Elements and Performance Criteria

The Range Statement provides information about the context in which the unit of competency is carried out. The variables cater for differences between States and Territories and the Commonwealth, and between organisations and workplaces. They allow for different work requirements, work practices and knowledge. The Range Statement also provides a focus for assessment. It relates to the unit as a whole. Text in bold italics in the Performance Criteria is explained here.
Organisational context may include:
the organisation, how it is organised, and its capabilities
the organisation's functions:
political
operational
financial
social
legal
commercial
the various stakeholders and clients
any official resources, including physical areas and assets, that are vital to the operation of the organisation
key operational elements and services of the organisation
any major projects
the relationship between the organisation and the environment in which it operates
Environmental factors may be:
social
economic
legal
technological
environmental
Stakeholders may include:
employees
managers
volunteers
unions
financial managers
self-insurers
clients
suppliers
contractors
service providers
community organisations
the public
Risk evaluation criteria are:
used to rank risks and decide whether they are acceptable or not
affected by:
legal requirements
perceptions of internal/external stakeholders
cost-benefit analysis, for example, cost of risk management being less than financial cost if the risk occurred
Legislation, policy and procedures may include:
Commonwealth and State/Territory legislation relating to risk management
national and international codes of practice and standards, such as SIRCA 8001:2003
the organisation's risk management policies and practices
codes of conduct/codes of ethics
AS/NZS ISO 31000:2009 Risk management - Principles and Guidelines
HB 436:2004 (Guidelines to AS/NZS 4360:2004) Risk Management Guidelines Companion to AS/NZS 4360:2004
ISO Guide 73:2009 Risk Management, Vocabulary
professional standards for risk management, for example certified practising risk manager (CPRM)
jurisdictional policies, guidelines and web sites, for example www.riskmanagement.qld.gov.au
Risk management:
is a logical and systematic process of identifying, analysing, evaluating, treating and monitoring risks related to any strategy, plan, process, program or procedure that will enable the organisation to minimise losses and maximise opportunities.
may be considered in relation to an organisation's:
people
assets and physical environment
reputation and image
legal issues
business continuity
finances
may include written procedures to ensure staff know:
what
how
when, and
by whom, action is to be taken to treat risks in the organisation
Methods for identifying risks may include:
analysis of past records
personal, local or overseas experience
interviews/discussions with stakeholders
surveys/questionnaires
audits and physical inspections
observation of activity
analysis of scenarios
research of external sources
using industry experts/consultants
Risks may include:
physical injury or death
failure of machinery or equipment
breaches of security
fraud
litigation
client dissatisfaction
unfavourable publicity
Risks may be:
internal
external
random
real
perceived
Sources of risk may include:
human behaviour
technology/technical issues
occupational health and safety
legal
political
property/equipment
environmental
financial/market
natural events
Risk events are:
what can happen, as opposed to the source (how a risk may arise) and the impact (what is the implication if it happens)
Probability of identified risk may be:
almost certain
likely
possible
unlikely
rare
Consequences of identified risk may be:
insignificant
minor
moderate
major
catastrophic
Control measures may:
reduce the probability of the risk occurring, the consequences of the risk, or both
include:
training
supervision
minimising/restricting exposure
physical barriers
relocation
Level of risk may be:
low - treated with routine procedures
moderate - with specific responsibility allocated for the risk, and monitoring and response procedures implemented
high - requiring action, as it has potential to be damaging to the organisation
extreme - requiring immediate action, as the potential could be devastating to the organisation
Documentation of analysis may include:
table showing all risks, any existing controls, probability of occurring, consequences and subsequent level of risk
Acceptable risks are:
those which an organisation has determined have the least potential for harm
not necessarily insignificant
Risks may be acceptable because:
the risk level is so low that it does not warrant spending time and money to treat it
the risk is low and the benefits outweigh the cost of treating it
the opportunities presented are much greater than the threat
Unacceptable risks are:
those which an organisation has determined have the most potential for harm
Options for treating risks may include:
avoiding the risk, for example, by terminating the activity or conducting it in another way (these actions may have different risks attached)
controlling the risk, by reducing the probability of the risk occurring, the consequences of the risk, or both
transferring the risk, for example, by arranging insurance, contracting some or all of the activity to another organisation or person, etc
retaining the risk, and making contingency plans/funds allocation for covering any loss or other negative effect from the risk
Risk treatment plan may include:
sources of risk and risk events
analysis of risks - probability, consequences and risk levels
prioritised list of unacceptable risks
treatment options selected
person/s responsible for implementing treatment options
resources required
performance measures
timeframe for implementation
timetable for review of plan
Resources may include:
physical - equipment, motor vehicles, furniture
human - management, employees, volunteers
financial - funding, budget allocation, sponsorship
resources that are part of the risk treatment, not just implementation of the treatment plan
training and briefing sessions
changes to the organisation's operating structure
Changes may mean that:
new risks are created
existing risks are increased or decreased
risks no longer exist
the priority order of risks changes
risk treatment strategies are no longer effective

The Evidence Guide specifies the evidence required to demonstrate achievement in the unit of competency as a whole. It must be read in conjunction with the Unit descriptor, Performance Criteria, the Range Statement and the Assessment Guidelines for the Public Sector Training Package.
Units to be assessed together
Pre-requisite units that must be achieved prior to this unit:Nil
Co-requisite units that must be assessed with this unit:Nil
Co-assessed units that may be assessed with this unit to increase the efficiency and realism of the assessment process include, but are not limited to:
PSPETHC401A Uphold and support the values and principles of public service
PSPFIN401A Use public sector financial processes
PSPGOV402B Deliver and monitor service to clients
PSPGOV405B Provide input to change processes
PSPGOV406B Gather and analyse information
PSPGOV409A Provide support to Parliament
PSPGOV422A Apply government processes
PSPGOV419A Work with interpreters
PSPLAND402A Undertake native title assessments
PSPPM405A Administer simple projects
PSPPROC410A Administer contracts
PSPREG406C Make arrests
PSPSEC405A Handle security classified information
Overview of evidence requirements
In addition to integrated demonstration of the elements and their related performance criteria, look for evidence that confirms:
the knowledge requirements of this unit
the skill requirements of this unit
application of Employability Skills as they relate to this unit
identification and treatment of risks in a range of (3 or more) contexts (or occasions, over time)
Resources required to carry out assessment
These resources include:
legislation, policy, procedures and protocols relating to risk management
AS/NZS ISO 31000:2009 Risk management - Principles and Guidelines
HB 436:2004 (Guidelines to AS/NZS 4360:2004) Risk Management Guidelines Companion to AS/NZS 4360:2004
other national and international risk management standards
case studies and workplace scenarios to capture the range of risk management situations likely to be encountered
Where and how to assess evidence
Valid assessment of this unit requires:
a workplace environment or one that closely resembles normal work practice and replicates the range of conditions likely to be encountered when identifying and treating risks, including coping with difficulties, irregularities and breakdowns in routine
identification and treatment of risks in a range of (3 or more) contexts (or occasions, over time).
Assessment methods should reflect workplace demands, such as literacy, and the needs of particular groups, such as:
people with disabilities
people from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people
women
young people
older people
people in rural and remote locations.
Assessment methods suitable for valid and reliable assessment of this competency may include, but are not limited to, a combination of 2 or more of:
case studies
portfolios
projects
questioning
scenarios
authenticated evidence from the workplace and/or training courses
For consistency of assessment
Evidence must be gathered over time in a range of contexts to ensure the person can achieve the unit outcome and apply the competency in different situations or environments