IFoA SP9 study plan

Map the components of an ERM framework (objectives, governance structure, risk appetite, risk process cycle, controls, communication and reporting) onto a single annotated one-page diagram using SP9 terminology.

Distinguish the decision rights and accountabilities of the board, board risk committee, CRO, actuarial function, internal audit and the first line, writing a 200-word allocation-of-responsibility note for each.

Tabulate at least six comparison rows between a Solvency II / Lloyd's-style insurance governance regime, a Basel-style three-lines-of-defence model and a COSO-style enterprise framework, noting where they conflict.

Explain two realistic failure modes of the three-lines-of-defence model (for example blurred second-line independence or audit scope gaps) and propose one control for each.

Draft 10 short-answer recall prompts on framework and governance and answer them closed-book from memory.

Construct a 20-line risk register for a hypothetical mid-sized life insurer, classifying each entry by risk source, impact type and primary driver using a stated taxonomy (financial, insurance, operational, strategic, conduct, emerging).

Rewrite five badly worded risk statements into strict cause-event-consequence form and annotate what was wrong with each original.

Identify and document four classification pitfalls (double counting, hidden correlation, overlapping categories, stale emerging-risk entries) with a mitigation for each.

Design the data fields and review cadence a risk register needs to stay useful to a board, and defend the choice of three fields you would delete to keep it usable.

Explain how risk identification workshops, process mapping and loss-event data each contribute different risks to the register, giving one example risk only each method would surface.

Compare VaR, TVaR/ES, stress testing and scenario analysis in a table covering what each measures, coherence properties, tail behaviour and typical misuse.

Compute by hand a fully worked VaR and TVaR for a three-line portfolio with stated probabilities and losses, showing the aggregation, the tail averaging and the interpretation in words.

Evaluate dependence modelling choices (correlation matrices, copulas, tail dependence) and state where a Gaussian copula materially understates joint tail risk.

Design a stress-testing programme for an insurer: at least six scenarios spanning insurance, market, credit, operational and emerging risk, each with a rationale and a transmission mechanism.

Compile a 10-item model validation and model risk control checklist covering documentation, independent review, back-testing, expert judgement, limitation logging and use-test evidence.

Draft a risk appetite statement that pairs qualitative statements with quantitative metrics for at least four risk categories, each with a rationale linked to strategy.

Cascade appetite into tolerance and then into operational limits for five specific risks, showing the trigger, escalation route and remediation action at each level.

Analyse a risk-reward trade-off for two competing business decisions, quantifying return against capital consumed and against tail risk, and state which you would recommend and why.

Critique four common risk appetite failures (appetite disconnected from strategy, limits never breached, no escalation evidence, appetite set only for measurable risks) and specify the evidence that would show each is absent.

Attempt a closed-book 45-minute written answer on Domains 1-4 under timed conditions and mark it against a self-built marking guide.

Diagnose how at least five behavioural biases (groupthink, overconfidence, anchoring, recency, confirmation bias) distort risk decisions, each illustrated with a concrete insurance scenario and a debiasing control.

Design a risk culture assessment using at least eight measurable indicators drawn from surveys, escalation logs, near-miss reporting rates and remuneration signals, and state the threshold that would trigger board action.

Construct a two-page board risk report containing exposure against appetite, limit breaches, top emerging risks, model and assumption changes, and forward-looking metrics, and justify each inclusion.

Critique a poorly structured risk report (no comparison to appetite, no trend, excessive granularity) and rewrite its headline section to be decision-useful.

Explain how conduct risk and mis-selling incentives interact with culture, using one historical industry failure pattern and the reporting signal that would have surfaced it early.

Compare regulatory capital and economic capital in a table covering purpose, calibration, time horizon, confidence level and governance, and explain why the gap persists.

Allocate capital across three business lines using two different methods (for example standalone VaR with correlation adjustment versus marginal/co-TVaR) and reconcile the difference in words.

Outline an ORSA report structure with at least 12 required content headings and state the board and regulator interactions at each stage.

Calculate a solvency coverage ratio from supplied own-funds and capital-requirement figures under two stress scenarios and interpret the movement.

Evaluate four capital instruments or management actions (subordinated debt, reinsurance, hedging, dividend withholding) on cost, availability, speed and risk transfer effectiveness.

Build a horizon-scanning register of 10 emerging and strategic risks (including climate, cyber, AI, demographic and regulatory change) scored on impact, likelihood, time horizon and detectability.

Apply one emerging-risk scenario to a live strategic decision and set out the risk-adjusted recommendation, the hedges and the exit triggers.

Explain how ERM outputs should feed strategy setting, pricing, product design, M&A and remuneration, giving one concrete mechanism for each.

Identify four reasons ERM fails to embed in decision-making (risk function isolation, output not decision-relevant, no link to incentives, no forward-looking view) and the test that would reveal each.

Draft a 1,000-word decision memo recommending between two strategic options, incorporating risk-adjusted return, capital impact and emerging-risk exposure.

Condense each of the eight domains into a single revision sheet of key definitions, frameworks and evaluation points.

Complete two full timed mock papers under exam conditions and mark them strictly against the published command-word and marking expectations.

Classify every lost mark by cause (knowledge gap, misread command word, poor structure, time management, calculation slip) and rank them by frequency.

Rehearse exam technique on the three highest-frequency weakness types identified, writing at least six timed short answers targeted at them.

Re-derive from memory the measurement formulas, capital definitions and governance accountabilities most likely to be tested and check them against notes.