In the ABCD RM model, the A combines Identify and Assess Hazards to lay the groundwork for effective risk management.

In the ABCD RM model, what steps does the "A" combine?

• A. Assess and Control Risks
• B. Assess and Mitigate Risks
• C. Identify and Assess Hazards
• D. Analyze and Consult

Answer: (C)

The choice indicating that the "A" in the ABCD RM model combines the steps of "Identify and Assess Hazards" is accurate because it reflects the foundational processes in risk management. The initial step in any risk management framework involves identifying hazards that could pose risks to an organization. Following this identification, assessing these hazards is crucial to understand their potential impact and likelihood. This dual approach of identifying and assessing is essential in laying the groundwork for effective risk management strategies. Identifying hazards provides the context for understanding what risks exist, while assessing them quantifies their potential effects, aiding in prioritization and subsequent decision-making. In operational risk management, this process is vital for developing a comprehensive view of the risks an organization faces, ensuring that more robust measures are in place for risk control, mitigation, and overall management. This particular integration of identifying and assessing hazards serves as a springboard for the subsequent steps in the risk management process, such as controlling, mitigating, or responding to those identified risks.

What the A in ABCD RM really means, and why it matters

If you’ve ever wrestled with risk at work, you know the moment you spot a hazard can feel like finding a loose thread in a sweater. You pull, and suddenly the whole thing trembles. In Operational Risk Management (ORM), that first move—what the A stands for in the ABCD RM model—is the part that sets the tone for everything that follows. It’s not flashy, but it’s foundational.

Let’s unpack what A really combines and why that pairing matters.

A stands for Identify and Assess Hazards

Here’s the neat, practical truth: you don’t know which risks you’re dealing with until you’ve identified the hazards that could cause trouble. Then you assess those hazards to understand how much trouble they could cause and how likely they are. In short, identify + assess = the map you use before you decide on any controls or responses.

If you’re picturing a two-step process, that’s true in a way. But in practice, the two steps are tightly connected. Finding a hazard feeds the assessment, and the assessment sharpens your sense of what counts as a “serious” hazard. It’s a loop you want to keep healthy, not a one-shot checklist.

Why identifying hazards first is essential

• Clarity first, action later: Hazards are the raw material. If you don’t see them clearly, you’ll chase the wrong fixes and waste time (and energy).

• Context matters: Hazards aren’t just “things that could happen.” They are the sources of potential harm within your specific system, process, or environment.

• Baseline for risk levels: Once you know what could go wrong, you can estimate likelihood and consequence in a structured way. That gives you a defensible basis for prioritizing actions.

Hazards vs. risks: two sides of the same coin

A lot of teams slip when they mix these terms up. Here’s a simple way to keep them straight:

• Hazard: a source or situation with the potential to cause harm (a messy chemical pipe, a fatigued operator, a software bug that could crash a system).

• Risk: the chance that harm occurs, taking into account how likely the hazard is and how bad the consequences would be, often with existing controls in mind.

Identifying hazards is about spotting the sources of trouble. Assessing hazards is about judging how big a deal they could be, given your current controls and environment.

How to perform Identify and Assess Hazards in practice

Think of this as a practical workflow you can apply across industries and settings.

1. Gather a cross-functional team.

Invite people who actually work the process day to day—the folks who notice the small, odd details that stick out only after a long shift. A fresh set of eyes helps you catch what you might miss.

2. Use a mix of methods to identify hazards.

• Process mapping and walkthroughs: trace each step, from start to finish, and ask, “What could go wrong here?”

• Checklists built from past incidents: what failed before, and why.

• Historical data and near-misses: what didn’t happen yet, but could.

• Inspections and SMT (subject matter tests): hands-on checks reveal hidden hazards.

• Brainstorming with a light touch: encourage ideas without judging them too early.

3. Create a hazards log.

Record each hazard with a short description, where it exists, who is exposed, and any early warning signs you’ve seen. Think of this as your hazard diary for the system.

4. Move to assessment with a clear lens.

Ask: How likely is this hazard to cause harm? How severe would the harm be? Do existing controls reduce either likelihood or impact? If a hazard is unlikely but catastrophic, it deserves attention even if it isn’t frequent.

5. Prioritize, don’t get overwhelmed.

Not all hazards are equal. Use a simple risk ranking (for example, a matrix that combines likelihood and consequence) to decide where to focus. If you’ve got a hazard in a high-impact, medium-likelihood box, it’s usually worth a closer look.

6. Document the outcome.

A concise risk record that links hazards to assessed risk levels keeps everyone on the same page. It also helps later when you design controls or monitor changes.

A practical glimpse: how this plays out in different settings

• Manufacturing plant: A hazard could be a machine with a known vibration issue. Identifying it means cataloging where it shows up and what could happen if it worsens. Assessing it weighs the probability of a failure against the severity of potential injury or downtime. With that picture, maintenance can prioritize parts replacement, and operators get targeted training to spot early warning signs.

• Healthcare facility: A hazard might be a medication labeling error in a busy ward. Identification includes checking all points of entry—prescriptions, dispensing, and administration. Assessment considers the potential patient harm and the likelihood given current checks and double-checks. This often leads to process changes like barcoding, better storage layout, or pharmacy-led double checks.

• IT and cybersecurity: A hazard could be an outdated software component with known vulnerabilities. Identifying it means inventorying systems, versions, and patch status. Assessing risk weighs the chance of exploitation against the impact on operations and data. The next steps might include segmentation, patching schedules, or compensating controls to reduce exposure.

What comes after A? A quick peek into the flow

Identifying and assessing hazards isn’t the endgame. It’s the landing strip for the rest of the ORM process. Once you’ve got a solid A, you can move to B (which would be about building and operating controls to manage those hazards), C (addressing changes and continuity, including contingency plans), and D (monitoring performance and reporting so improvements stay alive). If the A is weak, the whole runway becomes bumpy.

A few common pitfalls—and how to avoid them

• Assuming hazard lists are complete: Hazards evolve as processes change. Schedule regular reviews, and don’t rely on a single session.

• Overloading the log with minor issues: Keep a filter. Prioritize hazards by how much damage they could do and how often they occur.

• Confusing causes with hazards: A tool failure is a hazard; a failed calibration is a hazard trigger. Make sure the log differentiates sources, conditions, and potential consequences.

• Underestimating human factors: Fatigue, training gaps, and improper communication often hide in plain sight. Include people and culture in your identification and assessment.

Tools and methods you’ll likely encounter

• Risk matrix: A simple grid that helps you weigh likelihood against consequence. It’s not the whole story, but it’s a solid guiding compass.

• Bow-tie analysis: A visual method showing how hazards lead to top events and how barriers prevent or fail. Great for communicating risk to leaders who want a clear picture.

• HAZOP (Hazard and Operability Study): A detailed approach common in process industries. It’s thorough and sometimes heavy, but it catches subtle interactions that casual reviews miss.

• ISO 31000 principles: A framework that emphasizes context, leadership, and continual improvement. It’s a standards-based backbone you can align with without stifling your own process.

Real-world rhythm: staying grounded while you scale

The moment you shift from “what could go wrong?” to “how bad could it be, and how likely is it?” you start building a living, breathing risk picture. And yes, that means you’ll often revisit the A as conditions change—new equipment, new suppliers, shifting workflows, or even a global event that alters risk perception. The best teams treat hazard identification and assessment as ongoing conversations, not a single, ceremonial exercise.

A gentle nudge toward continuous resilience

ORM isn’t just about avoiding trouble. It’s about resilience—being ready to bounce back when something does go wrong. When hazards are identified early and assessed honestly, you’re not waiting for a crisis to reveal gaps. You’ve already mapped out where to act, what to monitor, and how to adjust. That kind of preparedness becomes part of the culture, not a one-off project.

A friendly mental model you can carry forward

Think of the A as laying the foundation for a sturdy house. If you rush the foundation, the walls will creak with every gust of wind. But when you invest time in identifying hazards and sizing up their potential, you create a structure that can weather storms. It’s not about chasing every possible risk—it's about building a robust, responsive system that helps people work safely and confidently.

Bringing it back to everyday decision-making

Here’s a small, practical takeaway: the next time you’re evaluating a process or a change, pause at the A. Ask yourself two quick questions:

• What are the hazards that could disrupt this process or harm someone?

• How likely is each hazard, and how severe would the impact be if it happened, even with current safeguards?

If the answers aren’t crisp, bring in a few colleagues for a quick hazard-identification session. A fresh set of eyes can reveal a hazard you hadn’t noticed, and a quick assessment can reveal where your risk controls are strong—or where they’re not.

A final reflection

The A in the ABCD RM model is deceptively simple, but it carries a big responsibility. Identify what could go wrong. Assess how big that risk is. Do it early, do it often, and do it with a clear view of the real-world context. When you start there, you’re not just ticking boxes—you’re building a safer operation, one hazard at a time.

If you’re curious, I’d love to hear about how your team tackles hazard identification. What methods have you found most effective in practice? Share a quick example or a lesson learned, and we’ll keep the conversation going—because good risk management is a living craft, not a static checklist.