While I still don’t quite understand the intense focus on defining GRC among GRC consultants, analysts, and vendors, this column by Lumigent Technologies President and CEO John Capobianco helped me understand that the motivation behind this focus extends beyond competitive positioning.

Here’s a snippet, one of several passages that contain valuable food for (GRC) thought:

The CGO [chief governance officer] is likely to be more valuable than the CCO simply due to the relationship between compliance and governance. … The CCO’s responsibilities, then, are really the chief financial officer’s job. Once compliance and compliance reporting are under control, the company is in a position to better evaluate, understand, and mitigate risks over time. And those capabilities blend with corporate wellness or corporate governance, which is really focused on making the most out of a business, making it more valuable after taking into account all of the risks, strategies, and reporting. more

Rear Admiral Grace Hopper knew a thing or two about the need for change.

The U.S. computer science pioneer once said that “the most damaging phrase in the language is: ‘It’s always been done that way.’” (I wholeheartedly agree with Rear Admiral Hopper.)

When she uttered those words, Hopper, who was nicknamed “Grandma COBOL” for her role in laying the foundation for that computer language, could have been speaking to the folks in charge of corporate planning functions.

Fortunately, things are changing in the realm of corporate planning.

I’ll be examining this change in an April 8 Webcast with Business Finance editor in chief Jack Sweeney. We will present fresh findings from a new budgeting best practices survey of more than 200 finance executives.

Tune in and you’ll see why a growing number of North American companies are recognizing that the traditional budgeting process does not compute. ###