Not a one finance professional has even smiled on this comparison. Odd, because these verbs are almost synonyms meaning similar activity - cleaning the cowshed after risks have realised and diseased production stock removed.
So please my reader do not mind and take a step back. In both Chinese milk crisis and financial crisis the methodology of supervisors to take care of the situation were essentially the same. And take "big flu", same again. Healthcare authorities can stop
contagion, luckily.
In spring Helsinki School Economics PhD Alumni organized unprejudiced discussion where the food industry authorities' risk management framework
HACCP (promoted by WHO) and the risk management framework of western financial supervisors were compared. Both emphasize foresight in supervision. But differences were also found:
- Food industry: full chain supervision "from field to plate" vs. Finance industry: "consider mainly bank risk-management system"
- Finance industry: supervision is not fully defined because of the industry complexity vs. Food industry: level of self-guided supervison is associated with the role of an institution in the production chain in a detailed manner
- Food industry: supervisory costs increase once incident occurs vs Finance industry: no clear pre-emptive supervisory cost incentives.
...Well HACCP was created in World War II to supervise artillery quality, then developed further by NASA.
Afterwards we wondered if operation of global financial system includes more dynamic complexity than microbiological processes in international food production chains. Hardly so.
By all means use HACCP for global banking. It is nowadays meant for saving lives.