The approach to be presented for the core skill of analysis is based on what is termed the logic diagram, which has three building blocks: findings, conclusions, and recommendations. Each of these three building-blocks will be defined, and then tests for their effective use will be presented.
Then, the session will present the analysis process, for using and completing the logic diagram, the key steps being:
Two process controls will be presented. The first is to assure that only appropriate key hypotheses are identified and used, in order to be efficient and effective. The second is that the process is managed by developing and completing a relevant logic diagram.
Some further concepts and aids to enhance effective analysis will be presented.
In closing, there will be a review of the key concepts, along with a case study, and suggestions about how to apply these key concepts as a core risk management skill.
Effective analysis is a core risk management skill for facilitators because the result of facilitation is to get agreement from the participants on what should be done, and getting agreement across disparate functions is usually tough to do. Similarly, it is a core risk management skill for both internal and external auditors because their analyses should lead to actionable recommendations related to risk management. Getting agreement and getting buy-in on recommendations is tough, and it has been shown that use of the tools presented in this course will increase effectiveness and efficiency because they enable greater understanding and acceptance of those who need to be convinced to agree and to do something.
This session is about analytics as related to problem-solving, to recommending, and by getting buy-in to making things happen. It deals with why, what, how, where, when and who, for analysis as a core skill.
We will delve into critical thinking skills, which sometimes are overlooked as an analyst focuses on big data and its use, which leads the analyst simply to accept the utility of bulk data and what trends or groupings emerge from it. Big data is useful but does not displace basic critical thinking skills. And, thinking involves logical analysis, of which there are two kinds: deductive reasoning, and inductive reasoning. Both will be defined and explained, how and when each is appropriate for use, and examples given.
The product for the core skill of analysis is the logic diagram, which following its definition will be expanded to its three components of findings, conclusions, recommendations. Each of these three building-blocks will be defined, and then will be shaped in terms of tests for its effective use, and then will be shown in use.
Then, we will get into the process for building a logic diagram. The key steps include the following.
In order to make this process work, there are two types of controls. The first control is that appropriate -- and only appropriate -- key hypotheses are identified. The second control is that the going-forward process is organized into a relevant logic diagram. More specifics will be providedon each of these two types of controls.
Following a discussion and presentation of each of these – the process, the controls, and some concepts and aids – key concepts will be reviewed, and a case study will be presented.
The course objective is to present an approach to analysis, and the tools to support that approach, for effectiveness and efficiency. These tools are for thinking through the design, scope and conduct of an analytical project. This approach to analytics is not merely big-data number crunching and organizing, which can be used as a component of an analysis project but is not analysis leading to actionable recommendations as such.
Facilitators and internal and external auditors will benefit from this course because they will have developed new tools that will make them more productive in undertaking projects dealing with risk management, internal control and compliance, and other projects dealing with complex outcomes.Also, their managers and related executives –C-level positions, board members, finance and operations and human resources managers and executives, as examples – will benefit because they will learn how analysis projects should be scoped, what skills are needed to do them, and what should be the outcomes from those who conduct such projects.
Until his recent retirement from PwC, Mr. Schwartz had been the partner responsible for the consumer products industry management consulting practice in its Eastern Region. He also had led the financial management practice. Previously, Mr. Schwartz was a senior vice president of Booz, Allen & Hamilton Inc., playing lead roles in the financial management, risk and controls, operations management, systems, and telecommunications practices; and had been responsible in the Eastern Region for the financial management services practice and for the administrative management services practice; and had been CFO. Typical consulting projects that he led include:
Mr. Schwartz also served in the U.S. Navy Civil Engineer Corps, concentrating in public works administration, construction project management, housing construction and administration, and transportation management.
Mr. Schwartz has written and spoken on governance, risk management, internal control, financial management, and productivity; has been an expert witness on industry and organization structure, and on cost management; and has addressed international audiences on controlling investments and productivity, risk management and controls, activity-based costing, and organization design; and has been contributing financial editor to technical journals. At PwC, he developed and led the activity-based costing practice; supported the development of business process reengineering; led the transition integration effort to create PwC from two separate firms, was one of the principal authors of Internal Control - Integrated Framework (ICIF); developed the risk assessment tools for the In-Control Practice; and developed related training for the for the Audit and Attest Practices. He was on several COSO task forces developing guidelines for using ICIF.
He received a BSE degree with honors from Princeton University, majoring in civil and general engineering, and was elected to Phi Beta Kappa. Also, he won the Class of 1883 English Prize for Freshmen in the School of Engineering. His undergraduate thesis was on “The Competitive Bid Construction Contract.”View all trainings by this speaker