ADD-ON · ENTERPRISE RISK MANAGEMENT

Different scales. One report.

If every risk area has its own matrix and its own appetite, how do you report across them? You don't add the scales together. You add the exceedances together, measured against one global appetite, and management gets something they can decide on.

Book a demo Watch the video

Trusted by 400+ organisations

Watch a demo of the management report👇

GDPR-compliant

Hosted in EU

Free onboarding

+400 companies use .legal

The top of the management report in .legal: a risk appetite limit of four exceeded by seven risks, 32 of 32 entities assessed, and exposure of EUR 1,926,500 falling to EUR 1,111,500 after mitigation

Management doesn't need your averages

A five in one area isn't a five in another, so an average across areas tells you nothing at all. What a board needs is how many risks sit above the appetite you set yourselves, where they sit, what they cost, and whether it's moving the right way.

Exceedances travel, scales don't: Being over appetite means the same thing in every area, whatever the underlying scale looks like.
A snapshot rarely tells you much: One number on one day is a status update. A trend is an argument.
Decisions need a threshold: Without a global appetite there's nothing to say when this stops being operational.

The Global risk settings dialog in .legal, setting how many risks across every area may sit above appetite — four — with six currently above it

Set one global risk appetite

Alongside the appetite in each area, you define an overall one for the organisation.

A total, not an average: How many risks across all areas may sit above appetite before management has to act.
A clear trigger: When the total is breached, it's no longer a question of judgement about whether to escalate.
Everything measured against it: The management report reads the whole organisation against this one number.

The management report in .legal reading across every risk area: risks above the appetite limit, 130 of 135 entities assessed, and exposure before and after mitigation in Danish kroner

A report that works across different scales

Areas keep their own matrices. The report reads what they have in common.

Entities assessed: How much of your scope has actually been through an assessment.
Risks above appetite: The current total, measured against the global appetite.
No forced translation: Nobody has to normalise a three step scale against a six step one to make the numbers meet.

The financial section of the management report in .legal: current exposure of EUR 1,926,500, EUR 1,111,500 after mitigation and a 42% reduction, next to risks over appetite by area

Financial exposure now and after your plans

Where you work with money, the report brings it together.

Exposure today: Total estimated exposure across every area.
Exposure after mitigation: What it would be once the open plans are completed.
What that costs: The estimated cost of the plans, next to the reduction they deliver.

The full management report in .legal, with mitigation costs of EUR 57,000 across five plans, a breakdown of risks over appetite by NIS2 and the AI Act, and a twelve-month trend against the appetite limit

Breakdown by area and trend over time

Two views that turn the report from a status update into a conversation.

Where the pressure comes from: A breakdown by area shows which domain is driving the numbers.
Direction of travel: A trend over time shows whether the picture is improving or getting worse.
Something to prioritise on: Together they make the next decision fairly obvious.

A risk area in .legal switched to its after-mitigation view, the matrix marked with arrows for every entity that moves once the open plans are completed, beside the risk distribution over time

See it as it is, as it will be, or as it was

The area overview lets you switch the view.

Current: The picture as it stands today.
After mitigation: What it would look like if every open plan were completed.
Historic: Any past point in time, exactly as it looked then.