Search results

Digital transformation misalignment refers to disparities in digital transformation levels between suppliers and buyers across the production and operation process. It has negatively affected supply chain stability. However, the existing research concerning the economic consequences has not been adequately addressed. Therefore, this paper aims to investigate whether such digital transformation misalignment increases supplier financial risk and to identify the factors influencing this relationship.

This paper examines binary combinations of suppliers and buyers listed on China’s A-share market between 2011 and 2021. This group constitutes a sample to empirically test the influence of digital transformation misalignment on the supplier’s financial risk, as well as the moderating effect of the geographical and organizational distances.

The paper’s findings demonstrate that digital transformation misalignment has indeed a significant increase in the supplier’s financial risk. Moreover, the impact is more intense when the geographical or organizational distance between the supplier and the buyer is relatively large.

The existing literature rarely explores the potential risks arising from digital transformation misalignment between supply chain partners. Therefore, this paper fills a notable gap as it is the first to study the impact of digital transformation misalignment on the supplier’s financial risk and the specific applied mechanisms. The contribution significantly improves the field of corporate digital transformation, particularly, within the context of supply chain management.

This study examined how economic freedom and its related components, such as open markets, regulatory efficiency, rule of law and the size of government, affect bank risk behavior, focusing on the Japanese context.

The study employs a two-step GMM framework on the annual data of Japanese banks ranging from 2005 to 2020 to empirically test the hypotheses. Furthermore, we also use the ordinary least square method to ensure the robustness of our mainline findings.

The finding suggests that economic freedom increases the banks' risk-taking, thus making them fragile. The results also highlight that out of the four main subcomponents of economic freedom, regulatory efficiency and government size increase bank risk-taking, while the rule of law and open markets decrease banks' risk-taking. Additionally, we examine how the banks' specific characteristics affect the results by creating a subsample based on capitalization and liquidity ratios. Overall, the results are consistent with the baseline findings. Moreover, the results are robust to alternative proxy measures of risk.

The study's findings have several implications for regulators and policymakers. The results suggest that regulators and policymakers should reconsider their strategies for economic freedom to ensure that they promote stability in the banking system and reduce banks' risk-taking inclinations.

Although previous studies have examined the impact of economic freedom on bank stability and risk-taking, this study is the first to do so in the Japanese context, contributing to the literature by providing new insights and empirical evidence.

This paper aims to examine the relationship between board structure and risk-taking, exploring how this association is influenced by advanced technologies in the banking sector.

This study uses a panel sample of 22 Pakistani banks from 2011 to 2018. To test the authors’ hypothesis, the authors use regression analysis with two-way cluster robust standard errors. Further, the authors also check the robustness of the authors’ findings using alternate proxies of board structure and bank risk-taking behavior. To address endogeneity concerns, the authors use the two-stage least square technique.

In the era of the Fourth Industrial Revolution, Pakistani banks’ digitalization is modeled by the presence of Temenos-T24/Oracle as their core banking system (software providing end-to-end operational integration). Its interactional effect with corporate governance is evaluated to implicate informed risk-taking by the board as a result of improved information access and analysis. The authors find that board size has a positive association with risk-taking, and the use of modern technology reshapes this association in the banking sector.

The contribution of this paper is twofold. First, the impact of board structure on bank risk-taking has not been extensively researched in Pakistan – a highly volatile and unpredictable economy. Second, the evaluation of the role of technology on bank risk is being researched for the very first time – a uniqueness of this paper.

This study empirically demonstrates a contradiction between pillar 3 of Basel norms III and the designation of Systemically Important Banks (SIBs), also known as Too Big to Fail (TBTF). The objective of this study is threefold, which has been approached in a phased manner. The first is to determine the systemic importance of the banks under study; second, to examine if market discipline exists at different levels of systemic importance of banks and lastly, to examine if the strength of market discipline varies at different levels of systemic importance.

This study is based on all the public and private sector banks operating in the Indian banking sector. The Gaussian Mixture Model algorithm has been utilized to classify banks into distinct levels of systemic importance. Thereafter, market discipline has been observed by analyzing depositors' sentiments toward banks' risk (CAMEL indicators). The analysis has been performed by employing the system Generalized Method of Moments (GMM) to estimate models with different dependent variables.

The findings affirm the existence of market discipline across all levels of systemic importance. However, the strength of market discipline varies with the systemic importance of the banks, with weak market discipline being a negative externality of the SIBs designation.

By employing the Gaussian Mixture Model algorithm to develop a framework for categorizing banks on the basis of their systemic importance, this study is the first to go beyond the conventional method as outlined by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI).

The purpose of this paper is to engage in a systematic examination of previous scholarship on the relationship between Sharia governance (SG), which is represented by the Sharia Supervisory Board (SSB), and the Internal Sharia Review (ISR), to determine whether the ISR can minimize financing risk in Islamic banking.

The literature search consisted of two steps: a randomized and systematic literature review. The methodology adopted in this article is a systematic literature review.

To reduce the risk of financing in Islamic banking, SG must be implemented optimally by making rules regarding the role of the SSB in supervising customer financing. In addition, it is a necessary to establish an entity that assists the SSB in the implementation of SG, namely, the ISR section, but there is still very little research on the role of the SSB and ISR in minimizing financing risk.

Establishing an ISR to assist the SSB in carrying out its duties has direct practical implications for Islamic banking: minimizing financing risks and compliance with Islamic Sharia principles. In addition, new rules regarding the role of SSBs and the ISR in reducing credit risk include monitoring customers to ensure that they fulfill their financing commitments on time. This new form of regulation and review can be used as a reference by the Otoritas Jasa Keuangan or Finance Service Authority to create new policies or regulations regarding SG, especially in Indonesia.

Subsequent research may introduce other more relevant variables, such as empirically testing the competence, independence or integrity of SSB and the ISR team as it attempts to minimize the risk of financing in Islamic banks. In addition, further research is expected to examine whether the SSB or the ISR team has a positive or negative influence on the risk of financing Islamic banks with secondary data.

The objective of this research is to investigate the capabilities of the ChatGPT GPT-4 model, a form of artificial intelligence (AI), in comparison to human experts in the context of construction project risk management.

Employing a mixed-methods approach, the study draws a qualitative and quantitative comparison between 16 human risk management experts from Finnish construction companies and the ChatGPT AI model utilizing anonymous peer reviews. It focuses primarily on the areas of risk identification, analysis, and control.

ChatGPT has demonstrated a superior ability to generate comprehensive risk management plans, with its quantitative scores significantly surpassing the human average. Nonetheless, the AI model's strategies are found to lack practicality and specificity, areas where human expertise excels.

This study marks a significant advancement in construction project risk management research by conducting a pioneering blind-review study that assesses the capabilities of the advanced AI model, GPT-4, against those of human experts. Emphasizing the evolution from earlier GPT models, this research not only underscores the innovative application of ChatGPT-4 but also the critical role of anonymized peer evaluations in enhancing the objectivity of findings. It illuminates the synergistic potential of AI and human expertise, advocating for a collaborative model where AI serves as an augmentative tool, thereby optimizing human performance in identifying and managing risks.

This study aims to develop an inclusive, multidisciplinary, flexible and organizationally adaptable safety risk management framework, including diversity management, that will be implemented to ensure safety is and remains at the desired level. If the number of incidents and potential incidents that could lead to accidents and their impact rates are to be reduced operationally and administratively, aviation safety risks and sources of risk must be better understood, sources of risk identified, and the safety risk management framework designed in an organization-specific and organization-wide sustainable way. At this point, it is necessary to draw the conceptual framework well and to define the boundaries of the concepts well. In this study, a framework model that can be adapted to the organization is proposed to optimize the management of risks and provide both efficient and effective resource allocation and organizational structure design in its operations and management functions.

The qualitative research method – triple techniques – was deemed appropriate for this study, which aims to identify, examine, interpret and develop the situations of safety management models. In this context, document analysis, business process modeling technique and Delphi techniques from qualitative research methods were used via integration as the methodology of this research.

To manage dynamic civil aviation management activities and business processes effectively and efficiently, the risk management process is the building block of the “Proposed Process Model” that supports the decision-making processes of aviation organizations and managers. This “Framework Conceptual Model” building block also helps build capacity and resilience by enabling continuous development, organizational learning, and flexible structuring.

This research is limited to air transportation and aviation safety management issues. This research is limited specifically to a safety-based risk management framework for the aviation industry. This research may have social implications as source saving, optimum resource use and capacity building will make a contribution to society and add value besides operational and practical implementation.

This research may contribute to more safe operations and functions in the aviation industry.

Management and academia may gain considerable support from this research to manage their safety risks via a corporate-tailored risk management framework, both improving resilience and developing corporate capacity. With this model presented, decision-makers will have a guiding structure that can optimally manage the main risk types that may be encountered in the safety risk in the fields of suppliers, manufacturers, demand changes, logistics, information management, environmental, legal and regulatory. Existing studies in the literature are generally in the form of algorithms and cannot be used as a decision-making support tool. This model aims to fill the gap in the literature. In addition, added value may be created by applying this model to optimum management safety risks in the real aviation industry and its related sectors.

Managers must make numerous strategic decisions in order to initiate and implement a business model innovation (BMI). This paper examines how managers perceive the management team interacts when making BMI decisions. The paper also investigates how group biases and board members’ risk willingness affect this process.

Empirical data were collected through 26 in-depth interviews with German managing directors from 13 companies in four industries (mobility, manufacturing, healthcare and energy) to explore three research questions: (1) What group effects are prevalent in BMI group decision-making? (2) What are the key characteristics of BMI group decisions? And (3) what are the potential relationships between BMI group decision-making and managers' risk willingness? A thematic analysis based on Gioia's guidelines was conducted to identify themes in the comprehensive dataset.

First, the results show four typical group biases in BMI group decisions: Groupthink, social influence, hidden profile and group polarization. Findings show that the hidden profile paradigm and groupthink theory are essential in the context of BMI decisions. Second, we developed a BMI decision matrix, including the following key characteristics of BMI group decision-making managerial cohesion, conflict readiness and information- and emotion-based decision behavior. Third, in contrast to previous literature, we found that individual risk aversion can improve the quality of BMI decisions.

This paper provides managers with an opportunity to become aware of group biases that may impede their strategic BMI decisions. Specifically, it points out that managers should consider the key cognitive constraints due to their interactions when making BMI decisions. This work also highlights the importance of risk-averse decision-makers on boards.

This qualitative study contributes to the literature on decision-making by revealing key cognitive group biases in strategic decision-making. This study also enriches the behavioral science research stream of the BMI literature by attributing a critical influence on the quality of BMI decisions to managers' group interactions. In addition, this article provides new perspectives on managers' risk aversion in strategic decision-making.

This study aims to explore the relationship between risk governance characteristics (chief risk officer [CRO], chief financial officer [CFO] and senior directors [SENIOR]) and regulatory adjustments (RAs) in Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development public commercial banks.

Using principal component analysis (PCA) and regression models, the research analyzes a representative data set of these banks.

A significant negative correlation between risk governance characteristics and RAs is found. Sensitivity analysis on the regulatory Tier 1 capital ratio and the total capital ratio indicates mixed outcomes, suggesting a complex relationship that warrants further exploration.

The study’s limited sample size calls for further research to confirm findings and explore risk governance’s impact on banks’ capital structures.

Enhanced risk governance could reduce RAs, influencing banking policy.

The study advocates for improved banking regulatory practices, potentially increasing sector stability and public trust.

This study contributes to understanding risk governance’s role in regulatory compliance, offering insights for policymaking in banking.

The primary objective of this research is to conceptualize the integration of enterprise risk management (ERM) as a mechanism to enhance the connection between corporate sustainability (CS) reporting and financial performance. This study suggests that future researchers should validate the proposed conceptualization by conducting a comprehensive content analysis of sustainability reports of Malaysian oil and gas companies. This analysis will allow for the collection of pertinent data regarding CS reporting and ERM implementation. The present study takes a comprehensive approach by integrating legitimacy, stakeholder, and resource-based view (RBV) theories, proposing a robust conceptual design that emphasizes the role of ERM in the connection between CS reporting and firm performance. Drawing on theoretical foundations, this study proposes that CS reporting will have a direct effect on financial performance. Moreover, the integration of ERM serves to strengthen the nexus between CS reporting and financial performance. This study offers valuable insights for stakeholders in the oil and gas sector by providing strategic guidance to enhance financial performance not only through CS reporting but also by implementing ERM. Moreover, the framework proposed in this study is expected to bring tangible and intangible benefits to corporations, including reducing information asymmetry, improving the quality of disclosure, and creating value within the field of CS. The proposed conceptual framework holds great significance as it enhances the applicability of legitimacy, stakeholder, and RBV theories, while also creating value for stakeholders through CS reporting and the adoption of risk management practices to enhance financial performance.