FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W227406198> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W227406198 endingPage "11" @default.
• W227406198 startingPage "1" @default.
• W227406198 abstract "UNDERSTANDING THE COSTS OF RISK RESPONSE IS A CRITICAL YET CHALLENGING PART OF DEVELOPING AN EFFECTIVE ENTERPRISE RISK MANAGEMENT (ERM) FRAMEWORK THAT GOES BEYOND THE INITIAL STEPS OF ASSESSING THE MOST IMPORTANT INHERENT RISKS FACING AN ORGANIZATION. THIS ARTICLE DESCRIBES THE DIRECT AND INDIRECT COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH REDUCING RISKS THROUGH INSURANCE, HEDGING, ALLIANCE FORMATION, AND CONTROLS IMPLEMENTATION. BY MORE THOROUGHLY UNDERSTANDING AND MEASURING THE COSTS OF RISK-REDUCTION STRATEGIES, ORGANIZATIONS ARE BETTER ABLE TO COMPARE THE NET BENEFITS ASSOCIATED WITH REDUCING RISKS TO A LEVEL MORE IN LINE WITH THEIR RISK APPETITES. Enterprise risk management (ERM) is becoming an increasingly important aspect of managing a business in today's complex, dynamic, and intensely competitive global marketplace. Organizations assign the growing responsibilities to perform effective risk management practices to different positions, including management accountants and internal auditors. In 2004, for example, Larry White, then Chair of the Institute of Management Accountants (IMA[R]), noted that all management accountants need to understand [enterprise risk management] work so they can help their companies analyze and manage financial and operational risk. (1) Not surprisingly, there are a growing number of consulting firms and share forums to assist organizations seeking best practices for understanding, assessing, and managing the risks faced in achieving strategic objectives. Implementing an ERM framework often moves along fairly smoothly as executives identify and assess the top inherent risks (i.e., risks prior to responding to them internally) facing their organizations. The process often breaks down at the point of deciding the proper allocation of resources in response to the risks faced by the organization (i.e., risk responses). Such responses enable organizations to reduce inherent risks to a lower level, commonly referred to as residual risks. Existing ERM models, including the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission's (COSO's) Enterprise Risk Management--Integrated Framework, provide excellent guidance for organizations in early ERM stages, which include understanding and assessing inherent risks. Yet these models are less clear regarding the stage where risk responses are selected and analyzed collectively. In this article, we examine one of the key--although often ignored or underutilized--steps to capturing the full potential of ERM: incorporating the costs of risk response. The quantification of risks and responses is complicated by various measurement issues, including the organization's determination of an appropriate time horizon and its definition of costs within the risk management process. For example, an unexpected event that causes an adverse impact on an organization's profitability also may have a negative effect on its cash flows and stock price over an extended period of time. One recent study found that public companies announcing a supply chain disruption between 1989 and 2000 experienced an average abnormal stock return of negative 40% over a three-year period starting one year prior to the announcement date. (2) Stock price volatility for these same firms increased 13.5% in the year following the announcement, reducing shareholder returns and providing evidence that the companies did not recover quickly from the negative effects of the disruptions. Therefore, the costs of risks and their associated responses can be incurred over several years and impact numerous stakeholders. We will discuss examples of and challenges to estimating both the direct and indirect costs associated with the most common risk-response options, which is critical in selecting the most appropriate responses. ESTIMATING THE EFFECTIVENESS AND NET BENEFIT OF RISK RESPONSES Assessing the effectiveness of a risk response requires measuring both the benefit and cost of the response. …" @default.
• W227406198 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W227406198 creator A5003338321 @default.
• W227406198 creator A5012905589 @default.
• W227406198 creator A5089423452 @default.
• W227406198 date "2009-01-01" @default.
• W227406198 modified "2023-09-25" @default.
• W227406198 title "Measuring the Costs of Responding to Business Risks" @default.
• W227406198 hasPublicationYear "2009" @default.
• W227406198 type Work @default.
• W227406198 sameAs 227406198 @default.
• W227406198 citedByCount "1" @default.
• W227406198 countsByYear W2274061982015 @default.
• W227406198 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W227406198 hasAuthorship W227406198A5003338321 @default.
• W227406198 hasAuthorship W227406198A5012905589 @default.
• W227406198 hasAuthorship W227406198A5089423452 @default.
• W227406198 hasConcept C10138342 @default.
• W227406198 hasConcept C112930515 @default.
• W227406198 hasConcept C11489865 @default.
• W227406198 hasConcept C121955636 @default.
• W227406198 hasConcept C144133560 @default.
• W227406198 hasConcept C162853370 @default.
• W227406198 hasConcept C170856484 @default.
• W227406198 hasConcept C195094911 @default.
• W227406198 hasConcept C199521495 @default.
• W227406198 hasConcept C207209096 @default.
• W227406198 hasConcept C32896092 @default.
• W227406198 hasConcept C9272383 @default.
• W227406198 hasConcept C95609273 @default.
• W227406198 hasConceptScore W227406198C10138342 @default.
• W227406198 hasConceptScore W227406198C112930515 @default.
• W227406198 hasConceptScore W227406198C11489865 @default.
• W227406198 hasConceptScore W227406198C121955636 @default.
• W227406198 hasConceptScore W227406198C144133560 @default.
• W227406198 hasConceptScore W227406198C162853370 @default.
• W227406198 hasConceptScore W227406198C170856484 @default.
• W227406198 hasConceptScore W227406198C195094911 @default.
• W227406198 hasConceptScore W227406198C199521495 @default.
• W227406198 hasConceptScore W227406198C207209096 @default.
• W227406198 hasConceptScore W227406198C32896092 @default.
• W227406198 hasConceptScore W227406198C9272383 @default.
• W227406198 hasConceptScore W227406198C95609273 @default.
• W227406198 hasIssue "2" @default.
• W227406198 hasLocation W2274061981 @default.
• W227406198 hasOpenAccess W227406198 @default.
• W227406198 hasPrimaryLocation W2274061981 @default.
• W227406198 hasRelatedWork W1027405291 @default.
• W227406198 hasRelatedWork W1178996007 @default.
• W227406198 hasRelatedWork W128663282 @default.
• W227406198 hasRelatedWork W1484364389 @default.
• W227406198 hasRelatedWork W2012829454 @default.
• W227406198 hasRelatedWork W2038773810 @default.
• W227406198 hasRelatedWork W2040357570 @default.
• W227406198 hasRelatedWork W2076275038 @default.
• W227406198 hasRelatedWork W2293855026 @default.
• W227406198 hasRelatedWork W2311999814 @default.
• W227406198 hasRelatedWork W2314692933 @default.
• W227406198 hasRelatedWork W2326720884 @default.
• W227406198 hasRelatedWork W2602008246 @default.
• W227406198 hasRelatedWork W2757691554 @default.
• W227406198 hasRelatedWork W2897853443 @default.
• W227406198 hasRelatedWork W2912912957 @default.
• W227406198 hasRelatedWork W3025645783 @default.
• W227406198 hasRelatedWork W3125146883 @default.
• W227406198 hasRelatedWork W624693308 @default.
• W227406198 hasRelatedWork W759812145 @default.
• W227406198 hasVolume "10" @default.
• W227406198 isParatext "false" @default.
• W227406198 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W227406198 magId "227406198" @default.
• W227406198 workType "article" @default.