NextGen Risk | Top 3 Finalists | Mount Royal University

In a display of polish, Mount Royal’s team members started their final presentation by proactively shaking hands with the judges, welcoming their Boreal clients.

Then they turned to the business at hand, identifying property, business interruption, and safety risks. They categorized Boreal’s risks into two buckets: Primary risks in immediate need of attention, and secondary risks suited better to long-term action.

In the ‘Primary’ bucket, the team said, Boreal’s Number 1 problem is that “they required an improvement in their storage facilities, inadequate storage facilities, which is a long-term exposure.”

Problem 2 is “inadequate training for seasonal staff, a short-term exposure,” the team said.

Problem 3 is a “lack of fire and security management systems, which again, is extremely hazardous and is a long-term exposure.”

Finally, building maintenance, “which includes both the building and the roof itself,” is a long-term exposure, the team said.

Secondary exposures, which could be addressed over a longer period, include propane tank location and inadequate lighting on site, the team said. Also, “we have leadership focus on cash flows. It’s a problem here. We require a leadership refocus, to focus more on risk management, rather than cash flow management.” And finally, a lack of property maintenance.

The Mount Royal broker team developed a risk matrix to assess risks for their frequency and sensitivity to the organization on a scale of 1 through 5.

One of the top risks identified on the scale was a lack of insurance coverage. Implementing FireSmart and fire suppression techniques (installing a new sprinkler system, for example) was another major recommendation guided by the risk matrix.

If the Fort Mac wildfire taught businesses anything, it was that they had to have alternative inventory sources available. These could be onsite or external sites that can be accessed so a wildfire “is not interrupting your cash flows and anything within your business operation.” As for insurance coverage, it should include contingent business interruption coverage.

And finally, the team called for the replacement of the roof and recommended the purchase of theft protection in the commercial insurance policy.

Post-presentation, the judges asked several questions about timelines. For example, they wondered why the group was not calling for insurance policies to be purchased before 2026 Q4 in the implementation plan. “It’s kind of a concern that if there’s a fire in Q3, there’s no coverage,” one judge noted.

The team said they had discussed that. Ultimately, they felt the role of the broker was to obtain the best premium pricing for the insurance coverage. Consequently, the team recommended the company should address its largest risk exposures immediately, the team told judges. That included including the installation of a sprinkler system and upgrading the 18-year-old roof.

Another judge asked if the sprinkler system installation should have been pushed to a later priority.  “If we’re looking at cash-strapped business, do you have any concerns with implementing a sprinkler system within six months? It’s not cheap.”

The team responded a medium-sized business would likely bring in revenues of between $2 million and $10 million. That’s a large exposure, and one of the reasons why the group recommended installing the sprinkler system right away, the team said.

“We called for the implementation of the sprinkler system as fast as we can, because it is one of those things that can prevent fire,” the team responded. “That’s just something the facility requires, considering there’s so much heavy equipment, and there are so many laborers, right?”