And on the first as in the finance industry

The risk, lately, has more ratings. Security, it does dream, almost everywhere, that of control. If it were possible, it would reduce it to nil. Fortunately, it is excluded. Because the risk was too tend to forget, accompanies each of our acts as his shadow. It is him, and often alone, which gives our creations in both meaning and price. Should we proclaim that the risk is the best thing in the world If it disappeared completely, he would not reign more than the peace of the grave. The only area where there is with certainty the "zero risk", it is absolute nothingness, the total absence. Such comments not incite in any way the carelessness, or recklessness. They simply recall the role essential, positive, impossible to suppress the risk in all human actions. And, on the first, as in the finance industry.

But that is where, paradoxically, that the risk seems far more poorly seen! The old maxim of capitalism was the profit by the market risk. What we see now More often than anything else: leaders invest the money of others, and to assign yet huge salaries, without the slightest risk to their own holdings. To complete this aberration, maximum risk (unemployment, insecurity, despair) weigh on people who did not put a penny in the business. Despite notable exceptions, the pathology of the risk seems to have become the common rule.

It is different among financiers. But not necessarily better. Since 2004, and the Basel II agreements, the principle was acquired from an integration of "operational risk" in the regulations of banks. Thus human error, mechanical failure, the manoeuvre of a dishonest or hostile collaborator (or both...) should they be taken into account in the calculation of risk, so in the necessary guarantees. In the light of recent months, it is doubtful the relevance of the proposed action or of their terms of applications. It could, there also, that risk is now suffering. But what, and how

Hypothesis: the risk suffers from being too calculated but not enough experience. It has not ceased, in recent years, to study the risks of passing it to the screen to find all sorts of names, since the "risk-country (train station to the coup and the insolvent nations)," to the "credit risk" (the debtor deserve our trust), passing through the "reputation risk" (a rumour so quickly arrived). Any strategic or operational, risk was now its experts and its management. It was finally under control, estimated, labelled, set. And, at the same time, forgotten in its reality. As if, through have these words in the mouth, it is dispensed to risk in mind.

Yet that should be the wrong is itself the problem the parameterizations sophisticated does obviously not eliminate risk. An impossible to suppress gap remains between the calculation of probabilities, also pointed, and the random emergence of actual events. Therefore, there is always the leaders of decisions, i.e. of responsibility to endorse. Then come, inevitably, old human issues, both legal, ethical and practical: who takes responsibility for incurring or risk Based on what data For what mandate With what foreseeable consequences

Not really subsidiary issues: If gains or losses are expected, they return to those who decided Or other And, failing that, what sanctions Such questions are not difficult to formulate or complicated to understand. Answer, in most cases, is much more difficult. It is the only way to regain the sense of risk, and its real issues.