I first heard of “connected risk” when I was looking at the background of a speaker at Chatham House, Suki Basi. He runs the Russell Group, which advises multi-national companies on connected risk. Basically, that means an interconnected world offers more opportunities than before, but also more perils than ever. Connected risks can arise out of political volatility, cyber hacking or supply chain exposures.
As Mr Basi’s Russell Group says on its website, companies face “cascading financial, operational and reputational vulnerabilities.” And the inter-connected architecture of today’s business-to-business relationships makes for massive connected risk.
Mr Basi’s Chatham House talk was on super cities, and their potential to destroy national economies unless they deliberately seek to connect to the rest of a country’s economy.
That brought me to connected risk posed by and within large cities. Shouldn’t metropolises be seen to symbolise modern inter-connected architecture, in terms of transport, public services and civic systems? And if there is operational vulnerability or breakdown, isn’t that an example of connected risk for the residents of a city?