A complete risk matrix

1. Regulatory Concept & Core Standards

In this video we will consolidate a skill: combine process, risk, assessment and measures in a coherent matrix. Use the case to test what you would do in a similar situation. We will explain the proposed response step by step so that you can understand each choice and recognise when more information would be needed. A risk matrix should reflect actual organisational activities. The course presents a risk plan as a management tool. Example scales and controls are not universal Croatian statutory requirements. Match them to the entity’s specific obligations and procedures.

A complete matrix connects process, risk, assessment, existing control and further action. Row count does not establish quality. What matters is an understandable connection and workable application. Croatia’s 2021–2030 strategy recognises internal compliance mechanisms, but this does not make every teaching template mandatory for all entities.

Apply the following rule: Article 4 covers the listed EU-law fields, EU financial interests and the internal market. The 2025 amendment adds restrictive-measures legislation in the Annex and specified offences against the economy and official duties, embezzlement and bribery of representatives. Other breaches of national law are covered where they also threaten the public interest. Check the work-related context in Article 6, the protection conditions in Article 12 and the exceptions and special rules in Articles 4 and 5.

2. Practical Implementation & Procedure

Complete a row with process, cause, event, consequence, likelihood, impact, level and measures. Add owners and monitoring evidence. Validate with the implementing department and plan coordinator. Check activity coverage and required approval. Prepare dissemination and communication under the entity's regime, distinguishing legal requirements from internal choices. Before moving on, turn this procedure into a sequence you could explain to a colleague. Identify the first check, the action that depends on its outcome and the record that allows the decision to be reconstructed. Follow the sequence on screen and identify the point where an error would change the result.

3. Case Study & Compliance Action

A procurement matrix identifies favouritism but lists backups as its control. Review finds no connection between risk and control. The team adds controls over interests, criteria and decision review, keeping backups in their appropriate context. Now read the case carefully. Separate established facts from information you would still need to confirm. Do not add motives or events that have not been described. This distinction matters when choosing a response proportionate to the information available.

The exercise is as follows: How can the connection between a measure and a risk be checked quickly? Choose an answer and write one sentence explaining it. During the pause, compare your choice with the criteria we have just considered. Also think about the material you would retain to explain the decision later.

Ask how it reduces the likelihood or impact of the described event. Without a concrete explanation, the measure may be misplaced or inadequate. The matrix should make this connection explicit.

One mistake to avoid is: filling cells to finish the document without testing the link between risk and measure.

Now apply the national rule to a second decision. A report is automatically classified as protected because it contains the word corruption. What check is missing?

Read the facts and apply the national scope, context and conditions for protection. A form label helps organise information but does not determine the legal framework. If the case falls outside the regime, identify an appropriate route without unnecessarily disclosing information.