Of public companies that responded, 78 percent said they were prepared versus only 22 percent of private companies and 32 percent of nonprofits.

During a panel discussion on the results, Matthew Allen, head of Marsh's enterprise risk practice, pointed out that private companies and nonprofits have not prepared because they do not have to report. However, because they have dealings with public companies, they will need to make reporting preparations.

The reason, he said, is those companies have to detail the material risk that they pose in their relationship with their publicly owned counterpart.

The major problem for all concerning compliance with SEC Rule No. 33-9089 is that it is not clear what they have to do to comply with the regulation. This is especially true for private companies moving forward, he noted.

"What they [private companies] need to understand is they still have to come into compliance," he said.

Pamela Rogers, senior vice president with Marsh, noted that a major benefit for companies is that by concentrating on compliance they will have to build a "good framework" for enterprise risk management, and that "can be beneficial to" all risk managers.

Ms. Rogers noted that one of the major challenges coming out of the survey for risk managers is "lack of personnel resources dedicated to risk management."

The survey found 44 percent of respondents identified this as a major obstacle they faced in elevating their risk management practice, followed by "other areas have greater priority" at 43 percent, and 34 percent saying "demonstrating the value of risk management programs."

She said one of the major reasons for this is the economic challenges all corporations faced during the recession, as staff are among one of the first resources companies cut to save money.

Risk managers need to emphasize the importance of risk management to their company's chief executives, which is essentially explaining that importance of spending money to avoid loss.

Deborah Luthi, director of enterprise risk management services for Sacramento, Calif.-based Matheson Inc. and vice president of RIMS, noted that risk managers need to underscore their importance by demonstrating to management how much they would lose if they are unprepared and the loss takes place.

Brian Elowe, managing director for Marsh, noted generally that concerns for risk differ markedly between risk managers, chief executives and finance departments.

Property risk was the number one concern among risk managers but ranked third for chief executives and fourth among finance.

Business interruption was the top concern among finance people, ranking second for risk managers and fifth for chief executives.

He said this is an indication that the interests of risk managers are not as well aligned as one might assume they should be with other members of management.

Risk managers are most comfortable with the handling of hazard risks, such as auto and property, Mr. Elowe noted, while strategic risks (political risk and enterprise risk) and financial risk fall into the not comfortable range.

The survey noted that climate change is the "most significant exception among hazard risks" as risk managers singled they are least comfortable with this risk.

The survey said it receives the least attention "but also generates the most discomfort. In part, it remains a difficult risk for which to develop a management plan. It is also a subject that continues to generate controversy."