RSK2601
ASSIGNMENT 1
DUE DATE: 1 APRIL 2026
, RSK2601 ASSIGNMENT 1 2026
DUE 1 APRIL 2026
Assessment of Board Responsibility for Emerging Risks in
Accordance with King IV Principle 11
Introduction
Corporate governance in South Africa is anchored by the King IV Report on
Corporate Governance for South Africa, which adopts an outcome-based
approach to ensure organisations are directed ethically and effectively.
Principle 11 of King IV specifically mandates that the governing body
should govern risk in a way that supports the organisation in setting and
achieving its strategic objectives . This principle moves beyond mere
compliance, requiring that risk management be integrated into the strategic
fabric of the organisation, encompassing both threats and opportunities. In
the context of the scenario where a financial services company suffered a
major cyberattack after delegating all cybersecurity responsibilities to the IT
department with limited board oversight, this assessment critically
evaluates the board’s failure to uphold its fiduciary duties in accordance
with Principle 11. The board’s approach was fragmented and reactive,
directly contradicting the holistic and strategic risk governance model
prescribed by King IV.
ASSIGNMENT 1
DUE DATE: 1 APRIL 2026
, RSK2601 ASSIGNMENT 1 2026
DUE 1 APRIL 2026
Assessment of Board Responsibility for Emerging Risks in
Accordance with King IV Principle 11
Introduction
Corporate governance in South Africa is anchored by the King IV Report on
Corporate Governance for South Africa, which adopts an outcome-based
approach to ensure organisations are directed ethically and effectively.
Principle 11 of King IV specifically mandates that the governing body
should govern risk in a way that supports the organisation in setting and
achieving its strategic objectives . This principle moves beyond mere
compliance, requiring that risk management be integrated into the strategic
fabric of the organisation, encompassing both threats and opportunities. In
the context of the scenario where a financial services company suffered a
major cyberattack after delegating all cybersecurity responsibilities to the IT
department with limited board oversight, this assessment critically
evaluates the board’s failure to uphold its fiduciary duties in accordance
with Principle 11. The board’s approach was fragmented and reactive,
directly contradicting the holistic and strategic risk governance model
prescribed by King IV.
