<\/p>\n
We help organisations define their risk appetite, design their ERM framework, and implement it directly in SharePoint<\/a> og Power BI<\/a> \u2013 so strategy and system are always aligned. We don’t hand over a framework document and leave. We build it into the tools your team uses every day.<\/p>\n Request a Consultation<\/a><\/p>\n <\/p>\n A SharePoint list can be built in days. But if the risk appetite is undefined, the categories don’t reflect the organisation’s strategy, and the scoring methodology isn’t agreed, the list is just a data entry form \u2013 and an expensive one. We work with organisations to get the framework right first, then implement it in a system that enforces it. The result is a risk register that reflects how your organisation actually thinks about risk.<\/p>\n Organisations spend significant time and budget on ERM frameworks that never make it into the tools people use day-to-day. The gap between what’s documented and what’s in the system creates real costs \u2013 in management time, in audit findings, and in board confidence.<\/p>\n Without a clear, system-enforced appetite matrix, risk owners apply inconsistent judgement. Risk 14 is scored a 3\u00d74 by one owner and a 2\u00d73 by another \u2013 same risk, same organisation, different week. The board sees scores that don’t match what they approved, and nobody knows why.<\/p>\n Dashboards are built from the data that exists, not from the framework that was agreed. Categories that were renamed or merged in the latest framework review are still showing under their old names in the Power BI report. Directors see visuals that contradict their own risk appetite statements.<\/p>\n Auditors compare the written ERM framework against the live risk register. When they don’t match \u2013 different category names, different scoring bands, missing fields \u2013 the finding is formal, the remediation is time-consuming, and the reputational cost is real.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n We work at the intersection of risk management expertise and Microsoft 365 implementation. Most ERM consultants deliver a framework document. Most IT consultants build the system. We do both \u2013 so nothing gets lost in translation between the two.<\/p>\n We facilitate the definition of risk appetite across your risk categories, working with your risk team and relevant senior stakeholders to reach a documented, approved position. This is not a theoretical exercise \u2013 we design the appetite definitions to be directly implementable in your risk register and dashboard. Typical outputs include:<\/p>\n Design or review of your enterprise risk management framework \u2013 the governing document that defines how risk is identified, assessed, managed, and reported across your organisation. Aligned with ISO 31000 and leading ERM practice, adapted to your sector, size, and regulatory environment. Typical scope includes:<\/p>\n Translation of the approved framework into your Microsoft 365 risk register \u2013 not just updating a few dropdowns, but ensuring every element of the framework is enforced by the system. This includes:<\/p>\n Structured facilitation sessions with your risk team, senior management, or board-level stakeholders. Not a presentation \u2013 a working session designed to reach agreement. Typical format includes:<\/p>\n <\/p>\n We review your existing ERM documentation, current risk register structure, and appetite definitions side by side. We identify specifically what doesn’t match, what’s missing, and what needs to be updated \u2013 and document it as a gap analysis before any work begins.<\/p>\n Structured facilitation sessions with your risk team and relevant stakeholders. We work through appetite definitions, category structures, and scoring methodology until they’re agreed and documented. Typically one to three sessions depending on scope and stakeholder availability.<\/p>\n The agreed framework is configured directly into your SharePoint<\/a> risk register and Power BI<\/a> dashboard \u2013 categories, appetite ratings, scoring bands, and visual representation. We update every place the framework appears: the list, the form, the flows, and the dashboard.<\/p>\n Full documentation of the updated framework and system configuration. Training for risk owners where required. Ongoing support available as a retainer. Includes 3 months of defect remediation on the system configuration.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n ERM consulting engagements are scoped based on the complexity of the framework and the number of stakeholders involved. We work on a Time & Material basis at a fixed day rate.<\/p>\nMost risk registers are built before the framework is ready.<\/h2>\n
The gap between ERM strategy and ERM system is expensive.<\/h2>\n
Risk owners scoring against outdated appetite levels<\/h3>\n
Board reporting that contradicts the approved framework<\/h3>\n
Audit findings when the system doesn’t match the documentation<\/h3>\n
What ERM consulting with LeapLytics looks like.<\/h2>\n
Risk Appetite Definition<\/h3>\n
\n
ERM Framework Design<\/h3>\n
\n
Risk Category Configuration<\/h3>\n
\n
Workshops & Facilitation<\/h3>\n
\n
How it works.<\/h2>\n
1. Framework Review & Gap Analysis<\/h3>\n
2. Workshop & Alignment<\/h3>\n
3. System Configuration<\/h3>\n
4. Handover & Documentation<\/h3>\n
What we cover.<\/h2>\n
Framework elements<\/h3>\n
\n
System implementation<\/h3>\n
\n
Transparent pricing.<\/h2>\n