Source: http://www.docstoc.com/docs/57004411/System-And-Method-For-Managing-Global-Risk---Patent-7433829
Timestamp: 2013-06-19 15:32:55
Document Index: 589691947

Matched Legal Cases: ['art11', 'art12', 'art 129', 'art 129', 'art 125', 'art 125', 'art 125', 'art 126', 'art 126', 'art 127', 'art 127', 'art 127', 'art 126']

System And Method For Managing Global Risk - Patent 7433829 Abstract
Inventors:Evelyn Borgia; Jodi Miller; Graham De Gottal; Christine O'Connor
Assignee:JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.
US Patent Application: 10/012,934
Patent number: 7433829
Tags:System and method for managing global..., Borgia, et al., Evelyn Borgia, Jodi Miller, Graham De Gottal, Christine O'Connor, Application number 10 012-934, Data Processing:Financial Business Pr..., patent attorney, patent search, the user, wherein said, JPMorgan Chase Bank, Patent Community, Page Range, risk management, Patent Inventor, Company Search
3634669N/ASoumas et al.1/1/1972
3946206N/ADarjany3/1/1976
4047033Checking an identity, authority or check document or the likeMalmberg et al.9/1/1977
4465206 Device for the simultaneous mounting of components on a carrierSorel et al.8/1/1984
4545838 Lamination product and method employing temporary transfer filmMinkus et al.10/1/1985
4634845 Portable personal terminal for use in a system for handling transactionsRiley1/1/1987
4746787 IC card with display and card recording and reading deviceOkada5/1/1988
4750119Purchasing system with rebate featureRobertson6/1/1988
4752676 Reliable secure, updatable "cash" card systemLeonard et al.6/1/1988
4754418Combined electronic calculator and credit cardHara6/1/1988
4766293 Portable financial transaction card capable of authorizing a transaction in foreign currenciesBoston8/1/1988
4766539 Method of determining the premium for and writing a policy insuring against specified weather conditionsFox8/1/1988
4822985 Transaction approval systemBoggan et al.4/1/1989
4831242 Control system for health club facilities and equipmentEnglehardt5/1/1989
4831526 Computerized insurance premium quote request and policy issuance systemLuchs5/1/1989
4837422 Multi-user card systemDethloff et al.6/1/1989
4870259 Transaction approval systemBoggan et al.9/1/1989
4897533 Credit card and method of making the sameLyszczarz1/1/1990
4906826 Usage promotion method for payment card transaction systemSpencer3/1/1990
4908521 Transaction approval systemBoggan et al.3/1/1990
4923288 Optical modulators based on polymersAllen et al.5/1/1990
4954985 Ferroelectric liquid crystal data storage cardYamazaki9/1/1990
4975840 Method and apparatus for evaluating a potentially insurable riskDeTore et al.12/1/1990
4978401 Card assembly methodBonomi12/1/1990
5049728 IC card system with removable IC modulesRovin9/1/1991
5055662 Portable information record medium having liquid crystal and photoconductive layersHasegawa10/1/1991
5080748 Card assembly apparatusBonomi1/1/1992
5095194 Holographic credit card with automatical authentication and verificationBarbanell3/1/1992
5146068 System for authenticating an authorized user of an IC cardUgawa et al.9/1/1992
5175416 Funds transfer systemMansvelt12/1/1992
5180901 IC card with individual authentication functionHiramatsu1/1/1993
5202286 Method of forming three-dimensional features on substrates with adjacent insulating filmsNakatani4/1/1993
5206488 Credit card system including a central unit and a plurality of local units for conducting low-cost transactionsTeicher4/1/1993
5206803System for enhanced management of pension-backed creditVitagliano4/1/1993
5214700 Method for obtaining a securitized cleartext attestation in a distributed data processing system environmentPinkas et al.5/1/1993
5218631 Telephonic-interface game control systemKatz6/1/1993
5276311 Method and device for simplifying the use of a plurality of credit cards, or the likeHennige et al.1/1/1994
5287269 Apparatus and method for accessing events, areas and activitiesDorrough et al.2/1/1994
5297026 System for promoting account activityHoffman3/1/1994
5311594 Fraud protection for card transactionsPenzias5/1/1994
5326959 Automated customer initiated entry remittance processing systemPerazza7/1/1994
5328809 Patterning of semiconductive polymersHolmes et al.7/1/1994
5349633 Telephonic-interface game control systemKatz9/1/1994
5350906 Currency transfer system and method using fixed limit cardsBrody et al.9/1/1994
5359183 Payment card with displaySkodlar10/1/1994
5361062 Personal security systemWeiss et al.11/1/1994
5365575 Telephonic-interface lottery systemKatz11/1/1994
5383113 System and method for electronically providing customer services including payment of bills, financial analysis and loansKnight1/1/1995
5397881 Third millenium credit card with magnetically onto it written multiple validity dates, from which is one single day as the credit card's validity day selected day after day by the legitimate card ownerMannik3/1/1995
5399502 Method of manufacturing of electrolumineschent devicesFriend et al.3/1/1995
5401827 Semiconductive copolymers for use in luminescent devicesHolmes et al.3/1/1995
5457305 Distributed on-line money access card transaction processing systemAkel et al.10/1/1995
5466919 Credit/charge card system enabling purchasers to contribute to selected charitiesHovakimimian11/1/1995
5477038 Method and apparatus for distributing currencyLevine et al.12/1/1995
5483444 System for awarding credits to persons who book travel-related reservationsMalark1/1/1996
5512654Semiconductive copolymers for use in luminescent devicesHolmes et al.4/1/1996
5513102Data processing methods of implementing an award to an authorized user of a credit cardAuriemma4/1/1996
5521813System and method for the advanced prediction of weather impact on managerial planning applicationsFox et al.5/1/1996
5544086Information consolidation within a transaction networkDavis et al.8/1/1996
5553120Telephonic-interface game control systemKatz9/1/1996
5585787Programmable credit cardWallerstein12/1/1996
5592560Method and system for building a database and performing marketing based upon prior shopping historyDeaton et al.1/1/1997
5608785 Method and apparatus for telephone prize opportunitiesKasday3/1/1997
5612868 Method and apparatus for dispensing discount couponsOff3/1/1997
5630127 Program storage device and computer program product for managing an event driven management information system with rule-based application structure stored in a relational databaseMoore et al.5/1/1997
5637845 Credit and bank issued debit card operated system and method for controlling a prepaid card encoding/dispensing machineKolls6/1/1997
5638457 Method and system for building a database for use with selective incentive marketing in response to customer shopping historiesDeaton et al.6/1/1997
5642279 Technique for utilizing a computer system to provide price protection to retail customersStone6/1/1997
5642485 Method and system for selective incentive point-of-sale marketing in response to customer shopping historiesDeaton et al.6/1/1997
5644723 Method and system for selective incentive point-of-sale marketing in response to customer shopping historiesDeaton et al.7/1/1997
5649117 System and method for paying bills and other obligations including selective payor and payee controlsLandry7/1/1997
5649118 Smart card with multiple charge accounts and product item tables designating the account to debitCarlisle et al.7/1/1997
5653914 Electroluminescent device comprising a chromophoric polymeric compositionHolmes et al.8/1/1997
5659741 Computer system and method for storing medical histories using a carrying size cardEberhardt8/1/1997
5664157 Noncontact IC card interface unit and communication system using the interface unitTakahira et al.9/1/1997
5665953 Self-contained personal data collector for redeeming couponsMazzamuto9/1/1997
5672678 Semiconductive copolymers for use in luminescent devicesHolmes et al.9/1/1997
5675607 Method and apparatus for facilitating the making of card callsAlesio et al.10/1/1997
5677955 Electronic funds transfer instrumentsDoggett et al.10/1/1997
5684291 Refundable prepaid telephone cardTaskett11/1/1997
5689650 Community reinvestment act networkMcClelland et al.11/1/1997
5696907 System and method for performing risk and credit analysis of financial service applicationsTom12/1/1997
5703344 Electronic funds confirmation at point of transactionBezy et al.12/1/1997
5705798 System and method for processing a customized financial transaction cardTarbox1/1/1998
5708422 Transaction authorization and alert systemBlonder et al.1/1/1998
5710458 Card like semiconductor deviceIwasaki1/1/1998
5715399 Secure method and system for communicating a list of credit card numbers over a non-secure networkBezos2/1/1998
5721768 Pre-paid card system and methodStimson et al.2/1/1998
5726884 Integrated hazardous substance tracking and complianceSturgeon et al.3/1/1998
5728998 Secure smart card reader with virtual image display and pull-down optionsNovis et al.3/1/1998
5734154 Smart card with Iintegrated reader and visual image displayJachimowicz et al.3/1/1998
5734838 Database computer architecture for managing an incentive award program and checking float of funds at time of purchaseRobinson3/1/1998
5736728 Non contact IC card and a non contact IC card systemMatsubara4/1/1998
5742775 Method and apparatus of creating financial instrument and administering an adjustable rate loan systemKing4/1/1998
5745049 Wireless equipment diagnosis systemAkiyama et al.4/1/1998
5760381 Prepaid cardStich et al.6/1/1998
5770843 Access card for multiple accountsRose et al.6/1/1998
5770849 Smart card device with pager and visual image displayNovis et al.6/1/1998
5777305 Package assembly and method for activating prepaid debit cardsSmith et al.7/1/1998
5777306 Credit card system and method of using credit card with such credit card systemMasuda7/1/1998
5778067 Value transfer systemJones et al.7/1/1998
5787156 Telephonic-interface lottery systemKatz7/1/1998
5787404 Credit-card based retirement fund system and methodFernandez-Holman7/1/1998
5789733 Smart card with contactless optical interfaceJachimowicz et al.8/1/1998
5794207 Method and apparatus for a cryptographically assisted commercial network system designed to facilitate buyer-driven conditional purchase offersWalker8/1/1998
5798950 Method and apparatus for estimating durations of activities in forming a current system, based on past durations of activities in forming past systemsFitzgerald8/1/1998
5799087 Electronic-monetary systemRosen8/1/1998
5805719 Tokenless identification of individualsPare et al.9/1/1998
5806042 System for designing and implementing bank owned life insurance (BOLI) with a reinsurance optionKelly et al.9/1/1998
5806045 Method and system for allocating and redeeming incentive credits between a portable device and a base deviceBiorge9/1/1998
5807627 Electroluminescent devicesFriend et al.9/1/1998
5809478 Method for accessing and evaluating information for processing an application for insuranceGreco9/1/1998
5815657 System, method and article of manufacture for network electronic authorization utilizing an authorization instrumentWilliams et al.9/1/1998
5815658 Portable terminal apparatus for IC card compatible with a plurality of applicationsKuriyama9/1/1998
5819234 Toll collection systemSlavin et al.10/1/1998
5819237 System and method for determination of incremental value at risk for securities tradingGarman10/1/1998
5826243 Integrated system for controlling master account and nested subaccount(s)Musmanno et al.10/1/1998
5832457 Method and apparatus for selective distribution of discount coupons based on prior customer behaviorO'Brien11/1/1998
5832488 Computer system and method for storing medical histories using a smartcard to store dataEberhardt11/1/1998
5835061 Method and apparatus for geographic-based communications serviceStewart11/1/1998
5835576 Telephonic-interface lottery deviceKatz11/1/1998
5839113 Method and apparatus for rating geographical areas using meteorological conditionsFederau et al.11/1/1998
5845260 System and method for parent-controlled charging for on-line servicesNakano et al.12/1/1998
5852811 Method for managing financial accounts by a preferred allocation of funds among accountsAtkins12/1/1998
5857079 Smart card for automatic financial recordsClaus et al.1/1/1999
5857709 Anticounterfeit documentation with see-through and write-able hologramChock1/1/1999
5859419 Programmable multiple company credit card systemWynn1/1/1999
5864828 Personal financial management system for creation of a client portfolio of investment and credit facilities where funds are distributed based on a preferred allocationAtkins1/1/1999
5864830 Data processing method of configuring and monitoring a satellite spending card linked to a host credit cardArmetta et al.1/1/1999
0N/AMcCarthy2/1/1999
5884278 Retail store and method employing multiple network interfaces at each cash register, and receiving signals from portable cards at each cash registerPowell3/1/1999
5884285 System for managing financial accounts by reallocating funds among accountsAtkins3/1/1999
5884287 System and method for generating and displaying risk and return in an investment portfolioEdesess3/1/1999
0N/AClaus4/1/1999
5893079 System for receiving, processing, creating, storing, and disseminating investment informationCwenar4/1/1999
5897620 Method and apparatus for the sale of airline-specified flight ticketsWalker et al.4/1/1999
5907350 Television signal activated interactive smart card systemNemirofsky5/1/1999
5911135 System for managing financial accounts by a priority allocation of funds among accountsAtkins6/1/1999
5911136 System for prioritized operation of a personal financial account comprising liabilities and investment assetsAtkins6/1/1999
5914472 Credit card spending authorization control systemFoladare et al.6/1/1999
5920629 Electronic-monetary systemRosen7/1/1999
5920844 Information display methodHotta et al.7/1/1999
5920847 Electronic bill pay systemKolling et al.7/1/1999
5926800 System and method for providing a line of credit secured by an assignment of a life insurance policyBaronowski et al.7/1/1999
5930217 Optical information recording/reproducing system, optical information storage medium, and manufacturing method thereofKayanuma7/1/1999
5930762 Computer aided risk management in multiple-parameter physical systemsMasch7/1/1999
5933817 Tiered interest rate revolving credit system and methodHucal8/1/1999
5953423 Electronic-monetary systemRosen9/1/1999
5956691 Dynamic policy illustration systemPowers9/1/1999
5963648 Electronic-monetary systemRosen10/1/1999
5970480 Centralized credit interchange system of converting purchase credit awards through credit exchange system for purchase of investment vehicleKalina10/1/1999
0N/ALevine et al.11/1/1999
5984180 Method and system for gift credit cardAlbrecht11/1/1999
5988509 Refundable prepaid telephone cardTaskett11/1/1999
5991413 Process for the acceptance of a virtual prepaid card use request permitting the reuse of its serial numberArditti et al.11/1/1999
5991743 System and method for proactively monitoring risk exposureIrving et al.11/1/1999
5991750 System and method for pre-authorization of individual account transactionsWatson11/1/1999
5999596 Method and system for controlling authorization of credit card transactionsWalker et al.12/1/1999
6002383 Polymer dispersed liquid crystal (PDLC) film using heat or an electric field to change state and the other to change backShimada12/1/1999
6003762 Transaction terminal for an electronic cashless systemHayashida12/1/1999
6004681 Light-emitting devices containing network electrode polymers in electron blocking layerEpstein et al.12/1/1999
6006988 Non-cash media card and process of dispensing from automated tellerBehrmann et al.12/1/1999
6014636 Point of sale method and systemReeder1/1/2000
6014638 System for customizing computer displays in accordance with user preferencesBurge et al.1/1/2000
6014749 Data processing circuit with self-timed instruction execution and power regulationGloor et al.1/1/2000
6016482 Enhanced collateralized funding processorMolinari et al.1/1/2000
6016954 Card holder-type balance readerAbe et al.1/1/2000
6018722 S.E.C. registered individual account investment advisor expert systemRay et al.1/1/2000
6019284 Flexible chip card with displayFreeman et al.2/1/2000
6029890 User-Specified credit card systemAustin2/1/2000
6032136 Customer activated multi-value (CAM) cardBrake, Jr. et al.2/1/2000
6038537 Intra-organization cooperation system, commodity deal management method, and storage mediumMatsuoka3/1/2000
6038552 Method and apparatus to process combined credit and debit card transactionsFleischl et al.3/1/2000
6041315 Automated payment system and methodPollin3/1/2000
6045042 Non-contact IC card having multiple receivers with different signal detection threshholds for minimizing current consumptionOhno4/1/2000
6049773 Automated method for identification of reinsurance claimsMcCormack et al.4/1/2000
6049782 Relationship management system and process for pricing financial instruments based on a customer's relationship with a financial institutionGottesman et al.4/1/2000
6064985 Automated portfolio management system with internet datafeedAnderson5/1/2000
6065675 Processing system and method for a heterogeneous electronic cash environmentTeicher5/1/2000
6068183 Chip card systemFreeman et al.5/1/2000
6070153 System and method for automatically investing a portion of a credit card interest charged amount in an investment accountSimpson5/1/2000
6076068 Coupon delivery systemDeLapa et al.6/1/2000
6076072 Method and apparatus for preparing client communications involving financial products and servicesLibman6/1/2000
6078888 Cryptography security for remote dispenser transactionsJohnson, Jr.6/1/2000
6078891 Method and system for collecting and processing marketing dataRiordan et al.6/1/2000
6078904 Risk direct asset allocation and risk resolved CAPM for optimally allocating investment assets in an investment portfolioRebane6/1/2000
6088678 Process simulation technique using benefit-trade matrices to estimate schedule, cost, and riskShannon7/1/2000
6091817 Host and user transaction systemBertina et al.7/1/2000
6095412 Host and user transaction systemBertina et al.8/1/2000
6095416 Method and device for preventing unauthorized use of credit cardsGrant et al.8/1/2000
6098053 System and method for performing an electronic financial transactionSlater8/1/2000
6105011Security system and method for business transactions with customersMorrison, Jr.8/1/2000
6105865Financial transaction system with retirement saving benefitHardesty8/1/2000
6109525Method and device for registering vehicles in a road toll facilityBlomqvist et al.8/1/2000
6112191Method and system to create and distribute excess funds from consumer spending transactionsBurke8/1/2000
6119097System and method for quantification of human performance factorsIbarra9/1/2000
6119103Financial risk prediction systems and methods thereforBasch et al.9/1/2000
6119932Identification verification apparatus and methodMaloney et al.9/1/2000
6122623Watershed method for controlling cashflow mapping in value at risk determinationGarman9/1/2000
6128598System and method for generating and executing insurance policies for foreign exchange lossesWalker et al.10/1/2000
6134536Methods and apparatus relating to the formulation and trading of risk management contractsShepherd10/1/2000
6138917 Multiple magnetic stripe transaction cards and systems for the utilization thereofChapin, Jr.10/1/2000
6145741 Universal pre-paid gasoline and travel cardWisdom et al.11/1/2000
6161096 Method and apparatus for modeling and executing deferred award instrument planBell12/1/2000
6163770 Computer apparatus and method for generating documentation using a computed value for a claims cost affected by at least one concurrent, different insurance policy for the same insuredGamble et al.12/1/2000
6164533 Point of sale automatic savings program contribution systemBarton12/1/2000
6167385 Supply chain financing system and methodHartley-Urquhart12/1/2000
6169975 Point-of-distribution pre-paid card vending systemWhite et al.1/1/2001
6182048 System and method for automated risk-based pricing of a vehicle warranty insurance policyOsborn et al.1/1/2001
6182894 Systems and methods for authorizing a transaction cardHackett et al.2/1/2001
6186793 Process to convert cost and location of a number of actual contingent events within a region into a three dimensional surface over a map that provides for every location within the region its own estimate of expected cost for future contingent eventsBrubaker2/1/2001
6192113 Method and apparatus for phone card billingLorsch2/1/2001
6195644 Computer program and system for credit card companies for recording and processing bonus credits issued to card usersBowie2/1/2001
6202053 Method and apparatus for generating segmentation scorecards for evaluating credit risk of bank card applicantsChristiansen et al.3/1/2001
6223143 Quantitative risk assessment system (QRAS)Weinstock et al.4/1/2001
6227447 Cardless payment systemCampisano5/1/2001
6263316 Automated process for retailing to a vehicle occupantKhan et al.7/1/2001
6278981 Computer-implemented method and apparatus for portfolio compressionDembo et al.8/1/2001
6295522 Stored-value card value acquisition method and apparatusBoesch9/1/2001
6298336 Card activation at point of distributionDavis et al.10/1/2001
6330546 Risk determination and management using predictive modeling and transaction profiles for individual transacting entitiesGopinathan et al.12/1/2001
6334192 Computer system and method for a self administered risk assessmentKarpf12/1/2001
6336099 Method and system for electronic distribution of product redemption couponsBarnett et al.1/1/2002
6338048 Electronic transaction systemMori1/1/2002
6341724 Cardless payment systemCampisano1/1/2002
6343743 Method of checking authenticity of a data carrierLamla2/1/2002
6345261 Customer loyalty investment programFeidelson2/1/2002
6345766 Methods and apparatus for providing a prepaid, remote memory customer account for the visually impairedTaskett et al.2/1/2002
6360954 Portable cardsBarnardo3/1/2002
6366220 RF tag based system and method for drive-through applicationsElliott4/1/2002
6377669 Method and apparatus for awarding and redeeming prepaid telephone timeWalker et al.4/1/2002
6385591 Method and system for electronic organization of couponsMankoff5/1/2002
6397202 System and method for monitoring risk in a system development programHiggins et al.5/1/2002
6405182 System for dispensing prepaid debit cards through point-of-sale terminalsCuervo6/1/2002
6422459 Method and system for off-line loading of stored value cards using a batch-load terminalKawan7/1/2002
6422462 Apparatus and methods for improved credit cards and credit card transactionsCohen7/1/2002
6434259 Method of providing secure user accessHamid et al.8/1/2002
6463039 Method and apparatus for full duplex sideband communicationRicci et al.10/1/2002
6467684 Pre-paid card system for purchasing products or servicesFite et al.10/1/2002
6484144 Method and system for healthcare treatment planning and assessmentMartin et al.11/1/2002
6498861 Biometric security encryption systemHamid et al.12/1/2002
6505168 System and method for gathering and standardizing customer purchase information for target marketingRothman et al.1/1/2003
6529880 Automatic payment system for a plurality of remote merchantsMcKeen et al.3/1/2003
6557750 Promotional mailing deviceDruse et al.5/1/2003
6560578 Advertisement selection system supporting discretionary target market characteristicsEldering5/1/2003
6601040 Electronic commerce terminal for wirelessly communicating to a plurality of communication devicesKolls7/1/2003
6601761 Method and system for co-branding an electronic payment platform such as an electronic walletKatis8/1/2003
6609111 Method and apparatus for modeling and executing deferred award instrument planBell8/1/2003
0N/ALevine et al.9/1/2003
6615189 Debit purchasing of stored value card for use by and/or delivery to othersPhillips et al.9/1/2003
6615190 Sponsor funded stored value cardSlater9/1/2003
6625582 Method and system for converting a designated portion of future social security and other retirement payments to current benefitsRichman et al.9/1/2003
6641049 Integrated circuit card with multiple integral electronic modulesLuu11/1/2003
6641050 Secure credit cardKelley et al.11/1/2003
6671673 Method for integrated supply chain and financial managementBaseman et al.12/1/2003
6675127 Computerized systems and methods for managing project issues and risksLaBlanc et al.1/1/2004
6675149 Information technology project assessment method, system and program productRuffin et al.1/1/2004
6687222 Backup service managers for providing reliable network services in a distributed environmentAlbert et al.2/1/2004
6693544 Electronic identification tagHebbecker2/1/2004
6742704 Multiple-service card systemFitzmaurice et al.6/1/2004
6745938 System and methods for card payment instrument with rebate applied to an insurance premiumSullivan6/1/2004
6757660 Method for analyzing information to provide an objective assessment of a predefined subjectCanada et al.6/1/2004
6757710 Object-based on-line transaction infrastructureReed6/1/2004
6802008 IC card and IC chip moduleIkefuji et al.10/1/2004
6805287 System and method for converting a stored value card to a credit cardBishop10/1/2004
6865547 Customer activated multi-value (CAM) cardBrake, Jr. et al.3/1/2005
6868426 Virtual document organizer system and methodMankoff3/1/2005
6876971 Funds distribution system connected with point of sale transactionBurke4/1/2005
6895386 Stock credit cardBachman et al.5/1/2005
6912502 System and method for compliance managementBuddle et al.6/1/2005
6970830 Methods and systems for analyzing marketing campaignsSamra et al.11/1/2005
6999943Routing methods and systems for increasing payment transaction volume and profitabilityJohnson et al.2/1/2006
7006992Risk assessment and management systemPackwood2/1/2006
7051925System and method for funding a collective account by use of an electronic tagSchwarz, Jr.5/1/2006
7072864Customer activated multi-value (CAM) cardBrake, Jr. et al.7/1/2006
7089503Mortgage loan customization system and processBloomquist et al.8/1/2006
7104443Method and system for facilitating electronic funds transactionsPaul et al.9/1/2006
7113914Method and system for managing risksSpielmann et al.9/1/2006
7165049Sponsor funded stored value cardSlater1/1/2007
0N/AAshery et al.8/1/2001
0N/ADembo et al.8/1/2001
0N/AWankmueller10/1/2001
0N/AKnight et al.10/1/2001
0N/ASaliba et al.11/1/2001
0N/AMorgan11/1/2001
0N/AMuller2/1/2002
0N/AKoppel et al.2/1/2002
0N/AMoore et al.4/1/2002
0N/ABarton et al.5/1/2002
0N/AWahlbin et al.5/1/2002
0N/AO'Leary et al.6/1/2002
0N/AAnderson et al.7/1/2002
0N/AUsui7/1/2002
0N/ASeifert et al.8/1/2002
0N/AMankoff8/1/2002
0N/AHed et al.8/1/2002
0N/AFetherston8/1/2002
0N/ARazvan et al.10/1/2002
0N/AAnderson10/1/2002
0N/AAnvekar et al.11/1/2002
0N/APerkowski12/1/2002
0N/AEpstein1/1/2003
0N/AArmes et al.1/1/2003
0N/AMankoff2/1/2003
0N/AHaines et al.2/1/2003
0N/ASlater2/1/2003
0N/ARisafi et al.3/1/2003
0N/APersons et al.5/1/2003
0N/AEpstein et al.6/1/2003
0N/ABrake, Jr. et al.7/1/2003
0N/AO'Leary et al.7/1/2003
0N/ASobek7/1/2003
0N/AMittal et al.8/1/2003
0N/AKitajima8/1/2003
0N/AKemper et al.9/1/2003
0N/AWalker et al.10/1/2003
0N/APhelan et al.10/1/2003
0N/ALibman11/1/2003
0N/ABrake, Jr. et al.2/1/2004
0N/ALibman2/1/2004
0N/ANewport et al.3/1/2004
0N/APhelan et al.5/1/2004
0N/APicciallo5/1/2004
0N/ADuke5/1/2004
0N/ABreslin et al.7/1/2004
0N/ADuke12/1/2004
0N/APostrel1/1/2005
0N/ACech2/1/2005
0N/AMankoff3/1/2005
0N/AMankoff4/1/2005
0N/ACourtion et al.4/1/2005
0N/AAwatsu4/1/2005
0N/ABishop et al.8/1/2005
0N/AGrau3/1/2006
7761730Determination of impact of a failure of a component for one or more servicesBailey, et al.7/20/2010
7698148Web-based risk management tool and methodLavu, et al.4/13/2010
8135638Summarizing risk ratings to facilitate an analysis of risksGopfert, et al.3/13/2012
Claims What is claimed is: 1. A compliance tracking system, comprising: a first storage device containing a first dataset of data related to regulatory and enterprise procedural policy information; asecond dataset storage device containing a second dataset of data related to a state of an operation activity; a processor coupled to said first and second datasets, and operable to access and manipulate data in said first and second datasets; a userinterface device coupled to said processor and operable to receive user input and provide instructions to said processor for accessing and manipulating said first and second datasets, wherein said user input is based on a compliance response structurecomprising a set of role definitions including a plurality of respective responsibilities, wherein said responsibilities being related to respective portions of said state of said operation activity, and wherein said instructions being related to saidresponsibilities whereby a level of compliance is modified based upon a combination of said responsibilities and respective portions of said state of operation activity; said processor being further operable to compare data contained in said first andsecond datasets and provide processor-generated indicia of compliance to said user interface device based on a result of said comparison; first determination means for determining whether an operation activity is in compliance or non-compliance based ona comparison of the data contained in the first and second datasets; second determination means for determining whether non-compliance is the result of a new policy or regulation or amendment to a policy or regulation; risk assessment means forassessing risk and identifying risk factors associated with the state of the operation activity and the new policy or regulation or amendment to a policy or regulation; third determination means for determining whether a risk acknowledgement has beenapproved, wherein risk acknowledgement approval comprises accepting the risk or developing or implementing a plan to achieve compliance; and plan selection means for developing or implementing a plan to achieve compliance, wherein the plan is based on asensitivity rating, an impact rating, a probability rating, and compensation and control procedures. 2. A compliance tracking system according to claim 1 wherein said processor further comprises a reporting engine processing device; and said reporting engine processing device can operate on said indicia of compliance to produce a compilationof compliance indicia in a summary format. 3. A compliance tracking system according to claim 1, wherein said indicia of compliance pertains to a plurality of portions of said operation activity. 4. A compliance tracking system according to claim 1, wherein said processor further comprises a registration engine processing device; and said registration engine processing device being operable to accept requests for registration from saiduser interface device, provide a notification to at least another user interface device for approval of said registration request, and provide a notification to said user interface device indicative of approval or refusal of registration. 5. A compliance tracking system according to claim 1, wherein said instructions include answers to a questionnaire related to assessing a level of compliance. 6. A compliance tracking system according to claim 1, wherein said instructions include information related to at least one of a sensitivity and a criticality of said operation activity with respect to a level of compliance. 7. A compliance tracking system according to claim 2, further comprising: a management structure having a plurality of management levels; and said compilation of compliance indicia is accessible to a management level above at least anothermanagement level. 8. A compliance tracking system according to claim 7, wherein said instructions include information related to at least one of a sensitivity and a criticality of said operation activity with respect to a level of compliance. 9. A compliance tracking system according to claim 8, wherein said compilation of compliance indicia is accessible to said management level based on said information related to said at least one of a sensitivity and a criticality. 10. A compliance tracking system according to claim 1, wherein said processor further comprises an administration engine processing device; said administration engine processing device is operable to at least one of input data received fromsaid user interface device into said second dataset and provide authorized access to said processor through said user interface device. 11. A method for tracking status and providing status feedback using a computer, comprising: accessing a set of rules in a database, the rules being related to an enterprise operation wherein said rules provide conformance standards forregulatory or enterprise procedural policies; accessing a set of data related to compliance with said set of rules; comparing, by a processing engine, said set of data against said set of rules to produce a compliance status; providing acomputer-generated indication of said compliance status to a user interface; and accepting user input comprising instructions through said user interface whereby a condition of said set of data is modified, thereby improving said compliance status,wherein said user input is based on a compliance response structure comprising a set of role definitions including a plurality of respective responsibilities, wherein said responsibilities being related to respective portions of said state of saidoperation activity, and wherein said instructions being related to said responsibilities whereby a level of compliance is modified based upon a combination of said responsibilities and respective portions of said state of operation activity; determining, by a processor engine, whether an enterprise operation is in compliance or non-compliance based on a comparison of the data contained in the first and second datasets; determining, by a processor engine, whether non-compliance is the resultof a new policy or regulation or amendment to a policy or regulation; receiving at least one survey generating, deleting, modifying or revising data related to the enterprise operation; and determining, by a processor engine, if a risk acknowledgementassociated with the enterprise operation has been approved, wherein risk acknowledgement approval comprises accepting the risk or developing or implementing a plan to achieve compliance; and developing or implementing, by a processor engine, a plan toachieve compliance, wherein the plan is based on a sensitivity rating, an impact rating, a probability rating, and compensation and control procedures. 12. A compliance tracking system, comprising: a first storage device containing a first dataset of data related to regulatory and enterprise procedural policy information; a second storage device containing a second dataset of data related toa state of an operation activity; a processor coupled to said first and second datasets, and operable to access and manipulate data in said first and second datasets; a user interface device coupled to said processor and operable to receive user inputand provide instructions to said processing engine processor for accessing and manipulating said first and second datasets, wherein said instructions include answers to a questionnaire related to assessing a level of compliance and information related toat least one of a sensitivity and a criticality of said operation activity with respect to a level of compliance, wherein said user input is based on a compliance response structure comprising a set of role definitions including a plurality of respectiveresponsibilities, wherein said responsibilities being related to respective portions of said state of said operation activity, and wherein said instructions being related to said responsibilities whereby a level of compliance is modified based upon acombination of said responsibilities and respective portions of said state of operation activity; said processor being further operable to compare data contained in said first and second datasets and provide processor-generated indicia of compliance tosaid user interface device based on a result of said comparison, wherein said indicia of compliance pertains to a plurality of portions of said operation activity, and wherein said device further comprises a reporting engine processing device, andwherein said reporting engine processing device can operate on said indicia of compliance to produce a compilation of compliance indicia in a summary format; a first determination processor or interface device for determining whether an operationactivity is in compliance or non-compliance based on a comparison of the data contained in the first and second datasets; a second determination processor or interface device for determining whether non-compliance is the result of a new policy orregulation or amendment to a policy or regulation; a risk assessment processor or interface device for assessing risk and identifying risk factors associated with the state of the operation activity and the new policy or regulation or amendment to apolicy or regulation; a third determination processor or interface device for determining whether a risk acknowledgement has been approved, wherein risk acknowledgement approval comprises accepting the risk or developing or implementing a plan toachieve compliance; and a plan selection processor or interface device for developing or implementing a plan to achieve compliance, wherein the plan is based on a sensitivity rating, an impact rating, a probability rating, and compensation and controlprocedures. 13. A compliance tracking system according to claim 12, further comprising: a management structure having a plurality of management levels; and said compilation of compliance indicia is accessible to a management level above at least anothermanagement level. 14. A compliance tracking system according to claim 12, wherein said compilation of compliance indicia is accessible to said management level based on said information related to said at least one of a sensitivity and a criticality. 15. A compliance tracking system according to claim 12, wherein said processor further comprises an administration engine processing device; said administration engine processing device is operable to at least one of input data received fromsaid user interface device into said second dataset and provide authorized access to said processor through said user interface device. Description BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION1. Field of the InventionThe present invention relates to a system and method for managing global risk, and more particularly relates to a globally accessible system for evaluating variables related to risk associated with a given project or enterprise.2. Related Prior ArtIn any given enterprise it is often desirable to evaluate the risk associated with particular activities. Risk can be determined in a number of different ways, for instance based on possible positive and negative outcomes, and can be assignedvarious levels of importance for a given project.For example, an enterprise may wish to evaluate its exposure with regard to regulatory compliance. Various individuals within the enterprise having responsibility related to regulatory compliance generally prefer to have a working knowledge ofthe procedures in place to produce compliance, and the status of various efforts to ensure compliance with regulatory requirements. Whenever a new task is undertaken in a given area related to regulatory compliance, the person or persons initiating theproject for completing the task may be required to assess the risk involved with implementing a solution. The persons knowledgeable about the task and goals may be required to answer questions on a questionnaire or otherwise fill out a form to evaluatethe risk associated with the particular task with respect to associated regulatory requirements and for reporting purposes. The task may be evaluated for risk associated with liability to the enterprise if a customer makes a claim related to regulatorysections with which the enterprise has not complied, for example. The individuals may be asked to rate various levels of risk from low to high, and provide other indicia related to ranking of risk factors.Another aspect of risk management relates to procedures established by the enterprise, with accompanying directives by management to comply with the procedures. A given manager responsible for a particular department may wish to establish thelevel of risk associated with activities in the department, and may formulate some system for evaluating and reporting risks, that can be used by lower level managers, and project managers, for instance. For example, on a periodic basis, such asquarterly, the managers for a given department might be required to communicate to upper management the various risk factors and risk evaluations that are related to computer information systems operations. Such risk factors can include security, backupprocedures and data retaining procedures, for example. The risk factor related information can be provided through various forms or questionnaires for evaluating risk and risk factors associated with projects for which they are responsible. These formsand questionnaires can be compiled into reports and other summary data to provide a department manager with a fairly good idea of the level of compliance with various enterprise procedures.Typically, if a group within the department is not in compliance with the established procedures for the enterprise, this information can be so noted in the summary or compiled data presented to the department manager. In such a case, thedepartment manager can establish plans to bring the group into compliance, and monitor the status of the group in progressing with the plan.The impact of evaluating the risk for a given enterprise can have serious consequences with regard to the success, or profitability of the enterprise. For example, if an enterprise is found not to be in compliance with regulatory requirements,the enterprise may be susceptible to penalties such as large fines, lawsuits, or potentially intense scrutiny by regulatory agencies. In addition, if the enterprise has established procedures that are designed to protect the enterprise from liability,or otherwise assure that levels of risk within the enterprise are minimized, the enterprise can be exposed to tremendous liability if the procedures are not properly followed. Also, the enterprise may suffer further liability if it is unable toascertain, or provide proof of compliance with established procedures, in the context of a lawsuit, for example. Moreover, the enterprise may suffer the loss of a competitive advantage if sensitive data is compromised, for example.Accordingly, large enterprises that may be vulnerable to a number of different types of risk typically attempt to ascertain the level of exposure to given risks at various levels within the enterprise, and minimize the exposure to risk that theenterprise may potentially suffer. In addition, the enterprise may establish a reporting system in which the degree of compliance with established procedures or regulatory requirements is readily accessible. Finally, the enterprise may wish toestablish a plan to bring various groups or departments into compliance with procedures or regulatory requirements, and track the progress of the plan as the group or department moves towards compliance.In typical enterprises, these types of reports and statuses regarding compliance with procedures or regulatory requirements to avoid risk are often somewhat haphazard, and inconsistent. For example, some managers may find the requirement offilling out forms and answering questionnaires to be an inefficient use of time, and fail to effectively complete risk assessments. Furthermore, in a department where the manager fails to take note of the potential problems caused by failing to evaluatethe risk associated with the department's activities, it is often the case that other members of the department will similarly fail to complete assessments associated with risk of activities within the department.It is also the case that the tools of these risk assessment type systems are form intensive, and inconsistent between various enterprise locations, for example. It is also often difficult to track and maintain the data that can be obtained fromforms related to assessment of risk. For example, forms containing information related to risk assessment must be gathered, and the information must be compiled, in order to be useful as a risk assessment tool. The transfer of paper documents within alarge scale enterprise is often a difficult task, and can lead to issues involving document storage space.Solutions to overcome the difficulties associated with paper based reporting systems for use with risk assessment often include the application of computer systems that are designed to permit a number of individuals responsible for riskassessment to enter data online. Once the data related to risk assessment is in electronic format, tasks such as data compilation, reporting and assessment can be accomplished with greatly reduced overhead and savings with regard to use of valuableresources. However, systems in which individuals enter information online related to risk assessment suffer from some of the same drawbacks as the paper based systems. For example, separate departments and locations within a given enterprise maydevelop their own online tools for inputting information related to risk assessment. Accordingly, it is difficult to consolidate information across departments or enterprise locations. This drawback in obtaining consistency across departments is highlynoticeable when various groups, departments or locations within an enterprise continue to use a paper based risk assessment system, while other groups, departments or locations use a variety of online type systems. Consolidating information related torisk assessment in such an environment can require a tremendous amount of resources, and yet still achieve inconsistent results.Additionally, if a group or department is not in compliance with a given protocol, devising a plan to bring the entity into compliance with a particular protocol can be problematic. Managing the progress status of any plan to achieve compliancecan be troublesome and fraught with some of the same difficulties as accumulating risk assessment information in the first place. For example, the progress of the plan may be reported inconsistently, or suffer from the perception of being a low prioritytask. It is also difficult for department managers to obtain feedback regarding compliance with protocols, for example, in a timely manner. For example, if a given department must be in regulatory compliance within a specific date, it may be verydifficult for the department manager to evaluate whether the department is on schedule for meeting the regulatory requirements.Accordingly, a system for assessing risk on a widespread and consistent basis, that can also provide reporting, planning for compliance, assignment of responsibility and accountability and tracking of compliance plans is highly desirable. Such asystem, and method for accomplishing the system, is provided by the system and method according to the present invention.SUMMARY OF THE INVENTIONIt is an object of the present invention to overcome the drawbacks associated with the prior art.Briefly stated, according to the present invention there is provided a system and method for determining compliance with enterprise policies and regulatory requirements as an auditing feature based on questionnaire responses that tracks steps tomove towards compliance. One or more responsible parties for a given project are identified or appointed to be responsible for responding to compliance questionnaires. The parties fill in questionnaires designed to focus on various features of riskassessment for specific aspects of a given project. For example, the responsible parties for a project that includes features that require data storage and computer information system access would be asked to rate their disaster recovery readiness. Therating for disaster recovery readiness may depend upon such factors as whether information is stored off site on a regular basis, intervals in which system backups are made, robustness of computer recovery systems and so forth.Once a questionnaire has been completed, the project can be given an overall rating of exposure to various forms of risk. Areas of risk can be acknowledged, prompting a sensitivity rating, such as severe, negligible and so forth. Once risk isacknowledged, a plan for reducing the risk or bringing the project into compliance can be formulated, and progress towards compliance can be tracked. Alternatively, an identified exposure to risk can be disclaimed through the system, which requires signoff by various higher level managers and administrators.Once risk assessment is completed for various projects, a higher level manager can review exposure to risk on a broad perspective, and through a user interface, expand particular areas where high risk is identified as a problem. A risk categorythat is expanded reveals the different departments and/or projects and their associated risks or compliance statuses. The higher level manager can thus identify particular projects or activity areas where risk exposure exists.The sensitivity of the risk factors can also be gauged and used to develop an overall risk rating. For example, a person responsible for assessing the risk related to a particular project is asked to rate the sensitivity of various hypotheticalevents such as competitive disclosure, financial loss or impact on perception of customers.Requirements for compliance with regulatory demands and regulatory agencies are built into the risk management tool. Project managers and higher level managers can determine in a glance if a particular project is in compliance with regulatoryguidelines. Higher level managers have broader access than lower level mangers to risk assessment information according to level of seniority. For example, a middle level manager can see all the risk assessment factors for each department/project thatthey manage, but can see no risk information beyond their allotted level. A high level manager can view all the information available to the mid level manager, in addition to any other manager or group for which the high level manager hasresponsibility. Accordingly, access to the system is provided on a secure basis that is reflective of the user's level of seniority.The system also provides security features such as logon IDs and passwords. Access levels are assigned based on seniority or management status, and provide a mechanism for a secure review of risk exposure and compliance. Once data is enteredinto the system it cannot be modified unless the user has proper authorization. The system generates reports to inform persons or groups about their compliance status. A search tool is available for locating various businesses, compliance areas, riskstatus levels and so forth. The system can also be used for training users on risk management policies, how risks are evaluated and how paths to compliance can be determined.The system according to the present invention thus provides immediate compliance verification, a calendar of events, allows shared best practices and corrective action plans and provides a mechanism for risk acknowledgement communicated to othermembers of a hierarchy. The system can be used in any hierarchical organization including such risk sensitive enterprises as military units, space missions and highly financed business endeavors. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGSFIG. 1 is a diagram showing various system components and interconnectivity according to the present invention;FIGS. 2A and 2B show navigation paths for reviewing risk related data according to the present invention;FIG. 3 is a flow diagram illustrating the rating procedure for various risks;FIG. 4 is a flow diagram illustrating operation of risk acknowledgement procedures;FIG. 5 is an illustration of form for risk acknowledgement;FIG. 6 is a chart illustrating an example of sensitivity ratings according to particular events related to a business;FIG. 7 is a flow diagram illustrating the process by which a non-compliant risk process is elevated to another level of management;FIG. 8 is a depiction of a risk management summary display for a business group;FIG. 9 is a chart illustrating various parameters related to risk management organized by business operation;FIG. 10 is a chart illustrating risk management status for a subdivision of a business operation;FIG. 11 is a flow diagram describing a process for adding a new application to the risk management system according to the present invention; andFIG. 12 is a flow diagram showing a process for obtaining access to the system according to the present invention.Other features and advantages of the present invention will become apparent from the following description of the invention that refers to the accompanying drawings.DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTSReferring now to FIG. 1, a diagram of system components and their interconnection is shown generally as system 16. A number of users 120 are able to access system 16 through a communication network 122. Users 120 connect to a communicationserver 104, for which connection access is granted by a system administrator 106. An application server 108 is connected to communication server 104 and provides users 120 with formatted application information that is transmitted to users 120 throughcommunication server 104. Application server 108 is also connected to a database server 118 that operates to access and collect data related to the application. Database server 118 is connected to, and can access, a database 116 to retrieve, store andmodify application related information. Database server 118 is also connected to a tape drive 114 to permit application information to be backed up and stored for safekeeping.Database server 118 is aware of a number of business operations or projects for which a risk management assessment can be made. Business operation 102 is shown coupled to database server 118 as an example of a business operation or project thatfalls under the scope of risk management system 16. Business operation 102 has associated with it business operation information resources 100, which provide data for business operation and projects within business operation 102. In a given businessoperation, a number of projects may be active at any given time, as illustrated by a project 110. Project 110 has associated with it project information resources 112, that provide project related data and data management. Project 110 can also have anumber of applications that support the project operations, as illustrated by a project application 123. Applicant information resources 124 are accessible by application 123 as a data resource for management of application information. The system ofthe present invention uses application 123 as the basis for tracking system information. For example, each application is defined under a business project, which is in turn defined under a business operation. Accordingly, changes to application 123 aretracked throughout the system, and are recorded in, for example, a log file. The system provides a search function to locate various applications, and includes functions to delete applications or change information related to application 123.Risk management system 16 assesses risk related to each application 123, and provides summary risk information for components such as application 123, project 110, and business operation 102, for example. Application server 108 provides users120 with status of the various risks associated with business operation 102, project 110 and applications 123. The information provided to users 120 about risk associated with various applications is accessed through database server 118. Applicationserver 108 also provides an interface for access to risk management system 16 through a display viewable by users 120 once they access the system through communication server 104.Referring now to FIG. 2A, an illustration of views and navigation paths available to users 120 is shown. Users are registered with risk management system 16 through user registration database 20. Registration database 20 can accommodate localand global users to permit access to a login home page 22. Login home page 22 serves as a point of entry and overall frame of reference for risk management system 16. Through home page 22, users 120 can view a risk status summary for an entire businessline through a business operations status display 23, presuming user 120 has been granted authorized executive level access to the system. Business operations status display 23 provides indications of levels of risk associated with various activities ona summary level for given business operations. The statuses of risks for various applications and projects are escalated, consolidated and summarized for display in status display 23. The process by which risk statuses associated with projects andapplications becomes escalated, or promoted, is discussed more fully below.If user 120 wishes to obtain details about risk indications shown in status display 23, they can make a selection to navigate to business operation subdivision status 24, for example by choosing a business operation link. Subdivision status 24is also accessible directly from home page 22 by users with lower seniority than the user authorized for status display 23. Subdivision status 24 provides risk assessment information summarized by subdivision level for a business operation. Forexample, a business operation may be broken into a number of departments, each of which may have a variety of projects and applications for which a cumulative risk assessment may be made. The cumulative risk assessments are displayed in subdivisionstatus 24. A manager responsible for a given operational subdivision can view subdivision risk status information through authorized managerial access in a subdivision status display 25. Subdivision status display 25 is also viewable by executive userswith access to status display 23. Accordingly, each executive or manager has access to all risk status information associated with their management level, as well as all lower business subdivisions for which they have responsibility.If a user selects a particular subdivision of the operation from subdivision status 24, a display of all projects that are active in the selected subdivision is provided in a project status 26. As with the upper business divisions, a projectmanager is given appropriate authorization to view project risk status in a project status display 27. Users with access to status displays 23 and 25 also have access to project status display 27. If the user selects a particular project displayedwithin project status 26, a number of applications associated with the selected project are displayed in an application status 28. Users responsible for particular applications can view an application status display 29 associated with applications forwhich they have been granted authorization. Individuals that have been assigned roles with respect to particular applications are displayed in an application role display 30. The roles involved with a particular application include an informationowner, a project manager and so forth. An information owner has the responsibilities of being aware of applicable control policies, assessment of application security and implementation of maintenance, availability and integrity processes, for example. They are knowledgeable about application confidentiality issues, other assigned role members, and can grant authority for application access. Application status 28 also provides information related to particular applications such as the applicationplatform and location.Each application has associated with it a number of policies for handling technology and information as provided on an enterprise basis. An example of an information policy provides the requirements for disaster recovery preparedness, includingbusiness continuity. The policy may require a plan accessible to a crisis team for recovery, for instance, with the plan being placed in a repository and periodically updated and tested. The level of compliance with the policies associated with a givenapplication provides the associated level of risk for the application. For example, if a policy provides for the privacy of information for certain sensitive applications, a small degree of compliance with the policy may create a large amount of risk. As policies are created, updated or deleted, affected applications must be reevaluated for risk assessments pertinent to the policy changes.The policies involved with an application selected from application status 28 are shown in a policy status 31. Policy status 31 provides a summary view of the policies associated with the selected application, and the present status of thepolicies with regard to risk assessment is shown in a policy status display 32. For each policy, a given application can be in compliance or not in compliance, as discussed in more detail below. If a given application is not in compliance with apolicy, an indication is provided in policy status display 32. The users responsible for assessing risk of non-compliant applications, as designated in application role display 30, are required to provide a risk acknowledgement for the policy, asindicated in a policy risk acknowledgement 33. The responsible user is asked in policy risk acknowledgement 33 to provide a path for obtaining compliance, or to obtain approval and acknowledgement of the issues associated with continuing non-compliance. A discussion of the factors involved in completing risk acknowledgement for a given policy is provided in greater detail below.Referring now to FIG. 2B, a diagram of risk assessment related to regulatory requirements is shown. As with the general business risks associated with the diagram in FIG. 2A, users of the risk management system are first registered to be able toaccess the system. Users can be located locally, or on a remote, global basis as indicated by user registrations 18, 19. Once a user logs into the system, a list of various business operations is displayed, as indicated in business operation status 42. Business operation status 42 shows a list of business operations, and provides a business operation status display 43. Business operation status display 43 shows a summarized set of risk assessment factors associated with regulatory compliance status. Depending on the user's access permissions, a login to the system can place the user at a level equivalent to that of home page 22 or project status 26, for example. In any case, it should be apparent that business operation status 42 can be merged withany of the entry screens according to access permission levels, so that both regulatory and business related risk statuses can be displayed on one screen.Among the risk factors that are displayed is an indication of compliance with federal regulations or requirements. The user can select a regulatory risk status associated with a given business operation from business operation status 42. Oncethe user selects a regulatory status related to a particular business operation, a regulator compliance display 41 is provided for viewing. Each subdivision in regulatory compliance display 41 has several risk assessment components, for which summaryindications of levels of risk are displayed. Each subdivision has a technology compliance status 34, a business compliance status 35 and a corrective action status 36. Each status 34-36 indicates levels of compliance with risk management policies, inaddition to the corrective action status for a given subdivision. The status indicators can be selected for further detailed examination of the status and its derivation. For example, selecting technology compliance status 34 produces a technologyquestion/response display 38.If a given business operation is in compliance with federal regulations, the regulatory indicator displayed in business operation status 42 reflects a positive status as a compilation of responses to risk questionnaires. The risk questionnairescan be viewed as shown by technology question/response display 38, a business question/response display 39 and corrective action plan status 40. Displays 38, 39 show questions related to assessing risk for given activities within a particularsubdivision and business operation that affect the state of compliance with federal regulatory requirements. The responses to the questions posed in displays 38, 39 are yes/no type questions, for example, with attendant comments discussing the response. For example, a positive risk assessment can be obtained even if a risk assessment question is answered in the negative, and the comment section describes procedures put in place to obtain compliance. When the risk management assessor reviews thequestionnaire, she can assign a status of compliant, non-compliant or "warning" for the particular subdivision. Accordingly, a technology or business display 38, 39 having negative responses for compliance, together with compliance plans deemedinappropriate by a reviewer, results in a non-compliant indication for a subdivision.Selecting corrective action status 36 produces corrective action plan status 40, which outlines a path for obtaining compliance with regulatory requirements. If a risk management review results in the decision that the corrective action plan isinadequate, the compliance indicator for the particular subdivision will indicate non-compliance. If the corrective action plan is acceptable after risk management review, the compliance status for the subdivision indicates compliance with regulatoryrequirements.It should be apparent that while various breakouts of organization structures are shown and described according to the present invention, many types of organizational structures are possible. The present invention works equally well, forexample, if an organization is arranged as a partnership or limited liability corporation. In addition, an organization structure that is "flat," or with only very few levels of managerial structures can benefit from the present invention. It shouldalso be apparent that while the regulatory requirements discussed above are based on federal regulations, any type of regulatory or other agency requirements can be used as compliance goals.Technology and business questionnaires that make up and result from displays 38, 39 are also time/date stamped with the author of the questionnaire responses noted. Information related to the author of the response is also available, such as thebusiness division and operation to which they belong, and contact information. For each of the business operations, the executive or manager in charge of the business operation is able to display regulatory compliance status for the business operationon a summary level, as indicated with a business operation status display 43. Status display 43 is limited to access by the particular executive or manager responsible for the business operation for which the risk status is provided. The executive ormanager for the business operation is authorized to view status display 43 by virtue of providing the appropriate logon information when accessing the system initially.Similarly, a subdivision executive or manager can view only the regulatory compliance risk status for their particular subdivision through a regulatory status display 37. Regulatory status display 37 provides a compilation of risk compliantstatuses for the various projects and applications associated with the subdivision for which the manager or executive has responsibility. Similarly, business operation status display 43 provides a compilation of risk compliant status for a businessoperation that includes all subdivisions within the business operation. Accordingly, an executive or manager with authorization to access status display 43 also has access to risk status view 37, associated with particular subdivisions under thebusiness operation.Referring now to FIG. 3, a flow diagram for determining the status of risk indicators for providing a state of health for a business operation, subdivision, project and so forth is shown. The process of determining a state of health isidentified in step 50 and begins in step 51 with obtaining and identifying compliance related information for a given application. While the invention is illustrated in FIG. 3 as being oriented toward applications, it should be apparent that the othertypes of risk related activities are contemplated. For example, the activities associated with a business operation, subdivision or project are also contemplated. In addition, activities related to various aspects of business are considered to beavailable for application of the present invention. For example, marketing, sales, research and engineering activities are all considered to be within the purview of risk assessment according to the present invention.Pertinent applicable business and technology control policies are obtained and applied comparatively to determine whether the criteria for the control policies is met by the state of the compliance information associated with the application instep 52. Any risk acknowledgement information, including approved responses and status of compliance plans, is also obtained in step 52. The critical business aspects and sensitivity related to various portions of the application are obtained andapplied in step 53. Criticality ratings for the various risk related aspects of the application are discussed in more detail below. The sensitivity of an application is also discussed in determining how much risk to assign various applications, andwhen non-compliance is escalated to a higher managerial level.In step 54, a self-assessment questionnaire response is obtained, consisting of a series of questions that must be answered with appropriate responses to produce compliance. It should be apparent that the assessment can be conductedinteractively online, for example, but is not to be considered so limited. For example, the assessment can be accomplished through the use of paper forms, or a combination of paper and electronic media. After the assessment, the process then proceedsto a decision step 55 in which a determination is made as to whether the application in question has been assessed for risk compliance. If an assessment has not been completed, the process branches from decision step 55 to a pending approval indicator56. Pending approval indicator 56 indicates that further entry is required for one or more inputs, or that the application has not passed completely through the assessment and approval process. If an assessment has been made, decision step 55 branchesto a comparison step 57, in which the status of compliance is determined based on applicable control policies and self-assessment of application sensitivity and criticality.In decision step 58 a determination is made on whether the application is in compliance, either by meeting all the requirements of the applicable control policies in the various risk assessments, or by having an approved process or plan in placeto achieve compliance. If the application is compliant, decision step 58 branches to compliant indicator step 59. Compliant indicator step 59 provides a visual indication that is displayed to the user to show that the particular application is incompliance with the guidelines established by the control policies.If the application is not in compliance as determined in decision step 58, the process branches to decision step 60, where a determination is made on whether the institution of a new policy has prevented a particular application from being incompliance. If a new policy, or an amendment to an existing policy, has prevented compliance, the process branches to incomplete step 61, in which a visual indicator identifying the risk assessment as incomplete is displayed to the user. The processcontinues after incomplete step 61 to input step 65, in which the user can be prompted for additional input, or completion of policy questions that remain unanswered. Once the input or answers to policy questions are obtained, the process fordetermining the state of health with regard to risk assessment can be initiated from the beginning to obtain a further compliance indication result.If a new policy or amendment to a current policy has not been made, as determined in decision step 60, the process continues with decision step 62, which determines whether a risk acknowledgement has been approved. Risk acknowledgement approvalis needed when the strictures of a control policy have not been met and the risk is either deemed to be acceptable because of various issues of practicality, or a plan to achieve compliance has been formulated or is in progress. A risk managementassessor reviews areas of non-compliance and the associated risk acknowledgements to provide approval if appropriate. If a risk acknowledgement is not appropriate for approval, decision step 62 branches to indicator step 63 in which an indication ofcritical lack of compliance is annunciated. Indicator step 63 provides a visual display to the user to inform them that they are (1) not in compliance and (2) have a non-approved risk acknowledgement. If a risk acknowledgement has been made andapproved by a risk management assessor, decision step 62 branches to a warning indicator step 64. Warning indicator step 64 provides the user with a visual display showing that a risk exists because of non-compliance with one or more control policies,but the risk is either deemed acceptable for one or more reasons, or an approved plan is in place to achieve compliance.It should be apparent that while the user is presented with a visual indication of risk status as a result of the process shown in FIG. 3, the status need not be a visual indication, but rather can be any kind of indicia that informs the userabout the level of risk for a given application. For example, risk indications can be in the form of audible warnings or in a printed format. While the preferred embodiments of the present invention provides status indicators of different color,namely, green for compliant, amber for warning, red for critical, blue for incomplete and gray for pending approval, the present invention should not be considered to be so limited in general. For example, an indication of risk status based onindicators of varying shape can be used to inform users of risk status on electronic devices that do not have color displays. Alternately, a color and shape indication can be used in combination to permit the present system to be used in a number ofplatforms in a flexible manner. Numerous other forms of indicators should be apparent to those skilled in the art, which are not mentioned here for the sake of brevity, but should nevertheless be considered to be within the scope of the presentinvention.Referring now to FIG. 4, a flow diagram of a process for obtaining risk acknowledgement is shown. The risk acknowledgement process begins at process identifier 70 and continues to decision step 71, in which an assessment of the critical natureof the application is made. If the application is not deemed to be highly critical, decision step 71 branches to result step 72, which indicates that no risk acknowledgement is needed and no compliance issues are raised. If result step 72 is reached,the risk status is essentially a non-event that is not promoted to higher levels of management or included in risk status summaries or compilations.If it is determined in decision step 71 that a particular control policy is applicable to the given application, decision step 71 branches to proceed to decision step 73, in which a determination of compliance with applicable control policies ismade. As discussed above, compliance with control policies takes into account application activities and assessments, as well as application sensitivity. If the application complies with the various applicable control policies, decision step 73branches to result step 74, in which an indication of control policy compliance is set. This risk status indication set in result step 74 may be promoted to higher levels of management if the application, project, subdivision, etc. is identified ashighly critical or highly sensitive, as discussed more fully below.If the result of decision step 73 is that various aspects of the application do not comply with control policies, decision step 73 branches to proceed to decision step 75. This path through the flow diagram shown in FIG. 4 is exercised if theperson responsible for assessing compliance of an application provides a negative answer in response to control policy related questions. A negative response to a control policy question indicates that the given application or project, etc. is not incompliance with one or more applicable control policies. Once the user submits a negative response, they are prompted to view another application with a similar platform in which risk acknowledgement or compliance processes are already in place.Accordingly, in decision step 75 the user is allowed to select whether another compliant process should be considered. If the user wants to consider another available compliance process, also referred to as a best practice, decision step 75branches to result step 76, in which the user can obtain a copy of the available compliance process. The copy of the compliance process is used in a process for risk acknowledgement and providing a plan to achieve compliance with the appropriate controlpolicy. If the user chooses to adopt the processes available in result step 76, the compliance process continues to decision step 73, in which the application is again checked for compliance.If the user chooses not to use available compliance processes to achieve compliance, decision step 75 branches to a series of risk acknowledgement related processes beginning with an application information step 77. Step 77 begins the process ofrisk acknowledgement by accepting information about the application including such items as the owner of the application or information, the business operation, the control policy that is the subject of the risk acknowledgement and so forth. Once allthe background information related to the application and the noncompliance is gathered, the process proceeds to a step 78 in which the application and aspect of the application related to the control policy is rated for sensitivity. A sensitivityrating can be obtained from an aggregation of several sensitivity rating assessments. For example, the user can rate the application, or aspect of the application related to the control policy as: highly sensitive, sensitive, internal public and notapplicable.After providing a sensitivity rating in step 78, the process proceeds to an impact rating in step 79. The impact rating relates to potential outcomes for various types of abrogations of the control policy. For example, possible impact ratingsinclude, on a scale from high impact to low impact: catastrophic; severe; moderate; and low. Following the impact rating, the process continues to step 80, in which the user is asked to rate the occurrence probability of a risk related event impactingthe application related to non-compliance with the associated control policy. Selections for probability can be, for example: high; medium; and low. Once the rating factors in steps 78, 79 and 80 are entered, the procedure continues with step 81.In step 81, the user is asked to justify the reasons for risk acknowledgement and enter information that can be transferred to a risk management assessor for review. The process then continues to step 82 in which the user is asked to inputinformation related to compensation and control procedures that can reduce the risk of non-compliance with the control policy. Again, this information is input in a format that can be transferred to a risk management assessor for review. The processthen continues with step 83, in which the user is asked to input information related to implementation of a plan to bring the application into compliance with the particular control policy. As with steps 81 and 82, the user inputs information in aformat that can be transferred to a risk management assessor for review.Once a user enters all of the information related to risk acknowledgement in steps 77-83, the risk acknowledgement information is submitted for review and approval in step 84. While the risk acknowledgement information is pending approval instep 84, any user accessing the risk status is presented with a visual indicator of the risk acknowledgement status to indicate that approval is still pending, and the approval period has not yet expired.While the risk acknowledgement information is pending approval, a risk management assessor can review the risk acknowledgement information in decision step 85 and decide whether to approve the risk acknowledgement. Decision step 85 alsorepresents a default decision that occurs if the period during which approval is pending expires, indicating that no approval has been granted. Accordingly, decision step 85 branches to step 86 if approval has been granted, and branches to step 87 ifapproval is not granted for the risk acknowledgement information. In step 86, a warning indicator displayed to the user indicates approval of the risk acknowledgement information. A warning indication informs the user that the application is not incompliance with control policies, but that an approved risk acknowledgement response is in place. Step 87 also provides a visual indication to the user, in this case indicating that the application is not in compliance with one or more control policies,and no approved corrective action plan is in place. Accordingly, the indicator produced in step 87 is considered a critical indicator for the level of risk associated with non-compliance in the particular application. Once a risk acknowledgementresponse is in place, the user can renew the response if a time limit is set for compliance, for instance, and an assessor approves the risk acknowledgement renewal. In addition, once a risk acknowledgement is approved, a notification is sent to allother members assigned to roles associated with the particular application. Other notifications to the members having a role in the risk assessment process can include a thirty day warning prior to expiration of a risk acknowledgement approval period,and a warning that a corrective action plan is due to expire.The processes shown and described in FIGS. 3 and 4 are related to each other in that FIG. 3 shows how compliance level indicators are determined, while FIG. 4 shows how risk acknowledgement indicators are produced. FIG. 4 is a more detaileddescription of the manner in which risk is assessed for a particular application, project, etc. related to risk acknowledgement. FIG. 3 integrates risk acknowledgement status in an overall indication of risk status for an application, project and soforth.Referring now to FIG. 5, a chart for use with entering information related to risk acknowledgement is shown. The form in FIG. 5 is an electronic format form that can be filled out by a user online. The form, shown generally as a form 99,includes a section 90 identifying the type of risk acknowledgement information entered on the form. The type of risk acknowledgement information includes new, permanent, renewal and review information. A section 91 of form 99 provides informationrelated to the application or information for which the risk assessment is conducted. These items of information include the information or application owner, the business operation, department names, applicable policy identifiers and so forth. Section92 is provided for ranking sensitivity of the information or application. The sensitivity rankings in section 92 include highly sensitive, sensitive, internal, public and not applicable.Section 93 permits the user to select an entry for potential impact of activities associated with non-compliance of the identified control policy. Potential impact entries selectable by the user include: catastrophic, severe, moderate and low. Section 94 allows the user to select a likely probability of occurrence for risk related events. For example, if an event occurred that the identified control policy is formulated to prevent, and this particular application is likely to incur the sametype of risk events, the probability might be ranked high. Selections available for the user to rank the probability of occurrence are high, medium and low.The remaining sections of form 99 are open entry style sections that allow the user to enter information that is generally applicable to risk acknowledge. For example, in section 95 the user is asked to input a statement describing the reasonsfor the risk acknowledgement. In section 96, the user can enter information describing controls and procedures that can compensate for non-compliance, or reduce the resulting risk from non-compliance. In section 97, the user is requested to discuss thebackground of the potential impact of non-compliance for the application or information. Section 98 allows the user to input a description of an implementation plan that is structured to achieve compliance with policy controls applicable to theinformation or application.Referring now to FIG. 6, a sample chart available to a user for rating risk is shown. Chart 129 has a number of rows related to questions that can assist in rating the application or information for risk sensitivity. The chart, as with FIG. 5,is available online, so that the user can make entries in electronic format and transfer the document to a reviewer. The user fills in the chart by assigning severity ratings for risk categories identified as DISCLOSED, MODIFIED and REPUDIATED. Theuser assigns a severity rating to each column associated with each of the questions in these several rows. For example, in response to question 2, in the second row, the user may rate disclosure as severe, modification as moderate, and repudiation ascatastrophic.Once all the entries in the chart have been completed, the user can submit the form for use with the risk status process. For example, a highly sensitive application, as determined through chart 129, which is not in compliance with one or morecontrol policies, is assigned a risk factor indication of critical. The critical risk factor indication may supersede the controls in place for risk acknowledgement, if the application is indicated as being extremely sensitive in several areas, forexample.Referring now to FIG. 7, a flow diagram of promotion of a risk status through various managerial levels is shown. As discussed above, applications with sensitivity ratings that are very high have risk status indicators that are promoted to uppermanagerial levels for a manager risk status summaries. The process is identified in step 130, which continues with decision step 131. Decision step 131 makes the determination as to whether the application or information is critical to a particularproject, business subdivision, or business operation, for example. If the application or information is not critical, decision step 131 branches to step 133, which prevents promotion of the risk status associated with the application to anothermanagerial level. If the application is indicated as critical in decision step 131, a branch to decision step 132 is executed. Applications that are under development are not considered critical for this purpose, nor highly sensitive, and will not havetheir risk status promoted. Once an application is in actual production use, it will be susceptible to risk status promotion.In decision step 132, a determination is made about whether the application has been rated highly sensitive in combination with non-compliance of one or more control policies. If a compliance status indicator shows critical, or indicatesnon-compliance, or if an application is rated as being sensitive and it has a risk status associated with it indicating a warning, then decision step 132 branches to promotion step 134. In step 134 the relevant risk statuses are promoted to the nextmanagerial level. A manager of a business subdivision, for example, can view a risk status display composed of a compilation of risk statuses for various projects and applications associated with the business subdivision that is within his managerialpurview. Accordingly, when a risk status is promoted to a managerial level, such as the level associated with a subdivision manager, step 134 serves to present appropriate statuses for the various projects and applications associated with thesubdivision.Referring now to FIG. 8, a high level display 159 shows a high level manager risk status view. In display 159, a senior business executive responsible for a major business operation can view the top level status of compliance and risk managementfor the business operation. In display 159, a number of selection elements 157 provide the business executive with options for reviewing risk and compliance for various levels of the business operation. Risk and compliance status elements for the toplevel of the business operation are shown in an indicator section 158. As illustrated in section 158, the business operations are shown as being in compliance with applicable policies, non-compliant, in progress, compliant with compensating controls inplace, unassigned or not applicable. A warning indicator is shown under the heading "Managing Risk", for instance. This indicator shows that an instance of non-compliance exists at a lower level with a low sensitivity level, or an approved riskacknowledgement procedure is provided for a non-compliant feature. As discussed above, the business executive can select the warning indicator to be provided with a display expanding the compilation that has resulted in the warning indicator in section158. Section 158 also shows YES/NO indicators for both "Corrective Action Plan" and "Risk Acknowledgement" headings. These indicators reflect the logic used to determine when an indicator to the left should be promoted.Referring for a moment to FIG. 2A, the view shown in display 159 is equivalent to that available in status display 23. Accordingly, a senior business executive can access a top level status display once they have logged into home page 22, andare recognized as a senior business executive, responsible for this particular business operation.Referring now to FIG. 9, views of consolidated risk management displays are shown. The displays illustrate the linking facility between a business operation, a division and groups within a division hosing various applications. The displays,shown generally as displays 139, 149 and 159, provide a status view of control policy compliance related to various aspects of a business operation. Tabs 157 can be selected to display a technology risk management state of health, technology riskawareness reports or application information. Link selectors 141 provide the user with access to various portions of the general system such as a start screen (home), feedback, signout, and so forth. The status of compliance with regard to varioussubdivisions for a business operation is shown in chart 125. A column 142 of chart 125 displays managers related to a particular subdivision within the business operation. Column 143 describes the subdivision for which the managers listed in column 142have responsibility. Column 144 displays indicators related to compliance with federal regulations. Round circles in column 144 indicate compliance (preferably colored green in practice), while down arrow indicators show non-compliance (preferablycolored red in practice). Accordingly, the business subdivision labeled "Regional Banking Group" is indicated as being not in compliance with federal regulations.Referring for a moment to FIG. 8, column 145 illustrates the status of compliance with regard to risk management. Warning symbols in column 145 (see FIG. 8) are shown as diamonds (preferably colored amber in practice). Accordingly, the firstentry in column 145 is not in compliance, while the fourth and last entries indicate a warning for compliance. The third entry in column 144 shows an example of a business subdivision in compliance with regulatory requirements. Column 146 shows whethera corrective action plan is in place for each of the business subdivisions. The same indications of compliance, warning and non-compliance are used to provide indications for each of the entries in columns 144, 145. The entries in columns 146, 147provide a YES/NO indication to mark the status of the business subdivisions with respect to corrective action plans and risk acknowledgement.Column 147 shows the status of risk acknowledgement for the various business subdivisions. As illustrated in chart 125, the first two entries of column 147 indicate yes and no, respectively, for risk acknowledgement. The first entry is pairedwith an indication of non-compliance in columns 144, 145, meaning that a lower level business operation lacks compliance and does not have a satisfactory corrective action plan or risk acknowledgement. The second entry in columns 146, 147 is paired withan indication of in progress, meaning that a lower level business operation has a non-compliant application, but has compensating corrective action in place, even though the risk acknowledgement is negative.Referring again to FIG. 9, the various displays 139, 149 and 159 are available to the business managers indicated in column 142, and the various lower level managers responsible for subdivisions, projects or applications can only view display 139or 149, appropriate to their permission level. For example, if the business manager indicated in the last entry in column 142 wishes to see the underlying statuses for the federal compliance indicator in the first row of column 144, she can select thelower level link, indicated as an underline in the title of the corresponding entry in column 143. The business operation manager can thus view the status of risk with regard to the various subdivisions, as indicated in chart 126 of display 139. Forexample, if the manager selects the first entry in column 143 of chart 126, a view such as that shown in display 149 is provided. In chart 127 of display 149, the status of various subdivisions for the selected business operation is provided. As can beseen in chart 127, only one entry indicates a status of non-compliance. Upon promotion of these statuses to the next higher managerial level, such as that shown in the first row in display 139 of FIG. 9, the status indicators appear as beingnon-compliant. If the indicators in chart 127 showed non-compliance, or showed a warning status because of a high sensitivity rating, they would be promoted to the next higher managerial level and be displayed as warning or non-compliant indicators,depending on their sensitivity, in chart 126.Tabs 157 permit the user to select an application for update or review of the risk status. A user can request to add, modify or delete an application, and accordingly change the associated risk status. Selection of a particular application forreview allows the user to see all the applicable policies for that application, and the status indicators regarding the policy compliance. For example, each policy associated with an application is listed, and each entry in the list has an indicatorthat provides an assessment status at a glance, such as compliant, non-compliant, pending, not applicable, and so forth. The listed policies can be selected to review responses to policy questions and ratings for application sensitivity and criticality. If a policy is added, changed or deleted, the affected user or person assigned a risk related role with respect to the application receives a notification. The user can then access the policy directly to review the changes and respond to new risk ratingcriteria.If an application has an outside vendor related component, for example if a third party furnishes a portion of the application functionality, any risks related to the outside vendor can be incorporated into the system. For example, if the vendorbreaches a contract term, discloses confidential material, or provides inadequate support for the supplied components, these factors can be incorporated into an application risk assessment and rated according to severity. In addition, if an outsidevendor wishes to take part in the risk assessment, they can receive feedback on the effectiveness of a corrective action plan, or receive specifications for achieving policy compliance, for example. It should be apparent that many other types of vendorinteraction are contemplated by the present invention, with the main focus being coordination of risk assessment and corrective action plans.Referring to FIG. 2A, reports 21 are also available for providing aggregated information based on several criteria. For example, a report can be generated to summarize risk statuses by each policy in a business operation. Alternately, reportscan summarize risk related to corrective action plans or risk acknowledgement. These reports can be very useful to upper levels of management in a hierarchically organized enterprise, since policies can be evaluated easily for compliance, and informeddecisions on funding initiatives can be made at the highest levels. The report information is also exportable in a number of formats for simple cross platform transfer and use.Referring now to FIG. 10, a display of policies is provided with compliance indicators. Each policy is in the form of a hyperlink that the user can select to immediately jump to a status of their responsibility for that policy. For example, aproject manager can select the "Network Security" policy that has a warning indicator, and review the portions of the policy that represent risks related to implementation of the project she manages. The manager can review the procedures in placedirectly from the policy link screen, and input procedures or responses to overcome the risk. FIG. 10 thus illustrates an abstract path for policy compliance for any level manager, whether at an operation, division, project or application level. Thedisplay shown in FIG. 10 also provides an indication of the compliance status for all policies related to the manager's responsibility level. The manager can thus determine at a glance which aspects of their risk status is in compliance, and which mayneed further responses.Referring now to FIG. 11, a flow diagram of a process for establishing new entries in the risk management system according to the present invention is shown. The process begins with the user accessing the system through a login 160. From login160, the user is able to select from three choices: a risk management status 161; a new application entry 162; and an application parameter editing 163. Selection of risk management status 161 provides the user with various displays already illustrated,such as business operation compliant status 164, which is equivalent to display 159 shown in FIG. 8. If the user selects new application entry 162, the process proceeds to decision step 165 in which a determination is made as to whether the user is aninformation owner or a project manager. If the user is neither an information owner nor a project manager, decision step 165 branches back to the login screen state provided through login 160. If the user is determined to be an information owner or aproject manager, decision step 165 branches to information entry step 166.In information entry step 166, the user enters details about the new application, such as the application name, the project manager, the information owner and so forth. The process then proceeds to assignment step 167, in which roles for theapplication are assigned to various individuals. The assignment of a role within the scope of the new application provides the assignee with certain responsibilities related to tracking and managing risk criteria. Once the appropriate roles areassigned, the process proceeds to application questionnaire step 168. In step 168, the information owner or project manager answers a series of questions related to the application. The information owner or project manager then submits the completedquestionnaire in electronic format, and the process continues to notification step 170.Notification step 170 provides notification to all individuals assigned to roles for responsibilities in the new application. The persons that are notified in notification step 170 are automatically provided authorized access to the riskmanagement system associated with the new application. The notification received in notification step 170 instructs the individuals on how to login through login step 160 and select application editing step 163. Once the individuals with roles andresponsibilities related to the application enter editing step 163, they are prompted to choose the application for which they have been assigned responsibility or a role in step 171. Once the users selects the application for which they have a role ora responsibility, the process continues with step 172, in which the user identifies themselves according to their role with respect to the chosen application. For example, the user may select one or more roles to which they have been assigned forresponsibility during the creation of the application in the risk management system. The user may have more than one role, such as, for example, security administrator and project manager.Once the user selects the role with which they have been identified for the application, the process continues with step 173 in which the user is presented with questionnaires related to their respective roles. The questionnaires provided instep 173 are preferably partially completed with existing information available for the application. The user need only complete questionnaire sections that are still blank or that require further response. With the completion of the questionnaire, theuser submits the responses and the process continues with step 174. In step 174, the project manager and/or information owner is notified that the questionnaire for a particular role has been completed. Upon notification, the process moves to step 175,in which the project manager or information owner can review the responses submitted in the role questionnaires. Once the questionnaires are reviewed, the process continues with step 176, in which the collected and reviewed questionnaires are submittedto the risk management system for review and approval. In step 177, a risk management assessor reviews the complete application, including the information provided by the information owner/project manager and the responses provided by the individualsassigned to the various roles.Once the risk management assessor has reviewed all the aspects of the application, they can take appropriate action that results in the setting of indicator statuses denoting compliance with control policies and risk acknowledgement in step 178. At this point, the application has been entered into the risk management system, and individuals responsible for various aspects of maintaining compliance with control policies can access and update the system, as described above.Among the information entered in step 168, for example, are hardware requirements, hardware locations and vendors, associated applications, software licenses, software vendors and so forth. The initiator of the new application also responds toquestions such as whether the application will run on a mainframe, mini-computer or local network, whether the information related to the application will be stored on a LAN, if disaster recovery is needed, and whether any business plans should beupdated.When the entire process for the new application has been completed, such as in step 177, time frames for compliance are set so that the compliance status indicators that are shown as pending will, after the compliance time frames, be set toappropriate indications of status, in step 178. For example, if the initial application is not in compliance with one or more control policies, the status indicators related to compliance with the particular control policies will show that a compliancestatus is pending. After the time frame for response expires, if no action has been taken with regard to obtaining compliance for the non-compliant aspects of the application, the related status indicators will show a critical indication that will bepromoted to the next managerial level, as discussed above.Referring now to FIG. 12, a flow diagram for a process of receiving authorization for access to the risk management system is shown. The process begins in step 180 with the user accessing a registration request form from the risk managementsystem introductory display. The user is prompted to fill out a request form, and submits the registration request in step 181. Once the request for registration is submitted, the user receives notification confirming receipt of the request in step182. The acknowledgement of the receipt of the registration request serves as a check on access to the system to provide a security feature for the system.System administrators and risk management administrators review the request for access to the system in step 183 to provide a multi-level approval structure. Administrators can search for a user profile and create, modify or delete user profilesin the system. User profiles may contain a number of pieces of information related to access of the system, such as a business ID, an accounting center, e-mail addresses, title and job grade, and so forth. Once the appropriate approvals have beengranted, the user is notified in step 184. The user is provided with a logon ID, and an initial password. Once notified, the user can login as shown in step 185, using the login ID provided and the initial password. Once the user gains access to thesystem using the logon ID and password provided, the system prompts the user to provide a new password of the user's choosing. According to various security protocols, the user is preferably informed of password conventions such as, for example, use ofa mix of alphanumeric characters and non obvious combinations, such as passwords resembling logon IDs. Once the user is admitted to the system in step 185, the user is provided with a number of administrative tracking features, such as connection time,logon time outs, periods of inactivity and so forth.Changes to the user account can be made through the same process shown in FIG. 12, by submitting a request for approval through the relevant administrators. The user can also request such typical administrative activities as password resetting,lockouts, releases and so forth.Although the present invention has been described in relation to particular embodiments thereof, many other variations and modifications and other uses will become apparent to those skilled in the art. It is preferred, therefore, that thepresent invention be limited not by the specific disclosure herein, but only by the appended claims.* * * * *
Register and get access to “System And Method For Managing Global Risk - Patent 7433829”
Login to continue downloading: “System And Method For Managing Global Risk - Patent 7433829”
7+ Documents Related to “System And Method For Managing Global Risk - Patent 7433829”