Mapping activities and processes

1. Regulatory Concept & Core Standards

In this video we will work through a concrete decision: identify processes and decision points relevant to the risk plan. The aim is to explain the criterion used and apply it to a workplace situation. We will start with the concept, move to the procedure and finish with a case to solve. A ZIntPK integrity plan applies to specified entities under KPK guidelines. For other organisations the approach is recommended practice. Risk assessment is not a finding of guilt or a copy of Portugal’s RGPC.

Mapping describes how work happens, including operational and support activities. An organisation chart identifies positions. A process shows decisions, inputs, outputs and handovers. The risk plan must cover the organisation and its activity. Apparently administrative tasks, such as changing supplier bank details, may create significant risk opportunities.

Apply the following rule: Article 9 generally covers entities with at least 50 employees. A threshold of at least ten applies to the specified principal healthcare, water, waste and environmental activities. Listed state bodies and municipalities are covered irrespective of headcount, and additional sectoral requirements exist. The trusted person, zaupnik, is appointed from employees. An external provider may receive reports, but purchasing a platform does not replace the trusted person’s statutory tasks.

2. Practical Implementation & Procedure

Select the process, steps and decision-makers. Mark data changes, approvals and exceptions. Check actual work with staff rather than only the procedure. Where an integrity plan is mandatory, use its methodology and required risk areas. 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

One person changes a supplier’s bank details and approves payment. The team identifies where an erroneous or deliberate change could remain undetected. 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: Is finance department a sufficiently precise risk description? 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.

No. Specify the action, potential misuse and missing control so that a useful measure can be selected.

One mistake to avoid is: describing departments while omitting decisions, exceptions and actual tasks.

Now apply the national rule to a second decision. A subsidiary copies its foreign headquarters’ procedure without its own assessment. What must it check?

Identify the Slovenian entity, employees, public or private status and article 9 exceptions. Appoint the trusted person and define tasks. Shared technology or external receipt does not replace national obligations.