A utility risk team notices the register mainly updates after outages are already logged. Which design best shifts the architecture toward leading risk signals?
Select an answer to reveal the explanation.
Short Explanation
Lagging counts are like checking the garage after the car already hit the curb. Leading KRIs watch the warning lights—near misses, failing controls, rising exceptions—so the risk register can move before the outage write-up shows up.
Full Explanation
Incident and loss counts are useful lagging measures, but an architecture that depends on them alone updates residual posture after harm. Preferring leading key risk indicators tied to precursor conditions improves early visibility. Purely retrospective metrics, annual memos alone, or ticket-count surrogates do not create that forward-looking signal design.