Explore the principles, methods, and best practices of organizational risk assessment. Learn how to identify, evaluate, and mitigate risks effectively to safeguard your business. Discover proven strategies, tools, and frameworks for building a resilient and risk-aware organization.
1. Introduction to Organization Risk Assessment
Organization risk assessment is an exceptionally important and vital component of management in today’s fast-paced and ever-evolving business landscape. In an environment characterized by constant change and uncertainty, every aspect of organizational decision-making inherently involves the careful consideration of various uncertainties that may arise. Consequently, organizational leaders are tasked with the need to make informed decisions while bearing in mind the potential impact that uncertainty, whether that impact is negative or positive, might impose on their enterprise's overall operations and strategic objectives. An enhanced understanding of concepts related to organizational risk assessment, along with a wider and more consistent adoption of risk assessment practices across various levels of business, will undoubtedly lead to more insightful and thoughtful decision-making processes. This will also assist businesses or organizations in proactively identifying and preventing potential failures before they escalate into serious issues.
This document aims to clarify and elucidate the underlying principles of risk assessment in finer detail and to discuss various practical methodologies that employees at different levels can adopt within their respective organizations to facilitate this important work effectively. As a valuable and indispensable tool, risk assessment should be systematically utilized to identify potential risks or threats in a thorough and exhaustive manner, as well as evaluating those risks which are prioritized as needing immediate attention and intervention. This proactive and methodical process distinctly separates comprehensive risk assessment from mere compliance with existing legislation or regulation, which typically focuses exclusively on identifying minimum requirements needed to mitigate harm. Risk is frequently characterized not only in terms of the significant potential negative consequences it may carry but also in relation to a low likelihood of occurrence which must be understood and communicated effectively.
The decision-making process regarding which risks to address, utilizing this proactive approach, involves managing the understanding, acceptability, and control of various risks that may hinder an organization’s progress. Taking the initiative to actively manage these threats in a manner that adequately protects organizational assets is an essential aspect of the strategic planning efforts of any progressive organization. Below are some fundamental principles and ideas meant to facilitate the development and effective implementation of a robust risk assessment framework along with its subsequent management: There exist three distinct approaches that organizations can adopt in carrying out their organizational risk assessment. The choice of which methodology to utilize heavily depends on the specific objectives to be achieved, the nature of the work being undertaken, and the resources that are available to support the process and ensure its success. The selected approach must consider environmental factors, organizational culture, and existing capabilities to truly enhance the assessment and management of risks in a comprehensive and meaningful manner. (Fraser et al., 2021)(Aven & Zio, 2021)(Challoumis, 2024)
2. Importance and Benefits of Organization Risk Assessment
Risk assessment is the essential underpinning of the ERM concept. Because of the importance of understanding what could happen in areas critical to achieving our goals, managers also value risk assessment in non-ERM activities. Beyond the need for information, risk assessment has other benefits. It can improve decision-making, allow management to better allocate resources, and increase the overall resilience of the organization. By identifying and assessing critical risks, the entire organization can focus on ensuring these are reduced or mitigated to support achieving key objectives. Risk assessment also identifies underutilized capabilities and opportunities while allowing management to understand the potential impact of risk on long-term strategy and day-to-day operations. Striking the correct balance requires a clear understanding of the overall objectives to which risk assessment is applied. (Fayshal et al.2023)(Marx-Stoelting et al.2023)(Björnsdóttir et al.2022)
As an outcome of evidence-informed decisions, risk assessment improves financial accountability by identifying both the need for and likely benefit of risk treatment, supports the safeguarding of assets by enhancing safety and security, and helps maintain an organization’s reputation as a reliable service provider. Risk assessment also supports compliance with legal and regulatory requirements, which has become increasingly important in more risk-averse operating environments. Additionally, risk assessment promotes a culture that is proactive and outward-facing, engenders stakeholder confidence, and ultimately supports organizational sustainability and growth. By accounting for downside risks, risk assessment makes a significant contribution to longer-term success. Knowing when, where, and why this is true is essential to practitioners providing management with strategic assurance. An organization’s resiliency and adaptability are tested during times of crisis. Organizational resilience reduces the chances of supply chain disruption, service failure, and loss of income. It supports managers in planning for new services or securing new resources and can help to protect jobs by reducing the likelihood of bankruptcy. Organizations can be resilient, drivers of risk having been avoided, reduced, or tolerated by the management. The organization may simply have the capability and capacity to respond and recover when crisis strikes. Furthermore, a resilient organization has systems and processes to anticipate and adapt to change in the environment. It is not simply the ability to cope with and recover from adversity. (Alzoubi2022)(Zhong et al., 2021)(Nobanee et al.2021)
It is an approach that is not just about protecting what the organization has—it is also about identifying sustainable paths for growth or change. In summary, risk assessment is now part of what management does. By placing it in the context of their current systems to recognize, understand, and prioritize risk, they will have distance towards better working. The process will be robust and repeatable, allowing for continual improvement in how the risk is managed. In particular, the organization’s success will be determined by having developed a proactive, performance-based, and commercial style of management that embraces risk as well as opportunity. The integration of risk management with systems, management processes, standards, and so on, is essential. It is difficult to apply the principles of risk management purely using the approach of a separate dedicated system or layer of activity. There are no generic or universally desirable risks, but instead risks with particular characteristics, potential impacts, and required responses that always need site-based and expert judgment. Often these decisions benefit from nearer to real-time decision-making and prioritizing.
3. Key Concepts and Terminology in Organization Risk Assessment
1. Introduction
With the rise in complexity of the ever-evolving social and economic systems that are intricately managed by organizations, particularly those that are actively engaged in critical infrastructures, the importance of an organization's own risk assessment has attained an essential and vital position within its operations. The aim of this chapter is to introduce and elucidate some of its fundamental basic concepts and relevant terminology to provide a clearer understanding for readers. Risk, as a concept, is defined as the probability of potential harm arising from a hazard or an unforeseen event that could occur under a specific set of conditions over a specified period of time. A hazard can be categorized as either a damaging phenomenon or a situation that possesses the potential to cause significant harm. Vulnerability, on the other hand, refers to a system's inherent susceptibility to experience severe and serious consequences as a direct result of the impact brought about by either a natural or a man-made hazard.
The term "organization risk assessment" is frequently used to refer to a variety of similar activities that may have a varied focus and scope. However, some ambiguity exists in the terminology. For instance, there is notable confusion that arises from the use of different terms and phrases such as "operational risk assessment" and "organization risk management." While they may sound similar, there are distinct and important differences between these concepts. Each entity has the capability to define its own frameworks and adapt them to accurately reflect the reality of its specific domain and context. However, there are frameworks that may standardize the terminology and core concepts to create a more universally accepted understanding. The intertwined use of these terms is somewhat inevitable, and it often leads to significant confusion, which can, in turn, reduce constructive dialogue aimed at solving pressing problems.
Therefore, this seems to be an appropriate time and opportunity to reach a well-defined agreement on a risk management framework that we can collectively use as a baseline to establish a firm and shared language. This would effectively help in unraveling the existing confusion and enabling the successful deployment of effective risk management strategies. It is, therefore, essential that entities, irrespective of their domain of operation, adopt a comprehensive approach based on modern risk management concepts. In turn, those individuals or groups who structure this paradigm, whether at a departmental level or an organizational level, must ensure that the language they employ is universally understood to prevent the fragmentation of the various departments and teams involved in maintaining and endorsing this critical field of study and practice. It is imperative to remember that these principles require a clarified and coherent definition among all interested parties within any given domain to facilitate effective collaboration and communication.
4. Frameworks and Models for Organization Risk Assessment
A framework can be broadly described as a fundamental structure that underpins a system or concept. In the context of this paper, a framework serves the essential purpose of standardizing or guiding the execution of an organization's risk assessment processes. This standardization is crucial as it not only aids in streamlining the adoption of newer and more effective principles but also enhances the methodologies related to risk assessment within an organization. Moreover, it helps to establish a common language that facilitates communication and understanding across various levels of the organization. Below is an overview of some notable models and frameworks that are frequently employed in the evaluation of organizational risks. Each model will be accompanied by basic information that highlights its features, benefits, and applications in the context of risk assessment. This overview aims to provide a clearer understanding of their significance and usability in effectively managing organizational risks.
ISO 31000:2009 is likely one of the most well-known and widely used frameworks in risk assessment in large organizations. It can be applied to the entirety of major global corporations and companies, or even to the creation of a security plan for a three-day concert with 5,000 to 7,000 attendees. The Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission ERM includes a list of eight components in enterprise risk management, and a description of the purpose and actions of each component. This framework is designed to be flexible and can be adapted to suit various sizes and types of organizations, organizational objectives, industries, and scenarios.
Frameworks such as the two described above can assist in the enhancement of organizational management, technical and legal job roles by providing systematically operational guidelines that can be used to plan and execute assessment activities. They can be used to aid the practitioner in the serial execution of the assessment steps and in the necessary recording and processing of the results. Frameworks that embody both qualitative and quantitative models may provide the best and most usable answers, since the linkage and implementation capability of qualitative models can bridge the gap between complex quantitative systems and the realities with respect to knowledge and data. Because the models have different objectives and major premises, one or the other should be selected for use based on a particular need and the requirements of individual organizations.
It is not practical to ask an organization to identify the plethora of risk factors in multiple departmental activities and/or processes, especially if business practitioners are insulated from each other and work primarily in isolation. With the sea change in the organization's operational level, it becomes even more important that risk assessment be based on relevant taxonomies that organizations can identify and understand. To this end, the selection of a suitable framework or model capable of continuously evolving in keeping with changing organizational objectives, and thus industry and knowledge management practices, is requisite for valid and viable organizational risk assessment. Therefore, it helps to have organizational security managers align the enterprise risk management of their respective organizations with a suitable assessment framework or model.
5. Common Challenges and Pitfalls in Organization Risk Assessment
What are the common challenges and pitfalls encountered by organizations in risk assessment? These can include the lack of data and relevant information, insufficient stakeholder involvement, lack of alignment with organizational strategic goals, and underestimation of interconnectedness between various risk elements. Also, risk perception in organizations is often affected by cognitive biases, such as anchoring, overconfidence, groupthink, and others that are relevant to risk and uncertainty.
The failure to thoroughly consider these numerous interrelated issues can lead to a situation where risk management becomes incapable of adequately addressing critical sources of potential risk. As a direct consequence, organizations may lose out on valuable opportunities to fully benefit from dynamic phenomena, rendering them far less prepared to effectively respond to or cope with unexpected challenges that arise. Cognitive biases, pervasive in organizational settings, can significantly hinder the organization's ability to perceive or act upon emerging risks, often until it is far too late to mitigate them effectively. These recurring patterns ultimately result in suboptimal outcomes, not only for the organizations themselves but for society at large. Cultivating a 'risk-aware culture' within the organization may play a crucial role in addressing these various challenges, facilitating the seamless integration of risk assessment processes with operational activities, as well as strategic planning and management initiatives.
Organizations routinely encounter similar problems, whether in the process of conducting risk assessments or after having completed them. These so-called 'pitfalls' can frequently be anticipated and effectively averted if they are identified in advance, thus saving time and resources in the long run. Reducing the impact of such pitfalls and bridging the often significant gap between good intentions and the actual outcomes of risk assessment requires a fundamentally experimental approach to organizational learning. Additionally, a deep and nuanced understanding of the ways that human beings construct knowledge is essential. Essentially, risk assessment functions as a pilot plan that aids in learning about the appropriate responses to various risks, their associated levels of severity, and the interactions with other actors and external events. Any existing gap between the results derived from risk assessments and the potential responses developed is a unique opportunity to foster organizational learning. Encouraging and facilitating that learning is one of the key hallmarks of effective long-term risk management strategies.
Another important lesson gleaned from the risk assessment process is that it serves as a means for improving inter-agency coordination just as effectively as it acts as a vital tool for conducting thorough internal analysis. The success, or even potential failure, in risk assessment practices can also be evaluated based on the extent to which improved communication is developed and established between inter-agency partners. For this reason, teams will want to invest time in learning how to effectively communicate their results and address any noticeable gaps in their learning processes. This proactive approach to communication and collaboration can lead to significant improvements in organizational capacity to manage risks efficiently.
6. Risk Identification and Classification in Organization Risk Assessment
Risk identification represents the crucial initial stage of the broader risk management process. It plays an essential role in facilitating the overall procedure of risk classification and prioritization, which are imperative for effective management. The initial step involved in risk identification generally focuses on pinpointing the risks that are certain, obvious, or readily apparent. This focus is important because such risks typically do not necessitate any further information or an in-depth investigation to recognize. Various risk identification techniques are employed to aid in this process, which include coding and sorting, the use of checklists, organized brainstorming sessions, focused interviews, environmental scanning, the Delphi technique, as well as the creation of detailed process flowcharts.
In addition to these techniques, risks can also be categorized into several distinct groups. Such classifications include strategic and operational risks, risks that exist both within and outside the organization, accidental risks compared to purposeful ones, as well as risks that are insured versus those that remain uninsured. Furthermore, risks can be classified based on compliance with legal standards, distinguishing between compliant and non-compliant risks. This classification is particularly advantageous as it assists organizations in managing the overwhelming list of potential risks they may face. By grouping risks in this manner, organizations are better equipped to establish priorities when it comes to risk treatment, ensuring a more organized and systematic approach to mitigating risks effectively.
By definition, what organizations see or perceive to be a risk will depend on their stake or position and capacity to perceive risk. Therefore, risk identification should involve a wide range of stakeholders to ensure that the organization has as comprehensive an understanding of its internal and external contexts. Also, risk identification should not be done in an anonymized vacuum; rather, it should be considered in terms of organizational and industry context with a view from different perspectives, alternatives, experiences, and points of view. These views and perspectives are brought under one platform with a focus on diverse stakeholders, and the appropriate identification of risk is the only challenge required for making informed decisions. Risk identification evolves from the type of organization, activities, products, and professional people involved, and is shaped by the purpose, policy, strategies, regulatory requirements, shared values, and socio-economic and geopolitical environment. It closely aligns with the organizational strategic plan, policy, and other management processes. It is important to identify risks continuously and not on a one-off basis, and a list of risks should be maintained, reviewed, and updated quarterly, half-yearly, annually, or when necessary. Storing risk-relevant knowledge for further analysis and treatment is also equally important. It is always prudent to compare the corporate risk register with that of other organizations in similar industry sectors. Organizations must take stock of management cultural factors that could inhibit the adoption of good risk identification practices. Generally, risk identification is fluid and not one of the positive steps in the optimization technique; it is an enabling step for other risk process activities and functions, and an identifier of the giant's shoulders under which to stand and make projections on trend analysis and the future state of the organization. A critical review is required on the application and practice of risk identification to improve and set salient and necessary pointers for attitudinal change.
7. Risk Analysis and Evaluation Techniques
Risk analysis and evaluation are widely recognized techniques utilized to thoroughly examine the identified risks that may be present in various contexts. These analysis methods can be broadly categorized into two main approaches: qualitative and quantitative. Understanding when to employ qualitative as opposed to quantitative analysis methods is crucial and largely depends on the information and specific data available for processing. If the consequences of a given risk can be thoroughly and unambiguously defined through the examination of prevailing control measures and existing hazards, then the qualitative method becomes an appropriate choice. Conversely, quantitative analysis is appropriate only when the necessary data has been meticulously collected, as it directly correlates to the level of risk involved. These analytical criteria serve to enhance organizational strategies comprehensively and facilitate the development of effective risk control measures.
In addition to the aforementioned analysis approaches, risk prioritization can be effectively achieved through the utilization of systematic ranking or rating systems. The rating systems that are commonly employed include risk matrices and Bowtie analysis methodologies. A risk matrix works by quantifying the potential risks associated with a given situation, while the Bowtie analysis provides a structured way to categorize the existing risks more comprehensively. An integrated approach that encompasses risk assessment from diverse perspectives, followed by the ranking of risks according to specific criteria, appears to yield better results in effective risk management. Given that there are inherent likelihoods and consequences associated with risk characteristics, it is essential that an assessment process accounts for both the likelihood of occurrence and the potential impact criteria as well. This overall assessment process ultimately necessitates the conversion of various numeric values into common units. Such a conversion allows for a consistently applied approach to different risk-related issues, thereby facilitating the ranking of those issues according to their relevance for management attention.
Various analytical tools, including but not limited to Monte Carlo simulations and decision trees, can be employed in the risk assessment process with relative ease. It is also vital to consider another significant factor: an organization’s risk appetite. Risk appetite encompasses the extent of risk that an organization is willing to embrace in pursuit of its overarching objectives. Therefore, it is imperative that all evaluated risks are systematically compared to the organization’s established risk appetite to determine whether or not they can be deemed acceptable within that context. When determining evaluative techniques, organizations should remain acutely aware that the passage of time has the potential to weaken the strength of protective measures, thus leading to a gradual accumulation of risk over time. Consequently, exemplary practice necessitates that organizations engage in a process of continuous review of decision-making techniques and re-evaluate their assessments as new information is acquired or throughout the entire lifecycle of the assessed activity. This ongoing process requires regular review, comparison, and where necessary, adjustments to be made regarding the evaluation tools detailed in the Measuring and Prioritizing section, including the establishment of a date for the 'last review' for all evaluations performed.
8. Risk Treatment and Mitigation Strategies
Risk treatment has the ultimate goal of either effectively mitigating or fully eliminating the adverse effects that arise from the realized causes of human errors in various operational environments. The detailed and proper application and implementation of suitable treatment strategies can significantly mitigate the risk associated with operational errors that can arise in the course of numerous activities. Treatment strategies that are specifically aimed at mitigating human error may include a wide variety of comprehensive approaches, such as increasing the capacity of the "Information Processing System Load," reducing the overall complexity of the tasks involved, decreasing the frequency with which the tasks are performed, providing more frequent as well as detailed refresher training, standardizing tasks and procedures to thereby reduce variability, ensuring the provision of adequate tools and equipment needed for effective task completion, enhancing communication among team members, allowing for additional time to complete a task without the pressure of strict deadlines, establishing effective cross-check systems that promote oversight and accountability, improving team interaction and coordination for better teamwork and collaboration, and the installation of more effective alarms and warnings to promptly alert individuals to potential errors or risks that may arise. A few specific strategies that can be employed to increase the "Information Processing System Load" capacity for an Information Processor I include the reduction of distractions in the work environment, the clustering of similar tasks to streamline efforts and boost efficiency, breaking complex tasks into simpler, more manageable steps, separating procedures to avoid any potential confusion regarding task execution, and the assignment of clear and explicit task responsibilities to individuals involved. One particularly beneficial and valuable strategy to increase the "Information Processing System Load" capacity for "Analytical Thinking Level 2" functions is the implementation of cultural changes within the organization that heighten attention to job activities, thereby fostering a more engaged and attentive workforce. Furthermore, defining strategic thresholds so that subtasks must be stopped at designated completion points, or are unable to proceed without additional scrutiny if violations of set points occur, may also confer significant benefits to the higher-level functions that are performed by teams or individual members.
9. Monitoring and Reviewing Risks in Organization Risk Assessment
D. Monitoring and Reviewing Risks
Risk management is a continuous, never-ending process, so reviewing and revisiting risks should be part of the routine process and a proactive step in risk management. This means it ties into the cultural part of the principles and enterprise risk management. The methods for ongoing monitoring include leading risk indicators or key risk indicators (KRIs), risk drivers, and risk checklists. Internal audits are a method of ongoing review. They can review the risks or the performance against the design of controls or other management responses.
Feedback and Improvement. A system to capture the feedback from the monitoring can be used and then built back into your risk assessment with lessons to be learned and best practices. This feedback represents a closed-loop cycle in a risk assessment program where feedback can also be used from events, audit recommendations, and business objectives not being met, as well as the threat environment changing or risk appetite altering.
Challenges in setting up an effective monitoring system are that it can consume resources. Creating triggers can be complex, keeping a focus on the important risks when technology provides a massive amount of data from multiple systems, over-reassuring regarding triggers marked as green, and keeping a focus on control effectiveness. It can be challenging for HR and Finance to assist senior management at the same time. Embedding risk identification through appraisals, integrating with strategy-setting documents, sharing a common view, and involving a wide layer of employees, including their awareness of risks, is essential. Data analytics is a huge area and can be used for monitoring constant changes in the data. In terms of risk assessment, data mining and predictive modeling can be used as a first-level filter to reduce the number of items that need to be investigated further. Assurance mapping, where a team develops a view of the controls across the organization, can then use monitoring techniques to assure senior management that anything important will bubble up. Consultation should be through finance and possibly internal audit. From an operational risk viewpoint, the insurance industry has developed a control assessment (CA) that focuses on the firm's risk management frameworks, risk control self-assessment, key risks, and other indicators. Assurance mapping is the practice of various risk carriers generating a risk statement in which they provide evidence through a sign-off mechanism of the key controls all the way to the main board. This becomes the assurance map because as you move from operational processes to main board processes, the sign-offs, both quantitative and qualitative, on key controls in respect of financial and non-financial risks across the entire firm regulatory perimeter become a key determinant of the level of reliance by the group financial controller, CEO, or ORSA processes. The benefit is that it minimizes the regulatory and management feedback to significant risk carriers. In a customer-centric risk culture, it is the reasonable expectation of such a customer about the way the firm addresses key operational risks, including financial crime and internal and external fraud.
Be aware that processes change over time, so as soon as a review is completed, and particularly if performed over three years (recommended), then senior management should task the risk owners with revisiting the risk assessments where changing conditions have potentially increased or decreased the risks, or new risks need to be added, and others removed. Steer towards a proactive culture in managing and adapting to new risks. Coaching from assurance providers and internal auditors is typically cost and time prohibitive, so it is generally better to raise one's own knowledge through personal research and events.
10. Integration of Organization Risk Assessment with Business Strategy
Integration with Business Strategy
In principle, the provision of a comprehensive risk assessment by an organization should serve as a crucial input to both the risk management process and the overarching strategic and general planning process. Through this hierarchy of input-process-output, we emphasize the essentiality for the organization to, on one hand, understand the range and nature of the risks it will encounter while striving to achieve its strategic goals, and on the other hand, to identify and delineate what portion of these risks will be manageable or contained within a “safe” envelope. This understanding is vital as it will also equip the organization with the necessary information regarding the most effective combination of risks that can be handled in the endeavor of fulfilling its tactical and operational planning. Consequently, the result of this careful orchestration of these three interrelated processes is the systematic marshalling of all organizational resources, strategically aligned toward the successful achievement of its established strategic goals and objectives, enhancing overall organizational resilience and performance.
Adjusting to Risk Situations
The thorough assessment of potential opportunities and threats can provide critical information necessary for organizations to become more adept at adjusting to various risks and dynamic changes, which in turn enhances their overall levels of agility and resilience in an ever-evolving environment. Organizations that tend to avoid risks may inadvertently cultivate a culture that is excessively cautious and resistant to necessary changes, potentially stifling innovation and growth. It is ultimately the responsibility of the leadership to establish the overarching philosophy and strategic approach that will be adopted when it comes to recognizing and understanding the presented risks, as well as the facilities available for evaluating the alternatives that can be accepted or pursued. Some enterprises have taken the initiative to document a clear vision, mission, and objective statement that serves to guide their expansion efforts in alignment with whatever is deemed acceptable in terms of risk levels. This documentation not only supports decision-making but also cultivates a more proactive culture that can navigate uncertainties more effectively.
Integration of Strategy and Risk Management
It is of great importance to ensure that the approach to risk management undertaken is not only seamless and efficient but also integral in its very nature to the overall functioning of the organization. This approach should, therefore, guarantee that it is firmly built upon logical reasoning and empirical sentiments derived from careful observations and analyses. Consequently, any organization’s comprehensive risk assessment must be meticulously aligned with its overall business strategy to ensure coherence and harmony. Furthermore, it should be actively involved in superior executive decision-making processes that understand and address the complexities of the current landscape. This alignment is crucial not just for anticipating potential challenges but also for seizing opportunities in a dynamic and ever-evolving business environment. Ultimately, fostering resilience becomes essential, and this can effectively promote sustainable growth in the long term, ensuring that the organization is adequately prepared for any uncertainties that lie ahead.
11. Case Studies and Real-World Applications of Organization Risk Assessment
Introduction This book is explicitly about organizational risk assessment. It begins with several case studies and real-world examples and terminates with what can be learned from these cases—the first part of many of the best practices mentioned in this handbook. In general, risk assessment projects were previously discussed in the professional or academic auditing or management literature. The case studies span different sectors of the economy. They are essential because they illustrate the ordinary tasks and the range of proof used for effective risk assessment at an individual firm and interorganizational level. These cases vary significantly in terms of their reliance on economic analysis, calculation techniques, and explicit decision frameworks.
Maximizing Profits, an Ethical Organization We present a venture between four college students who self-funded their enterprise from the onset. Their readiness to take on risk and address the uncertainties is crucial to our risk assessment lessons. These decision-makers are forward-looking risk-takers who employ one or more of a cost-benefit analysis, cash-flow record, and an evaluation of estimates as they have been trained to evaluate the safety of individual projects. With bond financing, they assess leverage from personal savings and from shareholders’ equity. These decision-makers understand that their industry and its threats are different from other subindustries, and that the risks vary among firms within a small overall business sector. The case also provides an opportunity to examine business culture and ethics when the corporation responds fairly to priority environmental threats. These stakeholders have relatively low power and a relatively minimal interest in continuing to sell chickens. The additional contractual costs of maintaining ethical standards within a weak stakeholder class should be far less than those associated with holding risk-averse investors. If the primary objective of the corporation is shareholder wealth preservation, it is by ignoring these stakeholders’ public ethical procedures.
References:
Fraser, J. R. S., Quail, R., & Simkins, B. (2021). Enterprise risk management: Today's leading research and best practices for tomorrow's executives. researchgate.net
Aven, T. & Zio, E. (2021). Globalization and global risk: How risk analysis needs to be enhanced to be effective in confronting current threats. Reliability Engineering & System Safety. sciencedirect.com
Challoumis, C. (2024). the Future of Business-integrating AI Into the Financial Cycle. XIV International Scientific Conference. researchgate.net
Fayshal, M. A., Ullah, M. R., Adnan, H. F., Rahman, S. A., & Siddique, I. M. (2023). Evaluating multidisciplinary approaches within an integrated framework for human health risk assessment. Journal of Environmental Engineering and Studies, 8(3), 30-41. researchgate.net
Marx-Stoelting, P., Rivière, G., Luijten, M., Aiello-Holden, K., Bandow, N., Baken, K., ... & Sanders, P. (2023). A walk in the PARC: developing and implementing 21st century chemical risk assessment in Europe. Archives of Toxicology, 97(3), 893-908. springer.com
Björnsdóttir, S. H., Jensson, P., de Boer, R. J., & Thorsteinsson, S. E. (2022). The importance of risk management: what is missing in ISO standards?. Risk Analysis, 42(4), 659-691. researchgate.net
Alzoubi, H. M. (2022). BIM as a tool to optimize and manage project risk management. International Journal of Mechanical Engineering, 7(1). skylineuniversity.ac.ae
Zhong, Y., Li, Y., Ding, J., & Liao, Y. (2021). Risk management: Exploring emerging human resource issues during the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Risk and Financial Management. mdpi.com
Nobanee, H., Al Hamadi, F. Y., Abdulaziz, F. A., Abukarsh, L. S., Alqahtani, A. F., AlSubaey, S. K., ... & Almansoori, H. A. (2021). A bibliometric analysis of sustainability and risk management. Sustainability, 13(6), 3277. mdpi.com