IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aic/jopafl/y2016v9p80-92.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How To Control Risks? Towards A Structure Of Enterprise Risk Management Process

Author

Listed:
  • Lidia MANDRU

    (Transilvania University of Brasov, Faculty of Economic Sciences and Business Administration, lidia.mandru@gmail.com, Brasov, Romania,)

Abstract

In this paper, we try to establish a structure of enterprise risk management process highlighting the steps that a company should follow in order to keep occurring risks under control. The reader will find that risk management process involves five basic stages: setting goals, risk identification, risk evaluation, risk response planning and risk monitoring and control. Risk score matrix� decision tree and Monte Carlo simulation are some methods presented in this paper and used to qualitatively and quantitatively analyze risks. For the main categories of risks, we bring in some preventive measures that companies may apply to face risks preserving their competitive advantage on market.

Suggested Citation

  • Lidia MANDRU, 2016. "How To Control Risks? Towards A Structure Of Enterprise Risk Management Process," Journal of Public Administration, Finance and Law, Alexandru Ioan Cuza University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, vol. 9(9), pages 80-92, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:aic:jopafl:y:2016:v:9:p:80-92
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.jopafl.com/uploads/issue9/TOWARDS_A_STRUCTURE_OF_ENTERPRISE_RISK_MANAGEMENT_PROCESS.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Brian W. Nocco & René M. Stulz, 2006. "Enterprise Risk Management: Theory and Practice," Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, Morgan Stanley, vol. 18(4), pages 8-20, September.
    2. Kleijnen, J.P.C., 2004. "Design and Analysis of Monte Carlo Experiments," Discussion Paper 2004-17, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    3. Milton Friedman & L. J. Savage, 1948. "The Utility Analysis of Choices Involving Risk," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 56(4), pages 279-279.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Stefanescu, Razvan & Dumitriu, Ramona, 2013. "Procese decizionale în cadrul managementului riscurilor [Decision – making Processes in the Risk Management]," MPRA Paper 50754, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 17 Oct 2013.
    2. Heineck, Guido & Süssmuth, Bernd, 2013. "A different look at Lenin’s legacy: Social capital and risk taking in the Two Germanies," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 789-803.
    3. John Weymark, 2005. "Measurement theory and the foundations of utilitarianism," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 25(2), pages 527-555, December.
    4. Jiao Wang & Lima Zhao & Arnd Huchzermeier, 2021. "Operations‐Finance Interface in Risk Management: Research Evolution and Opportunities," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 30(2), pages 355-389, February.
    5. Tuoyuan Cheng & Kan Chen, 2023. "A General Framework for Portfolio Construction Based on Generative Models of Asset Returns," Papers 2312.03294, arXiv.org.
    6. Schaefer Kurt C & Anderson Michael A & Ferrantino Michael J, 2008. "Monte Carlo Appraisals of Gravity Model Specifications," Global Economy Journal, De Gruyter, vol. 8(1), pages 1-26, February.
    7. Edi Karni & Philippe Mongin, 2000. "On the Determination of Subjective Probability by Choices," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(2), pages 233-248, February.
    8. Christian Johnson & George G Kaufman, 2007. "Un banco, con cualquier otro nombre…," Boletín, CEMLA, vol. 0(4), pages 185-199, Octubre-d.
    9. Roy, Saktinil & Kemme, David M., 2012. "Causes of banking crises: Deregulation, credit booms and asset bubbles, then and now," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 270-294.
    10. Krzysztof Kontek & Michal Lewandowski, 2018. "Range-Dependent Utility," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(6), pages 2812-2832, June.
    11. Chateauneuf, Alain & Eichberger, Jurgen & Grant, Simon, 2007. "Choice under uncertainty with the best and worst in mind: Neo-additive capacities," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 137(1), pages 538-567, November.
    12. Nicholas Barberis, 2012. "A Model of Casino Gambling," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(1), pages 35-51, January.
    13. Hooi Hooi Lean & Michael McAleer & Wing-Keung Wong, 2013. "Risk-averse and Risk-seeking Investor Preferences for Oil Spot and Futures," Documentos de Trabajo del ICAE 2013-31, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Empresariales, Instituto Complutense de Análisis Económico, revised Aug 2013.
    14. Christopher D. Ittner & Jeremy Michels, 2017. "Risk-based forecasting and planning and management earnings forecasts," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 22(3), pages 1005-1047, September.
    15. Pierre-Charles Pradier, 2006. "De usu artis conjectandi in jure : quid de oeconomia (politica) ?," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-00274325, HAL.
    16. Raj Chetty, 2004. "Consumption Commitments, Unemployment Durations, and Local Risk Aversion," NBER Working Papers 10211, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Eeckhoudt, Louis & Schlesinger, Harris, 2008. "Changes in risk and the demand for saving," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(7), pages 1329-1336, October.
    18. Brennan C. Platt & Joseph Price & Henry Tappen, 2013. "The Role of Risk Preferences in Pay-to-Bid Auctions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(9), pages 2117-2134, September.
    19. Christian Gollier & James Hammitt & Nicolas Treich, 2013. "Risk and choice: A research saga," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 47(2), pages 129-145, October.
    20. Bi, Junna & Jin, Hanqing & Meng, Qingbin, 2018. "Behavioral mean-variance portfolio selection," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 271(2), pages 644-663.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aic:jopafl:y:2016:v:9:p:80-92. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sireteanu Napoleon-Alexandru (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/feaicro.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.