onslaught of the English horsemen by setting pit traps in the ground, making it even more difficult to manoeuvre and sending many of the English falling onto spears. Knowing that any fighting would most likely be done at close quarters rather than with horses or archers, as was usual for the English, Robert also attached knives to their shields. This gave them additional fighting techniques without adding weight and would ensure the Scots would be at a huge advantage in terms of speed and endurance.
The importance of Contingency
As previously mentioned, Robert the Bruce had already decided to keep men behind as a contingency to adapt to various scenarios or to be used in the event of too many losses on either side (strike fear into the English or come to the aid of a failing Scots army). Whilst this accounted for a number of scenarios it also allowed a response to any uncertain aspects of the battle. These men eventually won the battle for the Scots when they came rushing in and chasing off the archers and joining the battle once the English King had retreated near the end, pushing the English back against rivers leading to drownings and their eventual retreat.
Organisational Culture and Risk Culture
Risk culture describes the values, beliefs and understanding of risk shared by a group of people. We can look at the organisational and risk culture of the Scottish and English armies by comparing their values, beliefs and behaviours in relation to the battle.
Scottish Army
The Scots followed leadership from Robert the Bruce who set a clear tone from the top of the ranks with his passion for Scotland and anger at the English. His passion was not only motivated by his country but also because the English had captured his wife and children and killed some of his brothers.
He provided an effective risk based strategy to the battle and the tactics and operational tactics were clear for his troops to follow. Communication and training were key.
The Scots were all aligned to the same culture, with their shared beliefs for Scottish independence which they were willing to sacrifice their life for in the battle.
Robert the Bruce led from the front even putting himself in danger in a one on one battle with an experienced and highly skilled Knight.
English Army
The English did not share the same sense of purpose. They lacked an alignment to the same culture as the troops were made up from Welsh and Irish soldiers. They did not have the same desire or passion to win and were not willing to sacrifice their lives.
As they expected an easy victory the English were not as focused, meaning their strategies and tactics weren’t established or well understood amongst the soldiers.
The English underestimated the Scots and didn’t expect them to take the risk of advancing on their camp and therefore didn’t have controls in place to mitigate their advance effectively. This affected their morale and led to them fleeing when they saw the battle being lost.
King Edward II stayed back at all times and was rarely visible to his men. Rather than stay when things got difficult, he retreated which would have been disheartening to his men.
Crucially, the Scots were completely aligned with the strategy and objectives. This is a key component to success of any kind and highlights the importance of having people with the right values in your team. There was also reports that the English army, who had little time to train or plan, didn’t work well as a team or understand their roles causing disagreement and confusion within the troops.
How Scots turned Key Risks into Rewards
Factor
Risk
Opportunity
Terrain
The Scots were outnumbered and the English would have advanced and defeated them if the battle ended up in an open field which it would eventually. The Scots decided to position themselves in the forest in order to mitigate the risk of an open field battle.
Rather than just focus on mitigation and stay in the forest to fight, which also would have led to defeat eventually, the Scots looked for opportunity and Lay traps along the difficult terrain that they knew the English were not used to, and only attacked in the open when the Scots had a clear advantage. This reduced English troop numbers, tired them out, hit their morale and allowed Scots to slowly make gains.
English ability to change Strategy due to numbers
Whilst the Scots had predicted the strategy that the English would employ, there was a risk that the English would do something unexpected or change strategies during the battle. The number of soldiers the English had would allow them to do this. The Scots decided to ensure enough units were left behind battle lines as a contingency that could be used for multiple purposes. This resource allowed the Scots mitigate the risk of a changing English strategy by being able to adapt quickly to new strategies by using the additional units.
The Scots decided to not only use the additional units as a contingency for adapting to changing strategies, but they also used them to surprise the English at critical points of the battle and to attack the archers who were a threat to the Scots allowing the Scots to continue their ambush.
Regrouping of a sizeable and more skilled English Army
In their camp, the English would have a chance to regroup and develop more effective and successful plans for the battle. With more understanding of the terrain and Scottish strategy, the English would probably be able to develop a strategy that would have led to a Scottish defeat.
Rather than regrouping themselves and taking time to second guess what the English would do next and plan accordingly, The Scots decided to take risk instead and to take the English by surprise. The English didn’t think the Scots would risk an attack on their camp. Located on a small hill, the English couldn’t get down and they were surrounded by rivers and lagoons on either side, trapping them within their camp. The Scots could use the restricted access to their benefit by attacking straight on and pushing the English back and trapping them in.
Highly experienced and well equipped Knight challenging Robert the Bruce to a one on one battle.
Robert the Bruce could have been injured or killed before the battle had started, striking a huge blow to the Scots and ultimately leaving them without a leader. Robert the Bruce could have mitigated this by returning to the forest where he had men and numbers.
Robert the Bruce understood that in order to win the Battle of Bannockburn, an extraordinary effort would be needed. His strategy, tactics and preparation were important but more would be needed. He saw the Knight approaching as an opportunity to show his men that anything was possible and that experience and armour was no match for passion, hard work and bravery. This would surely spur his men on and further increase morale and togetherness throughout the battle.
What other risks did the Scots turn to opportunity/reward?
Outcome
Although the Scots still suffered a huge number of casualties, they managed to achieve their objectives of defeating the English army despite the odds being against them. The Scots also achieved their ultimate objective of winning Independence for Scotland and Robert was named King. In addition, Robert’s family were released and Scotland became a united country.
Closing Message – Risk Perspective in Business world
The messages from this case study can be applied to business world from the key areas of risk management discussed. A large, well equipped organisation can still be at risk of losses and collapse if the operating environment, risk appetite and objectives are not aligned effectively with communication, strategy, tactics and operations. A positive risk culture is vital, with a clear tone and leadership from the top and with an effective HR recruitment strategy which focuses on a values and beliefs driven focus throughout the organisation in order to ensure alignment with organisational culture and vision. A small company can also succeed against the odds, if it embraces opportunity when available and ultimately turn risk into rewards.
Pictures are taken from a number of sources including screenshots from the film “Braveheart”, pictures from the battle site, pictures of paintings and the following websites:
A Guide to Risk Management 