Government supervisors remain concerned about pandemic preparedness. On December 12, the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council (FFIEC) issued additional guidance for use by financial institutions in identifying the continuity planning that should be in place to minimize the potential adverse effects of a pandemic. The new guidance expands on the Interagency Advisory on Influenza Pandemic Preparedness issued in March 2006.

When Congress returns later this month, it will face a deepening housing crisis and a particularly murky economic outlook — not the sort of circumstances that lead to cautious, well thought-out legislation. Indeed, if the partisan bickering of the last few months cannot be overcome, the result may be no legislation, well thought-out or otherwise. The fact that this is a presidential election year will only add spice to the mix.

Preparing for the worst, the FDIC has proposed regulations that would improve the process for identifying uninsured depositors at larger institutions in the event of a failure. The agency says the change will enhance its ability to make funds promptly available to insured deposit customers “in the unlikely event that a large financial institution is closed.”

The task of management understandably involves the identification, measurement, monitoring and controlling of risk. This article proposes that, while the financial field has done well in the areas of measuring, monitoring and controlling risk, it lacks a framework for risk identification.