Larry and others ...

Let me add this -- in my view any rule based system creates winners and losers.  By this I mean that it provides advantages to some and disadvantages to others.  A given of our working environment is that vendors will do everything possible to maximize owners equity (as they should, provided such activities consistent with the law).   There is every reason to believe that vendors  will be analyzing new rules that stakeholders attempt to establish by asking if this supports their primary goal of maximizing owners equity.  Let me emphasize that there is nothing wrong with this and for companies in which I own stock that is what I would expect them to do.  If GARP somehow got legs (e.g. was sufficiently recognized) there is every reason to believe the vendors might advertise their wares as GARP compliant.  Though right now it all seems a bit vague.

In rereading GARP on the ARMA website I am a bit curious as to the purpose of this -- e.g. how does this make things better for practitioners and RIM programs.  One could certainly do white papers to indicate how your enterprise is compliant with very general principles and perhaps even identify a couple of weaknesses (if that what you wanted to do), but I would think that it would be hard to produce a consensus as to what a GARP compliant RIM program would look like across our diverse enterprises.

Sometimes I think that there should be a general prohibition of the use of the words "reasonable" and "appropriate" in all policy documents provided that we are able to devise an appropriate risk acceptance process that will allow for reasonable exceptions.

David Gaynon
[log in to unmask]

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not already present, place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the message.
mailto:[log in to unmask]