IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jacrfn/v30y2018i1p89-97.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How to Evaluate Risk Management Units in Financial Institutions?

Author

Listed:
  • Michael Gelman
  • Doron Greenberg
  • Mosi Rosenboim

Abstract

Based on the existing Enterprise Risk Management framework and current government regulations, “banks are required to establish risk management units (RMUs) to review and evaluate their risks, monitor them, and to advise top management.†Currently an integral part of the risk governance and management process, RMUs in financial institutions have become increasingly important since the 2007–2008 financial crisis. This article details the authors' creation of an index to evaluate the performance of risk management units in financial institutions, and then examines some of their findings. The index transforms twelve parameters into a simple and convenient index that isolates the RMU's activities from the rest of the organizational risk management process, its risk preferences and the activities of the rest of the units. The index's parameters are divided into three dimensions of the RMU's performance: professionalism, organizational status and relationship with top management and the board. The authors found a positive relationship between their RMUI and some important risk governance characteristics: CROs who are among the five highest paid executives at the bank, banks with at least one independent director serving on the board's risk committee having banking and finance experience and boards with greater efficacy.

Suggested Citation

  • Michael Gelman & Doron Greenberg & Mosi Rosenboim, 2018. "How to Evaluate Risk Management Units in Financial Institutions?," Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, Morgan Stanley, vol. 30(1), pages 89-97, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:jacrfn:v:30:y:2018:i:1:p:89-97
    DOI: 10.1111/jacf.12281
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jacf.12281
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jacf.12281?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:bla:jacrfn:v:30:y:2018:i:1:p:89-97. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=1078-1196 .

    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.