The risk manager title debate continues, as a former board member writes in to support a change of designation

Dear Sir,

I take issue with Simon Whittaker’s assertion that “the word ‘resilience’ has similar negative connotations to the word ‘risk’." (Airmic News, November). 

This is certainly not my own impression.  To describe someone or something as 'resilient' is, for me, entirely and universally positive, even complimentary; and I can think of many examples where behavioural resilience has capitalised on opportunities.  Indeed, I would go so far as to say it is an essential characteristic of resilience, along with sensibility, prudence, preparedness and powers of recovery. 

On the other hand, regardless of connotations, the term 'risk manager' is so bland and generic as to be of no specific value to those of us who have practiced the range of crafts that keep us economically productive.  The process of 'risk management' is exercised, to a greater or lesser degree, by all creatures in every walk or swim of life.  To claim it uniquely for ourselves is thus fraught with difficulty since a host of other practitioners are at pains to do the same. 

And what risks do we actually manage?  I've spent so long working with analysts, engineers, sellers, auditors and sundry specialists that I cannot feel comfortable asserting that I manage, palpably, the same and more risks than they do.  I say 'time we moved our stall along'.  Resilience Street might be as good a place as any to make a fresh pitch.

Stephen Elston, Owner & Principal Consultant, Risk Options Ltd