Meka Olowola who is the Managing Partner, Zenera Consulting Limited is one of the leading communication specialists in Africa. The firm provides expert counsel on a wide range of investor relations and reputation management services. Read More
Employees often navigate their workplace environment calculating their every move in a Sherlock Holmes like manner to avoid discord with co-workers or worse, employers. This tactic might be successful initially but in the long run, it stifles emotions and brews unhealthy feelings in the organisation.Read More
Blame Regulatory Bodies – LUPAN
Unless the Department of Petroleum Resources (DPR) moves urgently to clamp down on illegal filling stations littered around residential areas in the country, lives and property will continue to be in terrible danger.
This is because, siting of fuel stations in residential areas is becoming fashionable. Though, DPR data showed 86 illegal filling stations around the country, The Guardian findings revealed that there are over 200 indiscriminate location of such.
For example, there is a filling station springing up around Amuwo Odofin area of Lagos, with the operator turning deaf ears to several DPR warning signs at the site to desist from the construction.
A few checks also revealed that some people in the neighbourhood actually wanted to stall the development – however, their protestation did not make the desired impact.
The Guardian gathered that the situation is even worse in rural areas where there is little or no presence of DPR officials. DPR Director, Modecai Ladan, said the agency had already clamped down on the illegal filling stations, saying the agency is collaborating with other agencies and relevant stakeholders to tackle the problem.
Speaking on the indiscriminate siting of filling stations in residential areas, Secretary General/Chief Executive Officer, Lubricants Producers Association of Nigeria (LUPAN), Emeka Obidike, attributed it to sharp malpractices between the regulatory bodies and operators.
He described the practice as a time boom, which the Federal Government and the relevant authorities have refused to tackle Obidike said: “It is alarming how tank farms and filling stations are sited indiscriminately. Look at Kirikiri and Navy town for example; the tank farms are so close to the armories. Any little ignition will set the whole-area ablaze. The Federal Government needs to step in urgently and ensure the relocation of any filling station around residential areas. The regulatory bodies should avoid compromising in the issuance of licenses to operate filling stations.”
Also, oil and gas analyst/ Managing Director, Zenera Consulting, Meka Olowola, stressed the need for relevant authorities to take an audit of all existing filling stations to ensure filling stations are sited professionally.
He said there is need for the DPR to evaluate the basis of licenses issued to existing filling stations to ascertain that they have been done correctly and professionally.
“There is possibility that development has caught up with some filling stations, which were not originally in residential areas at the time of construction.
There are instances, whereby; the state government gave approval for residential building around existing filling stations. There should be special working committee that will include various tiers of government so that they will be able to work harmoniously to ensure that things are done correctly,” he added.
A copy of the guidelines for operating a filling station was made available to The Guardian by the Department of Petroleum Resources (DPR); it stated that operators of filling stations are expected to follow a well-laid-down rules and regulations, which are designed to be tolerably environmental friendly when effectively observed.
Source: The Guardian Newspaper
True and false information spreads like wildfire in the vast and interconnected social media landscape and even the most venerable brands can be leveled in a flash. Brand Resilience has the tools a risk-intelligent enterprise can use to understand and survive in the new media landscape.
It seems that nearly every business day brings news of an oversight or misstep that shines a bright light on the need for a new way of looking at reputational risk. When tragedy and misfortune strike, some of the largest and otherwise well-equipped organizations have realized that they overlooked reputation as a performance indicator and therefore a serious risk condition.
Yet decision-makers are not always focused on branding issues or threats. Polling conducted among more than 1,100 executives during a Deloitte webcast, Brand Resilience: Protecting Your Brand Assets from Saboteurs in a High-Speed World, revealed that only 24% of companies represented by participants formally measure and report on brand value. Furthermore, fewer than 22% of the webcast participants thought it either likely or highly likely that negative information about their brands would show up on social media in the coming year.
Managing risk to reputation is about fundamental perceptions of the company’s contributions, value and strategic direction. For many companies, the first step involves reevaluating their current risk management program. “Traditional enterprise risk management approaches have focused boards and C-suite executives on avoiding risks and protecting assets,” says Henry Ristuccia, partner, Deloitte & Touche LLP, and global leader, Governance, Risk and Compliance Services, Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited. “These are important objectives, of course, and necessary for preserving the enterprise. But the traditional approaches often focus too much on risks within the organization and not enough on the ‘outside-in’ view. In other words, they don’t consider risks that can be seen and foreseen by observers from outside the company—an organization’s stakeholders.”
Time and again, catastrophic risk arrives unexpectedly. “This is generally because only the inside-out perspective has been considered,” notes Donna Epps, a partner and U.S. co-leader of Governance and Risk Management at Deloitte Financial Advisory Services LLP. “What is new today is the need for a 360-degree view of risk that effectively marries an outside-in risk perspective with inside-out risk intelligence.”
The true value of a “Risk to Reputation” program is to integrate an outside-in perspective into the enterprise risk program, providing a holistic overview of major and potential risks.
Step 1: Embark on a Discovery
Core to the discovery phase is a detailed examination of the firm’s current view of its strategies, risks and vulnerabilities. This helps ensure that, when the Risk to Reputation program is launched, the “known knowns” and the “known unknowns” are fully explored through a series of in-depth interviews conducted with C-suite executives.
Step 2: Establish the Baseline
In the second phase critical stakeholders are engaged to help assess the first outside-in perspective. Typically, this might cover regulators, financial and sector analysts, and local communities based around partners, customers, staff, suppliers, legislators, NGOs and other agencies.
A variety of techniques are employed to gather intelligence from the different audiences involved. It is important to gauge from the various perspectives the perceived impact of the firm’s reputation drivers on major enterprise strategies.
Step 3: Proactively Manage Risk to Reputation
By this time, techniques of outreach and research are established and the lessons from the discovery and baseline phases are put into action. There are three areas of focus at work:
“The payoff for effective management of a Risk to Reputation program is greater confidence in strategic execution,” notes Mr. Ristuccia. “By understanding and integrating external risks and opportunities into the organization’s Risk Intelligence, the goal is to end up with a program that puts the board and senior executives on the leading edge of knowing what might inhibit—or advance—the company strategy and then be prepared to act accordingly.”