Search results

Basel III regulations require banks to protect themselves against strategic risk. This paper aims to provide a comprehensive and measurable definition of this risk and proposes a framework to estimate economic capital requirements.

The paper studies the literature and solicits expert opinion in formulating a comprehensive and measurable definition of strategic risk. The paper postulates that the economic capital for a bank’s strategic risk should be estimated using the cost of equity as the profitability threshold, rather than zero and develops a simulation-based framework to estimate economic capital.

The framework closely matches the actual economic capital outlay for strategic risk from our case study of ABN AMRO. It is shown that a bank’s strategic growth plans can fall into one of two scenarios based on risk-return characteristics. In one scenario, the required economic capital outlay will increase, and decrease in the other.

This framework is generalizable and makes use of widely accepted and used practices in banks, making it readily implementable in practice. It does not introduce errors resulting from model selection, parameterizations or complex calculations.

Society would be worse off in the absence of banking and lending services. Banks need to take risks to grow and stay competitive. The framework facilitates better strategic risk management, protecting banks from collapse and reducing the need for taxpayer-funded bailouts.

The paper provides a measurable and practitioner-verified definition of strategic risk and proposes a simple framework to estimate economic capital requirements, a crucial topic, given the threats and increased levels of strategic risk facing banks.

This paper aims to explore the reporting challenges and related organisational mechanisms of change associated with disclosing corporate risks within integrated reports.

This paper adopts a Latourian performative approach to explore the organisational mechanisms of change in terms of networks of actors, both “human” and “non-human”, involved in the preparation of risk-related disclosure. Empirical evidence is collected by means of in-depth interviews with the preparers of an integrated reporting pioneer company.

Preparing disclosure on corporate risks in the context of integrated reporting demands close interaction among several actors. When disclosure shifts from listing key risks to providing information on how these risks are managed or connect with corporate strategy and value creation, departments not usually involved in corporate reporting play an active role and external stakeholders offer pertinent insights, benchmarks and feedback. Integrated reporting and risk management frameworks are the “non-human” actors that facilitate the engagement of diverse “human” actors.

Preparers should be aware that risk disclosure within integrated reports requires collaboration among (“human”) actors belonging to different departments and the engagement of external stakeholders. Preparers should consider the frameworks of integrated reporting and risk management as facilitators of cross-departmental discussions and dialogue, rather than mere contributors of guidelines and recommendations.

This study enriches the scant literature on organisational mechanisms of change made in response to integrated reporting challenges, showing subsequent advancements in the organisational process underlying the preparation of risk disclosure.

Inspired by new findings on and perceptions of risk governance, such as the necessity of taking a broader perspective in coping with risks in companies and working together in interactive groups with various stakeholders to deal with complex risks in the modern world, the purpose of this paper is looking for new ways to deal with financial risks. Current methods dealing with those risks are confronted with the problems of being primarily based on past data and experience, neglecting the need for objectivity, focusing on the short-term future and disregarding the interconnectedness of different financial risk categories.

A literature review of risk governance, financial risk management and open foresight was executed to conceptualize solutions to the mentioned-above problems.

Collaborative financial risk assessment (CFRA) is a promising approach in financial risk governance with respect to overcoming said problems. It is a method of risk identification and assessment, which combines aspects of “open foresight” and the financial risk management and governance literature. CFRA is characterized as bringing together members of different companies in trying to detect weak signals and trends to gain knowledge about the future, which helps companies to reduce financial risks and increase the chance of gaining economic value. By overcoming organizational boundaries, individual companies may gain the knowledge they would probably not have without CFRA and achieve a competitive advantage.

A conceptual paper like the one at hand wants empirical proof. Therefore, the authors developed a research agenda in the form of five propositions for further research.

This paper discusses the existing problems of financial risk identification and assessment methods. It contributes to the existing literature by proposing CFRA as a solution to those problems and adding a new perspective to financial risk governance.

Although brand risk management (BRM) is widely acknowledged as critical concern of business leaders, there exists little empirical evidence regarding what activities firms could do to make their brand secured in the increasingly competitive market. Moreover, previous studies find out the important role of innovation stimulus in firm performance, but little attention is paid on how firm's innovation stimulates the firm's brand security. This study aims at exploring the impacts of BRM activities on brand security with the innovation stimulus as a moderator.

Mixed method is applied in conducting this research. In the qualitative research, an interview with managers of 20 large-size foodstuff companies in Vietnam is conducted to obtain insights into their understanding BRM activities and brand security as well as the role of innovation stimulus in managing brand risk and developing measurements for new constructs. In the quantitative research, a sample of 258 respondents is collected for the tests of reliability and validity as well as all hypotheses using SPSS software.

The authors’ findings show that the level of implementation of BRM activities influences the brand security with the moderating effect of innovation stimulus. Specifically, four dimensions of BRM activities including: strategy, personnel, processes and investment have direct, positive and significant impact on brand security. Innovation stimulus including innovation in leadership and innovation in knowledge management could serve as a moderating variable.

The findings of the current study have contributed to BRM literature by highlighting the importance of the implementation of BRM activities and the key role of innovation stimulus in ensuring the brand security, on which previous studies have paid little attention. The study suggests some guidance for firms about how to improve the innovation stimulus in enhancing the effectiveness of BRM activities and, as a result, increasing the brand security of the firm.

The purpose of this study is to examine how companies integrate cyber risk into their enterprise risk management practices. Data breaches have become commonplace, with thousands occurring each year, and some costing hundreds of millions of dollars. Consequently, cyber risk has become one of the gravest risks facing organizations, and has attracted boardroom-level attention. On the other hand, companies already manage many kinds of difficult and growing risks, and that firms lose less than 1% of annual revenues as a result of cyber incidents. Therefore, how should firms appropriately address cyber risk? Is it indeed a materially different kind of risk area, or is it simply just one more risk that can seamlessly be integrated into existing enterprise risk management (ERM) practices?

The authors performed thematic analysis based on semi-structured interviews, with non-probabilistic, purposive sampling, to answer two main questions. First, how do firms manage enterprise risks, generally? And second, how are they integrating cyber risk into these existing processes?

The authors find that there is considerable variation in the approach and sophistication in ERM practices, such as whether they are driven more like an auditing function, or as a risk champion. The authors also find that despite the novelty of cyber risk, it can be integrated like other enterprise risks, and that cyber risk is most often seen as an operational risk (similar to workplace accidents or fraud), rather than a strategic risk, emerging from, for example, technology innovation and R&D.

The generalization of the results is limited by the sample size and variation of firms interviewed. While the authors attempted to interview enterprise risk managers across a wide variation of firms, there were clear limitations in the scope. That being said, the authors were fortunate to be able to examine ERM and cyber risk practices across small and large, private and publicly traded companies, from a variety of business sectors.

The authors believe these finding are important because they present evidence that while cyber risk may be new, it does not require specialized handling or processes to track it at the enterprise level. While some firms may choose to provide special accommodations or attention because of their data collection or business practices, this approach is neither necessary nor required of all firms in all situations.

This research is one of the only papers that, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, examines how cyber risk is integrated at an enterprise level.

Due to its fast growth, cross-border e-commerce (CBEC) is becoming a popular internationalization model, especially in those destination markets with impressive e-commerce development like China. However, CBEC also brings new logistics challenges and uncertainty. This paper aims to understand how companies cope with logistics uncertainty in this field and whether the different types of uncertainty influence the risk management strategies adopted to face them.

A survey targeting online exporters to China and third-party forwarding logistics service providers (3PFLs) is conducted. A structural equation model (SEM) analysis is performed to test the possible relationship between the adopted risk management strategies and the types of uncertainty. The type, industry and size of the company, as well as the distance between the company's home country and China, are used as control variables in the study. Survey results are enriched via interviews with some of the respondents.

The risk management strategies adopted are dependent on the type of logistics uncertainty that the companies face and, to a minor extent, on the industry the company operates in. Conversely, no significant influence is exerted by other types of control factors, i.e. home country, company size or company type.

The paper investigates logistics uncertainty and risk management approaches in the novel context of CBEC. A systematic review of relevant sources of uncertainty is offered to help both scholars and practitioners understand the current complexities of CBEC. From a theoretical perspective, the paper models the investigated concepts in light of the contingency approach. From a practical perspective, results can be of interest since the list of proposed items can support risk identification and evaluation while the interviews with managers can provide insights on risk management practices.