Robust optimisation is a well-established framework for optimising functions in the presence of uncertainty. The inherent goal of this problem is to identify a collection of inputs whose outputs are both desirable for the decision maker, whilst also being robust to the underlying uncertainties in the problem. In this work, we study the multi-objective extension of this problem from a computational standpoint. We identify that the majority of all robust multi-objective algorithms rely on two key operations: robustification and scalarisation. Robustification refers to the strategy that is used to marginalise over the uncertainty in the problem. Whilst scalarisation refers to the procedure that is used to encode the relative importance of each objective. As these operations are not necessarily commutative, the order that they are performed in has an impact on the resulting solutions that are identified and the final decisions that are made. This work aims to give an exposition on the philosophical differences between these two operations and highlight when one should opt for one ordering over the other. As part of our analysis, we showcase how many existing risk concepts can be easily integrated into the specification and solution of a robust multi-objective optimisation problem. Besides this, we also demonstrate how one can principally define the notion of a robust Pareto front and a robust performance metric based on our robustify and scalarise methodology. To illustrate the efficacy of these new ideas, we present two insightful numerical case studies which are based on real-world data sets.