Skip to content

7 September, 2026

  • Saved Articles
  • My Account
  • Subscribe
  • Log In
  • Log Out

Board Agenda

  • Governance
  • Strategy
  • Risk
  • Ethics
  • News
  • Insight
    • Categories

      • View all
      • Governance
      • Strategy
      • Risk
      • Ethics
      • Board expertise
      • Finance
      • Technology
    • data

      Every board needs a scientist or engineer

      STEM professionals are trained to work with incomplete data, and in business you rarely have...

      climate risk

      Now is the time to take action on climate risk

      Whatever direction national policies take, nature and climate remain as drivers of value and risk...

      AI risk

      AI is about strategy, not technology

      Clients are judging how professional services firms are performing against their AI expectations, but most...

  • Comment
      • View all
    • data

      Every board needs a scientist or engineer

      STEM professionals are trained to work with incomplete data, and in business you rarely have...

      climate risk

      Now is the time to take action on climate risk

      Whatever direction national policies take, nature and climate remain as drivers of value and risk...

      ai skills gap

      Don’t forget to price up the AI skills gap 

      With AI set to be biggest force reshaping organisations, it is time to put workforce...

  • Interviews
      • View All Interviews
      • Podcasts
      • Webinars
    • governance

      How better governance helps private companies grow

      If governance is to become mature, management decision-making has no place on the board’s agenda,...

      future-ready

      Is your board ‘future-ready’?

      The survival of a business in uncertain times depends on its ability to pivot as...

      investor confidence

      Lack of audit reform ‘will hit investor confidence’

      Government's failure to push ahead with audit reform is a risk to UK investments, the...

  • Board Careers
      • View All
    • board skills clash

      When board skills clash

      Board composition in terms of expertise has a clear impact on entrepreneurial decision-making and strategy,...

      female ceos

      FTSE 100 CEO appointments rise

      The number of CEO appointments has doubled in six months, although the global picture suggests...

      board role

      How to engage with outreach

      When board opportunities knock, should you answer the door? Here are tips from a new...

  • Resource Centre
      • White Paper Downloads
      • Book Reviews
      • Board Advisory & Corporate Services
    • Georgeson 2026 European AGM Season Review

      Georgeson’s deep dive into the evolving dynamics of investor voting across nine major European markets in...

      2026 MidYear Executive Benchmark Survey: The Verification Gap

      AI enthusiasm is running into reality: 1 in 4 executives in this Workiva survey say...

      Seven Steps for Futureproofing Business

      This guide from Business in the Community aims to help businesses build a practical strategy...

  • Events
  • Search by topic
    • Governance
    • Strategy
    • Risk
    • Ethics
    • Regulation
    • ESG
    • Investor Relations
    • Careers
    • Board Expertise
    • finance
    • Technology

Third-party failure could cause losses of up to ten times any regulatory fine

by Katherine Blackler on August 3, 2015

Failing to appropriately identify and manage third parties could cost shareholders up to £650m, claims Deloitte.

risk management

Photo: Shutterstock

Favorite
Risk
Photo: Shutterstock

Regulatory action and reputational damage arising from third-party actions could cost shareholders an average of ten times the size of any fine faced by companies as their market value is impacted, according to Deloitte.

Deloitte’s research, Third party governance & risk management: Turning risk into opportunity, highlights the average combined direct fine and remedial costs of failing to appropriately identify and manage third parties.

This has ranged from £1.3m to £35m before the cost of indirect losses, such as reduced sales and reputational damage. Where legislation is applicable on a global cross-industry basis for internationally operating businesses, the range is far higher, reaching £650m.

The negative impact on share price itself is an average of 2.55%.

However, Deloitte estimates that organisations could gain competitive advantage over their peers, outperforming them by an additional 4–5% return on equity, by adopting effective third-party governance and risk management (TPGRM).

In the case of Fortune 500 or Financial Times 500 (FT 500) companies, this could mean an average uptick in earnings (EBITA) of between £17m to £350m.

Kristian Park, partner and global head of TPGRM at Deloitte, said: “It’s not all doom and gloom for organisations reliant upon the services of third parties. Headline stories depicting regulatory action and reputational damage have caused many to reconsider their approach to third-party management.

“Those that adopt a proactive and leadership-led approach stand to unlock significant gains by turning risk into opportunity. Good governance and risk management is not about eliminating the risk of doing business with third parties, but rather managing it appropriately.

“An effective TPGRM structure will seamlessly incorporate the right structures, processes, people and technology into the business and ensure it is used consistently throughout the organisation.”

Seven elements of best practice

The Deloitte study provides seven elements to implementing a best-in-class TPGRM:

Governance structure: Strong governance structures are those that manage third-party risk at an enterprise-wide level, and have dedicated and empowered senior-level teams in place to drive consistent behaviours throughout the organisation.

Ownership (clarity of roles and responsibilities): The extent of ownership of performance and oversight of the TPGRM framework should be known by those tasked with it, and kept up to date to avoid an inability to manage risk in the event of staff departures or role changes.

Stakeholder engagement (awareness and commitment): An effective TPGRM programme will ensure an organisation’s people are aware of its processes and, crucially, understand how they are followed. Internal compliance is also key and dependent on the quality of “back-end monitoring”.

Capability: Ensuring that the most appropriate individuals with decision-making authority are allocated ownership for tasking TPGRM efforts. Such individuals will have the competencies and skills to apply judgement in line with business requirements and risk-management needs.

People and skills: Linked to the above, resourcing the right individuals will ensure skills, experience and seniority are compatible with TPGRM demands.

Process: Good processes are not only robust, clear, and achievable, but also aligned to the organisation’s stated risk appetite. The most optimised processes will provide a positive experience for both business and third parties.

Technology: Having the right technology in place supports a TPGRM framework seamlessly, from inception to exit of a third party. At the very highest level, this would also include the ability to manage third parties at both an engagement and relationship level, exploiting all opportunities arising from the extended enterprise.

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google+
  • LinkedIn
  • Mail

Related Posts

  • Where next for sustainability?
    December 6, 2023
    sustainability

    An expert panel discussed their view of global trends for the business world in Board Agenda's The Macro Memo podcast.

  • FRC reviews corporate governance reports 2021-22
    October 28, 2022
    FRC review reports

    The watchdog found the quality of reporting to be good, but there were many areas of concern, including cash flow statements.

  • Companies that make political donations are 'less risky'
    June 28, 2022
    Businessman handing over a cheque

    Research finds lower levels of both systemic and idiosyncratic risk among politically connected businesses.

  • Greenwashing threatens shareholders’ interests
    July 4, 2022
    greenwash

    ‘Companies that believe their own greenwash are embedding liability and storing up risk’, warns chair of UK Environment Agency.

Search


Follow Us

Most Popular

Featured Resources

The Future of FTSE 350 Chairs: Pathways, Pipelines & Barriers 2026

This report is a collaboration between the FTSE Women Leaders Review and Professor...

Agentic AI from principles to practice 

‘A C-suite guide to capturing value without losing control’, this Forvis Mazars...

Route to the Top: Europe 2026 

This survey report from Heidrick & Struggles finds that companies are tending...
board's role in a rewired world fgs 2026 cover

A hard job getting harder: The board's role in a rewired world

The role of a corporate director is demanding intellectually, ethically and strategically—and...

Boardroom resilience: Practical governance for risk, readiness and rapid response

Boards are operating in a world defined by uncertainty. Geopolitical tensions, climate...

Board Value Index Summer 2026

Board Intelligence found 86% of directors say rigid processes and inconsistent frameworks...

Governance Guide: Navigating Conflict in the Boardroom

The 'Governance Guide' on navigating conflict in the boardroom provides practical...

Becoming a non-executive director (4th edition)

Board composition is the subject of much debate, while the role of the non-executive...

SUBSCRIBE TODAY

Stay current with a wide-ranging source of governance news and intelligence and apply the latest thinking to your boardroom challenges. Subscribe


  • Editors & Contributors
  • Editorial Advisory Board
  • Board Advisory & Corporate Services
  • Media Marketing Solutions
  • Contact Us
  • About Us
  • Board Director Network
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookies

Copyright © 2026 Questor Media Group Ltd.

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy