Posted By Ian Waldram Have you looked at the IOSH Technical guidance on Business Risk Management? - all theory I know, but it does show some linkages. Within IOSH itself, there is an annual process. The senior management team identify our key business/reputation risks and rank them for consequence and likelihood, and these include OSH hazards - which are not too many as most of the activities are office-based, with some business travel. Their draft is then reviewed jointly with audit committee (who are all IOSH member volunteers) and the agreed version becomes a summary paper for Council (again all IOSH members, but also Trustees, responsible in law for all aspects of the charity's operations) who debate it as necessary. Usually not much comes up at that stage as the process has been in place for a few years. I realise this is an unusual example, but it does show how a particular group of OSH professionals (most with other managerial skills too) can contribute. Also note that the role of IOSH Council as Trustees will change later this year - but I'm confident a similar process will continue, involving the new Trustees. I would propose something similar if I was employed in a business, but am now retired. I have managed to guide another large charity (income ~£40m) towards a similar annual review, using the Australian Standard 4360 'Risk Management' as a guide, because it includes OSH issues holistically in its checklists. Prior to this recent move, the charity had completed a single BRM review led by auditors, with no process for annual review and updating. Final example is from CAA a few years ago before Turnbull was mandatory. They told me they used a risk identification and management process (+ paperwork) that was exactly the same from Board level to shop floor. This had been implemented with assistance from their internal OSH advisors.

Posted By George Wedgwood In two previous roles, I helped in the preparation of the CG review and prepared the numbers and detailed comment for the Board to approve. For most of the larger plcs, you will find that a H&S Practitioner is behind the numbers and details in such reports.

Posted By ken mosley Rakesh, With reference to your three specific questions on corporate governance I would give you the following responses. 1. In my organisation CG was initially driven by the parent company directors reacting to the recommendations of the stock exchange and the guidance of the institute of chartered accountants. Before Turnbull it was Greenbury and Cadbury. 2. I would suggest that the required skills to carry out this exercise are the fundamentals of risk management. The differentiation between pure and speculative risk and the application of risk avoidance, transfer, acceptance (with/without knowledge) and reduction. 3. It is crucial to have an extensive appreciation of business management to be able to effectively contribute to CG. A H&S practitioner's skills alone are insufficient. I hope this is of help. Ken