Raymond Cheung
Chartered Actuary · CRO · Board Adviser · Singapore
A statutory CRO manages risk within the organisation. CRO advisory brings independent perspective, regulatory credibility, and board-level risk literacy to the governance layer — and in Singapore's tightening MAS environment, that distinction is becoming critical.
Singapore's insurance and financial services sector operates under one of the more demanding risk governance frameworks in Asia. MAS's supervisory expectations — on capital adequacy, model governance, climate risk, operational resilience, and conduct — have been tightening consistently since the post-2008 regulatory wave. For organisations navigating this environment, the internal CRO function is essential. But it is not always sufficient.
I held statutory CRO roles at two MAS-regulated entities — AIG Asia Pacific and Basel Medical Group. In both roles, I was accountable to the board, to MAS, and to my colleagues for the adequacy of the risk framework. I know the mandate well. And what I know from that experience is that there are things the internal CRO cannot provide: independent perspective on whether the framework is adequate, experienced challenge on blind spots that internal teams have normalised, and board-level risk translation that does not carry the limitations of someone who is also managing the day-to-day risk function.
What CRO advisory provides
- Independent review of the enterprise risk framework — whether it is adequate for the regulatory environment and the actual risk profile of the business
- Board-level risk translation — presenting complex risk information in governance terms that directors can interrogate and take responsibility for
- Regulatory preparation — helping organisations anticipate and prepare for MAS supervisory expectations, including thematic reviews and ORSA assessments
- Specialist input on actuarial risk, capital strategy, and climate risk integration — areas where the internal CRO may lack depth or independence
- Transition support — when an organisation is between CROs, facing a significant risk event, or restructuring its risk governance framework
“The internal CRO manages risk. An external risk adviser challenges whether risk is being managed adequately — and does so from a position of independence that the internal role cannot occupy.”
When Singapore insurers typically engage CRO advisory
In my advisory practice, engagements tend to cluster around five situations: preparing for an MAS supervisory review; restructuring the risk governance framework following a significant event or leadership change; building out a new capability — climate risk, AI governance, ORSA — that requires specialist expertise the internal team does not have; providing ongoing board-level risk advisory alongside the internal CRO function; and situations where the internal risk function's independence is structurally compromised.
In each of those situations, the value of an external CRO adviser is not in replacing the internal function — it is in providing the independent perspective and board-level credibility that the internal function cannot provide for itself.
What to look for in a CRO adviser
The key criteria are statutory experience — have they actually held the role, with real regulatory accountability, in a regulated entity? Do they understand MAS supervisory expectations from the inside rather than from a consulting framework? Do they have the actuarial or quantitative depth to engage with the technical content of risk governance, not just the structural layer? And can they operate at board level — presenting, challenging, and building governance capability — rather than producing deliverables for the risk function?
These are the questions I would put to anyone considering this kind of engagement. They are also the questions I am happy to be tested against in any advisory conversation.
Common Questions
What is CRO advisory in Singapore?
CRO advisory provides independent risk governance expertise to boards and senior leadership of Singapore financial institutions — typically insurers, reinsurers, and MAS-regulated entities. It differs from an internal CRO role in that the adviser operates independently of the management team, providing external perspective and board-level risk translation.
When should a Singapore insurer engage a CRO adviser?
Common triggers include MAS supervisory preparation, risk governance restructuring, building new capabilities (climate risk, AI governance, ORSA), CRO transitions, or when the board needs independent risk input that the internal function cannot provide.
Is Raymond Cheung a qualified CRO adviser for MAS-regulated entities?
Yes. Raymond Cheung held statutory CRO roles at AIG Asia Pacific and Basel Medical Group, both MAS-regulated entities, with direct board and regulatory accountability. He now provides CRO advisory to Singapore boards and financial institutions through CER Consultancy.
About the author
Raymond Cheung is a Chartered Actuary, C-suite executive and board adviser with more than 20 years of experience across Asia in risk management, insurance, ESG and corporate governance. He is the CEO of CER Consultancy and an accredited trainer at SMU Academy and the Singapore College of Insurance.