IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i9p4937-d797780.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Benchmarking ISO Risk Management Systems to Assess Efficacy and Help Identify Hidden Organizational Risk

Author

Listed:
  • Svana Helen Björnsdottir

    (Department of Engineering, Reykjavik University, 101 Reykjavík, Iceland)

  • Pall Jensson

    (Department of Engineering, Reykjavik University, 101 Reykjavík, Iceland)

  • Saemundur E. Thorsteinsson

    (Department of Engineering, University of Iceland, 101 Reykjavík, Iceland)

  • Ioannis M. Dokas

    (Department of Civil Engineering, Democritus University of Thrace, 69100 Komotini, Greece)

  • Robert J. de Boer

    (Department of Engineering, SDO University of Applied Sciences, 3142 GC Maassluis, The Netherlands)

Abstract

The overall aim of this article is to contribute to the further development of the area of benchmarking in risk management. The article introduces a two-step benchmarking model to assess the efficacy of ISO risk management systems. It furthermore aims at verifying its usefulness in terms of finding hidden risk issues and improvement opportunities. The existence of all key elements of an ISO 31000-based risk management system is examined at the beginning of this study. Then, the quality in terms of efficacy of important aspects of the risk management system is examined in more detail with special benchmarks. The application of the model to six ISO-certified organizations follows and reinforces the novelty of this study, which is to combine risk science knowledge with benchmarking theory in the application of ISO risk management standards in organizations. The results show that the benchmarking model developed in this study provides rigor when assessing and evaluating the efficacy of an ISO risk management system. By applying the model, risk issues and risk factors can be found that had not previously been identified. The findings are of importance for risk management, the benchmarking science, and for the development of ISO risk management standards.

Suggested Citation

  • Svana Helen Björnsdottir & Pall Jensson & Saemundur E. Thorsteinsson & Ioannis M. Dokas & Robert J. de Boer, 2022. "Benchmarking ISO Risk Management Systems to Assess Efficacy and Help Identify Hidden Organizational Risk," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-33, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:9:p:4937-:d:797780
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/9/4937/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/9/4937/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Richard Fellows & Anita M.M. Liu, 2012. "Managing organizational interfaces in engineering construction projects: addressing fragmentation and boundary issues across multiple interfaces," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(8), pages 653-671, February.
    2. Leveson, Nancy, 2015. "A systems approach to risk management through leading safety indicators," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 17-34.
    3. Aven, Terje, 2017. "Improving risk characterisations in practical situations by highlighting knowledge aspects, with applications to risk matrices," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 42-48.
    4. B. H. MacGillivray & J. V. Sharp & J. E. Strutt & P. D. Hamilton & S. J. T. Pollard, 2007. "Benchmarking Risk Management Within the International Water Utility Sector. Part II: A Survey of Eight Water Utilities," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(1), pages 105-123, January.
    5. Terje Aven & Enrico Zio, 2014. "Foundational Issues in Risk Assessment and Risk Management," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(7), pages 1164-1172, July.
    6. Mikes, Anette, 2011. "From counting risk to making risk count: Boundary-work in risk management," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 226-245.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Svana Helen Björnsdóttir & Pall Jensson & Saemundur E. Thorsteinsson & Ioannis M. Dokas & Helgi Thor Ingason, 2023. "Aligning Stakeholders and Actors: A New Safety and Security-Based Design Approach for Major National Infrastructures," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(1), pages 1-44, December.

    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. Sven Ove Hansson & Terje Aven, 2014. "Is Risk Analysis Scientific?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(7), pages 1173-1183, July.
    2. Palermo, Tommaso, 2014. "Accountability and expertise in public sector risk management: a case study," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 59948, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    3. Vicky Arnold, 2018. "The changing technological environment and the future of behavioural research in accounting," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 58(2), pages 315-339, June.
    4. Wang, Wenhao & Wang, Yanhui & Wang, Guangxing & Li, Man & Jia, Limin, 2023. "Identification of the critical accident causative factors in the urban rail transit system by complex network theory," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 610(C).
    5. Zio, E., 2018. "The future of risk assessment," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 176-190.
    6. repec:dau:papers:123456789/15180 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Antonovsky, A. & Pollock, C. & Straker, L., 2016. "System reliability as perceived by maintenance personnel on petroleum production facilities," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 58-65.
    8. Hatem Elleuch & Wafik Hachicha & Habib Chabchoub, 2014. "A combined approach for supply chain risk management: description and application to a real hospital pharmaceutical case study," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(5), pages 641-663, May.
    9. Mangirdas Morkunas & Gintaras Cernius & Gintare Giriuniene, 2019. "Assessing Business Risks of Natural Gas Trading Companies: Evidence from GET Baltic," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-14, July.
    10. Luca Allodi & Fabio Massacci, 2017. "Security Events and Vulnerability Data for Cybersecurity Risk Estimation," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(8), pages 1606-1627, August.
    11. Elizabeth Sheedy & Dominic S. B. Canestrari‐Soh, 2023. "Does executive accountability enhance risk management and risk culture?," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 63(4), pages 4093-4124, December.
    12. Catherine Mei Ling Wong, 2015. "The Mutable Nature of Risk and Acceptability: A Hybrid Risk Governance Framework," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(11), pages 1969-1982, November.
    13. Seth Guikema, 2020. "Artificial Intelligence for Natural Hazards Risk Analysis: Potential, Challenges, and Research Needs," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(6), pages 1117-1123, June.
    14. Christiansen, Ulrik & Thrane, Sof, 2014. "The prose of action: The micro dynamics of reporting on emerging risks in operational risk management," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 427-443.
    15. Simon Ashby & Trevor Buck & Stephanie Nöth-Zahn & Thomas Peisl, 2018. "Emerging IT Risks: Insights from German Banking," The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance - Issues and Practice, Palgrave Macmillan;The Geneva Association, vol. 43(2), pages 180-207, April.
    16. Jozef Klucka & Rudolf Gruenbichler & Jozef Ristvej, 2021. "Relations of COVID-19 and the Risk Management Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-15, October.
    17. Rebecca Vine, 2020. "Riskwork in the construction of Heathrow Terminal 2," SPRU Working Paper Series 2020-20, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    18. Daniel J. Rozell, 2018. "The Ethical Foundations of Risk Analysis," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(8), pages 1529-1533, August.
    19. Jintao Liu & Keping Li & Wei Zheng & Jiebei Zhu, 2019. "An importance order analysis method for causes of railway signaling system hazards based on complex networks," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 233(4), pages 567-579, August.
    20. Wu, Chao & Huang, Lang, 2019. "A new accident causation model based on information flow and its application in Tianjin Port fire and explosion accident," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 182(C), pages 73-85.
    21. Read, G.J.M. & Naweed, A. & Salmon, P.M., 2019. "Complexity on the rails: A systems-based approach to understanding safety management in rail transport," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 188(C), pages 352-365.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:9:p:4937-:d:797780. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.