Parties & Providers
- Risk Coverage
- Risk-based Approach
- Monitoring & Metrics
- Actions
Given increasing reliance on and complexities in third-party/provider relationships as well as growing interdependencies and interconnectedness between and among companies and industries, regulators will continue to assess risks for supervised companies across such areas as compliance, fraud/waste, data management, cybersecurity, financial crimes, and fairness. Supervision and enforcement in 2025 is likely to focus on risk management oversight practices (throughout the relationship lifecycle and particularly to 鈥渃ritical鈥� providers/relationships) and may also focus directly on service and technology providers as well as government provisions and reporting.
1. Risk Coverage
The scope of third parties, providers and related business arrangements is broad, encompassing direct, indirect, and 鈥渘th鈥� party relationships. Such complexity elevates risks to companies and their customers and may draw heightened attention from regulators (and sometimes the public.)
Regulatory Pressure
Driven by increasing dependencies and interconnections between companies, as well as the complex ecosystems underlying the delivery mechanisms to customers, regulators will continue to assess third-party risk management expectations/pressures with a focus on:
- Risk-based management (i.e., based on the size, complexity, and risk profile of the company and the nature of the relationship with the third party), with more rigorous oversight of third parties supporting 鈥渉igher risk鈥� or 鈥渃ritical activities.鈥�
- Contingency plans for replacing third parties as needed.
- Risks associated with the non-delivery of goods and services by third parties (e.g., reputation, compliance, and strategic risk related to a third party鈥檚 failure to perform as agreed).
- Data practices, including use and security of customer information (e.g., data collection, ownership, access, use, maintenance, protection and security, and deletion).
- New or novel arrangements and features (e.g., bank-nonbank/fintech arrangements with long chains of providers).
- Comprehensiveness and clarity of contracts, tailored to the nature and scope of the arrangement and including delineation of responsibilities, performance measures, data obligations (e.g., access, ownership), adaptive clauses for changing regulatory requirements and/or market conditions, and terms related to default and termination.
Supervisory & Stakeholder Focus
Stakeholders and regulators are particularly focused on:
- Arrangements supporting 鈥渃ritical activities.鈥�
- Elements supporting operational resiliency (e.g., tolerance for provider / supply chain disruptions; incident response/business continuity plans; scenario testing/validation of interconnections/interdependencies).
- Financial and compliance risks.
- Reputational risks (e.g., ethical, sustainable supply chain).
Key features of 鈥渃ritical activities鈥� might include activities that: i) pose significant risk to the company if it fails to meet expected agreements, ii) have significant customer impacts, or iii) have significant impact on the company鈥檚 financial condition or operations.
2. Risk-Based Approach
Under a risk-based approach, companies will be expected to establish strategic plans for managing third-party and provider risks, focusing on due diligence, oversight, and governance throughout the relationship lifecycle.聽
Regulators will assess:
Strategic Plan
A strategic plan to direct the TPRM program for all party and provider relationships, including the allocation of resources, establishment of infrastructure, implementation of technology controls, and enhancement of organizational capabilities. Third-party relationships / arrangements are reevaluated through ongoing monitoring to discern whether they continue to align with the company鈥檚 strategic plan/goals.
Relationship Lifecycle
Consistent management of risk across the company and throughout the relationship lifecycle, irrespective of the type of relationship or activities involved. Key features include:
- An assessment of risk for each third-party relationship (during planning, due diligence, selection, contract negotiation, and monitoring), tailored to the specific size, complexity, and risk profile of the company and the nature of the relationship with the third party.
- Ranking of each third-party and provider arrangement based on the risk posed to the company, with parties and providers involved in 鈥渉igher risk鈥� and 鈥渃ritical activities鈥� (as defined by the company) subject to more rigorous oversight.
- Alignment with procurement and vendor management activities for risk management consistency.
Governance
The proliferation of available consumer data, the volume of Clear oversight and accountability mechanisms regardless of how TPRM and governance processes are structured (e.g., dispersed across business lines or centralized under specific function(s)). Regulators will look for key governance practices (commensurate with size, risk, and complexity) including:
- Delineation of roles, responsibilities, performance metrics, and standards for the Board and management.
- Board approval of the TPRM program, risk appetite, disruption tolerances, and, in some cases, the selection of third parties supporting 鈥渉igher risk鈥� and 鈥渃ritical activities.鈥�
- Board participation in the strategic plan.
- Periodic independent audits of the TRPM program.
- Documentation/reporting channels both within the company and to/from third parties.
3. Monitoring & Metrics
Due diligence, risk assessments, continuous monitoring, and informative performance indicators and metrics are essential to managing third-party relationships, and in facilitating strategic alignment throughout the relationship lifecycle.
Due Diligence
Relationships with parties and providers should align with the strategic goals, business objectives, and risk appetite of a company. Companies will be expected to assess, and document their capability to identify, monitor, and control the risks posed by a party/provider, commensurate with the level of risk and complexity of the relationship, taking into account the party鈥檚/provider鈥檚:
- Business strategies, goals, relevant experience, and legal/ regulatory compliance.
- Ownership structure and financial condition.
- Human resources (e.g., staffing, experience, culture).
- Governance and risk management, including cyber/ information security.
- Reliance on other parties (e.g., subcontractors).
Monitoring
On an ongoing basis, companies will be expected to evaluate a third party鈥檚/provider鈥檚 practices and adherence to company policies, standards, and thresholds; a key area of focus will be the controls related to sensitive systems or data. Regulators will likely expect companies to be able to demonstrate:
- Confirmation of the quality and sustainability of a third-party鈥檚 practices and controls, escalation of significant issues or concerns, and appropriate response when identified.
- Evaluation of the effectiveness of the third-party relationship, including whether it continues to align with the company鈥檚 strategic goals, business objectives, risk appetite.
- Periodic (or more frequent, where appropriate) monitoring for third-party relationships that support 鈥渉igher risk鈥� activities, including 鈥渃ritical activities.鈥�
Performance Measurement
Regulators are emphasizing the need to assess the effectiveness of both individual third-party relationships, and the entire TPRM program through metrics such as dynamic risk thresholds; key performance indicators; and scorecards to align/measure compliance with service-level agreements, contractual provisions, regulatory expectations, and legal requirements. These measures should be in line with company policies and procedures and serve as a framework for evaluating and maintaining the integrity of third-party relationships.
4. Actions
- Centralize Oversight and Governance: Firms should utilize a multidisciplinary approach to risk management of parties/providers (鈥淭PRM鈥�) by adopting a 鈥渉ub and spoke model鈥� to facilitate comprehensive identification and mitigation of risks and enable independent oversight of the TPRM function. The TPRM function would act as a hub with a central leadership team responsible for setting policies, standards, reporting and risk appetite of its operation, and would be supported by subject matter experts from relevant risk domains (e.g., privacy, cyber, BC, DR, etc.) to provide insights and execution while coordinating across the business line 鈥渟pokes.鈥� Alignment and integration with procurement and vendor management practices to drive consistency in execution is key.
- Employ a Risk-Based Approach: Adopting a risk-based approach is paramount to drive efficiency across the relationship lifecycle. This approach involves focusing efforts on third parties/ providers that pose the highest risk to the company, based on factors such as data access, service criticality, operational resiliency, and regulatory impact.
- Enrich data associated with service: In order to adopt a risk-based approach, it is important to gather the right data about the service up front in terms of how the service will be delivered and controlled (e.g. What process steps will service support?; What products are dependent on party/provider for delivery?; What controls at the third party will manage risk and compliance requirements? Are subcontractors involved in delivery? Will Artificial Intelligence be used in delivery of service?)
- Develop Strong Ongoing Monitoring: To ensure that party/provider risk is accurately measured and mitigated, firms need to perform ongoing monitoring of party/provider risk profiles and contract performance. Risks assessments should incorporate a comprehensive inventory of risks based on direct experience, market developments, and/or strategic business changes, and be conducted during the contracting phase and refreshed on a regular basis. (For example: Develop cloud governance programs aligned with cybersecurity strategies. Tailor security measures to address the unique risks of multi-cloud environments and enhance monitoring of cloud-based incidents.)
- Ensure TPRM meets or exceeds global and jurisdictional regulatory expectations: The location of a party/provider (and supply chain providers) does not relieve the company of its responsibility for compliance with all applicable laws and regulations, including ensuring that the party/provider also meets those obligations.
Dive into our thinking:
Get the latest from 乐鱼（Leyu）体育官网 Regulatory Insights
乐鱼（Leyu）体育官网 Regulatory Insights is the thought leader hub for timely insight on risk and regulatory developments.
Explore more
Insight
Points of View
Insights and analyses of emerging regulatory issues and their impact.
Insight
Regulatory Alerts
Quick hitting summaries of specific regulatory developments and their impact.
Insight
Regulatory Insights View
Series covering regulatory trends and emerging topics
Meet our team
