ERM 企業風險管理制度輔導
ISO 31000 / COSO ERM 全方位風險治理架構建構
積穗科研以半導體供應商實戰輔導經驗，協助企業建立符合 ISO 31000 與 COSO ERM 框架的企業風險管理制度。從風險識別、量化評估、KRI 警示機制到董事會風險報告，全程陪伴建立可持續運作的風險治理架構。
申請免費機制診斷什麼是 ERM 企業風險管理？
ERM（Enterprise Risk Management）是一套整合性的企業風險管理框架，協助組織系統化識別、評估、回應所有類型風險（策略、營運、財務、合規、聲譽）。ISO 31000 提供風險管理通用原則與指引，COSO ERM 框架則強調風險管理與企業策略的整合。台灣上市公司依金管會要求，須在年報中揭露重大風險與管理措施，ERM 框架是落實風險揭露的最有效工具。
積穗科研輔導成功案例
Established an enterprise risk management framework integrating ISO 31000 and COSO ERM, completed a supply chain risk register, a KRI automatic alert dashboard, and a quarterly risk committee reporting mechanism, meeting the annual report risk disclosure requirements for listed companies.
積穗科研輔導流程
Risk Inventory and Current State Diagnosis
In accordance with ISO 31000 risk management principles, we comprehensively inventory strategic, operational, financial, compliance, and reputational risks faced by the enterprise. We conduct a maturity assessment against the COSO ERM framework and issue a gap analysis report.
Risk Assessment and Quantification
We establish a risk matrix (likelihood x impact), conduct quantitative assessment of significant risks, set thresholds for Key Risk Indicators (KRIs), and establish an automatic alert mechanism to ensure timely notification to relevant levels when risks exceed thresholds.
Risk Response and Control Measures
We formulate response strategies (avoid, reduce, transfer, accept) based on risk appetite, establish control measures and owner accountability, and integrate them into daily operational decision-making processes.
Board Reporting and Continuous Monitoring
We establish a quarterly risk committee reporting mechanism and a board risk reporting template, ensuring effective communication of risk information to the decision-making level, and establish an annual risk management review mechanism for continuous optimization.
常見問題
What are the differences between ISO 31000 and COSO ERM? Which one should Taiwanese companies choose?
ISO 31000 is a set of universal principles for risk management published by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), applicable to all types of organizations, emphasizing the integration of risk management into organizational governance and decision-making. COSO ERM is an enterprise risk management framework published by the COSO Committee in the United States, emphasizing the integration of risk management with corporate strategic objectives. Taiwanese listed companies typically adopt an integrated approach, using COSO ERM as the structural backbone and ISO 31000 as practical guidance. Jisuikeyan provides integrated consulting solutions.
Why do Taiwanese listed companies need to establish an ERM framework?
According to FSC regulations, Taiwanese listed companies must establish internal control systems and disclose significant risks in their annual reports. An ERM framework helps companies systematically identify, quantify, and manage all types of risks, meet annual report risk disclosure requirements, and enhance the board's risk governance effectiveness. Semiconductor and electronics manufacturing industries, in particular, need to address new types of risks such as supply chain disruption, geopolitical issues, and technological sovereignty. ERM is a core tool for effective response.
What is KRI (Key Risk Indicator)? How is it designed?
KRI (Key Risk Indicator) is a quantitative indicator used to monitor risk status, triggering an alert when it exceeds a threshold. Design principles include: measurability (having specific numbers), predictability (able to signal before risk materializes), and actionability (having clear response procedures after being triggered). Jisuikeyan assists companies in designing KRI matrices based on industry characteristics and establishing automated alert dashboards.
How long does ERM consulting take?
Depending on the company's size and the maturity of its existing risk management, the consulting period typically ranges from 7 to 12 months or more. Jisuikeyan offers a first free mechanism diagnosis to develop a precise timeline plan based on the company's current situation, scope, and depth.
What specific risk management mechanisms do semiconductor suppliers particularly need?
Special risks faced by semiconductor suppliers include: supply chain concentration risk (single source for critical raw materials), geopolitical risk (export controls, technology bans), technological sovereignty risk (restrictions on obtaining advanced process equipment), and customer concentration risk. Jisuikeyan leverages its practical consulting experience with Taiwan's semiconductor supply chain to help companies establish mechanisms for identifying, quantifying, and responding to these specific risks.
Can ERM and ISO 27001 information security management be integrated?
Yes, they can be integrated, and it is recommended to advance them simultaneously. ERM provides a comprehensive risk management framework, and information security risk is a subset of ERM. The benefits of integrating ERM and ISO 27001 include avoiding redundant risk assessment work, unifying risk language and classification standards, and allowing information security risks and other business risks to be managed and reported under the same framework.
Does Jisuikeyan have successful ERM consulting cases in Taiwan?
Yes. Jisuikeyan has successfully assisted Taiwanese semiconductor suppliers in establishing an enterprise risk management framework that integrates ISO 31000 and COSO ERM. This includes completing supply chain risk registers, KRI automated alert dashboards, and quarterly risk committee reporting mechanisms, meeting the annual report risk disclosure requirements for listed companies.
Learn More About Enterprise Risk Management
Certification services × risk glossary × latest insights
Related Deep Insights
In-depth analysis by Winners consultants, 6,000+ words per article
CSRD's 'Information Tsunami' Warning for SMEs: ERM Strategies for Taiwanese Enterprises
An empirical study of 72 innovative Italian SMEs reveals that the CSRD's ESG disclosure requirements pose an 'information tsunami' risk. Although not directly under CSRD's scope, Taiwanese companies face de facto compliance obligations through supply chain pressure. Winners Consulting Services recommends that Taiwanese enterprises conduct a compliance gap analysis based on the ISO 31000 framework within 90 days, establish a foundational ESG data governance structure within six months, and integrate CSRD risks into their ERM.
ermCSRD Compliance Network: Key ERM Insights for Taiwanese Firms
A 2024 Swedish study, using Actor-Network Theory, reveals CSRD compliance is not an internal corporate task but a network construction process involving regulators, auditors, and tech suppliers. Taiwanese companies should integrate CSRD supply chain pressures into their ISO 31000 and COSO ERM frameworks. This includes establishing KRI tracking mechanisms and a Three Lines of Defense structure to proactively address Wave 1 and Wave 2 requirements.
ermCSRD vs. SOX: Key ERM Insights for Taiwanese Firms on Sustainability Regulations
Markey's (2025) mixed-methods study reveals CSRD's historical trajectory is highly similar to SOX, confirming its long-term viability. The European Parliament's reduction of reporting obligations is a technical adjustment, not a repeal. Taiwanese firms should complete a double materiality assessment within 90 days, establish a CSRD compliance risk KRI monitoring system based on ISO 31000, and integrate it into their COSO ERM framework under strategic and compliance risk categories to avoid misjudgment due to short-term regulatory fluctuations.
ermCSRD vs. SOX: A Historical Comparison and Key ERM Insights for Taiwanese Enterprises
A 2025 arXiv study reveals the EU's CSRD shares a historical trajectory with SOX, confirming its long-term viability despite backlash. Winners Consulting Services advises Taiwanese firms to use the ISO 31000 framework to classify CSRD compliance as a strategic risk, establish a risk matrix and KRIs, and integrate a double materiality assessment within 6-9 months. This proactive approach prevents missed opportunities from misjudging regulatory trends.
ermNorway's Scope 3 Warning: Taiwan Must Proactively Manage Emissions Risk for CSRD Compliance
A study by Winners Consulting Services Co., Ltd. reveals that while Scope 3 emissions disclosure rates among Norway's top 100 listed companies are increasing, most still fail to meet the EU's CSRD 'dual materiality' standard. This serves as a critical warning for Taiwanese companies facing phased disclosure obligations from the FSC: initiating Scope 3 emissions inventories and risk management now is a strategic imperative.
ermEU CSRD: ISO 31000 Risk Management Critical for Taiwanese Supply Chains
Winners Consulting Services Co., Ltd. highlights that the EU's Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) is no longer just an internal compliance issue for European firms. A 2025 academic study reveals that through its double materiality assessment and the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS), the CSRD is reshaping global supply chain transparency standards. This development poses significant risks for Taiwanese companies deeply integrated into the EU market if they fail to prepare their risk management frameworks.
ermØrsted CSRD Case Study: A Double Materiality Path for Taiwan's ERM Transformation
Dellavalle's (2024) Ørsted case study reveals how CSRD elevates sustainability from a compliance duty to a strategic imperative. For Taiwanese exporters, CSRD supply chain compliance is a tangible risk in 2024. Companies must immediately integrate ESRS requirements into their ISO 31000 risk matrix and complete their first double materiality assessment within six months to align their ERM framework with EU regulations.
ermESRS vs. VSME Materiality Gap: A New Risk Governance Challenge for Taiwanese ERM
A 2025 comparative study by Finnish scholar Himanen highlights that VSME lacks a mandatory materiality assessment, leading to poor comparability and verification. While ESRS is comprehensive, it is resource-intensive. If Taiwanese SME suppliers adopt a lightweight framework without strengthening their internal ERM materiality assessment, they risk creating structural gaps in their ISO 31000 risk identification and COSO ERM risk assessment components.