President’s Notebook
APEGA
distribution, and time itself is open-ended. Of course, a risk can be vanishingly small for a particular scenario, but an expectation of being able to achieve zero risk, for example by banning an activity or a product, inevitably ignores the consequences of alternative actions or inaction. APEGA ENJOYS A REMARKABLE LEVEL OF VOLUNTEER ENGAGEMENT FROM MEMBERS, WHICH IS ESSENTIAL TO MAKING SELF- REGULATION VIABLE AND DELIVERING IT TO MEMBERS AND THE PUBLIC 9. Uncertainty may be more important than consequence. The original practitioners of risk management have been found in the insurance industry. The underlying premise of insurance is that there can be financial compensation possible for any consequence, but insurance relies upon having confidence in knowing the probability of any consequence so that a financially viable premium can be charged to cover that risk. The magnitude of the consequence is less important to an insurer than knowing the appropriate premium. This perspective is at odds with how most citizens view risk. Concern about dire consequences usually dominates an individual’s rating of risk, more than how certain we can be about the likelihood of the risk prediction. 10. Defining risk scenarios is essential to comparing risks. A clearly defined risk scenario can have boundaries of certainty. Let’s use health risk as an example. Every person born has a lifetime probability of death equal to one, i.e., certainty. But within that overall boundary, the timing, cause, and nature of death allow for considerable variability about what health risks matter to individuals. This reality makes health risk assessment a challenging activity. In August 2016, APEGA embarked on formalized risk training for Council and senior staff. Going for- ward, managing risks to APEGA will be fundamental to what APEGA’s leadership must achieve. With some of the foregoing in mind, we need an initial framing of the
major risks facing APEGA. Following are some of the major considerations for such a framing. • Many Members and Permit Holders are in distress because of Alberta’s continuing economic realities. The situation may take a long time to improve and the consequences of those realities inevitably threaten the viability of APEGA to deliver effective self-regulation. • The regulatory model for APEGA has been more focused on careful selection of who can be licensed to practise our professions. Thereafter, the model has been more reactive, relying on investigation and resolution of complaints rather than active prevention of unacceptable practice. • APEGA enjoys a remarkable level of volunteer engagement from Members, which is essential to making self-regulation viable and delivering it to Members and the public. Sustaining volunteer engagement is therefore critical. • APEGA has found that some core elements of its operations and support systems need to be substantially upgraded. A failure to address these necessary upgrades will undermine the viability of APEGA in its primary mandate to protect the public. • The percentage of Members who turn out in our annual Council election may suggest to some stakeholders that many Members take for granted and do not value the privilege of self-regulation. Our turnout is consistent with other self-regulating organizations, and our turnout may not directly reflect low valuation of self-regulation. Still, it’s a connection some stakeholders may make, so maximizing voter turnout is a valid risk management goal for APEGA. Of this short list of major risks facing APEGA, the last one — increasing voter turnout in our annual Coun- cil election — speaks to something that you can act on right now for APEGA, and thereby help strengthen the health of the engineering and geoscience professions.
Questions or comments? president@apega.ca
6 | PEG SPRING 2017
Made with FlippingBook flipbook maker