Search results

The purpose of this paper is to highlight the main findings of a successfully defended doctoral thesis that studied factors or interventions causing the discrepancy between how adequate project risks should be managed and how project risks are actually managed.

The approach involved interviews and a survey using questionnaires gathered data from project managers about their experiences with project risk management during two phases of fieldwork. The first phase included in‐depth interviews with information technology (IT) project managers in order to explore patterns involving risk mediators and their influence on project risk management. A web‐based survey was used in the second phase for the purpose of testing these patterns on a wider range of project managers.

Specific risk‐related interventions strongly influence the effective use of project risk management: project managers tended to deny, avoid, ignore risks and to delay the management of risk. Risks were perceived as discomforting, not agreed upon. IT project managers were unaware of risks and considered them to be outside their scope of influence and preferred to let risks resolve themselves rather than proactively engaging with them. As a consequence, factors such as the lack of awareness of risks by IT project managers appeared to constrain the application of project risk management with the result that risk had an adverse influence on the outcome of IT projects.

The underlying rational assumptions of project risk management and the usefulness of best practice project risk management standards as a whole need to be questioned because of the occurrence of interventions such as the lack of information. IT project managers should first prevent risk‐related interventions from influencing the use of project risk management. However, if this is not possible, they should be prepared to adapt to risks influencing the project outcome.

The paper contradicts the myth of a “self‐evidently” correct project risk management approach. It defines interventions that constrain project manager's ability to manage project risk.

Introduces the basic concepts of risk management and their application to the field of facilities management (FM). Identifies the main classes of risk relevant to FM and introduces a model for determining the exposure of an organization to risk and for identifying the level of control that may be exercised over particular risks. Discusses responsibilities for risk and provides a plan of action for risk management.

States that information and help on managing business risk was sought by the Financial and Management Accounting Committee of the International Federation of Accountants (IFAC). Examines Pricewaterhouse‐Coopers part in this – in their guise as Global Risk Management Solutions and the guidance in an emerging area. Further discusses risk management and the interest in it, its improvement possibilities and the adoption of an integrated approach. Proposes that the implementation of risk architecture is not a response to risk but rather a paradigm shift that involves enterprises changing.

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the management process considering risks and performances in developing new products.

The paper provides risk factors and performance factors based on literature reviews and then discusses risk and performance management processes during the product development period. Some lessons for effective risk management and performance measures are reported.

The timing of risk management and performance measures is important to the impact level of performance.

This proposed framework could be used as a basis for systematic management of R&D investment projects.

The paper provides insights into the R&D committee's role in developing new products.

Against the backdrop of the fledgling entrepreneurship development and the imperatives of risk management to mitigate failure, this chapter discusses the impact of risk management practice on the development of African businesses. It also considers how best to align the practice of risk management in order to achieve business continuity. More than ever before, global competitiveness and the need to trade‐out of declining profits are currently driving businesses into risk management efficiencies in order to continue achieving increased returns on assets employed/equities for their shareholders. The attainment of these growth objectives can often be affected by several types of business risk (financial and operational) coupled with unpredicted movements in prices. These movements especially in times of high volatilities impact materially on profit growth potentials regardless of how well a business is managed. This chapter suggests how African business executives can evolve their business management styles to imbed risk management at all stages.

The purpose of this paper is to develop a General Systems Theory (GST) risk management framework and conducts a preliminary investigation into its potential benefits.

A risk management framework with four domains is developed by applying GST to property. Risk management in five listed Australian Real Estate Investment Trusts (A‐REITs) is benchmarked against the GST ideal using public web‐sites information. A‐REIT volatility‐adjusted returns are calculated using Treynor ratios for the year to May 2010. The link between risk management score and entity performance is then investigated.

The GST framework directs attention to risks involving surveillance, capacity and controls. However, as predicted by the Efficient Market Hypothesis (EMH), the study found no link between assessed risk management and volatility‐moderated annual returns to May 2010.

The risk scoring was predicated on publicly available data, with limited analysis of financial statements. The sample size was restricted.

Successful entities are well governed, focused and innovative. Robust finances allow exploitation of emerging opportunity when business conditions become favourable. Planning and environmental management capabilities are essential.

The paper makes conceptual and practical contributions. Conceptually, it develops a GST risk management framework. Practically, albeit for a handful of entities, the paper illustrates how the GST approach to risk management could be effectively deployed. The paper also outlines a pathway for more refined risk management research.

Aims to identify awareness of and involvement in risk assessments, training, incident reporting, information giving and consenting in an acute health care context. Explores how nurse managers perceived risk management as a concept and if they saw advanced neonatal nurse practitioners having a role to play in this activity. The method used was a postal survey of 62 nurse managers or clinical specialists responsible for neonatal nursing care services within NHS Trusts in the UK. Results show that while the nurse managers studies understood the definition of risk management in general, they were more vague about certain aspects of that definition. The nurse managers appeared to be passive in their dissemination and taking forward of risk management strategies, rather than proactively “promoting and helping them forward” as may be expected in facilitative managerial behaviour. Concludes that the challenges of clinical governance demand more proactive approaches to effect and demonstrate change, and support ongoing clinical quality improvements.

Given the increasingly turbulent business landscape and unprecedented incidents (e.g. Covid-19), firms must achieve supply chain resilience (SCRes) as a dynamic capability to bounce back from adversities and ensure continuity of operations. The purpose of this study is to integrate the three interrelated [knowledge management, risk management culture (RMC) and resilience] but often separately discussed concepts to advance the understanding of their intertwined influence on SCRes in the agri-food supply chains.

This study uses a cross-sectional survey approach where quantitative data is collected from 349 participants from the Australian agri-food supply chains to test the proposed hypotheses.

Exposure to supply chain risks triggers the deployment of specific knowledge management practices in the agri-food supply chains. Further, the analysis on serial mediation suggests that firms’ knowledge management practices work sequentially (knowledge acquisition, assimilation and application) and develop a RMC to achieve SCRes amid supply chain risks.

The findings of this study inform practitioners and policymakers who seek to understand the key mechanisms that facilitate the development of SCRes when facing supply chain risks, particularly in the Australian agri-food supply chains.

The growth of the food industry through more resilient food supply chains could ensure sustained food supply and more employment opportunities.

Using dynamic capability theory, the authors devise a novel empirical model that explicates how knowledge management practices and RMC instigate the dynamic capability of SCRes amid supply chain risks facing agri-food supply chains.

This study aims to explore the controllability of risk culture, identify and categorize risk culture controls used in firms and explore how industry and ownership structure affect the use of different risk culture controls.

This explorative study is based on 32 semi-structured interviews with 37 participants who are heads of risk management or top managers in German firms from different industries with different ownership structures.

Interviewees perceive risk culture to be largely controllable. The authors identify a wide spectrum of risk culture controls, ranging from leadership and motivational controls to risk competence controls; in each category, the authors find value-, symbol- and clan-based controls. Leadership controls were most extensively discussed by the interviewees. The use of risk culture controls varied based on industry and ownership structure.

Due to the explorative character of the approach, the authors cannot claim representativeness for the results. The study is limited to one point in time and to a German sample. The findings imply that companies should select risk culture controls according to their own context and that implementation requires support by the top and middle management.

The authors respond to the call for more organizational studies on risk management that consider cultural paradigms (Arena et al., 2010; Mikes, 2011; Power, 2009). The study systematically identifies risk culture controls used in corporate practice and categorizes them. It provides tentative evidence of the relevance of context-specific factors for the use of risk culture controls.

Debate is growing around the expansion of risk-based regulation. The regulation scholarship provides evidence of regulatory failure of the risk-based approach in different domains, including financial regulation. Therefore, this paper aims to provide cautionary evidence about the risk of regulatory failure of risk-based strategy in the financial regulation while using enterprise risk management (ERM) as a meta-regulatory toolkit.

Based on interview data gathered from 30 risk managers of banks and five regulatory personnel, combined with secondary data, this study mainly explores the challenges for meaningful use of ERM based self-regulation in regulated banks. The evidence helps to assess the risk of regulatory failure of the risk-based regulation while using ERM.

The evidence reflects that regulated banks face diverse challenges arising from both peripheral and internal environments that limit the true internalization of ERM-based self-regulation. Despite this, the regulator uses this self-regulation as a meta-regulatory toolkit under the risk-based regulation to achieve the regulatory aims. However, the lack of true internalization of ERM based self-regulation is likely to raise the risk of regulatory failure of risk-based regulation to achieve the regulatory goals. Risk-based regulation is an evolving strategy in the regulatory regime. Therefore, care should be taken while using ERM as a regulatory toolkit before relying on it substantially.

The paper provides empirical insights about the challenges for effective use of ERM as a meta regulatory toolkit that might be useful practically both to the regulators and regulated firms.